or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tipoo

    So no GT3e/HD5200 for anything, you think? 
The eDRAM on package for the high end GT3e Haswell configuration should provide a significant boost to performance, the GT2 with half the execution resources (although at a base clock twice as high as GT3 at 400 vs 200) performs about a quarter better than Ivy Bridges HD4000, and Intel is saying there's a 2x performance increase from IVB to Haswells integrated graphics on the top end.  I'm curious, especially for the 13" MBP, if we would be getting the one with or...
Now can it do basic UI animations without lag? Single core performance seemed to be the bottleneck there.
A smaller screen and a year and a half old SoC make for a cheap device to make? I'm shocked. SHOCKED.
Funny how they touted resolution over screen area for so long, then turned around just for their Nexus 7 comparison and touted the Minis screen area. They're having it both ways, and most people will take what they said in stride.
If you run the current RMBP on the Intel graphics (which it defaults to for most tasks) lots of animations are laggy, especially the resize animation and the ical page flip, I can literally count four or five frames separately. Perhaps the small resolution drop the 13" RMBP would take over the 15" would fix that, but I highly doubt it. Let's await and see.
Intel has a quad core mobile Ivy Bridge processor with the same TDP as the MBP 13 uses, I hope the Retina version gets that. Also the concern about Intel-only graphics is valid, on the 15" there is a very jarring lag with some UI animations like the green button resize or the calendar flip, like I can count 5-6 frames bad. If you force it to use the Nvidia card only, that is gone. Without the Nvidia card at all as a fallback there is limited room to improve that on the 13".
Thunderbolt alternative, which isn't really Thunderbolt at all.
Depends on how you see things, I mean it takes two Cortex A9 cores with good useage on both to beat a single Atom core clock for clock, and that's ignoring dual core Atoms and the upcoming architecture change.Even the link from the article shows the single core smartphone variant of Atom coming in second for Javascript, although that's also a test of software.
Lots of things make me doubt this happening in the next decade. The investment it would take to build a high performance chip like Intels would make the A6 seem tiny, desktop and laptop chips are still over an order of magnitude ahead of ARM chips. And Apple cannot use x86 instructions in their own chips anyways, the licence is exclusive to Intel, AMD, and Via. Apart from that, the patent portfolios of AMD and Intel make it nearly impossible to build an x86 of such...
New Posts  All Forums: