Penguins&PolarBears
Member
The new Atom chip sounds like it is a huge improvement over previous generations. They have 3X performance over last years chips.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Anandtech: Intel's new Atom CPU beats AMD's Jaguar in performance
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
soulassssns
Banned
Difference is I will NEVER own an Intel Atom processor.
anexanhume
Member
This shouldn't surprise anyone. Intel has been ahead of AMD since the Core microarchitecture debuted.
Atom was never a viable candidate for the consoles either so it's a moot point.
Atom was never a viable candidate for the consoles either so it's a moot point.
That^^^
A lot of the physics based calculations can be offloaded to GPGPU so I don't see the issue. Having a bleeding edge processor is less of a necessity these days.
SomethingInTheSea
Member
In regards console performance relative to other devices, this isn't really much of an indicator. Games haven't been cpu bound in a long time, its the gpu that's the real performance indicator.
This isn't really isn't surprising. An Intel CPU almost always beats the equivalent/comparable AMD CPU. But we all know that the integrated GPU in the AMD APU will always be way better compared to the integrated GPU in an Intel CPU, so that make the AMD APU a much better product in my eyes.
Horse Armour
Member
Offloading physics to the GPU lowers the amount of power available for rendering though, there's no such thing as free performance.
Only if those phones are able to push the same games out to my TV as my PS4 can.
crazepharmacist
Member
I'd like to know this as well. How does the Jag hold up to Cell?
Dictator93
Member
depends on the code.
The jaguar will beat out the cell at general game code. More GPU like tasks with vectors and what not will be much better on cell.
This is untrue. Lots of games are CPU bound. You're just not playing the right games, and things will have to get scaled back if/when those types of games are ported to consoles.
I don't have benches handy, but general purpose performance per core should be a LOT better than the crappy PPE core in the PS360. That said, I don't think it will come close to approaching the floating point performance of something like cell. That's where the GCN1 GPUs come in.
Ricerocket
Member
Isn't the point of GPGPU to take advantage of idle times on the GPU because they don't always have 100% utilization in GCN cards? I think that's what I read and that's how it will benefit X1/PS4 later.
Did people think others were lying when they were saying the new consoles are underpowered?
If you think this is not good wait and see the performance differential a year or two from now. Better break out the old "Gameplay is the only thing that matters" excuse and stop counting transistors, measuring memory bandwidth and speculating about secret sauces.
If you think this is not good wait and see the performance differential a year or two from now. Better break out the old "Gameplay is the only thing that matters" excuse and stop counting transistors, measuring memory bandwidth and speculating about secret sauces.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
Well if you can find a PC with a Cell or Xenon processor, feel free to run some benchmarks.
Derpcrawler
Member
I can try to run this crap on my YDL that is still installed on 2.0 fat PS3, but the OS itself puts great stress on PS3 due to limited RAM, last time I used it it was kinda slow for every day work, and that was compared to my old desktop Pentium 4 on NetBurst lol.
Edit: wait, is this test using Flash? I remember there was no flash for PPC. I will need to dust off my phat PS3 and hook it up to test.
Edit: wait, is this test using Flash? I remember there was no flash for PPC. I will need to dust off my phat PS3 and hook it up to test.
An Atom, yes. A new Atom that is -- astonishingly -- more than twice as fast as any Atom you've ever seen, and is also technically not on sale anywere yet.
Anandtech said:
Derpcrawler
Member
Just did boot up PS3 with old firmware, I actually had Fedora Linux. The test makes the system unresponsive.
Penguins&PolarBears
Member
I believe they already addressed media playback with Clover Trail and Clover Trail+ last year. Desktop usage was still molasses slow though. For tablet usage, like web browsing/apps, last years Atom was perfectly fine.
It sounds like now you can actually also have a useable desktop experience with Bay Trail, but still behind Ivy Bridge.
The question though is for non-desktop use is it better to go with ARM or Atom? On that chart the Atom wins on CPU, but Tegra 4 (Nvidia Shield) kicks Bay Trail's butt in GPU performance. For gaming on a tablet the Tegra 4 and Snapdragon 800 is probably a better experience.
McHuj
Member
Yeah. That's a big benefit 28nm vs 22 nm FF.
Their console division is doing pretty well
In this coming war...whoever loses, AMD wins! They're looking at something like 300 million consoles CPU/GPU sales!
JonathanPower
Member
Well, in the Cinebench tests the results of the AMD A4-5000 and Atom Z3770 are basically the same. So the new Atom has basically the same performance of Jaguar. And once AMD will use a 22 nm processing node the TDP should also be very similar, if not better.
AMD sells chips and presumably is busily making as many game chip APU's as they can. That is good, not bad. And yields are...
This quarter, Q3 2013, AMD should return to profit after recent losses. A growing part of that profit will be from custom projects like the games chips which allow AMD to re-use and re-sell their existing CPU and GPU chip layout IP without massive new R&D costs.
AMD does have a new generation video cards coming out this month.
Early next year, AMD starts releasing the Kaveri family of chips. These will not be high-end gaming chips. But because game console development innovations mostly apply, this architecture has a decent chance of influencing the entire personal computing industry in just a few years.
Are the exact reason for the Atom line? I get almost 10 hours of screen time on my hybrid and it's using an Atom from one or two gens ago. Heats less than my Nexus too.
Everyone read this thoroughly before posting:
The Jaguar isn't old. It was released in may this year and its predecessor Bobcat is from Q1 2011. The A4 5000 also has a TDP of 15W which means it is far too hot for a fanless tablet while Bay Trail was tested in a fanless tablet and the CPU is estimated to use just 2W like competing ARM CPUs.
The Jaguar is very much designed for the low end market where Brazos (APU with Bobcat cores designed for low end laptops/netbooks) enjoyed some decent success. The Tablet versions of the Jaguar CPU architecture runs at 1Ghz.
The names can probably sound confusing so this might clear it slightly:
Core architecture:
High end:
Sandy Bridge -> Ivy Bridge -> Haswell (Intel)
Bulldozer -> Piledriver -> Steamroller (AMD)
Low end:
Bonnel -> Saltwell -> Silvermont (Intel)
Bobcat -> Jaguar (AMD)
Bolded are current.
Names like A4 and Atom are just brand names. You'll find anything from Sandy Bridge, Ivy, Haswell and even Silvermont cores now underneath a "Pentium" badge. AMD also does the same. "Bay Trail" is just what Intel calls tablet SoCs using Silvermont, but with AMD it can be even more confusing to find Trinity and Zambezi both mean Piledriver cores only the first one is an APU and they you have Richland which is a slightly tweaked Trinity...
If you get confused just check wikipedia or google the names to find what is what.
"Modules" just means that the cores share some resources. This quad core Intel CPU has two dual core modules while an eight core AMD FX CPU has four dual core modules. It's sort of like hyperthreading on steroids
You are very mistaken.
JonathanPower
Member
Sadly, there is something just wrong about trying to compare directly-measured chip power to changes in overall platform power. It may well be that other chips are taking the extra power. We do not know because it is just not being measured properly.
maverick40
Junior Member
I helped make these, just saying!
Captain Tuttle
Member
Well at least they have these consoles locked in for a few years.
Only 2 pages, thought this thread would be bigger.
qa_engineer
Member
There is no 8 core variant of the AMD jaguar on the market, but I'm not surprised.
That's kind of the point. Mobile processors need to have very low TDP to be viable options for oems. The article is trying to say that given the data from benchmarks, and the atom as the baseline, the kabini chip would draw an estimated 6W compared to the atom's 2.5W.
I assume the kabini draws around 2.5W, but it's performance is much weaker compared to the atom which draws a similar TDP but gives much better performance. The problem for intel is it's pricing. Each of their divisions are expected to gross a minimum margin, so AMD's prices are usually much more palatable for OEMs depending on usage case.
Yep, the 8 core ones in the consoles are just 2 4-core modules put together basically.
Delusibeta
Banned
tl;dr edition: Next gen console CPUs are confirmed to be shite. Then again, this was expected when it was revealed that both were using AMD. P)
P)Horse Armour
Member
Not anymore. Atom prices are a fraction of those of Core processors. The highest end model is $37 which is ARM territory.
It's stronger than that laptop, and you're not only being limited by the CPU.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
No, I'm not sure what MS had done with theirs but the CPU in the PS4 is an customised 8 Core jag with a powerful GPU on the same die iirc
it's not really Apple's to Apple's.
The thing is, we really have no idea how upcoming engines will run on these. As it is, 8 vs. 4 core makes no difference when you are talking about games. All about IPC and frequency right now.
SC2 is entirely CPU bottlenecked. Need a 4.0GHz proc to get solid performance in that game.
Horse Armour
Member
A possibility is that they could have gone Intel CPU+ AMD/nVidia GPU. MS already have APU development experience when they made the XCPU which is an IBM Power CPU and AMD GPU in an APU and I'm sure Sony could have done the same too. Not that I'm saying that that would have been better than what we got, it's just a possibility.
You're missing the point
Hasn't most everyone realized that the PS4 and XbOne are using "older" tech in of themselves? Of course a new CPU will beat them. This is a new era...cutting edge consoles no more. They're simply "good enough" - if you're a console gamer you should close your eyes and block your ears from here on out with any new PC component. It will beat your systems capabilities.