Slashdot Mirror
Android On Intel x86 Tablet Performance Explored: Things Are Improving
MojoKid writes: For the past few years, Intel has promised that its various low-power Atom-based processors would usher in a wave of low-cost Android and Windows mobile products that could compete with ARM-based solutions. And for years, we've seen no more than a trickle of hardware, often with limited availability. Now, that's finally beginning to change. Intel's Bay Trail and Merrifield SoCs are starting to show up more in full-featured, sub-$200 devices from major brands. One of the most interesting questions for would-be x86 buyers in the Android tablet space is whether to go with a Merrifield or Bay Trail Atom-based device. Merrifield is a dual-core chip without Hyper-Threading. Bay Trail is a quad-core variant and a graphics engine derived from Intel's Ivy Bridge Core series CPUs. That GPU is the other significant difference between the two SoCs. With Bay Trail, Intel is still employing their own graphics solution, while Merrifield pairs a dual-core CPU with a PowerVR G6400 graphics core. So, what's the experience of using a tablet running Android on x86 like these days? Pretty much like using an ARM-based Android tablet currently, and surprisingly good for any tablet in the $199 or less bracket. In fact, some of the low cost Intel/Android solutions out there currently from the likes of Acer, Dell, Asus, and Lenovo, all compete performance-wise pretty well versus the current generation of mainstream ARM-based Android tablets.
I'm really waiting for an x86 phone that can be bought in the USA. These have been available for years in India (!!!!), its really appalling that you cannot yet buy one in the US of all places.
Can someone recommend an inexpensive tablet for beginning Android development?
Power VR is terrible, Intel released a ton of low end Atom powered devices with Power VR GPU, but due to licencing agreements never released drivers except for the 32 bit variant of Windows 7 and never for Win 8 or Linux drivers worth a damn. Means Linux users were SOL when they tried using these machines for anything media related. And I doubt the situation with Power VR is going to be any better this time around. Avoid like the plauge any Intel hardware that's hard wired to a Power VR chip.
moox. for a new generation.
These are RISC cores--occasionally ARM or a modified architecture--running an x86 or x86-64 translation layer as the decode cycle, such that the x86 instructions are cached as RISC instructions. ARM virtualizing x86 would be amusingly fast, too--faster than x86 running x86.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I just want to run OSx on a Surface Pro 2, that hardware specification is very similar to a Macbook Air, with the advantage of being cheaper, and pressure sensitive touch screen.
There are some solutions but closed hardware is the largest issue, no driver for the build-in WiFi. Same as for Android.
Example of Android, Windows, OSx, multiboot instructions:
http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/292645-guide-surfacepro-1-2-osx-android-windows-multiboot/
http://www.tonymacx86.com/bat-cave/87345-osx-microsoft-surface-pro.html
> ARM virtualizing x86 would be amusingly fast, too--faster than x86 running x86.
Are you joking or just high or low quality drugs? If what you are saying is true then how come Macbook Pros are shipping with Intel CPUs?
The biggest problem for Intel in the mobile space is they don't really know how to make radio hardware. Qualcomm and TI are kicking their trash as far as that is concerned.
But their emulation technology is really impressive.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Well, maybe someone has some uses for it, but the advantage of an x86 chip is that it can run a REAL operating system, specifically Windows, which Microsoft has been optimizing for tablets for over a decade.
Also, while Linux is woefully behind, the Ubuntu distribution has been making great strides in catching up to Windows as a desktop tablet OS.
If I am buying an x86 tablet it is to run Windows and maybe Ubuntu, not some lightweight toy OS.
I couldn't care less what processor is in my phone or tablet. I only care if my phone or tablet can do what I want it to do. I suspect that I'm in the majority here. So, Intel, please explain to me why it matters whether my devices contain ARM or x86 architecture?
I am doing fine watching porn on Arm Android platform.
Many may not remember the old WinCE 1.x, 2.x, or 3.x days.
There were MIPS, SH4, and ARM devices and variants of the operating system...
The problem was that unless your app vendor made code for your device's CPU, you were pooched for using it. Hampered uptake for the longest time until most of the vendors opted for ARM exclusively.
This is the EXACT SAME SCHISM going on here.
For example, an app is a NDK boosted app. At least 1/3rd of the apps catalog is just that. Your App vendor will need to make an ARM *AND* an X86 build of their NDK components just for you to be able to use it on an X86 tablet or phone. That's VASTLY easier said than done for numerous reasons. Much of this whole discussion about X86 is to keep Intel relevant against the incursion of ARM into the server spaces that's about to happen. The *ONLY* selling point of X86 in an embedded context (which, technically, includes these Android devices...) is being able to run Windows or X86 Linux proprietary binaries you can't get on ARM or MIPS. Seriously.
See the subject line.
Because this platform is optimized for doing this. Not some job related boring WinTel.
As I understand it Intel is doing everything they can to make all the Google Play apps work on their Android implementation. How is that working out?
The Android Compatibility Definition Document (CDD), published by Google, requires the system to present a fixed-size window to applications. This "all maximized all the time" policy isn't the most helpful if you're trying to write one document while referring to another. How does it benefit the user if the calculator app, for example, takes the whole screen? X11/Linux, on the other hand, embraces multi-window paradigms in both tiled and floating forms.
I'm not going to touch anything with an intel cpu (intel is against freedom)
I've been wondering when we would see a tablet/phone that includes ECC support. If your data is truly important, you want ECC. ECC doesn't need very much hardware (by today's standards) so I've been wondering if we'll ever see it on low-end devices.