ccw

根据新加坡VR-Zone从Intel内部得到的消息，Intel此前对移动业务进行了整合，新部门由Mike Bell和Hermann Eul领导。在合并后不久的一次会议上，Intel透露了采用32nm Medfield Atom处理器平板电脑的部分性能参数。

距离32nm Medfield正式发布即CES展会只有几周的时间，Medfield将直接与苹果A系列，NVIDIA Tegra，高通Snapdragon，三星Exynos和TI OMAP系列竞争。对手中目前只有三星Exynos的部分型号已经采用32nm制程工艺生产。



Intel最早在IDF展示的“公版”设计平板电脑采用单核心Medfield处理器，运行频率1.6GHz，内存采用1GB LPDDR2。WiFi/蓝牙/FM调频芯片厂商未知，屏幕为10.1英寸，分辨率1280*800，拥有一个eMMC/microSD卡槽。

目前透露的测试成绩均基于Android 3.x Honeycomb操作系统，正式出货产品将升级至Android 4.x Ice Cream Sandwich。

在Caffeinemark 3.0通过运行Java程序测算系统速度的Benchmark中，1.6GHz单核心Medfield取得了10500分左右的成绩。作为对比NVIDIA Tegra 2的分数在7500分左右，高通Snapdragon MSM8260为8000分左右，最高的是三星的Exynos 4210，分数为8500左右。目前暂时还不清楚Tegra 3的测试成绩。

从分数看来，起码在性能方面x86核心依然无可匹敌，不过续航又如何呢？

目前工程试作样机的正常使用功耗约为2.6W，Flash视频回放1280*720级别功耗约为3.6W，离Intel的目标2W以下/2.6W还有一段距离。至于正式发售时能否达到Intel自己设定的目标，答案还是留给时间吧。

http://news.mydrivers.com/1/213/213245.htm

[ 本帖最後由 ccw 於 2011-12-27 22:37 編輯 ]

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 ccw 於 2011-12-27 22:36 發表
根据新加坡VR-Zone从Intel内部得到的消息，Intel此前对移动业务进行了整合，新部门由Mike Bell和Hermann Eul领导。在合并后不久的一次会议上，Intel透露了采用32nm Medfield Atom处理器平板电脑的部分性能参数。

距离32nm ...

3.6W太高了

Henry

等待22nm成品.

jackli

intel 終於有chip 比android 用

cheungmanhoi

3.6………………
你用埋我果份 又唔系勁好多

ccw

Just the beginning.

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 ccw 於 2011-12-28 11:33 發表 [url=http://discuz.servehttp.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=787376&ptid=47691][/
Just the beginning.

In fact this is a disappointment

Henry

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2011-12-28 18:36 發表

In fact this is a disappointment

W/performance which one is better?

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 Henry 於 2011-12-28 18:50 發表 [url=http://discuz.servehttp.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=787843&ptid=47691][/url

W/performance which one is better?

3.6w@tablet ~ 65w@notebook
does performance matter?

Henry

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2011-12-28 19:26 發表

3.6w@tablet ~ 65w@notebook
does performance matter?

I mean compared to the ARM counterparts.

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 Henry 於 2011-12-28 20:16 發表

I mean compared to the ARM counterparts.

if you can only use it for 2-3 hours,
it does not matter whether it has i7 performance

Henry

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2011-12-28 20:16 發表

if you can only use it for 2-3 hours,
it does not matter whether it has i7 performance

I don't bother if it matches i7's performance, just curious why did you say disappointed.
If W/perf is similar to ARM, just clock the freq down will do.

Moreover, we are now waiting the predecessor of Cedar Trail, which suppose to have a better W/perf and better battery performance.

Henry

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2011-12-28 20:16 發表

if you can only use it for 2-3 hours,
it does not matter whether it has i7 performance

I don't bother if it matches i7's performance, just curious why did you say disappointed.
If W/perf is similar to ARM, just clock the freq down will do.

Moreover, we are now waiting the predecessor of Medfield, which suppose to have a better W/perf and better battery performance.

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 Henry 於 2011-12-28 20:31 發表

I don't bother if it matches i7's performance, just curious why did you say disappointed.
If W/perf is similar to ARM, just clock the freq down will do.

Moreover, we are now waiting the predecessor  ...

Totally bullshit
Clock i7 to 200MHz, can it match ARM with power consumption?

I have told you many times, if you can scale it to that low, why would Intel / AMD bother making Bonnell / Bobcat?

Henry

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2011-12-28 20:32 發表


Totally bullshit
Clock i7 to 200MHz, can it match ARM with power consumption?

I have told you many times, if you can scale it to that low, why would Intel / AMD bother making Bonnell / Bobcat?

Is Medfield a i7?
Does Medfield need to lower its power consumption to its 1/5 to 1/10?