facebook rss twitter

Video shows tablet gaming performance is better on ARM?

by Mark Tyson on 11 October 2013, 11:45

Tags: ARM, Intel (NASDAQ:INTC), PC

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qab3xv

Add to My Vault: x

A new video pitting two mystery Android tablets against each other has been produced by ARM, reports VR Zone. The video purports to compare real world gaming performance on two similar Android tablets; one with a quad-core ARM Cortex A9-based CPU chip clocked at 1.4 GHz and the other powered by a dual-core Intel Clover Trail+ processor running at 1.6 GHz.

For such a comparison we would expect the other system specs to be very similar if not equal, however the YouTube description only says the two tablets have the “same size screens”. That doesn’t help the comparison at all... As a sharp retort to some previous Intel benchmarks showing better AnTuTu scores the description below ARM’s new video says this side-by-side comparison video uses “a real application rather than a synthetic benchmark”.

As the video starts both tablets run the Need for Speed: Most Wanted game for Android. The ARM-based game load time, from prodding the game icon to racing along the tarmac was is 48.92 seconds. Already, at this early stage, Intel is behind – the Intel powered tablet took 85.48 seconds, 36 seconds more.

Futhermore we are told that the in game timer is based upon the frame rate and comparisons give rounded figures of the racing game performing at approx 40fps on the ARM tablet but only 30fps on the Intel version.

The video goes on to point out that the ARM tablet is roughly a year older than the Intel one we see playing the game. The reporting sleuths over at VR-Zone think that from this and other info given that the two tablets could be the ARM based 2012 version of the Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 and the Intel-based Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10.1 released just recently.

Both ARM and Intel have newer, better chips available or coming out shortly. Nevertheless it’s still interesting to see ARM create and publish this kind of video.



HEXUS Forums :: 7 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Because these mobile games have had years of optimisation for an ARM tablet. Meanwhile intel tablets are fairly new and still uncommon.

This doesn't mean the intel tablets are inferior they just haven't had games that are optimised for them yet.
Firstly it's CloverTrail+ which along with A9 CPUs is pretty old news now.

Game load time is probably more related to storage performance and only fair if the game was loaded from the same SD Card, or at least the same model of card, NAND quality/speed varies between tablets and is something neither ARM or Intel control.

Screen resolution and game settings are not checked/noted. Graphics performance is also far more GPU dependent which ARM don't always control, that is down to the SoC manufacturers, Intel didn't fit a terribly beefy PowerVR GPU to CloverTrail+ so it's not really a gamer's SoC but without knowing what the ARM tablet is its hard to say how fair the market segment comparison is, for example a Tegra is marketed at gamers.

I'm fed up of seeing this type of disingenuous bull**** marketing “benchmark”, ARM are just as bad as the rest of the tech industry for this and their self-righteous crap about “using real world apps” is just hypocrisy when the scientific rigour is all but absent.

P.S. Let me make it clear - not defending or fighting for Intel - I'm annoyed at the crap tests and unsubstantiated conclusions.
kingpotnoodle
Screen resolution and game settings are not checked/noted. Graphics performance is also far more GPU dependent which ARM don't always control, that is down to the SoC manufacturers, Intel didn't fit a terribly beefy PowerVR GPU to CloverTrail+ so it's not really a gamer's SoC but without knowing what the ARM tablet is its hard to say how fair the market segment comparison is, for example a Tegra is marketed at gamers.

The video did say that the Intel tablet benchmarked as having more powerful graphics than the ARM one, so that shouldn't be an issue.

However, chances are the game is compiled to native ARM, and the Intel platform is having to JIT translate it. If that is the case, then I actually find that really funny. For years the fastest Windows platform was the DEC Alpha, it could even use the same binary translation technique to run X86 code faster than a genuine Intel chip of the time. No-one bought the Alpha because Windows==Intel. Now Android==Arm, and the boot is on the other foot.

So yeah, totally unfair benchmarking. But funny :D
The frame rate is more of a test of the GPU than the CPU.

And they need to be more open about the screen resolutions used. And how long you could game on the tablet for before the battery died.

Bay Trail is out now, as are more powerful ARM based solutions. Maybe they could do a test with these, once they can.
The video goes on to point out that the ARM tablet is roughly a year older than the Intel one we see playing the game. The reporting sleuths over at VR-Zone think that from this and other info given that the two tablets could be the ARM based 2012 version of the Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 and the Intel-based Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10.1 released just recently.
Galaxy Note is about Ā£50 more than the Galaxy Tab, but the Tab is a newer model than the Note, so maybe the comparison isn't totally bogus. Yes, there's the usual complaint about ARM optimisation on the title, but lets be honest, there have to be very few Intel optimised titles available on the Play store.

This comparison wouldn't persuade me to buy an ARM-based tablet, any more than the Intel equivalent would have made me run out to get something from them.

Now what's needed is something from NVidia showing how both of them are laughable compared to Tegra4. ;)