Cortex A15: RIABench

The RIABench story isn't any different from the other tests, although peak power consumption is slightly lower for the Cortex A15 here. The gap between it and Atom/Krait remains quite large. The big leap in performance does come at a real cost in power consumption.

 

Task Energy - RIABench - Total Platform

 

Task Energy - RIABench - CPU Only

Task Energy - RIABench - GPU Only

RIABench - Max, Avg, Min Power

Max Power Draw - RIABench - Total Platform

Max Power Draw - RIABench - GPU Only

Max Power Draw - RIABench - CPU Only

Average Power

Average Power Draw - RIABench - Total Platform

Average Power Draw - RIABench - GPU Only

Average Power Draw - RIABench - CPU Only

Minimum Power

Min Power Draw - RIABench - Total Platform

Min Power Draw - RIABench - GPU Only

Min Power Draw - RIABench - CPU Only

Cortex A15: Kraken Cortex A15: WebXPRT 2013 - Community Preview 1
Comments Locked

140 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kidster3001 - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    Samsung uses everyone's chips in their phones. Samsung, Qualcomm, TI... everyone's. I would not be surprised to see a Samsung phone with Atom in it eventually.
  • jeffkibuule - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    They've never used other non-Samsung SoCs by choice, especially in their high end phones. They only used Qualcomm MSM8960 in the US GS III because Qualcomm's separate baseband MDM9615 wasn't ready. As soon as it was, we saw the Galaxy Note II use Exynos again. Nvidia and TI chips have been used in the low end from Samsung, but that's not profitable to anyone.

    Intel needs a major design win from a tier one OEM willing to put its chip inside their flagship phone, and with most phone OEMs actually choosing to start designing their own ARM SoCs (including even LG and Huawei), that task is getting a lot harder than you might think.
  • felixyang - Saturday, January 5, 2013 - link

    some versions of Samsung's GS2 use TI's OMAP.
  • iwod - Saturday, January 5, 2013 - link

    Exactly like what is said above. If they have a choice they would rather use everything they produce themselves. Simply Because Wasted Fabs Space is expensive.
  • Icehawk - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    I find these articles very interesting - however I'd really like to see an aggregate score/total for power usage, IOW what is the area under the curve? As discussed being quicker to complete at higher power can be more efficient - however when looking at a graph it is very hard to see what the total area is. Giving a total wattage used during the test (ie, area under curve) would give a much easier metric to read and it is the important #, not what the voltage maxes or minimums at but the overall usage over time/process IMO.
  • extide - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    There are indeed several graphs that display total power used in joules, which is the area under the curve of the watts graphs. Maybe you missed them ?
  • jwcalla - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    That's what the bar charts are showing.
  • GeorgeH - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    It's already there. A Watt is a Joule/Second, so the area under the power/time graphs is measured in Watts * Seconds = Joules.
  • Veteranv2 - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    Another Intel PR Article, it is getting really sad on this website.

    Now since you are still using Win8 which is garbage for ARM. Please us the correct software platform for ARM chips. I'd love to see those power measurements then.

    Anandtech did it again. Pick the most favorable software platform for Intel, give the least favorable to ARM.
    Way to go! Again....

    Intel PR at its best...
  • Veteranv2 - Friday, January 4, 2013 - link

    Oh wait its even better!
    They used totally different screens with almost 4 times the pixels on the nexus 10 and then says it requires more power to do benchmarks. Hahaha, this review gave me a good laugh. Even worse then the previous ones.

    This might explain the lack of product overviews at the start.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now