The Intel Atom Thread

[AtenRa]

OK i found a review of BayTrail with Cloud Gate and A4-1250

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proces...rail-and-Silvermont-Arrive/3DMark-Ice-Storm-a

In Ice Storm (Graphics) A4-1250 is 83% faster than Baytrail z-3770. It is the Physics that raises BayTrail overall score. A4-5000 is 129% faster in Graphics.

In Cloud Gate (Graphics), A4-1250 is 68% faster than Baytrail z-3770. It is the Physics again that raises BayTrail overall score. A4-5000 is 101% faster in Graphics.

Yes A4-1250 is 8W TDP with 300MHz for the GPU vs 225MHz of the A4-1200 but again the A4 has way faster graphics performance than Baytrail-T. We really have to see more results of real games to really know the exact performance though.

 

[Imouto]

D: i like your analogy but it lacks anything remotely resembling business acumen. you act as if the world is set in stone (based on your views) and there is no capacity for change or disruption.

Never said that. This is just my point of view. It's not like we are going to change the world in these forums and my theories are not that far fetched.

What if Tizen takes off? Let me guess in your mind it never will. but in 2008 would you have predicted how powerful a force android would be? probably not.

Tizen is supported by Samsung. What's your point here, really? Even if it takes off Samsung is the real threat for Intel in every single foundry aspect with the advantage that it is manufacturing everything in its devices by itself and all of them are badass supersellers. It's the Hyundai corporation story all over again.

 

[liahos1]

Never said that. This is just my point of view. It's not like we are going to change the world in these forums and my theories are not that far fetched.



Tizen is supported by Samsung. What's your point here, really? Even if it takes off Samsung is the real threat for Intel in every single foundry aspect with the advantage that it is manufacturing everything in its devices by itself and all of them are badass supersellers. It's the Hyundai corporation story all over again.

my point is you seem to think whoever is in charge now will be in charge forever. samsung was a non entity 3 years ago in smartphones and they are ruling the roost now. htc was the king in 2007 and they are nobody now. your chaebol analogies are meaningless. samsung cant even get yields at 28nm right. they make dram and nand but can hardly supply their own apps processors to samsung mobile. their apps processor business has given ever more share to qcom in the s4 vs the s3. they do a lot of things like going to a korean bodega but dont seem to do anything exceptionally. so what do they do? they just spam out all these different variants and pray to god something sticks. S4 Active, S4 mini, S4 Zoom, Note 3, Mega, meanwhile s4 was a disappointment. ;look at samsungs stock chart if you need any further proof.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Yes A4-1250 is 8W TDP with 300MHz for the GPU vs 225MHz of the A4-1200 but again the A4 has way faster graphics performance than Baytrail-T. We really have to see more results of real games to really know the exact performance though.

Interesting quote from your link.

As it turns out, Bay Trail is on another level of performance and efficiency than either Temash or Kabini from AMD. Look back at our Windows tests and see how many times the 3 watt Atom Z3770 matches the performance of the 15 watt A4-5000; or how much faster it is than the AMD A4-1250 at 4 watts.

 

[blackened23]

So quadruple the power consumption, considerably slower CPU and moderately faster GPU?

Also compounded by the fact that at lower resolutions, 3d applications are more often than not CPU limited. The physics test in 3d mark is nearly purely a CPU test, and the A4-1200 being one-third of Bay Trail T's CPU performance has some ramifications in that respect, for sure.

The Bay Trail T is just the more attractive and better SKU. It's the better overall package with better power consumption, a CPU that is three times faster, and comparable graphics. It should be mentioned, again, that low resolution 3d apps are generally CPU limited. So that's another negative for the A4-1200.

And this is the lowest tier Bay Trail SKU. The Bay Trail D and Bay Trail M will perform even better still, and the -D version has HD4000 graphics from what I understand.

 

[AtenRa]

So quadruple the power consumption, considerably slower CPU and moderately faster GPU?

Again, power consumption is not the TDP.
We also dont have numbers of TDP for Z-3770 and we certainty dont have power consumption numbers for both Z-3770 and A4-1200/1250.

We really have to see those numbers first and then we can conclude.

 

[blackened23]

A4-1250 is also an 8W TDP part. Good luck putting that in a 1-2W tablet as Bay Trail will be.

A4-1250 is, once again, a laptop and convertible chip but IS NOT a tablet chip. And it's still slower than bay trail-T. A more fitting comparison to the 1250 would be the Bay Trail-D, and I can't imagine the 1250 doing well there since Bay Trail-T is still a more complete and better package despite being designed for tablets while the 1250 is for notebooks and convertibles.

Wake me up when you find some A4-1200 benchmarks - besides which, the 1250 isn't even the same market category either, it isn't designed for tablets in a 1-2W window. Neither the 1250 or the 1200 are as attractive as a complete package as Bay Trail T is, period.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Again, power consumption is not the TDP.
We also dont have numbers of TDP for Z-3770 and we certainty dont have power consumption numbers for both Z-3770 and A4-1200/1250.

We really have to see those numbers first and then we can conclude.

Yeah I removed it, but platform consumption is stated to be a problem for AMD even if their chips use only a bit more power their reference platform isn't as good.

 

[AtenRa]

And this is the lowest tier Bay Trail SKU. The Bay Trail D and Bay Trail M will perform even better still, and the -D version has HD4000 graphics from what I understand.

Every BayTrail will have the same amount of EUs and thats 4. The only thing that will change is the TDP and base/turbo frequency. There is no HD4000.

 

[blackened23]

Every BayTrail will have the same amount of EUs and thats 4. The only thing that will change is the TDP and base/turbo frequency. There is no HD4000.

So in the meantime, you can go ahead and stop comparing laptop and convertible chips (eg A4-1250) to the Bay Trail-T which is intended for 2W tablets. AMD does not have such a product so you can't do these comparisons. When Bay Trail-D is released, you can do a comparison then, because that will be apples to apples. You'll be comparing a laptop chip to a laptop chip, instead of laptop chips to a 2W tablet chip.

 

[Roland00Address]

samsung cant even get yields at 28nm right. they make dram and nand but can hardly supply their own apps processors to samsung mobile. their apps processor business has given ever more share to qcom in the s4 vs the s3.

Samsung has no problem supplying the "app processor" to use your terms it just has no incentive to do so. Samsung has a similar processor to Qualcomm s600/s800 with their exynos gen 5 (often called exynos octocore).

The use Qualcomm s600 s800 for these parts have an integrated LTE modem or are bundled with the LTE modem. Qualcomm since they are effectively the only current supplier of LTE modems means Samsung must have a relationship with Qualcomm. If the s600 is bundled with a world class CPU that is sold cheaper than buying the exynos 5 then Samsung is going to use that CPU.

Samsung has many divisions of their company, if they can get a part cheaper outside the company istead of inside they are required to do so for that increases that divisions profitability and financials. Samsung mobile is separate from Samsung foundry.

In 3g markets you see Samsung use exynos 5. We will probably also see less Samsung using Qualcomm parts in the next 2 years with broadcom, Intel, and nvidia entering the LTE market.

 

[Abwx]

A4-1250 is also an 8W TDP part. Good luck putting that in a 1-2W tablet as Bay Trail will be.

A4-1250 is, once again, a laptop and convertible chip but IS NOT a tablet chip. And it's still slower than bay trail-T. A more fitting comparison to the 1250 would be the Bay Trail-D, and I can't imagine the 1250 doing well there since Bay Trail-T is still a more complete and better package despite being designed for tablets while the 1250 is for notebooks and convertibles.

Wake me up when you find some A4-1200 benchmarks - besides which, the 1250 isn't even the same market category either, it isn't designed for tablets in a 1-2W window. Neither the 1250 or the 1200 are as attractive as a complete package as Bay Trail T is, period.

I already posted this but some seems unable to do extrapolations..
How much would a A4 1250 consume in the scenarii below
given the A4 5000 comsumptions in said tasks..?...
And how much for the A4 1450 ???

 

[AtenRa]

So in the meantime, you can go ahead and stop comparing laptop and convertible chips (eg A4-1250) to the Bay Trail-T which is intended for 2W tablets. AMD does not have such a product so you can't do these comparisons. When Bay Trail-D is released, you can do a comparison then, because that will be apples to apples. You'll be comparing a laptop chip to a laptop chip, instead of laptop chips to a 2W tablet chip.

Where did you see 2W TDP for the Z3770 ??? That is the SDP

Again, Intel havent disclosed the TDP number of any BayTrail, and from the leaks we know that a Dual Core BayTrail Celeron at 1.46GHz will be at 4.5W TDP and <2.5W SDP.


http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile..._Bay_Trail_System_on_Chips_Gets_Revealed.html

And once again, A4-1200 is made for Tablets. I gave you the links before.

Edit: Intel says 2W SDP in their site.

 

[monstercameron]

Yeah I removed it, but platform consumption is stated to be a problem for AMD even if their chips use only a bit more power their reference platform isn't as good.

finally you speak the truth about AMDs situation, I completely agree with this. there is no reason for these completely different products to have the same platform power!

http://www.umpcportal.com/2013/05/amd-temash-a6-1450-performance-acer-aspire-v5/
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Acer-Aspire-V5-122P-61454G50NSS-Notebook.93321.0.html
acer v5-122p a6-1450

Power consumption
Off / Standby 0.1 / 1.0 Watt
Idle 6.9 / 9.4 / 12.4 Watt
Load 18.3 / 23.3 Watt
Key: min: , med: , max: Voltcraft VC 940

toshiba 15" a4-5000

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Toshiba-Satellite-C50D-A-10E-Notebook.100745.0.html

Power consumption
Off / Standby 0.1 / 0.4 Watt
Idle 4.9 / 8.4 / 10.8 Watt
Load 18.3 / 22.5 Watt
Key: min: , med: , max: Voltcraft VC 960

 

[blackened23]

There is no practical difference between TDP and SDP. SDP measures the typical power consumption during average application use. TDP measures the versatality required by the cooler during average application use.

Have fun explaining that one. You act like TDP and SDP are completely different things. They aren't. Every silicon manufacturer has their own, different, definitions for TDP and they are not directly comparable. AMD has their set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. Intel has their own set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. SDP measures platform power. TDP measures cooling versatility. And both of these depend on average applications as defined by whoever created the silicon. Do you think AMD TDP means anything? AMD TDP isn't the same as Samsung's TDP. It isn't the same as Qualcomm's TDP. For all we know AMD is (and likely are) lying through their teeth. This is why their power consumption is always worse than other competing solutions.

SDP measures total power use, TDP measures the versatility required by the cooling subsystem during average applications as defined by the manufacturer.

You act like AMD is doing something different with their TDP. Give me a break. TDP is not an industry standard. AMD can cite whatever the heck they want for TDP. There is NO INDUSTRY STANDARD defining what TDP is. So the bottom line is that AMD can and is dishonest about it - why else would their load power be so terrible.

 

[monstercameron]

There is no practical difference between TDP and SDP. SDP measures the typical power consumption during average application use. TDP measures the versatality required by the cooler during average application use.

Have fun explaining that one. You act like TDP and SDP are completely different things. They aren't. Every silicon manufacturer has their own, different, definitions for TDP and they are not directly comparable. AMD has their set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. Intel has their own set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. SDP measures platform power. TDP measures cooling versatility. And both of these depend on average applications as defined by whoever created the silicon. Do you think AMD TDP means anything? AMD TDP isn't the same as Samsung's TDP. It isn't the same as Qualcomm's TDP. For all we know AMD is (and likely are) lying through their teeth. This is why their power consumption is always worse than other competing solutions.

SDP measures total power use, TDP measures the versatility required by the cooling subsystem during average applications as defined by the manufacturer.

You act like AMD is doing something different with their TDP. Give me a break. TDP is not an industry standard. AMD can cite whatever the heck they want for TDP. There is NO INDUSTRY STANDARD defining what TDP is. So the bottom line is that AMD can and is dishonest about it - why else would their load power be so terrible.

did you see the post above? 15w kabini hardly goes over 20W and that is stress tested. Pleas stop thread crapping and make you points.

 

[Khato]

So quadruple the power consumption, considerably slower CPU and moderately faster GPU?

Precisely. The fact is that unless you want to ignore the Baytrail preview power numbers because the instrumentation for such was provided by Intel (unlike all the competition that won't even mention their power consumption, much less wire up their reference platform to precise measurement devices so that journalists could run the numbers on whatever workloads they like) then the 2.5W SDP figure is accurate. None of the previews that I've seen reported that the Baytrail SoC used more than 2.5W... and in an actual gaming workload there's a report of it only using 1.4W. How much do you think Kabini/Temash is using? According to one of Anandtech's Kabini articles - http://www.anandtech.com/show/6981/...ality-of-mainstream-pcs-with-its-latest-apu/3 - the 15W TDP A4-5000 went from platform power consumption of 4.75W idle to 15.2W while playing Oblivion. So it's safe to say that it's using at least 10W. If we assume that the A4-1250 also uses 2/3 of its TDP while gaming (unlikely given that a fair deal of the TDP reduction comes from less CPU cores) then it's still at ~5.3W... which is 3.8 times the power being used by Baytrail.

I'd hope that no one would argue that Baytrail has a faster/comparable GPU to Kabini/Temash. And in actual windows games Baytrail may well fall even further behind, and who cares if you can play your game for over twice as long if the experience is unacceptable? There's no question that Kabini/Temash make for the better low-resolution extreme budget gaming laptop choice. Good for AMD. They beat out Baytrail-M and Baytrail-D.

But need I remind you that what was previewed is a tablet SoC? Which windows games designed for mouse and keyboard user input are going to be played on a tablet? Because as soon as you go to actual tablet 3D games the 'weak' Baytrail GPU is apparently more than adequate to play smoothly at a 2560x1440 resolution. I just don't understand how Intel can be criticized for designing Baytrail appropriately for its intended market. (Conversely, depending upon how quickly tablet game complexity increases, Qualcomm could be criticized for unnecessarily increasing Snapdragon 800 costs by wasting too much space on its GPU... which is actually quite likely to be the case.)

 

[AtenRa]

There is no practical difference between TDP and SDP. SDP measures the typical power consumption during average application use. TDP measures the versatality required by the cooler during average application use.

Have fun explaining that one. You act like TDP and SDP are completely different things. They aren't. Every silicon manufacturer has their own, different, definitions for TDP and they are not directly comparable. AMD has their set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. Intel has their own set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. SDP measures platform power. TDP measures cooling versatility. And both of these depend on average applications as defined by whoever created the silicon. Do you think AMD TDP means anything? AMD TDP isn't the same as Samsung's TDP. It isn't the same as Qualcomm's TDP. For all we know AMD is (and likely are) lying through their teeth. This is why their power consumption is always worse than other competing solutions.

SDP measures total power use, TDP measures the versatility required by the cooling subsystem during average applications as defined by the manufacturer.

You act like AMD is doing something different with their TDP. Give me a break. TDP is not an industry standard. AMD can cite whatever the heck they want for TDP. There is NO INDUSTRY STANDARD defining what TDP is. So the bottom line is that AMD can and is dishonest about it - why else would their load power be so terrible.

Ok, whatever float your boat. Im not going to say anything else after what you typed above. I never meant this to turn in to an AMD vs Intel flaming war but the way and the things you say will trigger this mayhem once again. And it is a pity because we had a nice conversation so far

 

[blackened23]

did you see the post above? 15w kabini hardly goes over 20W and that is stress tested. Pleas stop thread crapping and make you points.

The Bay Trail T used 2.5W during stress testing and was rated a 2.5W SDP. So 15W Kabini is using 20W ? Who's really being dishonest?

Yes, I know TDP isn't power consumption. But the fact remains, you're white knighting the "TDP" phrase when the reality is, it means nothing. It is not an industry standard. AMD can define "average applications" however they want and if you veer away from THEIR applications, you can easily pass their TDP number.

 

[monstercameron]

Precisely. The fact is that unless you want to ignore the Baytrail preview power numbers because the instrumentation for such was provided by Intel (unlike all the competition that won't even mention their power consumption, much less wire up their reference platform to precise measurement devices so that journalists could run the numbers on whatever workloads they like) then the 2.5W SDP figure is accurate. None of the previews that I've seen reported that the Baytrail SoC used more than 2.5W... and in an actual gaming workload there's a report of it only using 1.4W. How much do you think Kabini/Temash is using? According to one of Anandtech's Kabini articles - http://www.anandtech.com/show/6981/...ality-of-mainstream-pcs-with-its-latest-apu/3 - the 15W TDP A4-5000 went from platform power consumption of 4.75W idle to 15.2W while playing Oblivion. So it's safe to say that it's using at least 10W. If we assume that the A4-1250 also uses 2/3 of its TDP while gaming (unlikely given that a fair deal of the TDP reduction comes from less CPU cores) then it's still at ~5.3W... which is 3.8 times the power being used by Baytrail.

I'd hope that no one would argue that Baytrail has a faster/comparable GPU to Kabini/Temash. And in actual windows games Baytrail may well fall even further behind, and who cares if you can play your game for over twice as long if the experience is unacceptable? There's no question that Kabini/Temash make for the better low-resolution extreme budget gaming laptop choice. Good for AMD. They beat out Baytrail-M and Baytrail-D.

But need I remind you that what was previewed is a tablet SoC? Which windows games designed for mouse and keyboard user input are going to be played on a tablet? Because as soon as you go to actual tablet 3D games the 'weak' Baytrail GPU is apparently more than adequate to play smoothly at a 2560x1440 resolution. I just don't understand how Intel can be criticized for designing Baytrail appropriately for its intended market. (Conversely, depending upon how quickly tablet game complexity increases, Qualcomm could be criticized for unnecessarily increasing Snapdragon 800 costs by wasting too much space on its GPU... which is actually quite likely to be the case.)

I dont think anyone here disagrees...what I think we are arguing are for the equivalencies intel v. amd.

 

[blackened23]

Ok, whatever float your boat. Im not going to say anything else after what you typed above. I never meant this to turn in to an AMD vs Intel flaming war but the way and the things you say will trigger this mayhem once again. And it is a pity because we had a nice conversation so far

I am sorry for the tone. But this thread has gone like this ----> Bay Trail T benchmarks revealed. Response? Comparing it to AMD laptop and convertible chips (wrong comparison). And then latching on the SDP. Come on. These aren't valid counter arguments.

AMD has some nice stuff, but the counter-arguments against Bay Trail in this thread have been largely ridiculous. Yes, Bay Trail T has shortcomings. The graphics need to get better. Integrated LTE (intel will have this next year) I agree with all of that. But to say it isn't quite a feat - I don't agree with that. Intel overnight has trounced the CPU performance of every ARM SOC in existence, so I find that highly impressive even if the graphics could use a little work.

Anyway, again, apologies for the tone.

 

[monstercameron]

The Bay Trail T used 2.5W during stress testing and was rated a 2.5W SDP. So 15W Kabini is using 20W ? Who's really being dishonest?

Yes, I know TDP isn't power consumption. But the fact remains, you're white knighting the "TDP" phrase when the reality is, it means nothing. It is not an industry standard. AMD can define "average applications" however they want and if you veer away from THEIR applications, you can easily pass their TDP number.

wrong victim again, I didnt mention anythin about tdp, I just wanted you to stop thread crapping and get with the facts.

pcper found that baytrail "reference design" was using 2.6W idle [indisputably very good ok!] while notebookcheck found the a4-5000 idling at 4.9W [larger screen, possible brighter screen, sata hdd, possibly higher power wireless chipset, possibly 1.35v ddr3 1600ram etc, laptop components]

 

[Khato]

I already posted this but some seems unable to do extrapolations..
How much would a A4 1250 consume in the scenarii below
given the A4 5000 comsumptions in said tasks..?...
And how much for the A4 1450 ???

I would hope for AMD's sake that the A4-1250 would consume practically the same as the A4-5000 in those scenarios. If not, then they have some pretty major issues with power gating unnecessary resources. After all, they're all using the same physical die, no?

 

[Abwx]

There is no practical difference between TDP and SDP. SDP measures the typical power consumption during average application use. TDP measures the versatality required by the cooler during average application use.

Have fun explaining that one. You act like TDP and SDP are completely different things. They aren't. Every silicon manufacturer has their own, different, definitions for TDP and they are not directly comparable. AMD has their set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. Intel has their own set of "average applications" which is not shared by ANYONE in the industry. SDP measures platform power. TDP measures cooling versatility. And both of these depend on average applications as defined by whoever created the silicon. Do you think AMD TDP means anything? AMD TDP isn't the same as Samsung's TDP. It isn't the same as Qualcomm's TDP. For all we know AMD is (and likely are) lying through their teeth. This is why their power consumption is always worse than other competing solutions.

SDP measures total power use, TDP measures the versatility required by the cooling subsystem during average applications as defined by the manufacturer.

You act like AMD is doing something different with their TDP. Give me a break. TDP is not an industry standard. AMD can cite whatever the heck they want for TDP. There is NO INDUSTRY STANDARD defining what TDP is. So the bottom line is that AMD can and is dishonest about it - why else would their load power be so terrible.

Lol , denial ending by branding AMD as the culprit for SDP propaganda..
One of the most funny post i ever did read...

Precisely. The fact is that unless you want to ignore the Baytrail preview power numbers because the instrumentation for such was provided by Intel (unlike all the competition that won't even mention their power consumption, much less wire up their reference platform to precise measurement devices so that journalists could run the numbers on whatever workloads they like) then the 2.5W SDP figure is accurate. None of the previews that I've seen reported that the Baytrail SoC used more than 2.5W...

You didnt look very far , just browsing is already 2.9W ,
iddling at 2.6W , granted that s for the whole system
but what about with CB MT or furmark + prime.??..

So far thoses numbers where provided under full control
of intel , we ll see once products hit the reviewers..

Measuring power at the battery we found that both BT (Bay Trail) and CT (Clover Trail) systems were using approximately 2.6 watts at idle in Windows 8. That is not the SoC power draw, but the entire system including display and accessories. When we fired up a web browser and loaded up CNN’s website, BT used 2.9 watts while CT drew a bit more at 3.2 watts.

 

[Khato]

You didnt look very far , just browsing is already 2.9W ,
iddling at 2.6W , granted that s for the whole system
but what about with CB MT or furmark + prime.??..

So far thoses numbers where provided under full control
of intel , we ll see once products hit the reviewers..

You're quoting platform power consumption there, not SoC. I specifically stated that the Baytrail SoC never went past 2.5 watts in any of the previews I've seen.