Just noticed that the Atom is being run with the new x32 mixed instruction set. This takes advantage of the 64 bit improvements in the architecture and enables 64 bit registers for doing math (faster in some cases) but limits the memory addressing to 32 bits (less cache pressure). Especially in a system like Atom I could see that giving a performance bump in many cases.
Having said that, the Atom N450 really is not considered a dual-core processor. Rather it is Single Core + Hyper-threading (two-threads). Would be very interesting to see a newer dual-core (ie Atom N550 - 4 threads) at 1Ghz go up against a newer ARM A9 chip such as the Tegra 3 or even an A15 chip. I'll bet it would be a really close battle, with the power consumption win probably going to the ARM architecture.
The x32 results are very interesting, in that it scored a few wins against X86_64. Would be nice to see x86 results for comparison... =)
Given Cortex-A9 is already old and SoCs based on the Cortex-A15 are starting to appear, I'm looking forward to seeing how those perform.
Yes, technically not a dual-core. Its a single core + hyperthreading making it capable of scheduling and partially processing two simultaneous threads. Nonetheless, it is a very interesting comparison, and I hope Michael can get us some results for an A9 Quad Core (ie Tegra 3) vs. A15 vs. latest gen Atom dual core (ie N2800)... that would be a very interesting showdown, though it has been widely reports that the Cedarview ATOM's are no faster than their Pineview predecessors.Quote:
Larabel *repeatedly* misrepresents the N450 calling it a "dual core" processor. It is *not* dual core but is a single core + HT chip. He could have spent 5 seconds using this new thing called "Google" to go here: http://ark.intel.com/products/42503 and get a full product page describing the N450 that *clearly* shows it is a single core chip. I'd love to see the A9's "beating" the N450 with only one core....
Aren't most benefits of HT are getting visible as CPU frequency is going up? There is little point in downclocking HT Atom and than getting it measured against real dual-core CPU.
Did the OpenSSL benchmark use any hardware acceleration on the ARM platform?
This also goes a long way to confirming that ARM based tablets aren't lower performing than an Intel Atom based tablet. In addition the Intel Atom based phones aren't actually going to be faster despite the advertising claims that Intel is paying for for the various new Intel based phones - especially as the ARM devices are getting quad-cores at around 1.5GHz in comparison to the single-core Atom at 1.6GHz.
You can also get 1.7GHz Quad-core ARM Cortex A9 chips.
So a dual-thread A9 compares very favourably to a dual-thread Atom at the same clock. That's a worthy finding.
Of course the quad-core ARMs will be in tablets and phones, but Intel's tablet and phone Atoms are the dual-thread single-core varieties.
The Atom here is being given two advantages:
1. it's targetting x32, I'd like to see pure 32-bit results
2. its memory is probably not underclocked, and probably is some desktop memory, at lest nothing similar to what you find on ORIGEN board.
Nice results anyway, and unsurprising ;)