Active Topics
-
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 8 hrs, 32 mins ago -
The N900 is now 15 years old! (6)
to Nokia N900 by Macros - 2 days, 4 hrs ago -
F(x)tec Pro1x (QWERTY) for sale (0)
to Buy & Sell by aln00000 - 2 days, 17 hrs ago -
n770 youtube video (0)
to General by nmdv - 6 days, 16 hrs ago - more...
 |
Capt'n Corrupt |
2011-03-18
, 06:20
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#31
|
I'm thinking of changing this thread to be a general discussion about ultra-mobile SoCs. What do you think?
|
|
2011-03-18
, 06:28
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#32
|
This is *very* interesting. It seems that the ODROID-A development tablet (EXYNOS 4210 w/ Mali400) is getting a healthy 36.6 and 45fps on GLBenchmark 2.0/PRO @ 1366x768.
http://www.glbenchmark.com/phonedeta...ernel+ODROID-A
This is very encouraging, and is suggestive that performance is still tightly coupled to resolution. Running at 1024x768, these numbers would increase yet again. This may begin to explain the disparity between the XOOM and the iPad2's numbers.
Apple was wise to keep the resolution to 1024x768 from a gamer-performance perspective. I wouldn't be surprised if the clock rate was also hiked up a bit.
It would be nice if these benchmarks allowed to be run at different resolutions, so that we might get a better feel of chip/system performance rather than trying to compare across wildly different setups.
http://www.glbenchmark.com/phonedeta...ernel+ODROID-A
This is very encouraging, and is suggestive that performance is still tightly coupled to resolution. Running at 1024x768, these numbers would increase yet again. This may begin to explain the disparity between the XOOM and the iPad2's numbers.
Apple was wise to keep the resolution to 1024x768 from a gamer-performance perspective. I wouldn't be surprised if the clock rate was also hiked up a bit.
It would be nice if these benchmarks allowed to be run at different resolutions, so that we might get a better feel of chip/system performance rather than trying to compare across wildly different setups.
|
|
2011-03-18
, 07:05
|
|
Posts: 395 |
Thanked: 509 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Brisbane, Australia
|
#33
|
Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt
Comparable to Core2Duo or Atom? Because those two arent in the same performance category.
with performance comparable to Core2Duo's
If true, this will certainly offer performance comparable to ATOM
| The Following User Says Thank You to azkay For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-03-18
, 07:12
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#34
|
Originally Posted by azkay
Indeed. A while back, it was speculated by the media that the next-gen of ARM would meet Atom in terms of performance. However, at this point, Nvidia is taking their claims one step further and saying that there will be comparable performance to C2D.
Comparable to Core2Duo or Atom? Because those two arent in the same performance category.
Of course, this may just be marketing fluff, but it's exciting to think that it may be true. Even with Atom performance, the world of legacy productivity will be opened more fully to these devices.
I would ditch my laptop in a New York Minute if I knew I could use a thin/light tablet that I could actually work from (thank goodness for Ubuntu's ARM support!).
|
|
2011-03-18
, 22:39
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#35
|
It looks like the Archos Gen9 tablet may have the fastest SoC yet!
http://armdevices.net/2011/03/18/arc...unced-in-june/
It's using a modified OMAP4440 clocked to a blistering 1.6GHz! This is a dual-core CPU with a SGX540 (who knows how high this is clocked).
I'd love to see how this CPU compares to something like Atom running the same frequency on a few benchmarks.
We need some Tablets that accept Mini-PCI-E adapters. It would be nice to be able to choose 3G for whichever network with a cheap $50 card.
http://armdevices.net/2011/03/18/arc...unced-in-june/
It's using a modified OMAP4440 clocked to a blistering 1.6GHz! This is a dual-core CPU with a SGX540 (who knows how high this is clocked).
I'd love to see how this CPU compares to something like Atom running the same frequency on a few benchmarks.
We need some Tablets that accept Mini-PCI-E adapters. It would be nice to be able to choose 3G for whichever network with a cheap $50 card.
|
|
2011-03-19
, 09:59
|
|
Banned |
Posts: 726 |
Thanked: 497 times |
Joined on Aug 2010
@ Gravesend, UK
|
#36
|
You are a very excitable man, Captain Corrupt.
|
|
2011-03-19
, 16:20
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#37
|
Originally Posted by JamesBond@ge
Thank you sir, and a shiny penny for you!
You are a very excitable man, Captain Corrupt.
I suspect if I used fewer exclamation points, I would seem more sober...
|
|
2011-03-19
, 18:44
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#38
|
Here's an interesting comparison between a 1st-gen ATOM and a 500MHz Cortex-A9.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/a...rried-2010016/
The test shows web rendering speeds on the different units despite the same browser, OS, and connection. The A9 performs more than admirably and compares quite well with the ATOM with most loads being a fraction slower.
Not exactly scientific, but interesting nonetheless.
ARM went on to claim that a cortex A9 @ 1GHz loads pages faster than ATOM!
http://netbooked.net/blog/arm-vs-ato...s-performance/
It seems that current gen A9 is more than capable of not too demanding productivity applications. The next generation is surely to improve on this greatly.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/a...rried-2010016/
The test shows web rendering speeds on the different units despite the same browser, OS, and connection. The A9 performs more than admirably and compares quite well with the ATOM with most loads being a fraction slower.
Not exactly scientific, but interesting nonetheless.
ARM went on to claim that a cortex A9 @ 1GHz loads pages faster than ATOM!
http://netbooked.net/blog/arm-vs-ato...s-performance/
It seems that current gen A9 is more than capable of not too demanding productivity applications. The next generation is surely to improve on this greatly.
 |
|
2011-03-20
, 01:28
|
|
Posts: 1,789 |
Thanked: 1,699 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
|
#39
|
Hey CC!
I was also wondering the same thing: How much until ARM is more powerful than x86 mobile chips?
And I just love your post because it reminded me of a graph I drew back in January 2010 (that's 14months ago!).
Shockingly it still seems accurate!
http://img21.imageshack.us/i/73554987.png/
It looks like the OMAP4440 is equivalent to the power of a Intel SU3500, which is a great solution for Windows7 netbooks/tablets.
What's even more shocking back then Cortex A9 had yet to surface in any device, and dual-core Atoms weren't even announced!
edit: I just remembered what those lines meant; it was illustrating the minimum level of performance needed to have a responsive Win7 experience, and the minimum level of battery life for Win7 netbooks/ultraportables/tablets. My insight freaked the daylights out of me!
Last edited by Kangal; 2011-03-20 at 01:31.
I was also wondering the same thing: How much until ARM is more powerful than x86 mobile chips?
And I just love your post because it reminded me of a graph I drew back in January 2010 (that's 14months ago!).
Shockingly it still seems accurate!
http://img21.imageshack.us/i/73554987.png/
It looks like the OMAP4440 is equivalent to the power of a Intel SU3500, which is a great solution for Windows7 netbooks/tablets.
What's even more shocking back then Cortex A9 had yet to surface in any device, and dual-core Atoms weren't even announced!
edit: I just remembered what those lines meant; it was illustrating the minimum level of performance needed to have a responsive Win7 experience, and the minimum level of battery life for Win7 netbooks/ultraportables/tablets. My insight freaked the daylights out of me!
Last edited by Kangal; 2011-03-20 at 01:31.
| The Following User Says Thank You to Kangal For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-03-21
, 20:38
|
|
Posts: 3,524 |
Thanked: 2,958 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Delta Quadrant
|
#40
|
Originally Posted by Kangal
Nice chart and great speculation! Do you think you could find cross-platform benchmarks? Perhaps get a feel for the different performance characteristics of the lower end x86 versus higher end ARM?
Hey CC!
I was also wondering the same thing: How much until ARM is more powerful than x86 mobile chips?
And I just love your post because it reminded me of a graph I drew back in January 2010 (that's 14months ago!).
Shockingly it still seems accurate!
http://img21.imageshack.us/i/73554987.png/
It looks like the OMAP4440 is equivalent to the power of a Intel SU3500, which is a great solution for Windows7 netbooks/tablets.
What's even more shocking back then Cortex A9 had yet to surface in any device, and dual-core Atoms weren't even announced!
edit: I just remembered what those lines meant; it was illustrating the minimum level of performance needed to have a responsive Win7 experience, and the minimum level of battery life for Win7 netbooks/ultraportables/tablets. My insight freaked the daylights out of me!
 |
| Tags |
| mobile, mobile soc, rainbows, revolutionizing, unicorns, zmobility |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:44.