Intel Bay Trail Brings New Architecture and Performance To Atom

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Bay Trail Brings New Architecture and Performance To Atom

Posted by Unknown on Wednesday September 11, 2013 @04:45AM from the small-cpus-are-so-cute dept.

Vigile writes "Today at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco, the company officially released the Atom Z3000 series of SoCs (Bay Trail) based on the Silvermont architecture. Unlike previous Atom designs, the Z3000 and Silvermont is a completely re-architected product from the ground up and is no longer based on legacy processors. Changes include a move to an out-of-order x86 architecture with drastically improved single threaded performance but the removal of Intel's HyperThreading technology. Dual-core modules with 1MB of shared cache can be paired up to create a quad-core SoC that also includes upgraded graphics design. Intel is no longer depending on PowerVR for a GPU and has integrated a 4 EU (execution unit) Intel HD Graphics design that is very similar to the one used in Ivy Bridge. As a result, as tested at PC Perspective in both Windows 8.1 and Android 4.2.2, the Bay Trail part is as much as 4x faster in single threaded tasks and 3.5x faster in gaming and graphics. Power consumption remains nearly the same as it did with Clover Trail (Atom Z2760) but with improved power gating and support for Connected Standby, Intel's new Atom looks and feels completely different than any before it." MojoKid notes that Intel also announced an "open" SoC architecture (where open involves you giving Intel tons of money).

68 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 04:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

This chip family is Intel's first real answer to arm SoCs. I look forward to seeing devices that feature it. Supposedly it will enable sub-100 dollar windows 8 tablets. (Well, excluding the win8 license probably. MS- You have a problem when your OS costs 2x more than the hardware itself.) - I'd love to pick up a 99 dollar tablet and see what I can do with a linux distro. I'd also love to see some ultra-small low cost SoC based boards. (Atomberry pi anyone?)
The x86 android port is supposed to be pretty damn good too, but intel seems to have a poor track record of actually getting shipping devices in to the hands of consumers.
1. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 05:09 · Score: 0
  
  Pick up a TC1000 then at half your willing price:
  
  http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=tc1000
2. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 05:26 · Score: 0
  
  No idea where you got came up with Windows costing 2x the hardware itself. For OEMs, it's definitely below $99....
3. Re:Been waiting for this. by hairyfeet · 2013-09-11 05:51 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  But how does it compare to the AMD Bobcats and Jaguars? To me THAT is the question. I have built many a system around the Bobcat and its pretty damned nice, more than powerful enough to replace the aging P4s in office environments while taking less power under load for the entire system than your average P4 idles at, great for netbooks, even low power servers, and the Jaguars are powerful enough that they are the chip of the Xbox N and PS4 while supposedly using little more than the Bobcats.
  Every system with an Atom chip that has came into the shop...sigh...the words "mediocre" and "weak" instantly come to mind. AMD was able to boost their Bobcat by pairing it with a powerful GCN GPU and splitting the load, but lets face it Intel has never been great at GPU design so you ended up with a weak sauce CPU tied to a weak sauce GPU and that equals just painful to use.
  So while I'll be happy to give 'em a spin if any ever walk through my door unless someone can show me some real world tests, NOT benchmarks because as we have seen the "Intel Cripple Compiler" makes any benchmark that doesn't announce which compiler they use suspect at best, I'll have to tell my customers to avoid Atoms, if they want Intel the i3s are ULV and at least have good performance.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
4. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 06:29 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  According to Intel this is a complete redesign that has more in common with haswell than it does with older atoms. It's interesting to note that all Intel chips, pre haswell, have had bolt-on powersaving tech. Haswell and later chips are designed from the ground up with power management in mind.
  The family has chips aimed at true mobile applications, like tablets and smartphones. It also has chips aimed at low end laptops and deskops, like the previous atom. I don't know how well they will compete with bobcat and Jaguar, and I'm not sure they're intended to compete in the same space. I think the Pentium line is what's meant to compete with those.
  On paper it looks good. Out of order execution, super low power states, power state awareness between GPU and CPU, 64bit support, 2 or 4 cores. I'm eager to see benches and reviews of new hardware once it becomes generally available.
5. Re:Been waiting for this. by phantomfive · 2013-09-11 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  Now that Intel is focusing on beating ARM, they have less energy to focus on AMD, so now is AMD's chance to move back in.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
6. Re:Been waiting for this. by 0123456 · 2013-09-11 07:01 · Score: 2
  
  Isn't Intel's R&D budget greater than AMD's entire revenue?
  I think they can afford to keep pushing high-end CPUs as well as low-end.
7. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 07:04 · Score: 0
  
  Intel is doing a pretty good job at beating both. Their CPUs are still much more powerful and power efficient than either.
8. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 07:05 · Score: 0
  
  Everyone is focusing on beating ARM. They're all moving away from desktops because that market is shrinking. Why would AMD spend its resources trying to catch up to a competitor who is 2-3 generations ahead in desktop CPU performance? Their best bet for long term growth is to try and carve as much of the mobile and embedded market for themselves before Intel takes over the market.
9. Re:Been waiting for this. by hairyfeet · 2013-09-11 07:25 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Well then that CPU is effectively fucked, as I can tell ya that folks HATE Windows 8. Can't say as I blame 'em, I spent half the night having to hack the living shit out of Win 8 to make it into a system that was actually usable. For those that want to know how here are the steps and note that you can NOT "just add Start8 and be done", not by a long shot!
  1.- Install and configure Start8, I turn off all the bling bling as it gives better performance on a laptop, how much or little you keep is up to you. 2.- type in "disable charms registry" to find the registry entires you will need to hack to kill the first half of that POS charms crap. ironic that they killed gadgets because "they were a security risk" when gadgets were actually useful, charms is just fucking irritating. 3.- Finally look up "synaptics generic touchpad driver" and pray to FSM that it supports your touchpad, otherwise seriously think about disabling your touchpad and going with a mouse, otherwise retarded Win 8 will read any halfway fast move on the touchpad as a "swipe" and cockblock you with the charms box!
  After you do ALL of that, along with striping out the ad laden crap and Metro garbage "apps"...fuck I hate that damned word now, the second anyone uses that word now I automatically think "hipster douche" thanks to its buzzword overuse...anyway once you do ALL of that, around 4-5 hours depending on how much extra third party crap is left? You will actually have a functional laptop/desktop, without? If you aren't on a cellphone it will drive you up the damned wall as Win 8 is so obviously built around touch that it hurts and without touch it feels like it is actively fighting the user every step of the way.
  But I wouldn't wish Win 8 on my worst enemy, yes its THAT bad. Anybody who doubts it should watch this video followed by this video showing what a REAL normal user goes through with Windows 8. Count how many times he says "no" "stop" and "I don't want that" in the video, he is unable to even do basic tasks as Win 8 is fighting him every step thanks to making poorly done half ass touch sensing the "centerpiece" of the shit sandwich.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
10. Re:Been waiting for this. by timeOday · 2013-09-11 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  unless someone can show me some real world tests, NOT benchmarks because as we have seen the "Intel Cripple Compiler" makes any benchmark that doesn't announce which compiler they use suspect at best
  RTA. The 4x improvement isn't an Intel claim, they are what PC Perspective observed "without intervention from Intel and without restrictions on allowed benchmarks." They ran SiSoft Sandra, CineBench, TrueCrypt, 3DMark, and a few more under Windows 8.
  This looks to me to be the part that would enable the Microsoft Surface Pro 2 to actually be a viable general-purpose computer in a true tablet form factor.
11. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Those things make atoms look like speed demons.
12. Re:Been waiting for this. by UneducatedSixpack · 2013-09-11 08:30 · Score: 0
  
  Well then that CPU is effectively fucked, as I can tell ya that folks HATE Windows 8. Can't say as I blame 'em, I spent half the night having to hack the living shit out of Win 8 to make it into a system that was actually usable. For those that want to know how here are the steps and note that you can NOT "just add Start8 and be done", not by a long shot!
  I use Win8 on my desktop. I learned to ignore charms and use start button on the keyboard. I also do not use any metro apps. That is about it.I do not see why win8 is such a big problem. I see win8-specific stuff maybe 20-30 seconds a day max. It is entertaining to see people pissed for no reason but man.. relax. Get a beer or something. We lived through XP mickey mouse interface with unremovable moviemaker. We can handle charms, apps and metro. Man up!
13. Re:Been waiting for this. by hairyfeet · 2013-09-11 08:44 · Score: 0
  
  How about YOU read what I posted, where I clearly said you can't trust benchmarks unless the companies that MADE the benchmark state clear which compiler they use. if you want to know why simply Google "Intel Cripple Compiler" to see how simply changing the CPUID of a Centaur CPU (the only CPU that allows you to change CPUID) from "Centaur Hauls" to "Genuine Intel" cause the benchmarks to magically improve by over 30% simply by changing CPUID and nothing else, amazing huh?
  Its actually VERY simple, any and ALL programs compiled with the Intel Cripple Compiler WILL be rigged against ANY non Intel CPU, and moreover the way it does this is known and well documented, it also can NOT be turned off as researchers even tried using flags to change the behavior and NEVER got the ICC to put out functional optimized code for anything BUT an Intel CPU. It will ALWAYS throw the program into "X87 mode" math, a path that has been depreciated since 1997 BTW, if the CPUID doesn't say Genuine Intel. That means NO SSE,, no advanced math features at all, it will run no different than if the code was compiled with the Pentium I in mind.
  So don't believe the benchmarks friend, after all the benchmarks say the slowest in order atom will beat the top of the line AMD Bobcat, even though its an OOO chip with a much more powerful GPU, yet you run the tests with a program compiled with GCC? The results are the opposite. BTW its already been proven the "Intel simply knows how to optimize for their own chips" is a lie as it also cripples the Pentium III CPU because when the P4 came out the P3 was curbstomping it in benchmarks, the cripple code was inserted into ICC 2002 and wadda ya know? Suddenly the benchmarks had P4 beating P3 by 30%. It just shows that the DoJ has no teeth anymore and a company can get by with anything nowadays.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
14. Re:Been waiting for this. by Rockoon · 2013-09-11 09:08 · Score: 2
  
  Its not just the benchmark code either. Benchmarks often link to pre-compiled math libraries that themselves were compiled with ICC, so compiling the benchmark with Visual Studio or GCC doesnt help the situation any if you continue to link to those libraries.
  
  In addition, you need to trust the benchmarkers themselves, and most of these tech sites that so often do benchmarks have conflicts of interest (advertising money, free review hardware, etc..) With this in mind I trust PassMarks online benchmark data more than any of review site even though the benchmarks are always entirely synthetic, because the benchmarks are crowd-sourced with anywhere from dozens to thousands of different people benchmarking a given piece of hardware on a wide array of setups.
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
15. Re:Been waiting for this. by Billly+Gates · 2013-09-11 10:16 · Score: 3
  
  Well then that CPU is effectively fucked, as I can tell ya that folks HATE Windows 8. Can't say as I blame 'em, I spent half the night having to hack the living shit out of Win 8 to make it into a system that was actually usable. For those that want to know how here are the steps and note that you can NOT "just add Start8 and be done", not by a long shot!
  I use Win8 on my desktop. I learned to ignore charms and use start button on the keyboard. I also do not use any metro apps. That is about it.I do not see why win8 is such a big problem. I see win8-specific stuff maybe 20-30 seconds a day max. It is entertaining to see people pissed for no reason but man.. relax. Get a beer or something. We lived through XP mickey mouse interface with unremovable moviemaker. We can handle charms, apps and metro. Man up!
  I see the same reaction with XP loyalists such as these in pages 2 - 15 in this article? Besides the 1st comment titled UPGRADE!! everyone is bitching and moaning on how only XP can do this only XP can do that and they site examples like show desktop doesn't exist!! It does it is that rectangle on the right. No sticky keys OMG .. uh enable them and they are there. One of them was a CIO who bashed those on modern operating systems saying he makes sure all his workplace computers are 12 years old because they are "familiar to him". Are you serious? What kind of CIO does nothing for 12 years? They love their blues and greens and that grassed hill in the background more than they want to change.
  Change is hard and I bet if MS removed METRO in Windows 9 you would be irritated too because you are used to the limitation and annoyance of Windows 8 Modern by this time frame too right?
  In reality though the complaints agaisn't 8 on a desktop with a mouse and keyboard are real. I do not get why I would click on the news tile and have no menu or functions and would have to move the mouse all over for just 3 of them full screen? Aero glass is gone and so is aero snap and Windows 7 instant search. That is a bummer too for multitaskers. Sure if someone put a gun to my head Hairy and I *could* use it but it is not optimized for desktops.
  I could get used to Windows 8.1 and Metro if I could get aero back, stacked tiles similiar to programs in the Windows 7 task bar, better control with a task bar for Metro and mouse integration. I would still feel uncomfortable because I do not like change but your argument then would be more valid. XP was a great OS for its time and anyone could get rid of that fisher price UI. It did not remove any functionality from Windows 98 with the exception of poorly written dos apps in assembly.
  
  --
  http://saveie6.com/
16. Re:Been waiting for this. by Billly+Gates · 2013-09-11 10:18 · Score: 1
  
  The link is here to give you an idea on how much people just hate change.
  
  --
  http://saveie6.com/
17. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 11:43 · Score: 0
  
  Its actually VERY simple, any and ALL programs compiled with the Intel Cripple Compiler WILL be rigged against ANY non Intel CPU, and moreover the way it does this is known and well documented, it also can NOT be turned off as researchers even tried using flags to change the behavior and NEVER got the ICC to put out functional optimized code for anything BUT an Intel CPU. It will ALWAYS throw the program into "X87 mode" math, a path that has been depreciated since 1997 BTW, if the CPUID doesn't say Genuine Intel.
  No, it's not "that simple". As usual, on anything even remotely technical, you're way out of your depth but more than willing to scream and shout as if you're an expert just because you run some podunk mom-n-pop PC building business and love to inflate your prejudices into facts.
  (hint: it absolutely is possible to force ICC to emit just one codepath with no CPUID checks, and in fact one of the popular benchmarks out there -- Cinebench -- is real production SSE2 code compiled that way. With ICC.)
  
  So don't believe the benchmarks friend, after all the benchmarks say the slowest in order atom will beat the top of the line AMD Bobcat, even though its an OOO chip with a much more powerful GPU, yet you run the tests with a program compiled with GCC? The results are the opposite.
  This would be the other uterly idiotic thing AMD-uber-alles asshats like you do. Namely, scream and wail about ICC and hold this up as prima facie evidence that no benchmarks inconvenient to your AMD uber alles narrative may be trusted, even though not all benchmarks or benchmarked applications were compiled by ICC. It's not even close to all. It's a pretty small fraction.
  All CPU suppliers attempt to influence benchmarks, and you had better believe that includes AMD -- the only reason you don't see lots of evidence of this is that their technical marketing budget has been next to nonexistent for a long time now. This does not imply that you can get away with just claiming "OMG OMG FIRE FIRE ALL BENCHMARKS BAD OMG!!!1!1!11!" when someone points you at independent evidence that yes, Bay Trail is indeed pretty fast.
18. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 12:18 · Score: 0
  
  Generally the OS cost with windows is Zero for most OEM's or close to it as it is offset by the bloatware other vendors pay them to ship with the device. Even without the offset though a license for an OEM is well below the 99 dollar mark.
19. Re:Been waiting for this. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 12:53 · Score: 0
  
  With this in mind I trust PassMarks online benchmark data more than any of review site even though the benchmarks are always entirely synthetic, because the benchmarks are crowd-sourced with anywhere from dozens to thousands of different people benchmarking a given piece of hardware on a wide array of setups.
  Er, what? That just means biased sources are free to submit doctored results without any hope of detection. It also means any real results are buried in the noise of thousands of idiots who have no clue how to run benchmarks. PassMark is garbage.
  "Crowd sourced" does not equal "better". I'd much rather have a known-biased source where I can examine their methodology in detail; at least I have a chance of pulling some worthwhile data out of that.
20. Re:Been waiting for this. by phantomfive · 2013-09-11 13:19 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but they don't have infinite resources. It can determine questions like, once they build a new fab for 14nm chips, should it be used to manufacture mobile chips or server chips before another comes online?
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
21. Re:Been waiting for this. by hairyfeet · 2013-09-11 19:46 · Score: 1
  
  Nice straw man Billy, might want to watch out for matches...WHOOSH! Why are you not driving your car with bike handlebars? Bikes are the #1 vehicle, are YOU afraid of innovation? Because that is exactly how retarded you sound because a SHITTY UI IS A SHITTY UI and just for the record, time it took me to "embrace innovation" with Android? About 3 minutes. OSX? Less than 10, iOS? About 4 minutes...Win 8? THREE FUCKING HOURS LATER AND THE BITCH IS STILL FIGHT ME because "herpa de derp we think a fucking touchpad and a touchscreen are the same thing, they both say touch right? herpa derpa".
  I have used everything from DOS to OS/2 to BeOS, how many OSes have YOU used Billy? I have ALWAYS been on the bleeding edge, when your ass was dragging behind on XP? I was running a beta of 2K3 stripped down into a desktop and the SECOND that XP X64 hit beta my ass was on it. I know innovation sir, I'm friends with innovation and Windows 8 is NOT innovation!
  But don't take MY word for it, how about some citations? here is a good one and this shows how they cocked up even the shutdown process and reviewers agree with me its THAT bad and the OEMs also know its a turkey., Face it win 8 is a joke and you can say having Ballmer take a steaming dump on your PC is "innovative" all you want Billy, its still a big pile of feces lying there.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
22. Re:Been waiting for this. by Billly+Gates · 2013-09-11 20:15 · Score: 1
  
  Nice straw man Billy, might want to watch out for matches...WHOOSH! Why are you not driving your car with bike handlebars? Bikes are the #1 vehicle, are YOU afraid of innovation? Because that is exactly how retarded you sound because a SHITTY UI IS A SHITTY UI and just for the record, time it took me to "embrace innovation" with Android? About 3 minutes. OSX? Less than 10, iOS? About 4 minutes...Win 8? THREE FUCKING HOURS LATER AND THE BITCH IS STILL FIGHT ME because "herpa de derp we think a fucking touchpad and a touchscreen are the same thing, they both say touch right? herpa derpa".
  I have used everything from DOS to OS/2 to BeOS, how many OSes have YOU used Billy? I have ALWAYS been on the bleeding edge, when your ass was dragging behind on XP? I was running a beta of 2K3 stripped down into a desktop and the SECOND that XP X64 hit beta my ass was on it. I know innovation sir, I'm friends with innovation and Windows 8 is NOT innovation!
  But don't take MY word for it, how about some citations? here is a good one and this shows how they cocked up even the shutdown process and reviewers agree with me its THAT bad and the OEMs also know its a turkey., Face it win 8 is a joke and you can say having Ballmer take a steaming dump on your PC is "innovative" all you want Billy, its still a big pile of feces lying there.
  OMG perfect! Download apps to keep track of your apps. Apps for getting apps. Apps for watching apps. Apps to launch apps. Apps to search for launching apps that launch other apps to watch other apps for all my apps to simpy get cell phone apps!
  Sign me up today. I will take that Atom and my new Cryris 3 app to run inside my VMWare workstation app with emulated OpenGL/Direct X. According to www.tomshardware.com all the x87 fpu benchmarks show it can cream the hell out of AMD piledriver 8 core anyday and represents real world performance according to the fan boys on here and over at that site ... with the all so loving Metro UI on a non touchscreen.
  
  --
  http://saveie6.com/
23. Re:Been waiting for this. by hairyfeet · 2013-09-13 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  The sad part is the way forward for AMD is obvious but nobody there is listening. How did Intel beat AMD after years of having to bribe the OEMs to use the P4? By ditching netburst, going back to the proven P3 technology and focusing on ramping up performance of it instead of the P4.
  How can AMD beat Intel again? By dropping the turkey that is the Bulldozer "half core" design and going back to a solid proven performer...the K8, which powered the Athlon64 and 64x2 to such great heights. Use THAT as the basis for a new chip and watch AMD kick serious ass again, hell just taking the stock K8 which was at 90nm and using today's 32nm process you could slap 4 K8s on a die easily and crank their clocks up a good 50% and STILL stay under 95w on the desktop!
  Instead it looks like AMD is gonna keep beating the Bulldozer dead horse for awhile while spending the lion's share on Bobcat. This will probably help in mobile, being that Jaguar (which is just an amped up Bobcat) is running the PS4 and Xbox N, who knows maybe their idea of making the CPU and GPU into a single entity (HUPA I think its called) will work and allow them to combine the low power of Jag with the high performance of the Radeons and make a good chip but I just don't see it beating Haswell.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Good, Screw you PowerVR by h4rr4r · 2013-09-11 04:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

Hopefully, this will end any reliance on PowerVR by Intel. I dream that this is the beginning of the end for those bastards.
1. Re:Good, Screw you PowerVR by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  Yes this is some of the best news by far. An x86 (well x64 too) SoC without a crappy binary blob driven SoC GPU.
2. Re:Good, Screw you PowerVR by h4rr4r · 2013-09-11 06:07 · Score: 0
  
  To the idiot with modpoints, here is another comment you can mod down. Have fun, my karma can take it.
3. Re:Good, Screw you PowerVR by bill_mcgonigle · 2013-09-11 07:44 · Score: 2
  
  Just to add to what you're saying here, allow me to illustrate.
  I was doing some embedded FreeBSD work on an Atom board, and it had the PowerVR GPU. The VGA text console was all scrambled. This was in 2011, it's not like VGA is all that new.
  It turns out that the VGA spec itself says that data can be written to the frame buffer in half-byte words. Every VGA implementation that FreeBSD had ever encountered worked with writing VGA text console data to the frame buffer a byte at a time. Until 20[8-10] when PowerVR decided to implement the letter of the spec, making it incompatible with at least the entire BSD world, and not so much as bother to test it. I'm going to assume they never bothered to test BSD because the other option is that they did test it, knew it was broken, probably knew why, but failed to send up a simple patch to the devs.
  This would all have been fine and dandy except Intel decided to bolt their GPU onto their Atom platform. I dunno, maybe there was a patent licensing deal that caused this to happen, but sheesh - good riddance!
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
4. Re:Good, Screw you PowerVR by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 08:07 · Score: 0
  
  I dare say it is. Imagination Technologies moves in mysterious ways. MIPS and all that. We can only speculate.
5. Re:Good, Screw you PowerVR by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 13:08 · Score: 0
  
  So you freely admit that you're whining because PowerVR implemented the spec correctly, and FreeBSD wasn't compliant with the spec, and somehow it is PowerVR's fault that you had to bring BSD into compliance.
  You also freely admit that you're making a mountain out of a molehill. This could not have been very difficult to fix unless the BSD text console code is completely FUBAR in every possible way.
  Pardon me if I think you're an idiot. (Note: that opinion was not formed by this post alone.)
  By the way, Intel used PowerVR in a lot more places than just the Atom. Many "Intel GMA" GPUs are licensed PowerVR cores. It's amusing that you've hinted at some kind of dark patent motive. It happened simply because Intel needed a cheap integrated GPU, did not want (at that time) to design their own, and therefore made a deal with a company whose main product is licenseable GPU intellectual property (both hardware and software). There is no reason to adopt conspiratorial thinking here.
OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by CajunArson · 2013-09-11 05:01 · Score: 5, Insightful

It turns out that Bay Trail has some very solid performance numbers and that the power consumption is very good too, but frankly, you can get similar results from high-end ARM SoCs.
What you can't get, however, are 100% GLPd GPU drivers that are already in the mainline Linux kernel. THANK YOU INTEL and I hope this is a wakeup call to the ARM vendors that the days of crappy, unsupported binary blobs are hopefully coming to an end.

--
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
1. Re:OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by h4rr4r · 2013-09-11 05:05 · Score: 0
  
  Hopefully we finally see some x86 android devices.
  BTW your sig is stupid. If a smoker tells you not to smoke as it causes cancer do you ignore him too?
2. Re:OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by phantomfive · 2013-09-11 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  It turns out that Bay Trail has some very solid performance numbers and that the power consumption is very good too, but frankly, you can get similar results from high-end ARM SoCs.
  But will that still be true in 2014 when Intel drops to 14nm?
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
3. Re:OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by CajunArson · 2013-09-11 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  Who knows? Even last year the results that Bay Trail is showing would have been considered next to impossible for an x86 part. Intel is still an underdog in mobile devices like tablets/smartphones, but it is good to see some competition.
  
  --
  AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
4. Re:OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by h4rr4r · 2013-09-11 05:39 · Score: 2
  
  Does it matter?
  If I can get even comparable power consumption sign me up. I am sick of this binary driver ARM bullshit.
5. Re:OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by phantomfive · 2013-09-11 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  Well said.
  
  I got one of the Samsung Android devices with an Intel chip on my desk the other day, and I was running native code, and didn't even notice it wasn't ARM until some obscure library wasn't opening correctly, and I tried to run objdump on it. So Intel seems to have the emulation capability, they should have no problem moving right in to the place where ARM is.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
6. Re:OPEN SOURCE GPU DRIVERS!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 06:33 · Score: 0
  
  The problem is that Intel is a de facto monopoly in the rest of the computing landscape. Intel wants to be the sole provider of processor from the smallest embedded system and smartphone to the largest mainframe and supercomputer. They already have too much power on the computing landscape, and should be stopped.
  The day I can only buy a mobile phone with an Intel chip is the day I stop having a mobile phone.
agreed by PhrostyMcByte · 2013-09-11 05:07 · Score: 3

PowerVR has some of the most pathetic support for x86 and Windows I've ever seen, and it hasn't got any better. With my fanless Shuttle PC using an Atom N2800, I have a choice of either 32-bit Windows and glitchy graphics, 64-bit Windows and VGA output, or Linux with VGA output. It's pretty obvious why, of course... PowerVR's x86 market is so infinitesimally small compared to their ARM market, they probably hired some old printer driver developer to be the sole guy working on it stashed in a closet somewhere. It is really surprising that Intel ever decided to use them, without some sort of support contract built in.
1. Re:agreed by tlhIngan · 2013-09-11 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  PowerVR has some of the most pathetic support for x86 and Windows I've ever seen, and it hasn't got any better. With my fanless Shuttle PC using an Atom N2800, I have a choice of either 32-bit Windows and glitchy graphics, 64-bit Windows and VGA output, or Linux with VGA output. It's pretty obvious why, of course... PowerVR's x86 market is so infinitesimally small compared to their ARM market, they probably hired some old printer driver developer to be the sole guy working on it stashed in a closet somewhere. It is really surprising that Intel ever decided to use them, without some sort of support contract built in.
  Two things...
  1) Why are you running 64-bit Windows when all the Atom chipsets only support 2GB of RAM?
  2) PowerVR doesn't care about x86. In fact, I don't think they're officially in x86 at all. Yes, PowerVR does NOT do x86.
  They're making a nice living doing GPU cores for ARMs, not x86 - the only reason you find them for Intel is that Intel needed a GPU, and GMA950s are a joke. So they licensed PowerVR just to have a power efficient GPU. They probably got some reference implementation driver code and ported that to Windows. Of course, for this they did a low-budget port - Atoms are bottom of the barrel in cost and there's only so much R&D money you can throw.
  No one competes in the x86 world - it's just Intel, NVidia and AMD.
2. Re:agreed by h4rr4r · 2013-09-11 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  At least GMA950 works. I would rather have that than anything PowerVR.
3. Re:agreed by turgid · 2013-09-11 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  They're making a nice living doing GPU cores for ARMs,
  But for how long? The ARM folks are designing their own GPUs now.
  
  --
  Stick Men
4. Re:agreed by PhrostyMcByte · 2013-09-11 10:04 · Score: 1
  
  Why are you running 64-bit Windows when all the Atom chipsets only support 2GB of RAM?
  This is not true. Cedar Trail (the current gen, out for about 2 years now) supports 4GB max, which is what I have in mine.
5. Re:agreed by Narishma · 2013-09-11 21:31 · Score: 1
  
  And the PowerVR folks just bought their own CPU (MIPS).
  
  --
  Mada mada dane.
6. Re:agreed by h4rr4r · 2013-09-12 00:39 · Score: 1
  
  Which competes directly with ARM and while it has some market is not exactly as big as it once was.
7. Re:agreed by turgid · 2013-09-12 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, at great expense and with a shrinking market share. ARM has the smartphone market cornered. So the PowerVR are losing GPU market share and they've got no chance of competing against ARM in the embedded CPU market in phones...
  Maybe they have other plans?
  Then one day OpenRISC will come along and ARM will start to lose out. It's already started in some very small, currently not very significant niches.
  
  --
  Stick Men
Free as in beer? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 05:24 · Score: 0

Or free as in what?
1. Re:Free as in beer? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 06:43 · Score: 0
  
  Free as in lunch.
2. Re:Free as in beer? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 06:55 · Score: 0
  
  Free as in Hans Reiser: TANSTAFAIHR.
Power consumptions is "about the same"? by erice · 2013-09-11 05:34 · Score: 1

Given that Intel wants so badly to push into mobile and their biggest weakness has been the relatively high power consumption of previous Atoms compared to the incumbent Arm offerings, it seems odd that their big re-design improves performance but not power. Have they given up on the phone market?
Meanwhile, Haswell improved power consumption greatly but gives meager improvements in performance over the previous generation of Core.
So, instead of broadening to cover new markets, it looks like Intel's line is actually converging. They are even offering Bay Trail based "Pentiums" and "Celerons". Seems like a poor use of R&D investment unless they plan on dumping one or the other.
1. Re:Power consumptions is "about the same"? by 0123456 · 2013-09-11 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  Should work great in netbooks. Sorry, Atom-based ultrabooks.
Windows 7 support? by Billly+Gates · 2013-09-11 05:56 · Score: 1

I hate metro and the latest atoms force you to use Windows 8. The SOI is proprietary and linux and Windows 7 support are not existant.
If Intel has drivers for this one I will withdrawl my compliant

--
http://saveie6.com/
1. Re:Windows 7 support? by NJRoadfan · 2013-09-11 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  What is exactly stopping alternate OSes from booting on those machines?
2. Re:Windows 7 support? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 17:08 · Score: 0
  
  LOL FAGGOT.
  Haswell runs great on Linux with accelerated graphics. Stop using 5 year old distros and crying like a bitch.
Cool by TheSkepticalOptimist · 2013-09-11 06:17 · Score: 1, Troll

Bay Trail and Windows 8.1, trailblazing a new generation of failures.

--
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
1. Re:Cool by 0123456 · 2013-09-11 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  Not really. Bay Trail can also run Android and should run Linux (unlike the last generation of Atoms with the PowerVR GPU), so it gives Intel a decently performing mobile chip that isn't reliant on Windows.
Bad comparison? by edxwelch · 2013-09-11 06:53 · Score: 1

The Z3770 is the fastest Silvermont at 2.4 Ghz, I think they should be really comparing with the fastest Jaguar which is A6 5200 (at 2.0 Ghz), not the A4 5000 (1.5 GHz).
1. Re:Bad comparison? by 0123456 · 2013-09-11 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  The Z3770 is the fastest Silvermont at 2.4 Ghz, I think they should be really comparing with the fastest Jaguar which is A6 5200 (at 2.0 Ghz), not the A4 5000 (1.5 GHz).
  So they should be comparing a 4W CPU to a 25W CPU?
2. Re:Bad comparison? by edxwelch · 2013-09-11 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  They already compare to the 4.5W Temash if you want something with equilivilant power consumption, but if you want a raw power comparison why choose the second fastest?
3. Re:Bad comparison? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 09:46 · Score: 0
  
  Because they are different segment parts.
  5 times the power envelope (almost 6) makes one part a mobile part, and the other a laptop part.
  Intel have a haswell chip for 25watts, AMD didn't so they made the 25watt part in their Jaguar line.
  Maybe they should compare 5 Z3770's to one AMD Jaguar.
Intel and You by Mister+Liberty · 2013-09-11 08:12 · Score: 0

Does anyone here have any illusions as to what that relation is?
Advanced technology by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 08:16 · Score: 0

I misread the title as "Intel Bay Trail Brings New Architecture and Performance To _the_ Atom"
Re: BarbaraARosas by gl4ss · 2013-09-11 09:01 · Score: 0

is this some clever troll? or are you advertising some scam by saying that you bought one of these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Renault_5_TURBO_(8014525001).jpg

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Engineered In Israel by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-11 16:26 · Score: 0

Engineered In Israel so there are likely backdoors.
Misread title as "Bay Troll" by the_arrow · 2013-09-11 19:50 · Score: 1

I misread the title as "Intel Bay Troll Brings New Architecture and Performance To Atom", which didn't make much sense.

--
/ The Arrow
"How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
ATOM SMASHER! by DarthVain · 2013-09-12 03:50 · Score: 2

OK. I fail to the the point (market) of the Atom processor. Ditto for the AMD counterpart.
The reason I say this is because of A) miniaturization and power efficiency gains in traditional processors, and B) ARM and Motorola.
I just bought an i5 Haswell on an itx format. I could have got an i7 (or an i3 for that matter). They make laptops with all of those. Power usage is way down. If looking for "cheapness" past an i3, they still over Celerons more less. AMD likewise has some cheap lower powered chips.
ARM and Motorola (A# and Snapdragon basically) own the phone/tablet market. Nothing Intel or AMD do to their lines is going to change that.
For Atom and it's AMD counterpart fall somewhere in between the very cheap low end chip, and the ARM/Motorola chips. What are you making with these chips? Shitty netbook laptops? Sorry the processor is only part of the price of these things. Not to mention the death of the netbook due to the popularity of Tablets.
Anyway I just do not see the point of this processor segment at all.