Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Atom Versus Tegra 3

  1. #1

    Atom Versus Tegra 3

    My experience with Tegra 3 is based on my Nexus 7, by which I get the impression that while it has grunt enough for anything you are likely to throw at it in a tablet environment, the power draw, both standby and "active" is merely "okay".

    My experience with Atom dates back a couple of years to netbooks, where the graphics chipset sucked power like there was no tomorrow. And just sucked. The CPU itself was always pretty frugal, and reasonably ... not "powerful" but, well, agile at least.

    So I guess I'm not too shocked to learn that Atom, paired with a modern, mobile graphics solution, can go toe-to-toe with Tegra 3. I'm just not sure what, if anything, I should be reading into the result.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,813
    It means you can pay ~$200 for a Tegra 3 equipped Android tablet, or ~$500+ for an Atom/Windows based one with about the same performance...

    Expect stampedes.
    To find the right answers you must ask the right questions.

  3. #3
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by worminator View Post
    So I guess I'm not too shocked to learn that Atom, paired with a modern, mobile graphics solution, can go toe-to-toe with Tegra 3. I'm just not sure what, if anything, I should be reading into the result.
    The only thing I get away from this is that Tegra3 is crap (one of the worst ARM SoCs out there) but that's not really anything new.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,604
    Tegra 3 is rubbish - we know that. That's why it is in cheap tablets.

  5. #5
    Tegra might be slower and not the best out there, but the Atom was three times faster in that particular test... however how much windows is optimised for Intel over ARM is, questionable to say the least. MS has a lot of apples in the Intel basket, and has a reason for Intel to look favourable to ARM for tablets, at least, thats how I see it.

    When will MS start making the OS stupidly cheap for tablets so they can be sold cheaper, sell in higher volume and start looking for alternative ways to make money like Apple/Google do.... MS do seem to be going the wrong way about everything at the moment.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunkenmaster View Post
    Tegra might be slower and not the best out there, but the Atom was three times faster in that particular test... however how much windows is optimised for Intel over ARM is, questionable to say the least. MS has a lot of apples in the Intel basket, and has a reason for Intel to look favourable to ARM for tablets, at least, thats how I see it.
    I think Windows and browser optimizations can be questioned, Z2760 certainly isn't 3 times faster than Tegra 3 (clock for clock it should be close, but the 1.8 GHz over 1.3 GHz helps the Intel SoC, so I guess 50% faster is what it should be). But I don't think MS did that on purpose; they probably lack experience on modern ARM chips, things will probably improve.
    Speaking for myself.

  7. #7
    It was a huge mistake to put Tegra 3 in Surface RT. Played with Snapdragon S4 powered Samsung Ativ Tab and it is far superior. Really smooth and fluid. Not flawless but easily faster than any Android or Windows RT Tegra 3 tablet and apart from loading times as good as than iPad 3. (not tried out 4) I think a QC/Adreno 320 version will make it the fastest tablet yet.

    Even so, at this moment Z2760 is making Windows RT irrelevant. I am sure things will improve a lot very soon but at this time not a good option. I really think they should have foregone certifying Tegra 3 and gone Qualcomm only like on Windows Phone 8. WP8 is absolutely flawless performance-wise. Next year with Tegra 4 they could have introduced Nvidia into the mix. Hopefully Exynos 5 Quad gets Windows RT certified too.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Guild View Post
    I really think they should have foregone certifying Tegra 3 and gone Qualcomm only like on Windows Phone 8. WP8 is absolutely flawless performance-wise. Next year with Tegra 4 they could have introduced Nvidia into the mix. Hopefully Exynos 5 Quad gets Windows RT certified too.
    No one in the mobile sector wants to be forced into buying from a single source, so I think MS was wise in not selecting a single SoC even for the initial release of WP8.
    Speaking for myself.

  9. #9
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    425
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuckey View Post
    It means you can pay ~$200 for a Tegra 3 equipped Android tablet, or ~$500+ for an Atom/Windows based one with about the same performance...

    Expect stampedes.
    LOLOLOLOL! I have to check my shorts now!

  10. #10
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    483
    Atom is much more powerful than tegra. ARM core cache architecture is pathetic even compared to the atom. Intel just have a hardon for hyperthreading for some reason.

    Intel also purposed lock out features from Atoms especially from the graphical department. When intel start taking atom serious when they move atom down to their cutting edge production node and stop cutting out easily implemented features, ARM won't really compete.

    Tegra 3 is also a crappy SoC by design.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux