Saturday, August 02, 2014
Search
  
Submit your own News for
inclusion in our Site.
Click here...
Breaking News
French Carrier Iliad To Bid For T-Mobile
Google's Ambitious Secret Barge Project Was Scarped
Chinese Smartphones Boost Sharp's 1Q Operating Profit
HP's Luxury Smartwatch Coming This Fall
Tessera and Micron Execute New Technology and Patent License Agreements
Sony Releases The AS20 Action Cam, New Cyber-shots
Microsoft Releases New Limited Edition Wireless Mobile Mouse 3500 With Master Chief from Halo
Researchers Discover New Smartphone Flaws
Active Discussions
help questions structure DVDR
Made video, won't play back easily
Questions durability monitor LCD
Questions fungus CD/DVD Media, Some expert engineer in optical media can help me?
CD, DVD and Blu-ray burning for Android in development
IBM supercharges Power servers with graphics chips
Werner Vogels: four cloud computing trends for 2014
Video editing software.
 Home > News > Mobiles > Has Int...
Last 7 Days News : SU MO TU WE TH FR SA All News

Friday, July 12, 2013
Has Intel Really Beaten ARM?


EE Times member Jim McGregor debunked a recent ABI Research report claiming that AnTuTu benchmark results and a recent ABI Research report claiming, "Intel apps processor outperforms Nvidia, Qualcomm, and Samsung."

New AnTuTu benchmark results and a recent ABI Research report claim that Intel surpassed the entire ARM ecosystem in mobile processors for the high-end smartphone segment.

In response to the report, EE Times member Jim McGregor investigated further and compiled a variety of benchmark information from tech reviewers, benchmarking organizations and other industry resources. In particular, he looked at processors from Samsung, Intel and Qualcomm and, in effect, debunked the entire report, showing that ARM-based processors came out on top. At the same time, he pointed to the nuances and traps of processor benchmarking in general.

"Evaluating current mobile processors is challenging because these processors, known as systems-on-chips (SoCs), are complex systems of heterogeneous processing elements combined with memory, I/O, high-speed networks, communications modems and a host of other dedicated system functions," a forum user wrote.

"Integration of the processors into mobile devices further complicates any evaluation because the overall performance and efficiency of these processors is impacted by the other system components. As a result, the industry turns to benchmarks to compare processors and devices. Unfortunately, mobile benchmarks are plagued by many issues and also fall short of providing an accurate evaluation."

Despite what seemed a fairly comprehensive conclusion, the EE Times community took McGregor's analysis, and benchmarking in general, to task, with an emphasis on power consumption:

"...this analysis kinda sidestep[s] the issue of power consumption. It was not the processor's computational speed that was in question. It was that Intel CPU had more or less the same performance at HALF the current drain/power."

"Well, long calls affecting battery life is much more a function of the RF chipset efficiency and software control of transmit levels, etc. I don't see how it would fit into a comparison of digital SoCs."

"Also, what OS was running on each platform to carry out these tests, since a highly optimized OS can make these benchmark tests show amazing performance on a slow processor vs. poor results on a badly ported OS running on a considerably faster processor."

"The ABI article is clearly more about the current draw than about raw performance. So, while I agree that they could have done a better job by averaging multiple benchmarks, I think the point of the article is that Intel seems to have finally conquered what analysts have considered its 'Achilles' heel': power consumption."

"The RAM scores seem highly unusual. Is there some kind of "cheating" going on with AnTuTu?"

On the topic of compilers:

"What's wrong with Intel getting ahead using better compiler technology?"

"Nothing, if we're talking about making real applications run faster. But that's not what we're talking about here.

What we're talking about here is the compiler removing portions of the benchmark, contrary to the intent of the benchmark. As a result, the benchmark results become meaningless."

The discussion continues to heat up. Clearly, all benchmarks should be questioned and none used exclusively; and recent headlines were more sensational than truthful.


Previous
Next
Apple Also Looks At Globalfoundries To Ensure Chip Capacity Flow        All News        Microsoft Cuts Prices Of Surface RT In Japan
Microsoft Sues U.S. Customs For Not Enforcing Google Phone Ban     Mobiles News      Windows Phone 8 GDR2 Update Brings New Features

Get RSS feed Easy Print E-Mail this Message

Related News
New Intel Solid-State Drive Pro 2500 Series Packs SK Hynix Flash And Brings Trusted Security Features
Licensing Fees Drive ARM's Profit
New Intel Haswell CPUs Released
Intel to $60 Ship Galileo Gen2 Computer Next Month
Intel Reports Second-Quarter Revenue of $13.8 billion
Intel Chipsets To Support PCIe 3.0
Intel To Manufacture Future Panasonic SoCs Using Intel's 14nm Low-Power Process
ARM Releases Reference Platform For 64-bit Android L Developers
JBL Announces the Synchros E-Series, Synchros Reflect and JBL Synchros Reflect BT Sport Headphones
Intel Details Next-Generation Xeon Phi Processor with Integrated Omni Scale Fabric
Intel Adds Laughter into Mobile Messaging
Garmin Introduces The Approach S6 Golf Watch

Most Popular News
 
Home | News | All News | Reviews | Articles | Guides | Download | Expert Area | Forum | Site Info
Site best viewed at 1024x768+ - CDRINFO.COM 1998-2014 - All rights reserved -
Privacy policy - Contact Us .