Intel executive says 14nm Bay Trail chip provides more power and energy efficiency than Apple's A7
Krzanich responded by comparing Intel's Bay Trail silicon to the Apple A7. He noted that the difference between using the 28nm process on the A7 and the 22nm process on its Bay Trail allowed the latter to have a higher transistor density which allows for a more energy efficient, powerful chip. The executive also touched on price stating that a traditionally designed laptop powered by the Intel Bay Trail processor can sell at retail for as low as "$299, which is a new real price point for a touch-enabled devices, so we see it continuing to grow as we enter next year."
Samsung is expected to start producing 64 bit Exynos 6 chips from a 14nm process. Those chips are should be powering up some of Samsung's mobile devices next year. Speaking of a 64 bit processor, when discussing the Apple A7, Qualcomm CMO Anand Chandrasekher originally called it a gimmick that was useless to Apple iPhone 5s users. Before you could snap your fingers, Qualcomm did a 180 degree change and called Chandrasekher's comments inaccurate. Ouch! Getting thrown under a bus has got to hurt.
source: CNET via BGR
1. Shatter (Posts: 2031; Member since: 29 May 2013)
The a7 is weak with apples ios7 being used to fake benchmarks. Intel is about to begin its invasion into mobile, the snapdragon 800 is horrible compared to a quad core baytrail.
2. NexusPhan (Posts: 541; Member since: 11 Jul 2013)
No way man. A7 is a great mobile processor. It was nothing to do with the fact that it's 64 bit either. Unfortunately it's trapped inside a tiny phony who's restricted OS doesn't make use of it at all other than one or two games.
12. user996 (Posts: 193; Member since: 25 Feb 2013)
that restricted OS with A7 has beaten S800 with 2x more FPS in graphics benchmarks and almost same results for cpu scores and S800 is 2.3 GHz monster but A7 is 1.3 as i remember. what is main reason for that? yes sir, main reason is OS. may be iOS7 is not the best but anyway it can beat quad core 2.3 ghz cpu with android 4.2.x running on it. i'm not apple fan. i'm nokia fan (not MS) optimization and once again optimization makes those miracles out of those "slow" CPUs. on of the first was ARM11 on nokia 808 and 701 not even minimal lag on a single core that was optimized symbian doing that job.
22. Finalflash (Posts: 1912; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)
Yea, because graphics heavy games are all played on the CPU, and really that is the only thing that is running in the system at all. /sarcasm
You have to be pretty retarded to peg FPS to the cpu in any high detail gaming environment. Hats off to PowerVR for their excellent design and optimizations. Though the A7 does get thrashed in pure core heavy benchmarks such as the physics test in 3d mark. Otherwise the A7 only wins when single or dual core tests are conducted and it doesn't even win them all. Not that the A7 is a bad chip, its is an amazing good cpu, but over blown in its reputation by people who know little about how tech actually functions. Just like the idiot analyst who asked about the process shrink, there is no question about it. The process shrink is advantageous whether you like it or not, less power and cheaper to produce. They don't shrink the die so they can increase performance, they do it for economics and power reasons.
23. brrunopt (Posts: 552; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
, the cores on the A7 are massive.. each core is a lot bigger than the rest (about 2x or more the size). The A7 its actually the largest ARM chip on a phone.. That why it gets that great performance with 2 cores at those frequencies...
and on the GPU its nowhere near 2x the performance of the s800, it's barely better...
26. ahomad (Posts: 165; Member since: 15 May 2012)
2X more FBS isn't accurate at all, yes the A7 Gpu more powerful than S800 but only because it has 1/3 amount of pixels compared to what S800 phones have
31. saffant (Posts: 233; Member since: 04 Jul 2011)
2x more FPS? Are you naively counting the on-screen GFX benchmarks of each of the phones? Cuz you know they're different resolutions.
Main reason for the great performance is the architecture. The ARMv8 64bit architecture is outstanding.
13. Reality_Check (Posts: 277; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
S800 is an SoC that provides power, performance, efficiency, connectivity, antenna and other benefits for the OEMs in one place thus reducing cost of production and increasing profit margins. When Intel's BayTrail starts offering this and more, OEMs will start to include Intel made SoCs. Till then Qualcomm will rule.
15. livyatan (Posts: 753; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
For gosh sake, when will you stop spewing this deluded crap of yours??
Intel whore, get a freking clue for once.
And get this through your skull - at the very least, Snapdragon 800 is comparable to a TABLET version quad core Bay Trail in terms of CPU, and clearly superior in terms of GPU.
Add an integrated LTE modem, dedicated motion and imaging processing units, all packed into a 50$ piece of sillicon and you get a product that rightfully dominates the SoC space.
Again, Bay Trail wins in JS browser benchmarks but those are heavily software based, single threaded tests that show next to nothing on raw processing potential.
The only cross platform benchmark that is trying to measure raw processing is Geekbench.
And there, a phone Snapdragon 800 actually smokes Intel's tablet BT chip.
3. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)
At more than a 10 nanometer advantage I would certainly hope that is the case...
Their chips on a similar process seems to at best match the top offerings which would seem to indicate that their designs aren't all that better than the competition.
4. hboy857 (Posts: 242; Member since: 03 Jun 2013)
Hey, Alan Bay Trail is build on 22-nanometer technology not 14 nm, you should correct your title.
8. Sauce (unregistered)
I sure hope not. When Apple does die, the competition rate between companies will go down, and phones won't continue to grow as fast with pushed ideas and tech. Think about it, rather than replying with an easy to say "fanboy" response.
21. darkkjedii (Posts: 12659; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Well said, why would you want any of these companies to die? He just wants some green thumbs.
39. Sauce (unregistered)
Anyway, love or hate Apple, you can thank them for your innovative Samsungs and other flagships that keep getting rushed out to keep up with the popularity and drive that Apple holds.
11. power_x (Posts: 244; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
everyone will die one day my friend , everyone will .
16. Kalevro (Posts: 56; Member since: 11 Sep 2011)
Well What will Newton rely on then ? Grape..
41. sarge77 (Posts: 202; Member since: 14 Mar 2013)
Not likely they have to many partnerships for any of there partners to let this giant die.
6. ajonly (Posts: 15; Member since: 25 May 2013)
wow.. the most stupid title i had read in PA (And i wrote this before the author edited the title.... just in case he cared to )
7. twens (Posts: 700; Member since: 25 Feb 2012)
Hehehe, the iPhone and Apple are already dying. Where do you think samsung,htc,LG and other OEM's are getting their sales from?.....lol
9. Ninetysix (Posts: 1680; Member since: 08 Oct 2012)
LOL....What does this graph tell you?
Do you see a negative number next to Apple? You just went full potato bro.
27. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1655; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
LOL unit shipments (not sales) are up but market share is down from 2012 which is where it really counts. Truth hurts
29. Ninetysix (Posts: 1680; Member since: 08 Oct 2012)
LOL yeah. Apple is dying even if they're selling more phones now vs last year.
33. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 1275; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
Really? I didn't realize market share had finally been monetized. So, I guess all that market share has rescued HTC, LG, Motorola, and the rest from their slide toward insolvency?
I know, you will say that having dominant market share will finally tip developers toward thinking Android first, leaving iOS to pick up dev scraps like WP8.
Wait, that hasn't happened? You said "market share...is where it really counts," right? How can this be that NOTHING has changed? Apple still makes truckloads of money AND gets all the great apps first? Insanity, I tell you, insanity.
40. Googler (Posts: 813; Member since: 10 Jun 2013)
All that market share doesn't belong to HTC, LG, and Motorola, it belongs mostly to Samsung. Last I read, Samsung is dominating on many fronts.
42. sarge77 (Posts: 202; Member since: 14 Mar 2013)
Their ahead mostly in the US not across the globe.
14. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)
Anandtech showed the A7 in a dead heat with Bay Trail even with the more advanced fab process.
18. brrunopt (Posts: 552; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
the A7 only won on the benchs running on safari (witch is way more lightweight than others), so not really comparable...
32. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)
I dont see how this is not fair seeing that Chrome is Google's official and flagship browser. It should also represent the best performance available on the the platform.
35. brrunopt (Posts: 552; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
you can say that the iphone 5S will be faster, but you can't say that the A7 is more powerfull.
Also the test on baytrail where on chrome too, afterwards tests on IE (still a desktop browser) surpassed Safari on the 5S by a good margin...
17. livyatan (Posts: 753; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
The obvious and embarassing(for Intel) truth is that A7 utterly demolished BayTrail per core/clock.
You have a 28nm dual core 1.3ghz beating /rivaling the 2.3ghz quad core 22nm TABLET chip in every CPU test published so far..with a GPU being at least a good 50% better.
Also an integrated 4G modem and a motion processing unit.
Overall Intel is just laughably underachieved, in comparison.
The reason for this Apple's superiority is in ARM v8 architecture which is a stupendous improvement over the v7.
If Samsung really outs the 14nm full octa core ARM v8 early next year, we will see a phone chip about 3-4 times more powerful than this Apple A7!
It is a staggering prospect.
20. brrunopt (Posts: 552; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
except you forgot 1 thing, the cores on the A7 are massive.. each core is a lot bigger than the ones inside the baytrail SOC's.
And get your facts straight,
the A7 didn't won on the CPU side, and on the GPU side it doesn't get anywhere near 50% , it's a bit better but not that near that much (the A7 has good graphic scores but miserable physics and medium triangle output)
28. livyatan (Posts: 753; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
You pretend to have some clue but that was just weak and ignorant twisting of my facts that remain firm.
- what does a die area have to do with my points?
What does it matter for performance and power envelope?
Intel chip doesn't beat A7 in the former and fails to fit in the same power envelope - otherwise Bay Trail would be made for phones and not tablets only.
Also, what is the die area of quad core BT?(22nm vs 28nm mind you )
A7 CPU performance is indeed overall rivaling that of the BT, like I said.
I didnt said it won, just that it has beaten it in some areas.
The Rogue in A7 is rated at about 76(even well over 100, by some sources)GFLOPS vs ~50GFLOPS in BT GPU.
And in the few tests where two get compared, that difference looks like about right.
And even you know triangle and physics tests are completely irrelevant and meaningless..just look at how iPhone 5 blows the 5S in that regard, and then get back to me.
30. brrunopt (Posts: 552; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
"- what does a die area have to do with my points? "
everything.. more area -> more transistors -> more performance .
You refered that the A7 achives the same performance with only 2 cores instead of 4 like it's due of "magic". While it happens because instead of dividing the transitors into more cores (for better multitasking) they choose to make bigger cores (a A7 core has the same size or even bigger than 2 cores on BT , or a S800).
Smartphone SOC's based on the same cores inside baytrail are coming early 2014.
"You have a 28nm dual core 1.3ghz beating /rivaling"
And no , its not rivaling, it falls a reasonable amount short..
since when does GFLOPS translate into real world performance and quality ?
" And even you know triangle and physics tests are completely irrelevant and meaningless.. "
irrelevant and meaningless ?? LOL ?
You migh get very high frame rates an/or at high resolutions due to the raw power of the GPU but you get weaker details .
Things like curve surface smoothness, multiple edges details , water detail, landscape smoothness, etc (things improved by the higher number of triangles generated) .
Things like crash damage calculations, water movement, rain, leafes , interactive and destructible worlds (particle calculations)
34. livyatan (Posts: 753; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
Now please, read and learn something.
Again, every single of my points still holds true.
CPU tests of A7 compared to Bay Trail:
Now pay attention to the GPU test results:
..and compare them to Bay Trail GPU results:
..clearly a good 50 % superior overall, with some results being over 100% ahead!
And again, the triangle output means virtually nothing in practice.
Judging by your notion, the iPhone 5 (FAR grrater triangle output than iPhone 5S) would be graphically superior to iPhone 5S! I told you to think about it before replying but no, you proved to be unable to think rationally and objectively.
Oh and btw, the BT triangle output is horrible.
And finally, the core die size means nothing, what matters is the end result comparison.
The A7 is a phone chip, get it?
When the A7X comes out in a few weeks it will be a tablet chip in the same class with the Intel's offering(regardless of the die area) and will certainly blow Bay Trail out of the water.
36. brrunopt (Posts: 552; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
the A7 wins on bench with stock browser test , witch is complete BS of a comparative.. Safari is a lot more lightweight
Also " Update: Intel responded with a Bay Trail run under IE11, which comes in at 329.6 ms. "
some it has a big advantage but other are completly miserable with BT having more than 2x the power too..
And more triangle output means virtualy nothing ?
" the iPhone 5 (FAR grrater triangle output than iPhone 5S) would be graphically superior to iPhone 5S! I told you to think about it before replying but no,
triangle output is important but it's not everything , i never said it was. And on the rest the A6 lacks a big part..
37. livyatan (Posts: 753; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
Again, here are the CPU comparisons!
Please tell me in which ones Bay Trail won and in which the A7!
And answer me does the statement - the A7 CPU is overall rivaling the Bay Trail CPU - holds true??
The fact Apple used a mobile safari shouldn't count as an advantage, on contrary - desktop IE has a lot more room for JS optimization!
Now the GPU. Again!
T Rex HD offscreen:
Bay Trail - 16fps
A7 - 25fps
..thats more than 50 percent advantage for the A7
AND again, your famous triangle throughput(even if it mattered)
Triangle throughput offscreen T Rex HD:
Bay Trail 70M/s
Looks like you ran out of material for trolling!
38. pulkit.tyagi (banned) (Posts: 35; Member since: 15 Nov 2012)
stop being a fanboy and except the facts !
24. jove39 (Posts: 1331; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
well...comparing soc fabricated with 28nm vs 14nm...doesn't make much sense...and every one knows 14nm fabrication produces more efficient soc than 28nm!
25. Jimstar (Posts: 259; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)
14nm better than 22nm? Naaaaah you don't say?
Question for me is when am I going to see it in something I'd be interested in buying? Laptops are cool, but not my thing.