Skip to main content

Report: Samsung Chooses Intel for Next Android Tablets

Unnamed sources have confirmed with Reuters that Samsung has decided to use Intel's 32 nm "Clover Trail+" Atom mobile chip for at least one version of its Galaxy Tab 3 10.1. The company is also reportedly unveiling new ATIV tablets using Intel chips at a June 20 event in London. Currently it's unknown if the Clover Trail-based Galaxy Tab 3 will be showcased at the same event.

Reuters reports that it's currently unclear if South Korea-based Samsung plans to use Intel chips in other versions of the 10-inch Galaxy Tab, or if the company plans to use its own Exynos 5 chip. Both Intel and Samsung declined to comment on the report, Reuters said.

Intel introduced its line of Clover Trail Atom chips last fall, reporting that they are targeted at low-powered Windows 8 hybrid devices, or rather form factors that serve both as tablets and laptops. However the Clover Trail-powered Galaxy Tab 3 10.1 will be playing host to Android instead, a trend that seems to be increasing in the second half of 2013.

PCWorld reports that last week two benchmarking sites posted test results of a Samsung tablet sporting an Intel Clover Trail chip and Android 4.2.2. This tablet was designated as the Santos 103 and with the product number GT-P5200. The Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 was dubbed as the GT-P5100 before it was released.

 According to the report, both benchmarking sites revealed that the tablet will have a 1280 x 800 resolution, and an Intel SoC running in the 800 MHz to 1.6 GHz range, which is within the specs of Intel's Atom Z2560 chip. This SoC, along with the Z2580 and Z2520, is optimized for Android, and Intel has developed new firmware, drivers and middleware to enhance Android power management and security.

"The processors include the Intel Graphics Media Accelerator for compelling and realistic 3D gaming experiences, 1080p HD video, and crystal-clear graphics. WUXGA 1920x1200 display support is ideal for the larger screens of tablets," Intel states (PDF).

This deal with Samsung should be welcome news for Intel who is struggling to enter smartphone and tablet markets that have adapted to ARM low-power systems. Even more, Intel is facing ARM in the server market as enterprises are looking for a greener future that will cut by using low-power, high performance solutions. However for now, Intel will have the upper hand in servers and data centers.

"With Atom, you don't have to change your existing infrastructure, your code, your software vendors and your middleware vendors," said Cody Acree, director of research at Williams Financial. "You can just use Intel and continue with your existing architecture."

  • spp85
    Intel gave bribe money to Samsung for not choosing AMD APUs . AMDs Jaguar APUs is clearly superior in performance and power efficiency compared to any production Intel processor. This is injustice to the consumers.
    Reply
  • acerace
    10900924 said:
    Intel gave bribe money to Samsung for not choosing AMD APUs . AMDs Jaguar APUs is clearly superior in performance and power efficiency compared to any production Intel processor. This is injustice to the consumers.

    This clearly makes you an AMD fanboy. Wake up, dear. Yes, the Jaguar is good, but if Samsung want to use Intel, let them be. Maybe they get better deal with Intel than AMD. It's business afterall.
    Reply
  • warmon6
    10900924 said:
    Intel gave bribe money to Samsung for not choosing AMD APUs . AMDs Jaguar APUs is clearly superior in performance and power efficiency compared to any production Intel processor. This is injustice to the consumers.

    Perfomance? Yes, AMD APU is way better.

    Power? Definitely not compared to this particular atom.

    If you knew anything about the atom there using, you'll know that it design for mainly Smart Phones. Something the AMD (last i checked) is not targeting.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/atom-z2580-clover-trail-medfield,3446.html

    So using something that specifically design for a phone vs something that design for a beefier power tablet, the power requirements are not going to be the same.

    As for why Samsung chose the Atom over the APU, probably battery life or it may have something to do with that this atom works Android while the Jaguar APU (as far as I know) is only targeted at Windows X86 tablets. Thus, for Samsung, would not make any sense for them run a cpu that doesn't work for there needs.

    Now if someone actually finds some solid info that the AMD Jaguar is also meant to be used with the Andriod OS, then I'll removed the part above about "Jaguar APU is only targeted at Windows X86 tablets". Although this is the info i'm finding ATM.
    Reply
  • chumly
    10900924 said:
    Intel gave bribe money to Samsung for not choosing AMD APUs . AMDs Jaguar APUs is clearly superior in performance and power efficiency compared to any production Intel processor. This is injustice to the consumers.

    They must not want people playing HD games.

    ANGRYBIRDS4LIFE. lol.

    Maybe they're getting bribed by Rovio (or threatened by carrier pigeons).
    Reply
  • ojas
    Well, some of the ATIV tablets were expected to have Clover Trail in them.
    Only the Galaxy Tab is news, that too not new.
    The real take away is that Intel probably has Samsung at least (and it's likely that it has Asus too, evidenced by the Padfone or Phonepad or whatever) on board for Silvermont based stuff. Galaxy S5 just may have Atom inside.
    Reply
  • Grandmastersexsay
    All tablets are good for is watching movies and surfing the internet.

    In which case, battery performance, not processing performance is king.
    Reply
  • tobalaz
    X86 in our android tablets...
    You'd think they would have went AMD for tablets because the Jaguar chips are more powerful but Samsung might be getting a better deal out of Intel by using Intel chips in both their phones and tablets down the line, and maybe I'm just overestimating tablet gaming which would push me towards the AMD chips if I were making the tablets myself.
    Can't wait to see how the Intel and AMD X86 chips in tablets stack up against the ARM based chips with Nvidia gpus and Adreno gpus. Really, really looking forward to that one so I have a better idea which tablet to shell out next for since my Viewsonic G-Tablet with a XDA rom is getting a bit long in the tooth.
    Reply
  • chumly
    10901311 said:
    10900924 said:
    Intel gave bribe money to Samsung for not choosing AMD APUs . AMDs Jaguar APUs is clearly superior in performance and power efficiency compared to any production Intel processor. This is injustice to the consumers.

    Perfomance? Yes, AMD APU is way better.

    Power? Definitely not compared to this particular atom.


    If you knew anything about the atom there using, you'll know that it design for mainly Smart Phones. Something the AMD (last i checked) is not targeting.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/atom-z2580-clover-trail-medfield,3446.html

    So using something that specifically design for a phone vs something that design for a beefier power tablet, the power requirements are not going to be the same.

    As for why Samsung chose the Atom over the APU, probably battery life or it may have something to do with that this atom works Android while the Jaguar APU (as far as I know) is only targeted at Windows X86 tablets. Thus, for Samsung, would not make any sense for them run a cpu that doesn't work for there needs.

    Now if someone actually finds some solid info that the AMD Jaguar is also meant to be used with the Andriod OS, then I'll removed the part above about "Jaguar APU is only targeted at Windows X86 tablets". Although this is the info i'm finding ATM.

    You have to understand, tablets are breaching the PC/Notebook market. If these consumers wanted a phone, they'd buy a phone. Instead, they are buying a mobile computing device, it should be able to handle all the things that you're trying to replace with it. Otherwise it's just a fancy web browser/eReader that costs way more than it should.
    Reply
  • jwcalla
    IIRC Galaxy Tabs haven't done too well and don't seem very competitive with other brands.
    Reply
  • m32
    I thought Samsung had an ARM license and made ARM chips? It seems like lately they are using other company's chips, instead of their own.
    Reply