Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 5   >   >>
Yog-Sothoth
User Rank
Freelancer
Re: More analysis
Yog-Sothoth   7/11/2013 11:41:54 AM
NO RATINGS
"The main point is that  Intel is closing the ARM gap quickly"


There is no evidence to support this, unless you consider marketing hype to be 'evidence'.

DMcCunney
User Rank
CEO
Re: Anybody who knows the basics of Engineering realize Intel's game
DMcCunney   7/11/2013 11:11:49 AM
NO RATINGS
Consider the evolution of the PC market.

On my desktop, I don't care about power consumption.  It's plugged into an outlet, and always on.  There's no battery to drain.

On my laptop and notebook, I start to care, because they can be used without being plugged in.  I don't care much, because I don't normally run them solely off of battery.  If I travel, they get set up and plugged in once I'm at my destination.  I don't normally use them when I'm actually in transit.

On my cell phone and PDA, I care a lot, because they are normally running off of battery, and I've made it a reflex to plug them in to a charger whenever I'm not actually out and about so I don't find myself suddenly running dry.

Yes, more powerful processors make possible more sophisticated applications, at the trade-off of increased power usage.

Power concerns are becoming relevant in the server market.  ARM has a shot at the server market because data centers are increasingly larger with increasingly greater numbers of servers in racks, and power requirements are continually escalating.  ARM's planned 64 bit processors stand to make significant design wins, because the power they use will be a lot lower, and power costs are a significant fraction of the cost of operation of the data center.

The CPU doesn't have to be the most powerful available - it just has to be powerful enough, especially as applications move to parallel processing, and multiple CPUs will be engaged on any particular task.

In the mobile market, the big challenges in processing power I see are in the GPU.  The "killer apps" tend to be those that demand video performance, and we are seeing devices with screen resolution and 3D accelleration that used to be the province of the desktop and laptop.  Intel is far behind in GPU performance. (I have Intel graphics on board in my machine.  It's adequate for what I do, because I don't do things like serious gaming.  If I did, I'd be looking at shifting from mobo graphics to a dedicated video card, or getting a whole new machine.}

The desktop market is shrinking, as tasks formerly performed on the desktop migrate to laptops, notebooks and tablets.  The mobile market and the server markat are booming, as things increasingly more to the cloud.

Power consumption is the new critical factor, and Intel is playing catchup.

Wilco1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Compilers
Wilco1   7/11/2013 11:02:47 AM
NO RATINGS
The issue is that no real workloads will ever benefit, not from these optimizations and not from ICC.

Android uses GCC as the default compiler, so ICC is irrelevant, even if it happened to be better than GCC. By secretly having AnTuTu replace GCC with ICC in this closed-source benchmark and adding specific optimizations which only speedup this particular code, Intel is cheating by manipulating the benchmark scores.

If changing compilers, settings and adding specific benchmark busting optimizations is OK, what if someone wrote a hand-compiled version of the benchmark - would that be legitimate too? After all, the best compiler is still a human.

You're quite right that software and compilers are important. Intel could, like ARM, invest more in GCC and speed up real Android workloads rather than showing off cheated ICC results while pretending they are in any way relevant for Android performance.

JeffBier
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Compilers
JeffBier   7/11/2013 10:36:28 AM
NO RATINGS
"What's wrong with Intel getting ahead using better compiler technology?"

Nothing, if we're talking about making real applications run faster.

But that's not what we're talking about here.

What we're talking about here is the compiler removing portions of the benchmark, contrary to the intent of the benchmark.  As a result, the benchmark results become meaningless.

As Reinhold P. Weicker, co-author of Dhrystone, wrote in 1988:

...optimizing compilers should be prevented from removing significant
statements. It has turned out in the past that optimizing compilers
suppressed code generation for too many statements (by "dead code removal"
or "dead variable elimination"). This has lead to the danger that
benchmarking results obtained by a naive application of Dhrystone - without
inspection of the code that was generated - could become meaningless.
[http://bit.ly/1atTdWZ]

 

performanceguy
User Rank
Rookie
Compilers
performanceguy   7/11/2013 10:23:44 AM
NO RATINGS
What's wrong with Intel getting ahead using better compiler technology? I understand if the gains are only on a single benchmark, but if a broad range of real workloads benefit then it's definitely legitimate. Good compilers are an essential part of any microprocessor platform. If ICC only supports x86/64 then it's one of Intel's strategic assets, just like they don't share their superior fabs with ARM. Software is really important. People need to better appreciate this. ARM needs to invest more in compiler technology.

Remember that when exploring the microarchitecture design space, simulations are done using benchmarks as input. Benchmark tuning also happens at the hardware level.

 

jaybus0
User Rank
CEO
Re: Anybody who knows the basics of Engineering realize Intel's game
jaybus0   7/11/2013 8:57:23 AM
NO RATINGS
I'm not convince x86 is a losing battle. It depends on the direction device platforms go. I rather think Intel is attempting to use what they experienced in the PC world. An increase in performance allows ever more complex and capable software, and once those apps are available nobody wants to go back. So just as with PC evolution, an increase in performance that allows for the next "killer" app will up the performance bar for all players.

 

I see no reason to believe that the evolution of mobile devices will not closely follow the evolution of the PC. So while ARM is playing to their strong point and pressuring Intel to lower power usage, Intel will be pressuring ARM to increase performance. In a stagnant software world, ARM would surely win. But it is not a stagnant software world, so it is still unclear whether or not x86 will compete in the mobile market.

KB3001
User Rank
CEO
Anybody who knows the basics of Engineering realize Intel's game
KB3001   7/11/2013 7:35:49 AM
NO RATINGS
Great article! I have always been surprised at the gullibility of many people when it comes to such sensational "benchmark" results. People should take some stock and critically analyze the hypotheses, experimental set-up etc. before coming to a conclusion. It does not take a genius to realise that the recent Intel claims are just marketing nonsense with no solid scientific foundation. It also does not take much to realise that Intel is fighting a losing battle as long as it is sticking with x86. Superior fabrication technology will only take you so far (incremental linear gains at best). The much higher gains are in the architectural hardware and software levels. Indeed, anyone who optimized software would tell you that a bit more care in how we code can often get you 10x performance gains. Try and get that gain at the Transistor level....So even if Intel are ahead with FinFet etc. they will not be able to compensate for their inferior power management technology and inadequate software stack. They might reduce the gap a bit every now and then but they cannot maintain doing that forever. One thing that has really changed since the 80's is that the competition is strong and diverse. Consumers have a choice, and they will vote with their pockets.

 

 

Wilco1
User Rank
CEO
Re: You guys are missing the point
Wilco1   7/11/2013 4:24:23 AM
What makes you so sure Intel will be better than ARM on cost, performance or power? Given the large complexity, overhead and cost of x86 that is by no means certain even with a manufacturing advantage. We all know how bad Atom really is despite the marketing claims - even OEMs aren't fooled: Atom has just 0.2% mobile market share. Who knows, in 10 years Atom may well be remembered as yet another Itanium, iAPX 432 or i860...

Simon7382
User Rank
Freelancer
You guys are missing the point
Simon7382   7/11/2013 1:12:33 AM
NO RATINGS




The main point is that  Intel is closing the ARM gap quickly. Whether they are already better or just will be better in the next generation is not really important. They  decided to be number one in the performance/power game for mobile processors and if history is any guide they will be. Whether in 6 months or 18 months matters little.

mcgrathdylan
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Is Antutu a Real Benchmark? Cheating?
mcgrathdylan   7/10/2013 11:04:26 PM
NO RATINGS
Agree. Benchmarks are a pure marketing tool. And I agree 100 percent that Intel will not get a single design win based on the benchmark. It did what it's basically designed to do: give Intel a PR boost. 

<<   <   Page 3 / 5   >   >>


Flash Poll
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Engineer's Bookshelf
Caleb Kraft

The Martian: A Delightful Exploration of Math, Mars & Feces
Caleb Kraft
6 comments
To say that Andy Weir's The Martian is an exploration of math, Mars, and feces is a slight simplification. I doubt that the author would have any complaints, though.

The Engineering Life - Around the Web
Caleb Kraft

Surprise TOQ Teardown at EELive!
Caleb Kraft
Post a comment
This year, for EELive! I had a little surprise that I was quite eager to share. Qualcomm had given us a TOQ smart watch in order to award someone a prize. We were given complete freedom to ...

Design Contests & Competitions
Caleb Kraft

Join The Balancing Act With April's Caption Contest
Caleb Kraft
57 comments
Sometimes it can feel like you're really performing in the big tent when presenting your hardware. This month's caption contest exemplifies this wonderfully.

Engineering Investigations
Caleb Kraft

Frankenstein's Fix: The Winners Announced!
Caleb Kraft
8 comments
The Frankenstein's Fix contest for the Tektronix Scope has finally officially come to an end. We had an incredibly amusing live chat earlier today to announce the winners. However, we ...

Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)