Next generation 20nm mobile processors to break the 3 GHz barrier
posted by Daniel P. / Jul 10, 2013, 2:28 AM
Snapdragon 800 or the Tegra 4, can clock at 2.3 GHz per core max, then the 20nm chips that TSMC will churn out are going all the way up to 3 GHz, without sacrificing on power consumption.What does it mean? It means that if the best representatives of the current crop of 28nm chipsets like the
In a nutshell faster and more frugal mobile processors will be ready for phone and tablet makers to put in their devices come early 2014, but you already could have guessed that much, couldn't you? The tipping point here is breaking of the mythical 3 GHz barrier, not that all flagship phones will be clocked at the maximum but it's nice to have options.
Awesome!! Bye bye Intel ;(
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 2:37 AM 3
Posts: 328; Member since: Aug 15, 2012
5 GHz from current ARM chips probably doesn't match a 1.7GHz Intel or AMD x86 processor still. (I believe current ARM chips don't beat the latest ATOM even with the exception of graphics performance which is less related to the CPU - if someone has evidence proving otherwise please say so.)
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 3:16 AM 5
Posts: 483; Member since: Mar 05, 2013
Of course ARM doesn't match the maximum performance of x86 processors... I don't think anyone disagreed with that. The performance per watt is what makes ARM more dangerous. At least so far, it's efficiency isn't matched -- and that's important because a lot more is constantly moving to data servers and power consumption is a key area to cut electricity bill costs, and where customers will look to buy. If Intel is going to try to become competitive, they're going to have to start dropping more legacy support to trim the watts, but that'll lose them a key defining feature that made them so successful in the first place.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 2:33 PM 0
Posts: 71; Member since: Sep 15, 2012
OMG, I think those who are thinking that intel will bye bye in this Mobile Processors battle I think all of those who are thinking that intel will bye bye are crazy D*mb, coz even a 1ghz Intel Atom can defeat a 2 core 1ghz cortex a9 proc so I think Intel cant be beaten in this type of battle. except from having LTE.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 2:56 AM 7
Posts: 571; Member since: Nov 19, 2012
I reckon if Intel makes a new processor that is 4g capable then they have a winner because theve got the exp, and money to do so. Qualcomm is having a huge comeback witt there 600 and 800 processors, they've acheived that thus year what about next year. Tegra to me is more for multitasking but there slowing down and its not as wow as last year tegra 3 were they broke every processor before it and after it.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 3:06 AM 3
Posts: 3718; Member since: Nov 03, 2012
No one need so much speed actually, upto 2 gigs with dual / quad core is already fast enough to perform every operation
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 3:17 AM 2
Posts: 581; Member since: Jul 07, 2012
I'd wager a guess and say likely non-tablet candidates for this will be the Galaxy Note 4/HTC Two Phablet or even the rumored 5.7 inch Apple Phablet next year, A57/A53 64 bit and may possibly be seeing 4GB of RAM at this point for supersize phablets and 8GB of RAM for tablets.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 3:48 AM 0
Posts: 867; Member since: Jun 19, 2013
For those who think Intel has the edge over ARM..forget about Antutu and Atom's simulated memory scores! It is the only benchmark that makes Atom look competitive. Please check the review of latest Intel powered Galaxy Tab on Gsmarena and see just how ridiculously inferior it is to best ARM chips in EVERY OTHER BENCHMARK EXCEPT ANTUTU(I cannot post links because of my posting number) The real truth is overwhelmingly in favor of Snapdragon, Exynos &co. Go to Geekbench and compare 2Ghz Clover trail + with Exynos octa.. numbers show a staggering advantage in every category for the latter, overall being about 120% better
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 4:25 AM 2
Posts: 1152; Member since: Apr 30, 2012
Read anandtech. This generation's intel processors are actually nothing to next generation processors (silvermont) which will use 22nm trigate transistor of intel. This will allow greater power and less power consumption. 3GHz on a mobile processor, especially a15 would be a power hungry processor. Even using a 2ghz processor eats up a lot of power. Also, intel has this expertise, dont you think they can't produce SoCs that has better performance than arm? Not defending intel, I just say what I think is true.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 6:07 AM 0
Posts: 271; Member since: Oct 19, 2012
If you can trust geekbench, intel atom in motorola razr i which is clocked at 2 GHz, single core but with hyperthread, saltwell architecture, has 974 in geekbench and exynos octa has 3500 at 1,6 GHz. But we shouldn´t compare these two because razr i uses an old architecture and doesn´t stand a chance against arm 15. Alright now, intel said that silvermont will be 2x more powerful in single thread than saltwell, however I don´t know if Intel compared it to rarz i which is clocked to 2 GHz, and consume 4,7x less battery ( I my self do not believe that :)) and silvermont will have 4 cores instead of the one core which is now being used in phones, but silvermont will not have hyperthread however saltwell does have hyperthread, so if we do the math. 2x more powerful in single thread and 4x more cores, that means 8x more powerful than saltwell, that would mean more single thread performance than S800 or ARM 15 and definitely more multi-thread performance than S800 and ARM 15 at less battery consumption. But be aware that this is just theory and intel didn´t specify which processors he compared silvermont to, or any frequencies. But from what Intel showed us, Silvermont should be better than ARM 15 or S800. And consume less power. But this is was just a presentation, Silvermont could in reality be much worse, but I don´t think so. Silvermont will bring more competition, which is good for us.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 7:11 AM 0
Posts: 124; Member since: Aug 08, 2012
Why do people want intel to beat ARM? I dont' want intel to have a monopoly in the mobile phone world, and the desktop pc world. ARM is far better anyway, in the mobile world because their chips are much more efficient. I am not going to buy any phone with an intel chipset because I don't want to help them gain a monopoly.
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 5:21 AM 1
Posts: 867; Member since: Jun 19, 2013
Paradox, it has to do with how human mind is hardwired to get fascinated with bigger and badder, instead of truly advanced and efficient. For example, you won't see majority admiring the fox (most intelligent and widespread member of carnivora)instead of lion will you? You won't see majority being in awe with super efficient, ultra modern little hybrid engine, next to an old, roaring big block V-8 with a giant supercharger, right? Intel is the big, musular, loud thing and so it gets perceived as cool and superior. While in reality, ARM is the non spectacular and quiet yet more advanced creature. It will out survive Intel and flourish, there's no doubt in my mind about that. The Bay Trail (Silvermont based)is nothing against even the current snapdragon 800..quad cores will cost 3 times more, in comparison (150$ vs 40$), will have double the TTP(10w vs 5w),, and have a far inferior GPU! And even considering the promised 2x increase in performance from current Atom, that still should't translate in the more capable CPU compared to S800(look at tons of data showing the S800 being up to 150% faster) Overall, its just an overkill on Qualcomm's side. And next to this 3ghz CPU(add another 30-60% increase on top of this clock speed based gain when A57 core gets introduced) coupled with SGX Rogue or ULP Gforce Kepler GPU..well, that Airmont can't come fast enough for Intel. Until then, ARM has absolutely nothing to compete against
posted on Jul 10, 2013, 7:06 AM 3
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):