Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 13 Aug 2010.
If Intel has hopes for all these features that these chips will run on, then it will be interesting to see how much power they use.
'Yeah, I've got DVB-T on my phone, but the battery life means I can only watch a half hour programme before the battery dies!'
Are you sure those numbers in the the 3rd patagraph are supposed to be square mm? If so, thats's one big ass chip.....
It's what the document claims, but it's possibly a typo in the original.
It's neither. The 4200mm^2 size is in reference to the total size of the pcb required to host the platform, the "motherboard" it sits on, not the size of the chip. They haven't mentioned the size of the pcb required for the new chips, but I would assume somewhere south of 3500.
I hope they get curbstomped by ARM.
This is excellent news and yet another part of the industry to get the proper treatment of quality and the reliability of Intel. Not only will this do exactly what it says on the tin but will put a few including ARM in a bit of a panic sweat that Intel are taking their gloves off in their ring!
You will all benefit from this in one way or the other so fangirlism aside you have to be happy about this positive step by Intel.
If they run in a handset the size of a Nokia 6303, with battery life lasting a week and not a day, i might be interested.
Not those ones - the *other* measurements, which state the size of the SoC as 144mm².
You're right Vigilante, I was getting my square numbers muddled. 144mm^2 is only 12mm in length which isn't bad. I think performance per watt might be an issue of there's still though when compaired to ARM's designs.
Separate names with a comma.