Slashdot Mirror
Intel Challenges ARM On Power Consumption... And Ties
GhostX9 writes "Tom's Hardware just published a detailed look at the Intel Atom Z2760 in the Acer Iconia W510 and compared it to the NVIDIA Tegra 3 in the Microsoft Surface. They break it down and demonstrate how the full Windows 8 tablet outperforms the Windows RT machine in power consumption. They break down power consumption to include the role of the CPU, GPU, memory controller and display. Anandtech is also reporting similar findings, but only reports CPU and GPU utilization."
Despite repeated claims that x86 is beating ARM here, they look neck and neck. Assuming you can make a meaningful comparison.
Despite repeated claims that x86 is beating ARM here, they look neck in neck.
It's neck and neck.
First, those articles are very interesting, thanks to Intel for making them happen.
Second, it's a good thing that Intel is catching up. I'm not a great Intel fan (rooting for the underdogs and all that), but still, I'm impressed.
Third, isn't the OS choice biasing the results a bit ? Would ARM fare better under a more ARM-oriented OS such as Android ? Or is power consumption profile, in the end, fully OS-independent ?
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
The only issue here is that this is not an apples for apples comparison. 40nm vs. 32nm should give a huge benefit to the 32nm Atom. We need to compare the same technology node for this to make any sense. Also, looking at the idle cpu power consumption from the anandtech article, the Atom SOC used 10x more power. /half speed or with the SOC sitting idle?
So the real question is what do most tablets spend the majority of their time doing? Running a benchmark at full
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/snapdragon-s4-pro-apq8064-msm8960t,3291-4.html
Atom isn't here, but perhaps because it is too new, but it's clear from this graph that at least Tom's Hardware seems to agree that the Snapdragon eats Tegra's lunch.
I have a Nexus 4 (Snapdragon S4) and a Nexus 7 (Tegra 3), and the 4 is WAY, WAY faster than the 7 in almost every experience.
On the Nexus 4 I can leave a movie playing in the background and keep listening to it while I check an important email that just came in or make a move in a game of Words with my wife. Attempting the exact same thing on the Nexus 7 results in the movie skipping and the user experience slowing to a crawl.
Perhaps there are some significant architecture differences between the two, but at least from a real-world user experience standpoint, I would not characterize the OP's assertion as "random conjecture" at all.
No, it doesn't.
Why doesn't it mean x86 is ahead? Because x86 has had years of development ahead of ARM. Also because x86 uses proprietary microcode.
So having them equal means ARM is a significant benefit.
The original x86 was introduced in 1978.
/. crowd and other self described "experts" have been saying for years that a neck and neck tie between them for power consumption would never happen. And well it did, so obviously this is a win for the x86.
The original ARM was introduced in 1985.
That is just 7 years more over the ARM with 27 years of development since the first implementation. Plus all of the
Why are they a node ahead all the time? Because they spend billions in R&D. When the downturn hit everyone in the fab business cut R&D, except Intel. So now they have a 22nm fab that has been running for awhile, another that just came fully online, and two 14nm fabs that'll be done soon (one on 450mm wafers).
They do precisely what geeks harp on companies to do: Invest money in R&D, invest in tech. They also don't outsource production, they own their own fabs and make their own chips. Most of them are even in the United States (8 of the 11).
The payoff is that they are ahead of people in terms of node size, and that their yields tend to be good (because the designers and fab people can work closely).
If other companies don't like it, well the only option is to throw in heavy on the R&D front. In ARM's case being not only fabless but actually chipless, just licensing cores to other companies, they can't do that. They are at the mercy of Samsung, TSMC, Global Foundries, and so on.