Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

ARM: Intel Cannot Match Us in Power Consumption

Tags:
  • Power Consumption
  • Intel
Last response: in News comments
Share
September 17, 2012 7:06:09 AM

Intel : ARM can not match us in performance.
Score
35
September 17, 2012 7:18:34 AM

Intel: ARM can not match us in profits.

:D 

But seriously, watch out, ARM, Intel has so much money and R&D capability it can force its way into any market it wants to. Who's heard of Ultrabooks a year ago? ;) 
Score
24
Related resources
September 17, 2012 7:22:50 AM

Although ARM is to be praised with their very low power SoC's... the hell is TSMC, Qualcaum, Samsung, etc going to do against Intel Fabs? Intel are already working on sub 10nm processor designs (probably even working designs too). Meanwhile ARM SoC makers are just starting to utilize 28nm/32nm technology (mind you intel is already on 22nm)...

I wonder how long it'll take for intel to say "NOPE" ...
Score
20
September 17, 2012 7:24:06 AM

Intel: ARM cannot match us (period).
Score
9
September 17, 2012 7:31:34 AM

We'll see what ARM thinks when Intel brings out the Haswell 10W chips. Broadwell could really change the game when it integrates the PCH.
Score
5
September 17, 2012 7:32:53 AM

Intel: ARM cannot match us in arms.
Score
2
September 17, 2012 7:39:54 AM

My pocket calculator: "Arm cannot match me in power consumption!"
:D 

But seriously, what are the performance/watt numbers for those?
Score
14
September 17, 2012 7:44:59 AM

now All we need is the day where I can buy a wifi USB combo keyboard/mouse and plug the phone video output to TV via HDMI, use my phone as a desktop web PC/play half-life 1/starcraft 1 like a boss.
Score
1
September 17, 2012 7:53:33 AM

AMD : Intel and ARM can't match us in numbers of COARS!!!!!

:p 
Score
21
September 17, 2012 7:57:09 AM

They may "only" have a "Huge monetary backing" but boy are they are going to use it.
At least it's going to put some pressure on development.
Score
3
September 17, 2012 8:02:38 AM

Competition, I welcome it I like to see how this leads and pushes both companies. Intel has the money to toss into R&D which may not make them a threat right now but they will be soon.
Score
6
September 17, 2012 9:05:03 AM

greghomeAMD : Intel and ARM can't match us in numbers of COARS!!!!!

some arm and mips cpus contain hundreds of cores, and an amd core would certainly beat an arm core
Score
3
September 17, 2012 9:41:23 AM

AMD : We can't win on performance or power consumption.
Score
20
Anonymous
September 17, 2012 9:53:32 AM

Somewhere in the world : Eureka!!! I just made a working qubits!!
Score
0
September 17, 2012 10:10:07 AM

Right now... They are correct. And I don't think ARM is going to sit on their laurels either. Just saying.
Score
0
September 17, 2012 10:11:09 AM

JDW_SWBAMD : We can't win on performance or power consumption.

wrong, AMD can win on power consumption. their CPU's have the highest power consumption of all, noone can match them, unless intel brings back netburst with 8 cores.
Score
16
September 17, 2012 10:26:25 AM

Quote:
wrong, AMD can win on power consumption. their CPU's have the highest power consumption of all, noone can match them, unless intel brings back netburst with 8 cores.

Intel : 8.6GHZ Pentium 4, 16 core edition! unmatched heating and power requirements!
Score
11
September 17, 2012 10:35:14 AM

It takes more than funds to innovate. Amount of money invested in R&D is not the only factor to make a revolutionary innovation. Intel is a giant for sure and they have bright minds at their side but there will always be a brighter mind in this arena. Please remember those days when AMD's Thunderbird/ Athlon XP / Athlon 64 wiped the floor with Pentiums + with much lower clock rates. It is not that Intel is FAR more innovative/creative/smarter than other companies. It is others' fault that they don't innovate with enough passion
Score
-1
September 17, 2012 10:35:19 AM

ARM: "I TROLL U!"
Intel: "We didn't even care about competing with you on a power consumption term to begin with, get over it."
ARM: "I TROLLED U! U BUTTHURT!!! DERP DERP DERP!"
Score
2
September 17, 2012 11:23:52 AM

i have a feeling well see history repeat itself here just like how intel beat amd. intel might be behind on power consumption now against arm, but next generation will only get better. with the amount of money intel invests in R&D and power consumption, their next gen chips will definitely be a major improvement. intel uses their own 22nm process while arm is just now using 28nm, so intel has alot more room for improvement.

arm better stop barking because intels just gonna bite them in the ass harder. Im not trying to bash arm, theyre power consumption/performance is always getting better with every generation by alot. its just that, like a commenter already said, intel has so much money and smart people with them that they can invade any industry and be a success.
Score
2
September 17, 2012 11:33:25 AM

I believe process technology is not solely a defining factor in improvement; Architecture is.
Score
2
September 17, 2012 11:38:36 AM

Transmeta: Intel cannot match us in power consumption.
Intel: Transmeta who? Oh, the Crusoe boy, R.I.P.
Score
2
September 17, 2012 11:57:25 AM

madooo12some arm and mips cpus contain hundreds of cores, and an amd core would certainly beat an arm core


ARM's Cortex A15 is getting pretty close to AMD's Bulldozer in terms of per core performance per megahertz (at least in DMIPS). It's not a be-all-end-all benchmark but it definitely says something.

A15 - 3.5 DMIPS/core/MHz
FX-8150 - 3.78 DMIPS/core/MHz
2600K (for reference) - 9.43 DMIPS/core/MHz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second

Score
-4
September 17, 2012 12:03:20 PM

bustaprIintel's just gonna bite them in the ass harder.


That's nice. I'd like to actually see that.
Score
-1
September 17, 2012 12:06:09 PM

Ok, there's just so much wrong with this article (and with ARM's statement, if this is true).

I mean it's a normal anti-Intel Wolfgang article which screams bias from the title to the last full-stop. Also, it's ARM trying to look brave as they always do, knowing within them that they're going to face very, very difficult times ahead.

Then.
Quote:
ARM: Intel Cannot Match Us in Power Consumption

Otellini said recently, and i think it's a fair claim, that they simply never targeted power consumption. Now that they are, the results have been good. I mean, if they can fit a 17w CPU in an ultrabook, i'm sure they can hit a tenth or less of that value. Plus tick-tock, their recent push for more SoC integration, etc...the list goes on.

Quote:
Intel's only advantage at this time is its huge monetary backing

Which they've built over years of successful (maybe not all of them) products, R&D, marketing and all of that. A $12B per quarter revenue doesn't appear out of thin air.

Quote:
while ARM has to rely on an armada of ARM chip makers to compete with Intel, including Qualcomm, Nvidia, and Texas Instruments

Don't those two license ARM's IP? Qualcomm, at least IS a part of the armada of chipmakers, for sure. Also, isn't this a reflection of the situation? ARM needs an armada to compete with one company.

Quote:
Intel has its first smartphone processor out, the Z2460, but it would be an exaggeration to describe the processor as a chip that got Intel's foot into the door to the smartphone market.

Well, looking at how the rest of the year is planned out, with win 8 tablets and newer android phones (Moto Droid M in the UK) that have a Saltwell CPU at their core, i think it pretty much was Intel's foot in the door.

Quote:
So far, it may not be much more than a beachhead that, however, showed that Intel can crank out capable silicon in relatively short time.

That a surprise? Anyway, they've been at it for a few years now. They're beyond the point (for now) where they'll rush anything. They've secured their main market, now they're focusing on expanding. Their CEO keeps saying their mobile road map is a marathon not a sprint.

Quote:
In the past, Intel has always been most successful when it was under pressure and the 22 nm product generation of the Atom SoC will be the first serious indicator how competitive Intel will be in the smartphone processor market.

Yes, i give you that. 22nm will be the shock and awe phase, probably.

TL;DR: Intel: lol.
Score
3
September 17, 2012 12:11:49 PM

kartuMy pocket calculator: "Arm cannot match me in power consumption!"But seriously, what are the performance/watt numbers for those?


LOL, your pocket calculator is mostly likely powered by ARM.

ARM is everywhere.
Score
0
September 17, 2012 12:35:24 PM

ojas said:
They simply never targeted power consumption.


My point exactly.
Score
3
September 17, 2012 12:44:55 PM

Well, Intel certainly can't at the moment, so this statement is correct. They just want to get some PR though just in case Intel beats them when their 22nm low power cpus emerge. Then they'll probably say "Intel cannot match us in price" which will probably be very true. That has been Intel's achilles hill for a long time now.
Score
-2
September 17, 2012 12:51:34 PM

JeanLucLOL, your pocket calculator is mostly likely powered by ARM.ARM is everywhere.

Nah. Ti calculators are all that remain of the venerable z80 architecture, which cloned the intel 8080 processor. That means your pocket calculator is probably based off of the direct predecessor to intel's entire modern chip line.
Score
4
September 17, 2012 1:04:35 PM

aicomARM's Cortex A15 is getting pretty close to AMD's Bulldozer in terms of per core performance per megahertz (at least in DMIPS). It's not a be-all-end-all benchmark but it definitely says something.A15 - 3.5 DMIPS/core/MHzFX-8150 - 3.78 DMIPS/core/MHz2600K (for reference) - 9.43 DMIPS/core/MHzhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second


MIPS = Meaningless Information about Processor Speed
Score
5
September 17, 2012 1:21:39 PM

lol, ARM is so funny. ARM is great for dedicated use items that require a low power envelopes, but for general computing x86 (even AMD) is more efficient on a total !/W standpoint. So yes, ARM, you win the crown for the lowest overall power usage... but hardly the most efficient, or most useful chip design in existence.

That being said, I really hope that ARM becomes the new AMD and really knocks Intel some good blows to keep competition going. Better yet, have ARM purchase AMD, and then licence out x86 to everyone to give Intel a real run for their money.
Score
2
September 17, 2012 2:50:22 PM

Quote:
ARM: Intel Cannot Match Us in Power Consumption

because it has to be said:

in a test by test comparison intel beats arm in all categories hands down when playing crysis.

Score
0
September 17, 2012 3:01:36 PM

I prefer the old Intel. Don't forget that part of the reason they are where they are now is due to relatively recent bribing of vendors and copying others' ideas...just saying.
Score
-5
September 17, 2012 3:03:16 PM

caedenvlol, ARM is so funny. ARM is great for dedicated use items that require a low power envelopes, but for general computing x86 (even AMD) is more efficient on a total !/W standpoint. So yes, ARM, you win the crown for the lowest overall power usage... but hardly the most efficient, or most useful chip design in existence.That being said, I really hope that ARM becomes the new AMD and really knocks Intel some good blows to keep competition going. Better yet, have ARM purchase AMD, and then licence out x86 to everyone to give Intel a real run for their money.

x86 is intel property. if amd is bought off, I believe their x86 license expires and amd-arm wont have the rights to sell/license x86-64 without a new intel agreement.
Score
3
September 17, 2012 3:08:16 PM

f-14because it has to be said:in a test by test comparison intel beats arm in all categories hands down when playing crysis.

Id like to see this test you speak of. seems like youre saying crysis will run on arm architecture -.- I think we can all agree that intel beats arm nearly everywhere, but no need to give phony "facts"

Score
2
September 17, 2012 4:22:38 PM

Intel : ARM can't match us on fanboy
Score
6
September 17, 2012 4:49:28 PM


Hondo 'Bobcat' APU cores are already 4.5w or less (my 7-inch Tab with 'Cortez ARM' is 5w).

Presumably, Kerala/Kabini APUs even better, but I suspect consumers will ultimately demand more than the 'minimum' from their devices -- Trinity/Kaveri or IB/Haswell.

Score
3
September 17, 2012 5:53:50 PM

aicomWe'll see what ARM thinks when Intel brings out the Haswell 10W chips. Broadwell could really change the game when it integrates the PCH.

You realize 10W is too much right? An old quad core 800Mhz ARM consumes 0.25W.
Score
-1
September 17, 2012 6:18:23 PM

Didn't Intel demo a CPU last year that was powered by a solar cell? Something about "near threshold voltage" IIRC. That would seem to qualify as "low power"..
Score
2
September 17, 2012 6:39:49 PM

greghomeAMD : Intel and ARM can't match us in numbers of COARS!!!!!


JDW_SWBAMD : We can't win on performance or power consumption.

my two favorites.
Score
-1
September 17, 2012 7:20:08 PM

Proffet: LOL.
Score
-1
September 17, 2012 8:26:36 PM

master_chen said:
Proffet: LOL.

good to see you 'master_chen'.
your kung-fu is very strong....
:) 
Score
1
a b å Intel
September 17, 2012 8:40:18 PM

technoholicIt takes more than funds to innovate. Amount of money invested in R&D is not the only factor to make a revolutionary innovation. Intel is a giant for sure and they have bright minds at their side but there will always be a brighter mind in this arena. Please remember those days when AMD's Thunderbird/ Athlon XP / Athlon 64 wiped the floor with Pentiums + with much lower clock rates. It is not that Intel is FAR more innovative/creative/smarter than other companies. It is others' fault that they don't innovate with enough passion

Then the sleeping giant woke up.
Score
3
September 17, 2012 9:00:42 PM



mmstick said:
You realize 10W is too much right? An old quad core 800Mhz ARM consumes 0.25W.


My 7-inch Tab with single-core 'Cortex ARM' 1.2GHz with Mali-400 graphics pulls 5 watts.

It's one year old this month -- when the Mali-400 graphics debuted, it benched 15% faster (I think!) than anything on the market.

32nm Atom is something like 3.5 to 10w with Intel graphics. Not sure where they will land with **PowerVR Inside** on the graphics side of things. Luv to see a link if anyone can find something.

There is a 'Silly Circle' going on now (over the past year and a half) where AMD, ARM and Intel shout back-and-forth between one another, "More efficient!" -- "Better Processing!" -- "Greater Graphics!"

Each of them has points to make in their own convoluted ways.



Score
1
September 18, 2012 3:32:40 AM

I think I remember ARM saying Intel cant even compete, and I think that was less than 9 monthes ago. They must really like lies.

Intel is comming, ARM is improving but not at a pace that Intel should even be worried about. Just their FAB is miles ahead, and with in-house dev I dont know anyone can touch them. Now ARM needs to join its makers and force mass upgrades instead of having bickering within. If they come together they can hold back Intel for awhile, but Intel wont be held back for long.
Score
0
March 1, 2013 9:16:48 PM

Growing power consumption, and majority of total power usage, is poker leakage as chips become smaller. Chips will continue to become smaller, making active power less and less of a concern. And what company's chip will handle static power leakage better and what chip will demanding customers like Samsung and Apple want in their devices? Intel's which are made in its self owned, peerless fabrication facilities, or Arm's, which is a fabless licensing company who lets second tier fabrication facilities, which it does not control make its chips?

Listen to Jefferson Airplanes's White Rabbit song for the answer. Intel: Off with Arm's head.
Score
0
!