Cortex A15: SunSpider 0.9.1

SunSpider performance in Chrome on the Nexus 10 isn't all that great to begin with, so the Exynos 5250 curve is longer than the competition. I wouldn't pay too much attention to overall performanceas that's more of a Chrome optimization issue, but we begin to shine some light on Cortex A15's power consumption:

Although these line graphs are neat to look at, it's tough to quantify exactly what's going on here. Following every graph from here on forward I'll present a bar chart that integrates over the benchmark time period (excluding idle) and presents total energy used during the task in Joules.

Task Energy - SunSpider 0.9.1 - Total Platform

The data here reflects what you see in the chart above fairly well. Acer/Intel manage to get the edge over Dell/Qualcomm when it comes to total energy consumed during the test. The Nexus 10 doesn't do so well here but that's likely a software issue more than anything else.

CPU power is just insane. Peak power consumption is around 3W, compared to around 1W for the competition.

Task Energy - SunSpider 0.9.1 - CPU Only

Looking at the CPU core itself, Qualcomm appears to have the advantage here but keep in mind that we aren't yet tracking L2 cache power on Krait (but we are on Atom). Regardless Atom and Krait are very close.

Even GPU power consumption is pretty high compared to everything else (minus Tegra 3).

Task Energy - SunSpider 0.9.1 - GPU Only

SunSpider - Max, Avg, Min Power

For your reference, the remaining graphs present max, average and min power draw throughout the course of the benchmark (excluding beginning/end idle times).

Max Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - Total Platform

Max Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - GPU Only

Max Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - CPU Only

Average Power Draw

Average Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - Total Platform

Average Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - GPU Only

Average Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - CPU Only

Minimum Power Draw

Min Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - Total Platform

Min Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - GPU Only

Min Power Draw - SunSpider 0.9.1 - CPU Only

ARM's Cortex A15: Idle Power Cortex A15: Kraken
POST A COMMENT

140 Comments

View All Comments

  • djgandy - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    People care about battery life though. If you can run faster and go idle lower you can save more power.

    The next few years will be interesting and once everyone is on the same process, there will be less variables to find to assert who has the most efficient SOC.
    Reply
  • DesktopMan - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    "and once everyone is on the same process"

    Intel will keep their fabs so unless everybody else suddenly start using theirs it doesn't look like this will ever happen. Even at the same transistor size there are large differences between fab methods.
    Reply
  • jemima puddle-duck - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    Everyone cares about battery life, but it would take orders of magnitudes of improvement for people to actually go out of their way and demand it. Reply
  • Wolfpup - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    No it wouldn't. People want new devices all the time with far less.

    And Atom swaps in for ARM pretty easily on Android, and is actually a huge selling point on the Windows side, given it can just plain do a lot more than ARM.
    Reply
  • DesktopMan - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    The same power tests during hardware based video playback would also be very useful. I'm disappointed in the playback time I get on the Nexus 10, and I'm not sure if I should blame the display, the SOC, or both. Reply
  • djgandy - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    It's probably the display. Video decode usually shuts most things off except the video decoder. Anand has already done Video decode analysis in other articles. Reply
  • jwcalla - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    You can check your battery usage meter to verify, but... in typical usage, the display takes up by far the largest swath of power. And in standby, it's the wi-fi and cell radios hitting the battery the most.

    So SoC power efficiency is important, but the SoC is rarely the top offender.
    Reply
  • Drazick - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    Why don't you keep it updated? Reply
  • iwod - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    I dont think no one, or no anandtech reader with some technical knowledge in its mind, has ever doubt what Intel is able to come up with. A low power, similar performance or even better SoC in both aspect. Give it time Intel will get there. I dont think anyone should disagree with that.

    But i dont think that is Intel's problem at all. It is how they are going to sell this chip when Apple and Samsung are making one themselves for less then $20. Samsung owns nearly majority of the Android Market, Which means there is zero chance they are using a Intel SoC since they design AND manufacture the chip all by themselves. And when Samsung owns the top end of the market, the lower end are being filled by EVEN cheaper ARM SoCs.

    So while Intel may have the best SoC 5 years down the road, I just dont see how they fit in in Smartphone Market. ( Tablet would be a different story and they should do alright.... )
    Reply
  • jemima puddle-duck - Friday, January 04, 2013 - link

    Exactly. Sometimes, whilst I enjoy reading these articles, it feels like the "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin" argument. Everyone knows Intel will come up with the fastest processor eventually. But why are we always told to wait for the next generation? It's just PR. Enjoyable PR, but PR none the less. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now