Slashdot Mirror


Info On Intel Bay Trail 22nm Atom Platform Shows Out-of-Order Design

MojoKid writes "New leaked info from Intel sheds light on how the company's 2014 platforms will challenge ARM products in the ultra light, low power market. At present, the company's efforts in the segment are anchored by Cedar Trail, the 32nm dual-core platform that launched a year ago. To date, all of Intel's platform updates for Atom have focused on lowering power consumption and ramping SoC integration rather than focusing on performance — but Bay Trail will change that. Bay Trail moves Atom to a quad-core, 22nm, out-of-order design. It significantly accelerates the CPU core with burst modes of up to 2.7GHz, and it'll be the first Atom to feature Intel's own graphics processor instead of a licensed core from Imagination Technologies."

2 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. About bloody time... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I, for one, will be overjoyed to see the last of Imagination's 'PowerVR' shit, especially on x86, and hope we'll never see the likes of the "GMA500" again.

    On the other hand, this report has me wondering exactly what the Atom team is up to. Back when Intel started the whole 'Atom' business, the whole point of having a substantially different architecture, in-order, was to have something that could scale down to lower power in a way that their flagship designs couldn't. Since then, the ULV Core I3/5/7 chips have continued to improve on power consumption, and the Atoms have apparently been sprouting additional complexity and computational power. How much room do they have to do that before 'Atom' evolves itself right out of its power envelope, or Core ULV parts start hitting the same TDPs as higher-power Atoms; but with much more headroom?

  2. Re:Not Windows 7 compatible by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The link is here. Basically some Atoms can not run WIndows 8, and clovertrail is specifically designed not to be Windows 7 compatible.

    Unless any information has changed my suspicious part of me feels Intel feels threatens the low margin and is trying to make sure this stays only in tables and not in servers nor desktops which is shame. I see no reason to spend a tiny portion of R&D backporting WDDM1.2 to WDDM 1.1 so the graphics work with the Windows 7 kernel.