Are you excited about Intel's push in mobile processors?

Are you excited about Intel's push in mobile processors?
So here it is then, the Motorola RAZR i! The first phone to feature a processor clocked at 2GHz, and way more importantly, one of the very first phones to feature a processor made by Intel! The two companies just announced the first fruit of their collaboration, and we have to admit that it does look pretty well.

Actually, the RAZR i is something like an Intel Inside version of the recently-announced RAZR M. It's a great handset with a smaller form-factor than the behemoths we're seeing lately. Still, the phone sports a sizable 4.3" screen so there's plenty of screen real estate to enjoy. But hey, we're not here to convince you how good it is! We're here to see what your opinion is regarding Intel's late entry into the mobile processor market.

For years now it's been rumored and reported that Intel is joining the mobile SoC race. The company itself has talked about it quite a few times, but somehow, it just couldn't come out with a solution that doesn't drain your battery in a matter of a few hours. Now, it seems that Intel has finally gotten it right, with its mobile Atom processor being featured in the RAZR i. It's a single-core CPU, something that silicon aficionados may not be too excited about, but still, it will be achieving speeds of up to 2GHz, so this should compensate for the lack of cores.

Anyways, let us hear what you think about all this - are you excited about Intel's push in mobile processors? Do you think they have the technology and skill to match or even out-perform ARM's power-efficient solutions? Please cast your votes in the following poll!

Are you excited about Intel's puch in mobile processors

Shut up and take my money!
Sure, it'll make the market even more diverse and wonderful!
I would rather wait for some real-world impressions and benchmarks first.
I don't know about Atom, but my Snapdragon screams!
Not really, way too late to join now.

Related phones

  • Display 4.3" 540 x 960 pixels
  • Camera 8 MP / 0.3 MP VGA front
  • Processor Intel Atom, Single core, 2000 MHz
  • Battery 2000 mAh



1. XPERIA-KNIGHT unregistered

ummmm bench marks first please.....

2. No_Nonsense unregistered

Benchmarks can be cheated upon. By the way here's one:

3. XPERIA-KNIGHT unregistered

link is broken?

5. No_Nonsense unregistered

I can see it fine.

6. XPERIA-KNIGHT unregistered

it wont let me click on it bro

8. No_Nonsense unregistered

Copy-paste perhaps?

9. XPERIA-KNIGHT unregistered

lol yea i tried that man i didnt go through for some reason... update: i got it to work thanks :)

4. nadar.bsm

Posts: 32; Member since: Jul 13, 2012

sure the performence is great but will wait to see the apps compatibility with Intel Architecture... if that is taken care of then Intel will also be one gaint in mobile proccessers..... fingers crossed... battery efficient.......

12. juanyunis

Posts: 73; Member since: Aug 31, 2012

Well, since android uses a VM for running the apps "Dalvik", it's irrelevant the processor inside the device to run apps, android was developed with this in mind, they made the most open mobile operating system, so if android runs on x86, then their apps too.

7. bobfreking55

Posts: 866; Member since: Jul 15, 2011

I'm more concerned on apps. A lot of apps won't work right? anyone who could clarify?

10. No_Nonsense unregistered

Why won't they work?

11. juanyunis

Posts: 73; Member since: Aug 31, 2012

Well, since android uses a VM for running the apps "Dalvik", it's irrelevant the processor inside the device to run apps, android was developed with this in mind, they made the most open mobile operating system, so if android runs on x86, then their apps too.

16. TylerGrunter

Posts: 1544; Member since: Feb 16, 2012

Mostly correct but not totally so. Around 90% of the apps will work, but those using native code and not only Dalvik won't work unless the developer creates a branch of the app for it and compiles it for x86 systems. Many of the apps that won't work unless a bit of development is done will be games, as they tend to use native code to improve performance.

24. juanyunis

Posts: 73; Member since: Aug 31, 2012

Good to know, i forgot about the native development, NDK :). Well i guess this is used in games and some root apps to access natively to the hardware.

13. FranksGT

Posts: 167; Member since: Aug 29, 2012

Intel have always made fast proccessors. Im not worried about specs. I want a 4-7 inch screen with NO dumb on screen buttons.

14. mrllano

Posts: 91; Member since: Aug 20, 2012

if paired with 2gb ram then maybe worth to take a look

15. Nathan_ingx

Posts: 4769; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i think 1.5 Ghz is quite enough to power a it single, double or quad. Not saying 2Ghz is bad, but it seems unnecessary. What it might need is a better hardware for display output.

17. No_Nonsense unregistered

I feel at least 2GHz is necessary.

18. shawman

Posts: 43; Member since: Sep 18, 2012

I am intrigued for sure. if intel pulls a conroe with their mobile push with either merrifield next year or 14nm Airmont in 2014, they will disrupt the market for sure. Plus they work closely with Google and optimize the platform for their chips. Their reference platform is quite good for a mid range single core device. We will see phones with Z2580(dual 1.8ghz) in H1 2013 and Merrifield Q4 2013. That being said they will probably be only in a niche market player. i think Qualcomm and other ARM brethens will continue to own 90%+ of market. But even 10% with most of the it in High End/Mid will be huge in volume. I doubt intel would even look at low end smartphone or feature phones.

20. pats4thewin

Posts: 29; Member since: Jul 10, 2012

i agree, this late in the game you just cant do anything but go all out and put all your eggs in a basket

19. Glim12808

Posts: 394; Member since: Oct 26, 2011

Wow I'm very interested! If the phones will be available in Oct, by Nov, or Dec at most, we'll already have reports how well or badly it will perform! Oh yes! I'm very interested!

21. ap1989

Posts: 145; Member since: Oct 12, 2011

ya i want my next phone processor to be an Intel not Ti OMAP

22. aoikemono27

Posts: 177; Member since: Feb 27, 2012

Dude the only company in the game is ARM. That's called a MONOPOLY. Which usually means innovation loses out to complacency and money. Three is ideal. If only AMD didn't suck so much right now.

23. pikapowerize

Posts: 1869; Member since: May 03, 2012

i dont vote coz i dont care! but as long as it will have what ARM base processor offered now like LTE, then im cool with it!! im just hoping to see dual core or maybe quad core 2ghz but not power/battery hungry! im hoping that microsoft will now look for intel chips for WP! along with qualcomm... but still hoping more chips like Texas Instruments and NVIDIA!

25. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

no, I'm not. I think its going to cause way more harm than good for the android community. However, I think it's a good thing for W8 pro devices for the extra power.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.