Replies to post #127037 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[This Causes an Error]

Apparently you do.

I spoke with Intel's chief low power CPU architect and Bay Trail's chief architect at IDF. You know what the common theme was? Next generation SoCs will have more and more of the die dedicated to graphics. Even the CPU lead seemed a tad frustrated that the graphics guys got priority.

Intel understands graphics is important and serious, but they're not moving fast enough to be competitive with the ARMy.

[simplytom]

[I think Intel has made steady progress in graphics and in taking market share from both AMD and Nvidia. I don't see putting more effort into this area should be their top priority. Apparently you do.

Aeassa is so funny when he is talking about GPU-Power-numbers.
And then they use GFXBench off-screen-rendering numbers.
This bench is only measuring theoretical gpu-numbers with little cpu interference. This is a useless number.
Why not 3dmark Ice Storm scores. They are useless as well but they are a lot closer to real world fps of the complete system.

In Desktop-World GPU is the limit (you can purchase a slow i5 and the best Geforce and everything is vanilla) in mobile World it is by far more unbalanced. There are CPU-limits all around.
Setting to lower gpu details is easy
Setting the maximum number of monsters to a lower number can make a game boring.

When it comes to CPU:

This is fact:
4 Silvermont-Cores are more powerefficient and stronger in raw numbers than 4 Qualcomm-krait cores.

This is fact:
4 Silvermont-Cores are more powerefficient and stronger in raw numbers than 2 Apple-A7-64bit-Cyclone cores.

And I predict that:
4 Silvermont-Cores are more powerefficient and stronger in raw numbers than 2 nvidia-Denver-64bit-Cores.


So let's look at the games people play on tablets:
Minecraft
Cut the rope
Angry Birds
Plague Inc
Doodle Jump
World of Goo
Bridge Constructor
Tetris
Airhockey

If the crowd wants to play an ego-shooter the crowd goes to the Desktop-PC.

From a game-software-developer-point-of-view:
I look at the graphics-power of the tablets which are currently out at the customers (take a look at the high-volume-devices).

Kindle Fire HD 7 (TI OMAP)
Kindle Fire HDX 7 (Snapdragon 800 but much smaller sales numbers)
Ipad 2
Ipad Mini
Ipad Air
Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 7-inch (TI OMAP)
Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 7-inch (Marvell PXA)

The average gpu-processing-power of tablets is lower then the average gpu-processing-power of phones.
This is because there are a lot Samsung Galaxy S3 and S4 out in the market.

Do you think a high-demanding ego-shooter will sell very well on poor tablets?

Currently I'm quite disappointed about using tablets as productivity tools. Because the EMMC-storage is a weak point.

Next they claim the tablets have a fast wifi but in real life there have very poor implementations.