Fri, Jul 25, 2014, 8:27 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 1 hr 3 mins

Recent

% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Intel Corporation Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • khitchdee khitchdee Nov 2, 2012 2:29 PM Flag

    Medfield vs A6 vs A15 vs S4

    32nm Medfield at 1.6GHz is roughly at par with Apple's 45nm (ARM A9 based) A5 at 800MHz in the iPhone 4s. That's a known data point and Medfield's success in the market is a reflection of that fact.

    22nm Silvermont will be roughly at par with today's Apple A6. That's a projection.

    In both cases, we assume we've normalized for battery life. Without doing that, comparisons are meaningless.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • 'In both cases, we assume we've normalized for battery life. Without doing that, comparisons are meaningless.'

      You don't normalize performance which is measured in seconds over battery life which is measured over hours. You look at both and see what combination suits you best. The RAZRi beats the iPhone4S in one of those battery tests anyway. iPhones success is as much to do with the design and Apple ecosystem as it is due to the chips themselves. Medfield is a new chip in not many phones outside of the brand leaders, it will take time to acquire brand recognition and sales.

      • 2 Replies to marsavian
      • 'Intel has a history of emphasizing performance while downplaying battery life. Why else would they clock their first version of Medfield at 1.6GHZ when Apple's A5 was at 800MHz. This when they were terrible battery hogs at that frequency.'

        It's a single-core chip so it's clocked high to highlight its performance as single-thread applications still dominate smartphone usage. It uses hyperthreading for multi-threading/tasking and that works well enough at least for integer applications which tend to stress the cpu less than floating point ones. It's only a battery hog in your imagination as under the same Android o/s, tests across 3 different sites now have shown it to have better battery performance than Qualcomm's dual-core Krait while consistently beating it in varied javascript benchmarks. In fact Anand has directly measured it to have similar performance/power to Apple's A6 when running the Kraken benchmark. Your statements are clearly factually faulty and based more on ARM/x86 power myths than recent detailed tests.

      • You don't normalize performance which is measured in seconds over battery life which is measured over hours. You look at both and see what combination suits you best. The RAZRi beats the iPhone4S in one of those battery tests anyway. iPhones success is as much to do with the design and Apple ecosystem as it is due to the chips themselves. Medfield is a new chip in not many phones outside of the brand leaders, it will take time to acquire brand recognition and sales.

        Intel has a history of emphasizing performance while downplaying battery life. Why else would they clock their first version of Medfield at 1.6GHZ when Apple's A5 was at 800MHz. This when they were terrible battery hogs at that frequency. They are concertedly trying to make people think in terms of performance, even on battery operated smartphones. As you've correctly observed market success is based on several factors, not just performance for short bursts. You can trust Intel to continue to bump up the frequency of their future chips with utter disregard to power consumption because they think consumers will buy their performance message. Today, Medfield is a new chip. Tomorrow, Silvermont will be a new chip and then Airmont will be a new chip. I guess they'll start getting traction in the market when Paul Ottelini accelerates their fabrication technology faster than Moore's law with Airmont while the other foundrys stand still.

 
INTC
34.25-0.03(-0.09%)Jul 24 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.