Slashdot Mirror


Intel Announces Atom x3, x5 and x7, First SOCs With Integrated 3G and LTE Modems

MojoKid writes Intel is unleashing a new family of Atom processors today, taking a cue from its highly successful Core series with model branding. Similar to the Good, Better, Best strategy with the Core i3, i5 and i7, Intel is renaming its Atom family with x3, x5, and x7 designations. The biggest news comes from the low-end Atom x3, which will be available in three distinct variants; all of which will come with integrated modems — a first for the Atom family. All three variants are 64-bit capable cores. The Atom x3-C3130 tops out at 1GHz, incorporates a Mali 400 MP2 GPU, and includes an integrated 3G (HSPA+) modem. The Atom x3-C3230RK bumps the max clock speed to 1.2GHz, throws in a Mali 450 MP4 GPU, and the same 3G modem. Finally, the Atom x3-C3440 clocks in at 1.4GHz, features a Mali T720 MP2 graphics core, incorporates a Category 6 LTE modem, and can optionally support NFC. Using handpicked benchmarks, Intel claims that the Atom x3-C3230RK can offer up to 1.8x the media editing performance of competing SoCs from Qualcomm and MediaTek. Then there's Intel's Cherry Trail-based Atom x5 and x7. These are the first 64-bit Atom SoCs to be built using a 14nm manufacturing and they incorporate eighth generation Intel graphics. While the Atom x5 and x7 don't feature integrated modems like the Atom x3, they do support Intel's next generation XMM 726x and 7360 LTE modems. Intel claims that the Atom x7 offers two times the graphics performance of the existing high-end Atom Z3795 in the GFXBench 2.7 T-Rex HD benchmark and 50 percent greater performance on the 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited benchmark.

26 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. One way into mobile market by thebes · · Score: 2

    As the subject says, this is one way to get into the mobile market or cement a position in it, assuming the modem is high performance, good quality, good support, like their other networking products.

    1. Re:One way into mobile market by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Am I the only one who is generally confused by Intel Marketing and rebranding blitz on their products.

      Back in the olden day, We had 286, 386, 486... Life was easy, sure there was the SX vs DX (Math-co-processor addition). Then instead of the 586 we got the Pentium. Then is the Pentium pro the 686 or was that the Pentium 2. Then they added the budget Celeron to the name, but still it made sense. Finally at a point where the Ghz peaked around 3ghz, We got the Core and the Core Dual, then the Core 2, after the Core 2, intel swapped to using the i3, i5, and i7, and with a new number scheme.
      Now they are doing this with the Atom, so we are just adding to the confusion.
      I just want a simple method to knowing what I am running on and if I need my processor upgraded. That i5 runs faster than the 3 year old i7. If I want to upgrade, I may not want the newest but 1 generation behind. But it is so much harder to figure it out now.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:One way into mobile market by slaker · · Score: 2

      Pick a benchmark that's representative of your computing needs. Look at relevant benchmark scores.

      Recent Intel CPUs are differentiated by their GPUs and TDP moreso than clock speed or thread performance, which is probably why a brand new Haswell i3 is only just a bit faster than an original Nehalem i7 from all the way back in 2008.

      If you want top-end per thread performance, you probably want an i5. If you want that and need more cores than a typical desktop, get an i7. You probably don't need to worry about anything else; even five year old desktop and laptop parts are going to be subjectively similar to new for anything but a narrow range of content creation, gaming or scientific applications (assuming similar amounts of RAM and disk subsystems, that is). Whatever CPU you buy will probably be good enough for the life of the other components in the computer.

      It's certainly a hassle to compare between CPUs on differing device types (e.g. is a 15W ULV i7 faster than a four year old 45W mobile i3?) but the truth is that within broad categories, newer things are faster and the classifications hold up. If you're doing an apples to oranges comparison, you have to look at whatever benchmark you think might be most relevant.

      --
      -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
  2. Spyware by tepples · · Score: 2

    That or it's a way for three-letter government agencies to spy on users of detachable laptop computers, using a built-in hardwired SIM card even when the user thinks the cellular radio is off.

    1. Re:Spyware by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

      They don't need a SIM card, my phones can make emergency calls without a SIM card.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  3. Deja vu all over again by sideslash · · Score: 2

    Probably premature to say this, but it would be funny if Intel does to mobile processing and ARM what it did to Mac computers and RISC. For a long time the Mac-heads were constantly harping about how superior PowerPC was to anything in the Wintel world. And then suddenly everything was x86 again. It seems x86 is the technology that can't be killed.

    1. Re:Deja vu all over again by hattig · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In this case there is no legacy software advantage for x86, and a lot of cost disadvantage. Intel are subsidising their products in the mobile area massively but that can't last forever.

      In addition, some manufacturers are doing their own chips now, and will not see any benefit to losing control of design to Intel in this area.

      The Atom core is not great either in terms of performance - an A57 core should be more powerful, and Samsung have got their 14nm process working so that advantage for Intel is not as clear-cut as it once was.

    2. Re:Deja vu all over again by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There wasn't really a legacy software advantage for x86 in the Mac arena either. In fact, of the three major tablet OSes, one actually does have a bit of a legacy software advantage if run over x86. I'll go into that in a moment but first:

      As far as performance goes, I got an HP Stream 8 a few months ago. It's running Windows 8.1 and has a recent Atom in it, but obviously not a top-of-the-line thing because it's a really cheap tablet, despite supporting 3G. And I have to say I have no complaints whatsoever about performance. It's running everything I throw at it at a decent speed.

      Now I'd admit, mentally I'm comparing it to Android. The fastest Android device I've used was a Galaxy Nexus, and the Stream is easily smoother and more responsive than that. It may well be the difference is, in part, Windows and Metro - I get the impression Google really doesn't understand the importance of UI responsiveness. But the truth is with the Stream I really, really, have no complaints relating to speed.

      Back on x86 legacy advantages: The other issue I'd raise is that there are quite a few "tablet operating systems" that are languishing in "Not Android" land that might well do well if more hardware comes out supporting x86. The stuff Ubuntu and GNOME are trying to make work might, for example, end up turning into something very, very, powerful if they can get the UIs fixed and if a surfeit of x86 tablets comes out.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Deja vu all over again by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      There wasn't really a legacy software advantage for x86 in the Mac arena either.

      Indirectly there was and that's all that matters: The x86 legacy advantage was unassailably strong in the wintel world. And wintel had the lions's share of teh sales. As a result, Intel had more money than the competitors to invest in both processor design and process technology, the result of which is that intel eventually overran their competitors.

      The processors for macs just couldn't keep up because Motorola and then IBM didn't have the volume and margins in their chip business to be able to compete with Intel.

      The world is a bit different now, but is it different enough to matter?

      The whole expensive x86 front end decoder cost used to matter on the desktop, but eventually the large number of parallel functional units and the OoO logic to keep them filled started to dominate massively. Then it used to matter on phones, but now it's pretty much reaching the stage where phone processors are so large and powerful that similar things are happening.

      But the low end still exists (below phones), so ARM will never be squeezed out by Intel. There will always be a market for some noddy core with 2K of RAM and on that scale the decoder matters.

      So, ARM is there. While nothing like as rich as Intel, they put most of their developement into the CPU tech, not process. The world has also hit diminishing returns in CPU design. Back in the past, there were "easy" developments like the caches, MHz wars, the transition to superscalar, out of order execution and vector instruction units. Once those topped off, the next bit was tweaking the cores for more IPC, e.g. the Core 2 to i7 transition, but returns have really diminished in that regard. Now it's got to the stage where it takes massive effort to get a few percent IPC better.

      In recent times Intel have dominated IPC. However, while competitors may not ever catch up completely, it's easier for them to close the gap than it is for Intel to keep it open because Intel have already taken their low-hanging fruit.

      Still, Intel have one of the best CPU design teams out there, which is always going to be an advantage.

      Then there's the process tech. This is another area where intel lead, but the world has been losing fabs at a shocking rate. Previously, Intel was the 800lb gorilla up against a lot of other smaller chipmakers with smaller market sizes. Everyone else has been consolidating so intel now has fewer, but much larger competitors. This will make life harder for Intel relative to the past.

      Intel is not a gun for hire. This has positives and negatives. On the plus side, they bend all their resources to fabbing the top end PC chips. On the minus side, the major phone manufacturers can't get custom chips like they can with ARM, which means that unless they are very lucky, they're paying for things they don't want or have lower integration if they go with intel.

      It also means that the other people can test out new processes on smaller chips. Large area makes the probability of damaging defects go way up. Other fabs can do smaller chips on new processes which keeps the proportion of defective units lower.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Deja vu all over again by MrFlibbs · · Score: 2

      Ah, but you're forgetting the impact on the server market. All those smart phones and tablets accessing the web drive the need for more servers. Guess who dominates the server market? There's a reason Intel keeps breaking revenue records every year.

      Also, the PC market is far from dead. Despite periodic predictions of its demise, PC shipments picked up last year and modest growth is predicted for 2015.

    5. Re:Deja vu all over again by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      Just FYI...

      ARM is based on RISC architecture

      The 1980s called and they want their reference architectures back.
      RISC ceased to be a thing that meant anything useful for high performance CPU architecture sometime between 1990 and 1995. The Huffman like encoding of CISC instructions is certainly more beneficial for performance than the benefits of a 'simpler' instruction format which take twice the instruction bandwidth to do the same thing.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  4. Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines success by hattig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The X3 line is very weak, and will be competing against $5 to $10 SoCs from MediaTek, AllWinner, etc. This market is very price sensitive, and battery life is also important.

    The X5 and X7 look more capable, it will be interesting to see how they compare against the competitor SoCs using A57 cores. The 14nm process will also help with the battery life significantly.

  5. Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Informative

    MediaTek and AllWinner don't have integrated modems. Intel is aiming squarely at Qualcomm and Samsung with these chips.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  6. Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Weak?

    These chips don't even compete in the same markets.

    The intel offerings easily offer 5-10x computational power over the budget-minded SoCs from the likes of AllWinner. The /previous/ gen baytrail based Atom SoCs can run a full-fat windows 8.1 installation in a tablet formfactor. A real tablet. USB charging, thin, touch screen fanless device with no BS tablet battery life. I've got two. (Dell Venu 8 pro and Asus transformerbook T100)

    I'm not saying that Allwinner and company don't sell a lot of chips, but those devices mostly go in to ultra-budget android devices, "stick" computers, and media set top boxes. They're also really really really poorly supported and are generally useless for anything other than the build of Android that comes shipped with them.

    The Intel offerings, however, are standard architecture and can run whatever OS you want. Android, Windows, Linux, or even iOS or MacOS if Apple cared. (Don't fool yourself. There's a skunkworks x64 build of iOS somewhere int the depths of Cupertino, waiting in the event that Intel throws its literally 2 generations superior chip fabrication technology full on in to the mobile chip market. These new Atoms are EXACTLY the sort of thing that would tempt Apple)

  7. Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes by jcdr · · Score: 2

    Until the price and the modem support and performances are verified, it's too early to pretend that integrated modem is an advantage. On the SoC market Intel have for years making big press release of chips that vanished into insignificant niche market compared to the SoC leading chips that massively use ARM cores.

  8. Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well I work for an actual company that offers integrated modems. And the silicon price is basically the same. The additional cost we add to the chip is to pay for the R&D investment.

    A big company like Intel can soak a lot of R&D costs initially if they wish to make a long term play into the market.
    I have no doubt that the Atom X3 is going to make it cheaper to put an x86 into a LTE capable tablet/phone. And Intel gets to get paid for the modem instead of a third party, so it's a big advantage for them.

    The only barrier I see at this point is if their modem's performance is good enough to compete with Qualcomm. I'm familiar with other vendors that failed to take over the mobile market with wireless integration.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  9. Closed source GPUs by Movi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Incorporating Mali GPUs is bound to piss off the OSS crowd - they tried that before with PowerVR before, and those chips were the bane of any nettop user. They should have tried to slim down their own GT chips.

  10. Is it finally happening? by morgauxo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would love to be able to install my x86 desktop aps on my mobile devices, even on my phone! This is all I have ever really wanted from mobile devices.

    Sure.. a lot of them will suck cramped into a small screen and a touch interface they were never designed for. But.. they would not be totally unusable when I really need them. If they weren't then nobody would bother with vnc or remote deskop on their phones!

      If such an environment was common then new versions of applications would be developed to scale well to both small and large screens and to work well with both keyboard/mouse and touch interfaces. Proving it is possible I have seen some Android devices that do this really well on a lapdock when they switch between their phone and tablet modes. In the tablet mode they don't just blow up the same view, they have different layouts with additional controls enabling more desktop-like features.

    This is how mobile computing should have played out in the first place. Blackberry and Symbian plus the later iOS and Android have been only a poor imitation of what could have been and have slowed down mobile development as all the wheels have had to be re-invented.

    Over the weekend I had an opportunity to play with a friend's Intel Windows 8 tablet. It was nice using real, full featured applications for once. An x86 Windows phone would definitely tempt me away from Android although I would much prefer a Linux (as in real Linux desktop) phone. That did almost exist once. There was an alternative desktop named GPE which ran on old Zaurus and HP PDAs back in the day. It used GTK on top of X. Qt was available as a separate package. So.. pretty much any Linux software, if you had the source it could be built! It even had a phone dialer although I don't know of any hardware that the dialer could be functional on. Unfortunately the cross-compiler was nearly required a PHD to get working and there weren't enough tools included to build packages on the device itself. It would have been a mini-desktop if it weren't for that.

    Maybe someday....

    Oh.. also on my wishlist.. these desktop-software running mobile devices should have HDMI out and USB host. When it does everything a desktop does there is no reason we shouldn't be able to plug it in and use it like one when we are not on the go.

    Additionally... there is no reason it shouldn't work with something like the Motorola Lapdock. Except.. there should be some upgrades on that device which Motorola never offered. How about a touch screen? Better speakers? And.. why not make that keyboard removable. Then it becomes just a bigger screen for your phone.. your phone is a tablet.. is a laptop. Of course you could still have the HD docking station so it's a desktop too! Unless you want an always on-server then your phone is the only computer you need!

    This is how it should be. What we have now sucks in comparison.

    1. Re:Is it finally happening? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      This is where I see things going in the next 10 years. Instead of everyone buying a $700 cell phone, a $1000 ultrabook, and a $500 desktop, most people will just buy a small computer that they can carry around in their pocket that acts as the computer for any screen that you hook it up to. Your phone would still have a screen, but wouldn't really have much of a processor of it's own. It would just use the computer you carry around in your pocket. Hook up that same computer to a 10 inch or 15 inch portable screen and keyboard, and you have a laptop. Use the same computer with a 24 inch monitor and a full size keyboard and mouse, and you have a desktop computer. You probably won't be able to do high end games or video editing on a device that fits in your pocket for a while, but most people would be able to accomplish all their computing needs on a single device. And nobody would have to worry about cloud storage or syncing between devices, because they would only have a single device they use for everything.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Is it finally happening? by darkmeridian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The end game that Intel is considering is everyone running Windows 10 or 11 on their phones using Intel processors. Android can go run on whatever cheap architecture is out there, but if you want to run full-on Windows, you'll have Intel and pay a premium. Or at least, that's what Intel hopes.

      The hardware is getting fast enough to put Windows on a phone. The Dell Venue 8 Pro is over a year old and runs Windows 8.1 in a small form factor on an old Intel Baytrail. It's not a far leap to expect a Windows phablet about the size of a Galaxy Note 4 that runs freaking Windows. Windows RT got eaten up by Windows 8. Windows Phone will eventually get eaten up by Windows 8 as well.

      Docking will be wireless and easy. Just walk up to a BT keyboard/mouse and connect to a Miracast device. If your phone supports wireless charging, just drop your phone on the charging pad. Are you afraid that you'll lose your data if you lose your phone? Don't worry! Use Microsoft OneDriveâ"it's 100 GB free for two years! (Don't ask how much it'll cost later.)

      Is Intel cost-competitive with other mobile solutions? Probably not. But why chase commodity markets on SoCs when you can ride along the Windows/Office monopoly?

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    3. Re:Is it finally happening? by narcc · · Score: 2

      I've been saying that for 15 years. I just hope I don't need to wait another 15.

  11. Re:not if by Carewolf · · Score: 2

    BMW has anything to say about that

    The funniest thing is that the BMW X-series are the big, heavy, stupid and inefficient ones.

  12. Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes by Kjella · · Score: 2

    I have no doubt that the Atom X3 is going to make it cheaper to put an x86 into a LTE capable tablet/phone. And Intel gets to get paid for the modem instead of a third party, so it's a big advantage for them.

    Not really, the X3s are all made with third party GPU and modem functionality at TSMC. It's a bought design where they add a CPU and a brand to pretend they're competing in a market they're really not. The X5/X7s are Intel's homegrown solution with their own graphics and LTE modem and aimed only at the premium segment. You will not get Intel tech for cheap.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  13. Re:Only 3G? by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 3, Informative

    The summary says 3G only on the x3 and x5 models. You only get LTE on the x7 model.

    Reading fail...

    The summary says:
    x3-C3130: integrated 3G (HSPA+) modem
    x3-C3230RK: integrated 3G (HSPA+) modem
    x3-C3440: integrated LTE modem
    x5 and x7: no integrated modem, but support for Intel's next generation XMM 726x and 7360 LTE modems

  14. Someone building iOS on x86 ... by perpenso · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It just takes a dev or two building and testing the code on x86 just to make sure its cross platform.

    Such an effort can pay for itself simply through the bugs it will find. What is a very subtle and sometimes currently unnoticed bug on one platform may become a highly visible bug on another platform. Bugs sometimes manifest differently on different platforms. I've been on several teams over time where we moved good "working" code to a new platform and watched it crash spectacularly over and over again. Each time the original devs who thought their code was in great shape were shaking their heads wonder how it ever ran on the original platform. Lucky values in uninitialized variables and such.

    So yes, someone is probably building and testing iOS on x86 but it has little to nothing to do with any plans regarding using x86 on any devices. Sort of similar to the Microsoft's efforts to internally build and test Windows on a non-x86 platform after it gave up on shipping MIPS, PowerPC and Alpha binaries. Its more about testing and future proofing a core asset than any short term plans.

    And if I were running Intel I would be supplying the engineers to do so if Apple was not doing it on their own initiative.

  15. X3 is Rockchip/Spreadtrum/RDA, NOT intel by citizenr · · Score: 2

    Intel was forced to "invest and partner' in China, or face same sanctions Qualcomm did. They decided to throw China a bone in form of $1B and license for lowest performance Atom CPU cores.

    X3 will be made 100% by chinese 'partners', if at all - previously Intel dropped ATOMs $40 sticker price down to $4 Allwinter 4core level and there still were almost no takers.

    --
    Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.