Z8700 Atom phones when?
The chip only costs 35 buckaroos and has a sdp of only 2 watts.
The zenfone 2 was okay but we need a powerful cherry trail phone now.
>inb4 atom housefire
It's built on 14nm lithography not ancient 22nm lithography.
We'll probably see it on the zenfone 3.
The Acer Predator.
>x86
Go away with that legacy shit
>>51313665
butthurt armshill detected
>>51313639
nvidia shield tablet on suicide watch!
We'll probably see the z8300 atom on phones first. Intel only wants $20 for it. Probably make for a really decent $200 phone.
>>51313787
$20 for an x86 CPU? Is intel fucking nuts?
>>51313824
I guess atom chips aren't that expensive to manufacture. Intel also wants a piece of mobile cpu market share so they might be selling them cheap for that reason as well.
>>51313522
what is the advantage of an x86 phone anyway? I mean most people will argue that software is an important point but as long as you don't want to compile it yourself you have to use Linux or Windows because there is more software for windows the average user is interested in the most likely choice is to run some kind of desktop windows on your phone? or am i missing a point why we need x86 for mobile?
>>51314066
>what is the advantage of an x86 phone anyway? I mean most people will argue that software is an important point but as long as you don't want to compile it yourself you have to use Linux or Windows because there is more software for windows the average user is interested in the most likely choice is to run some kind of desktop windows on your phone? or am i missing a point why we need x86 for mobile?
Simply put you can run x86 software on such a phone. The zenfone 2 can already run windows 7 on a virtual machine.
x86 phones are also cheaper. Manufacturers only need to spend $40 for 2gb ram + $20 atom, they can spend the remaining $60 on screen, batterry, etc. So in the end an atom phone would cost around $100-150 to produce and could be sold for $200 while still making a decent profit per phone.
The 2gb ram zenfone 2 only costs $200 yet has all the performance of a note 3 + 1080p screen + 13mp camera + mSD slot.
>>51314250
phones can only cost $100 to produce.
ARE YOU FUCKING DUMB LMAO
get filtered.
>>51314395
That tripfag is well known for being an ignorant dumbass. I'm surprised you hadn't fiitered him
>>51314395
http://blog.gsmarena.com/samsung-galaxy-note-3-teardown-reveals-that-it-costs-240-to-build-the-phablet/
Dumbass
>>51314435
This somehow disproves my argument, lol fuck off.
$100=$240
????
comparing budget phones to flagship
once again
you think
$100=$240
hahahaha
hahaha
hahahahah
hahahah
>>51314429
Unfortunately he's right though, the zenfone 2 is like 100 bucks, components only. Other phones like the Bote 5 can cost more than 200 bucks, again components only.
Also see >>51314435
Intel is hideous when it comes to releasing kernel sources and buildtools. That's why 3rd party/community ROM's and support for it are nearly non-existent.
>>51314494
What I'm trying to prove is that the zenfone 2 is cheaper to build than the note 3. Tripfag is right about the processor and ram, they aren't that expensive.
Asus would never sell the zenfone 2 for $200 if it costs them more than $150 to build.
>>51314536
Who gives a shit, we just want to run windows 7 on it.
>>51314611
You don't speak for all of us, I want to run gentoo on it.
>>51314611
lol this
>>51314743
So you want encase your autism on a phone?
Disgusting.
>>51313522
>Z8700 Atom phones when?
When it includes boring stuff like LTE modems. You know, like the bottom tier on your picture does.
It would also probably be thoroughly unsuited to anything that isn't a 5.7" phone with liquid cooling, like the Lumia 950 XL or the Sony something or other.
>>51314818
>When it includes boring stuff like LTE modems. You know, like the bottom tier on your picture does.
You can add a separate chip for that like they did on the zenfone 2.
>It would also probably be thoroughly unsuited to anything that isn't a 5.7" phone with liquid cooling, like the Lumia 950 XL or the Sony something or other.
Not true, the z8700 is 14nm cherry trail meaning it stay's pretty cool with no active cooling at all. It's die size is also smaller than the 22nm atom chips so it would fit 5" phones just fine.
>>51314881
Did I mention this fucker has 16 execution units @ 600 mhz max for the iGPU? Yeah.
>>51314611
>huehue winblows 7 on fon guis
Have using using that shitty gui via touchscreen on the go senpai
>>51317038
wut is a bluetooth keyboard with a trackpad
>>51317433
So where do you put that when you're walking down the street trying to send a text message?
>>51314881
>Not true, the z8700 is 14nm cherry trail meaning it stay's pretty cool
But that's wrong. Go read the reviews of it, it throttles heavily to stay within the SDP.
The lithography doesn't change the fact that the Atom series are thoroughly mediocre. Even the year and a half old Puma architecture gives it a run for its money with a 2.8 watt SDP.
>>51313943
Where to buy them?
I'm thinking of building a laptop and a 2w x86 chip would be perfect. >>51313787
>>51318631
>puma architecture
Isn't that AMD?
>>51318772
Yes it is. It's indeed sad that an outdated AMDS architecture is keeping up with a modern intel architecture on a considerably better manufacturing process.
The reason it flopped as bad as it did is because it's AMD, they're terrible at design wins. It's also more expensive.
You'd be forgiven for thinking that there are some lingering deals with manufacturers to not use AMD kit.
>>51318872
Actually I think more use Intel simply because the name is more recognised. I run a pc shop and you'd be shocked how many people don't even know there's an alternative to nvidia or Intel.
AMD seriously needs to work on their marketing.
>>51318735
They're BGA only, obviously, and you can't buy them.
You couldn't build yourself a laptop either since you're this clueless.
>>51314881
The Puma core *is* Jaguar, and they don't compete with modern Atoms. Beema did a good job of competing against Baytrail though, its no longer relevant today.
FYI the entire Cat core line was dead ended some time ago. AMD's next tiny chip is Stoney Ridge, and its using a single Excavator module.
>>51319314
I know they're bga. I could buy the cpu+mobo together.
Thanks fuckwad.
>>51319656
>he actually thinks hes going to buy a custom made mobo for a BGA only chip
Thanks for making me laugh.
>>51319689
Asrock sells the j1900.
>>51318631
How much does it throttle though. People report the z8700 throttles to 2.2 Ghz if under very heavy load.
>>51319786
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Microsoft-Surface-3-Tablet-Convertible-Review.141116.0.html
Draws 6watts measured right at the socket, reached 82c within minutes running Cinebench, and clocks lowered to 2.2ghz~ If the GPU were also being taxed at the same time then the CPU clock would have to lower further.
This clearly is not suited for a phone, unless you wanted to give the S810 a run for its money.
>>51319971
But it can throttle so it means it can force itself to not burst into flames.
Most vydia won't stress the cpu that much though. Pretty impressive it stayed at 2.2GHz even under all that load. 6 watts of draw under heavy load is reasonable.
This is perfect for a phone, you could keep it at 800-1,600 MHz for normal use and unlock the 2.4 GHz turbo for when you need all that raw power. It's beautiful.
>>51320047
The whole Samsung Galaxy S6 draws under 5 watts when the GPU is running at max clocks at its highest voltage state in a GPU bench. The entire device, not just the SoC.
6w for a chip alone is far too much for a phone. Atoms as always are sub par for mobile devices aside from netbooks and mediocre tablets.
>>51320171
X86 tablets with windows and an atom seem like a good idea tho.
>>51320171
Does the exynos 7420 cost $35 though?
I wouldn't mind a lower battery life if it meant the phone was less expensive.
>>51320215
Why tbqh? We could be rid of both of them for once and all.
>>51320216
>Samsung’s own Exynos 7 chipset is the second most expensive item on the BOM and costs an estimated $29.50.
Mobile SoCs are never very expensive, and the Exynos 7420 was the first production run chip on Samsung's 14nm LPE node. The price was only as high as that because yields were low.
>>51320243
hmmm interesting to know. Thanks.
>>51313522
is the atom chip even any good? I know it was utter shite when it came out
>>51320309
Performance wise they're at that "good enough" level where they can handle any common task. Web browsing, video play back, office software, that kind of thing.
One shouldn't expect to do anything particularly demanding on them.
>>51320309
Geekbench integer multi-core performance looks breddy gud: 4621
Remember this chip has literally no active cooling even on the surface pro in pic related.
>>51320348
bullshit
>>51320357
Its a Microsoft Surface 3.
Not a Surface Pro 3.
Those are two different product lines.
>>51320373
Are you daijoubu?
The exynos 8890 looks nice, but its arm
>>51320373
oh sorry, you're right.
>>51320409
You're quite literally retarded.
The Atom is not used in the Surface Pro 3 as you just said it was.
It is used in the less expensive non Pro model.
Go kill yourself.
![n41mpzqueelcron8itdo[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/uh8V72p.jpg "n41mpzqueelcron8itdo[1].jpg")
>>51317433
>>51317774
on your back obviously
>>51320357
And here is the nvidia shield tablet score, integer multi-core performance is: 4438
So the x7 z8700 shits on the nvidia tablet while only costing $300, not bad
>>51320503
Isn't the shield from like 2013.
>>51320474
lol, that was another anon not me. I understood.
>>51320474
I wasn't even the guy you were replying to, but
>anon asks if atom is any good
>another anon posts benchmark of surface 3
>you start sperging out about how surface 3 is not surface pro 3
Have you thought about killing yourself anon?
>>51320516
true but it cost ~$400 and now a $300 tablet (predator 8) is shitting on it.
>>51320503
>tegra
Way to cherrypick an easy target. There's a reason nvidia are the only people using the tegra for anything, it's a ball of shit.
That being said, don't use geekbench to compare architectures. It's ridiculously stupid.
>>51320569
That's like saying a gtx 950 is better than a gtx 660...
>>51320516
The Shield Tablet is from mid 2014.
It uses the Tegra K1 SoC, which was a major pile of shit. It has 4 Cortex A15 cores, which are still 32bit ARMv7.
This is of course ignoring the fact that Geekbench is not directly comparable across different architectures.
>>51320538
>tech illiterate retard calls it a Surface Pro 3
>its not a Surface Pro 3
>I politely correct him
>gets butthurt and starts shitposting when called out for it
Kill yourself, child.
>>51320571
The integer multi-core performance is an okay benchmark from geekbench though, you can't deny that. Almost as good as specint desu
>>51320597
>The integer multi-core performance is an okay benchmark from geekbench though,
Its really not.
Geekbench has a long history of glaring issues with their code. Some tests were shown to be running in a loop that was doing nothing, but still spitting out a meaningless number as a result. This has happened more than once. Every time a bug is fixed, a new one ends up being found.
Its a novelty, just like Passmark.
>Almost as good as specint
It is nothing like SpecINT.
