[Android] Phones/Tablets Arm vs Intel

Intel has an number of Atom processors in the budget tablets, and they get good benchmarks even better than an lot of Arm based ones, and Intel has to emulate the Android OS which is impressive.

So why are there no Intel cpu`s in phones or high end tablets now, I had an android phone a few years ago that had an Intel single core cpu and it ran fine, I think it was an Motorola phone, maybe a Razor.

So what has happened to Intel

John.

 

Intel just doesn't have the market penetration of Qualcomm and Exynos. It might be a price issue, I know ASUS has a strong partnership with Intel and thus you see almost everything has the Intel Atoms for the SoC. I have a ASUS MemoPad 7 HD for my fiance's daughter, and it runs fine for a sub 100 dollar tablet.

 

Intel is in budget tablets as i said, but no phones or high end tablets when the notebook market is shrinking with Sony and Samsung making no more Windows notebooks, Samsung makes only chromebooks now.

edit : It looks like Intel supplies processors for chrome books, which can use ARM or INTEL.

http://chromebookratings.com/chromebook-model-comparison/

John.

 

Don't Snapdragons tend to last longer on a given battery size than an equally-fast Intel processor? This may be why Intel has had far more success breaking into the Android tablet market (where batteries are larger and battery life is less of a critical selling point) than the Android smartphone market.

 

The test below between Intel and Arm shows that there is very little in battery life between them, Intel has 4 minutes less than Arm in 10 hours.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/05/intel_disputes_arms_claims_of_android_superiority/

John.

 

I thought it was because Android was optimized for ARM...?

 

Yeah, in that last link that John posted, it sounds like 10% of common Android apps only run on ARM natively. However, Intel's ability to run non-native apps has apparently improved, so that (according to that article) you nearly always can run one with an Intel-powered device and often can run it with no visible impact to performance.

Still, I can understand why manufacturers of flagship devices would be wary about even a few popular apps being incompatible with their device.

 

So i wonder how difficult it would be for Arm to run x86 or even x64, or is Arms use of risc make that impossible.

John.

 

Tinderbox (UK), you can see how it works by running Windows inside DosBox on ARM device.

 

wasn't that Qualcomm sell their stuff by bundle? and intel is behind of lte stuff?

 

Its as stated... x86 versus ARM... Dynamic recompilation is not a viable solution and most developers will not cross-port for x86 or x86_64 code because there are too many errors in doing so. If Intel wants to get serious about mobile, they need to adopt the RISC ARM code and admit that their CISC code is a disaster for mobile...

 

I suppose Intel uses AMD x64, so it`s not like they have not used another company work before, the same as AMD uses Intel x86

John.

 

Recently read about apps rage quit on the zenfone. So Intel need more work.

Sent from my 306SH

 

Intel doesn't do well on Android mobile because it doesn't bring anything to the table that people care about.

1) Android OS and apps all run better on ARM. All of the Android development for the past 8 years has been entirely around ARM. Intel Atom-based processors are a relatively new entry into the mobile space, and there is often a compatibility issue (with applications crashing or not running).

2) Most people out there aren't power users, and don't really care about performance on a mobile device. They just care about performance that is "good enough" where their device, applications, and user interface don't lag when they use it. And high-end ARM processors are more than enough to get that done. And even if a device is slow, you're going to have a lot more success in getting it to run faster by modifying the software configuration on the phone, rather than trying to upgrade the underlying hardware.

 

If Intel had their way, they certainly won't be using 3rd-party architectures for their CPUs. The main reason Intel is licensing AMD64 from AMD is because Itanium was a massive failure on the market.

 

Intel CPU makes dualbooting Android and full-blown Windows on single machine possible. If only all Intel-based tablets were dualbooting... =(

 

An 2014 comparison between Arm and Intel both running Android.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/02/arm_test_results_attack_intel/

John.

 

I mean yes Snapdragon crushes the Atom processors....but remember most Atom tablets are easily 10-40% cheaper than their ARM counterpart tablets. I used the ASUS MemoPad ME176CX with the Z3745 Intel Quad core Atom Baytrail...and it ran 4.4 Kitkat fine. Sure the battery life isn't the **best** but it was also a quad core, 1 GB tablet with a WXGA IPS screen for less than 100 bucks.

 

I have an Acer switch 10 with the Intel Atom Z3735F Win8.1 and i love it, and my main computer is Intel as well, so i am not knocking Intel, I just believe that people should facts to be able to make an informed choice when they buy their new Android Phone/Tablet.

John.