| ghost_of_fazz said: Psht! Playstation 4's closed environment optimization and magic sauce will have better performance than this... ;) |
Or probably better games
| ghost_of_fazz said: Psht! Playstation 4's closed environment optimization and magic sauce will have better performance than this... ;) |
Or probably better games
Soleron said:
Both 6.5W and 13W bear no resemblance to actual power consumption. No matter how many times you bold "LOW POWER". If you'd like I can get an actual chip engineer to come and explain this to you. In the server configuration, neither part is actually competitive on performance/watt versus ARM. So it does not represent an advance. And as I said they crippled performance to get it down that low in power. And anyway this thread is talking about DESKTOP performance, right? That's what we care about? And that's what I'm claiming no advances since 2012 for. |
Haswell, the new Intel chip is a desktop chip, that they have managed to lower the power consumption on, so much that they are making a few that can be put in tablets - but they are still full desktop power chips.
I just find it wierd that someone wants to argue, without end, against reality. But whatever floats your boat - or canoe if you don't belive boats can float.
With virtually no competition on the performance front when it comes to traditional computers, but much to be gained in the mobile space, Intel has been increasingly focusing on power efficiency. Haswell has already gone a long way improving battery life on ultra thin notebooks, and now, the company is making good on its promise to follow up with lower power variants by announcing a new Y-series part carrying a 4.5W SDP.

For those unfamiliar with Intel’s new power rating, SDP stands for scenario design point and is specific to Y-series SKUs. AnandTech explains how the chipmaker comes up with this number and how it differs from TDP:
Intel calculates TDP by looking at average power through a set of benchmarks that tend to include some of the worst case offenders on a desktop or notebook PC. The SDP thermal rating uses a lesser set of benchmarks, more appropriate for a thin tablet chassis, to determine average power. If you run Furmark on one of these parts and the OEM building the system does nothing to thermally manage the platform, it'll dissipate 11.5W. If you use it like a tablet, you should see 4.5W (or 6W depending on the SKU) as the average power dissipated.
In simpler terms, for typical tablet workloads (web browsing, email, gaming, video playback, etc.), the chip should be able to fit comfortably inside a chassis designed to cool only 4.5 watts worth of heat. According to AnandTech, that means it's possible to get Haswell in a fanless tablet design.
Whether that actually happens remains to be seen. Much like the 6W SDP Haswell Y-series parts unveiled in January, these will only be available in limited quantities, which may serve as an indication that there are no big plans or design wins behind Haswell ULT yet. It’s still a testament to Intel’s commitment getting its latest processors down the power scale, enough to pose a serious threat to ARM eventually.
It’ll also be interesting to see how Samsung’s 10.1 inch Galaxy Tab 3 fares in the market. The device is powered by an older Atom Z2560 "Clover Trail+" processor, but it’s the first Intel Android device released in the US, and from a big name manufacturer no less. Intel sure needs the OEM support to gain a foothold in the mobile space.
http://www.techspot.com/news/53338-intel-teases-low-power-haswell-chip-for-fanless-tablets.html
Please stop quoting fucking press releases at me with LOWER POWER bolded. It doesn't make it true!
Nothing you've shown me shows that Haswell consumes less power, as measured on real things that exist, while maintaing the same performance, again on real things that exist.
| Soleron said: Please stop quoting fucking press releases at me with LOWER POWER bolded. It doesn't make it true! Nothing you've shown me shows that Haswell consumes less power, as measured on real things that exist, while maintaing the same performance, again on real things that exist. |
Haswell consumes less power than IB for the same performance. Take a look at a 2013 MacBook Air review. Last years MBA used a 1.8ghz( up to 2.8ghz turbo) i5 IB (1.7ghz i5 in the 11"), but this years MBA uses a 1.3ghz (up to 2.6ghz turbo) i5 Haswell. Performance remains consistent between this years MBA and last years MBA, but the battery life had a substantial increase. Last years 13" MBA had a 7hr Max battery life and this years model has a 12hr max battery. Pretty much everything is the same between the 2012/2013 MBA except for the Haswell CPU. The CPU now uses less power and can perform similarly at lower clock speeds which improves battery life.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7085/the-2013-macbook-air-review-13inch/6

starcraft: "I and every PS3 fanboy alive are waiting for Versus more than FFXIII.
Me since the games were revealed, the fanboys since E3." 


Skeeuk: "playstation 3 is the ultimate in gaming acceleration" 


Coming to you from the year 2034!
Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.
Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash
smbu2000 said:
Haswell consumes less power than IB for the same performance. Take a look at a 2013 MacBook Air review. Last years MBA used a 1.8ghz( up to 2.8ghz turbo) i5 IB (1.7ghz i5 in the 11"), but this years MBA uses a 1.3ghz (up to 2.6ghz turbo) i5 Haswell. Performance remains consistent between this years MBA and last years MBA, but the battery life had a substantial increase. Last years 13" MBA had a 7hr Max battery life and this years model has a 12hr max battery. Pretty much everything is the same between the 2012/2013 MBA except for the Haswell CPU. The CPU now uses less power and can perform similarly at lower clock speeds which improves battery life. http://www.anandtech.com/show/7085/the-2013-macbook-air-review-13inch/6 |
Just curious but do you know if Apple is using the exact same battery between the 2 models?
The rEVOLution is not being televised
| Azzanation said: So how much is that baby worth? |
It retails for $3,599.99.
The rEVOLution is not being televised
Viper1 said:
Just curious but do you know if Apple is using the exact same battery between the 2 models? |
He doesn't, for they aren't. There are other different components, too, and a quick search over the net showcases how the battery life spent ob various tasks remain just about the same.
Amazing for how long after Jobs has died the reality distortion field will still work huh.