Intel executive says 14nm Bay Trail chip provides more power and energy efficiency than Apple's A7

Intel executive says 14nm Bay Trail chip provides more power and energy efficiency than Apple's A7
Intel CEO Brian Krzanich took some time during Tuesday's conference call with the media, to answer a question posed by an inquiring mind. The analyst wanted to know what the advantages were of Intel going to a 14nm process versus the 28nm process used for the Apple A7 chip. The analyst noted that Apple was able to score good benchmark results with its silicon. As a general rule, the smaller the geometry of the chip, the more advanced the manufacturing process leading to more powerful and energy efficient chips.

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: 2036; Member since: May 29, 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: 632; Member since: Jul 11, 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: 221; Member since: Feb 25, 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: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 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: 742; Member since: Aug 15, 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: 175; Member since: May 15, 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: 274; Member since: Jul 04, 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: Aug 15, 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: 867; Member since: Jun 19, 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: Mar 05, 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: 367; Member since: Jun 03, 2013

Hey, Alan Bay Trail is build on 22-nanometer technology not 14 nm, you should correct your title.

5. Champion

Posts: 12; Member since: Oct 14, 2013

Apple will die one day

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: 31328; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Well said, why would you want any of these companies to die? He just wants some green thumbs.

39. Sauce unregistered

Exactly. 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: 264; Member since: Aug 28, 2013

everyone will die one day my friend , everyone will .

16. Kalevro

Posts: 56; Member since: Sep 11, 2011

Well What will Newton rely on then ? Grape..

19. noler

Posts: 326; Member since: Aug 19, 2013

And also you will die one day.

41. sarge77

Posts: 202; Member since: Mar 14, 2013

Not likely they have to many partnerships for any of there partners to let this giant die.

6. ajonly

Posts: 16; Member since: May 25, 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: 1180; Member since: Feb 25, 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?

9. Ninetysix

Posts: 2965; Member since: Oct 08, 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: 1777; Member since: Oct 18, 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: 2965; Member since: Oct 08, 2012

LOL yeah. Apple is dying even if they're selling more phones now vs last year.

33. Napalm_3nema

Posts: 2236; Member since: Jun 14, 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 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: Jun 10, 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: Mar 14, 2013

Their ahead mostly in the US not across the globe.

10. ZeroCide

Posts: 816; Member since: Jan 09, 2013

x86 FTW!!!!

14. bigstrudel

Posts: 606; Member since: Aug 20, 2012

Anandtech showed the A7 in a dead heat with Bay Trail even with the more advanced fab process.

18. brrunopt

Posts: 742; Member since: Aug 15, 2013

the A7 only won on the benchs running on safari (witch is way more lightweight than others), so not really comparable...

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.