Search results

That should not be the case. Maybe some games run slowly because they are poorly implemented, but the Intel chip does not consume arbitrary amounts of energy. Its TDP is pretty much the same as that of the competiting ARM SoCs. The actual power consumption of the previous generation was even...

I agree. None of your posts in this thread are even remotely on-topic, unlike most others. Mods: Feel free to delete this post.

I don't think what _wb_calls a sociological disadvantage actually is a disadvantage. Yes, there might be those gamers who buy the device because they can possibly run their favorite x86 games, but would that really be such a bad thing? For the Pyra's success it could certainly be quite helpful...

This "backdoor" that people claim to be in some processors, would actually be a deliberate flaw in the RNG of that CPU. Unless the implementers are really stupid, it is next to impossible to tell if the random numbers generated are truly random or not. So if you suspect there to be a backdoor...

What does this have to do with the Pyra?

Actually, it is the second generation that is competitive in terms of performance per watt. The previous generation (32 nm) was already pretty good when compared to A15 based SoC. Anandtech did a pretty detailed comparision ( http://www.anandtech.com/show/6536/arm-vs-x86-the-real-showdown ). The...

There is nothing wrong with that. :)

Even then lots of embedded devices have been running Linux. You may not have noticed it, though. Toolchains were not that much different from today's toolchains either. When writing software for Linux, the actual CPU architecture usually does not matter much anyway, if it matters at all. There...

Back in the Pandora days, x86 wasn't really an option, so back then the choice for ARM was pretty easy. Things have changed since then, those Baytrail SoC are really competitive in terms of both power consumption and cpu power. Also it runs with open source drivery only. No blobs needed...

Linux runs on ARM for more than 15 years (e.g. on the good old StrongARM SA-1110 from 1998), which I don't consider new.

New frontier? ARM has been used in mobile devices for ages, much unlike modern x86, which is pretty new in this context. If we had known that, nobody would have dared to even think about using another SoC, let alone suggesting to look at other options.

The datasheets for that Intel SoC are more than 4000 pages long. Looks pretty much complete to me. You have to check both part 1 and 2.

Cortex M4 cores are small microcontroller cores without a MMU and a limited feature set, so they can't be used as general purpose CPUs by the operating system. The M4 cores can only be used for very special tasks. That is exactly the point of big.LITTLE. So there actually is quite a difference...

It seems kind of strange to me, that there does not seem to be any documentation for those chips, but on the other hand Intel tries to encourage small developers to use their chips by releasing development boards (even as open source hardware), like the http://www.minnowboard.org/'>Minnow board...

Which is what exactly? TI is implementing ARM's Cortex-A15 core on their SoC (unlike some other manufacturers who design their own ARMv7 CPU cores), so basically the only thing having a major influence on the CPU core's power consumption is the manufacturing process. They might implement power...

Actually, no. The A15 is about 40% faster per clock than the A9 and consumes about twice as much power for that, which makes it less efficient. That does not say anything about its idle consumption, though. Of course, ARM knows that, which is why they are pushing their big.LITTLE configuration...

The full-power example is not necessarily silly. Emulators will probably run at a fixed frame rate and as such will not use 100 % of the CPU time, but native games tend to try to run as fast as possible, which usually means loading the CPU as much as possible (unless something else is limiting...

Under full load the Pyra will most likely run a lot shorter than the Pandora under full load, as the Cortex-A15 cores are particularily power-hungry. Their efficiency is lower than that of the Cortex A9 cores under load. The modern Intel X86 SoC are actually more power efficient than A15 based...

I didn't mean to say he wasn't friendly or anything. It is not for me to say, I haven't even met him. All I was trying to say is, that it looks like (from his previous projects and posts on the forums), that he is pretty familiar with those OMAPs and he might be pushing into the OMAP direction...

You never know if his claims are worth anything, until you get in touch. He said he can point him to the right contacts, which might be all that is needed. It seems that the gta04 guy is pretty much focused on the OMAP5, which could be a problem, but it does not look like they have already...