Real World Technologies - Forums - Thread: 1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench

By: mas (a.delete@this.b.com), 2013-07-17 12:20 UTC

Next Post in Thread >

Thread (102 posts)

Topic	Posted By	Posted
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-07-17 12:20 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-07-17 12:20 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-07-17 12:49 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Klimax	2013-07-17 14:54 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-07-17 17:02 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-07-17 18:58 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-07-17 21:42 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-07-17 21:59 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Wilco	2013-07-17 22:07 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	anon	2013-07-17 13:02 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	someone	2013-07-17 14:57 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Megol	2013-07-17 16:45 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-07-17 17:01 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Wilco	2013-07-17 18:40 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Megol	2013-07-18 08:44 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-07-19 08:58 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-07-19 09:17 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-07-19 10:13 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Megol	2013-07-20 17:33 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-07-17 17:20 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	someone	2013-07-17 17:31 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-07-17 18:03 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-07-17 18:04 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-19 10:52 UTC
Nope	Wilco	2013-07-19 11:58 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-19 12:33 UTC
Nope	none	2013-07-19 13:08 UTC
Nope	Wilco	2013-07-19 14:16 UTC
Nope	Michael S	2013-07-19 14:40 UTC
Nope	tarlinian	2013-07-19 15:59 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-19 21:12 UTC
Nope	none	2013-07-19 11:59 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-19 12:17 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-19 12:46 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-19 13:08 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-20 22:01 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-21 02:04 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-21 07:29 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-21 09:38 UTC
s/10/5 (NT)	anon	2013-07-21 09:40 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-21 11:13 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-21 11:46 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-22 10:45 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-22 11:53 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-23 12:56 UTC
Nope	anon	2013-07-24 04:48 UTC
Nope	Doug S	2013-07-21 16:36 UTC
Nope	anonymou5	2013-07-21 23:24 UTC
Apple & 14nm	Doug S	2013-07-19 17:14 UTC
It is "Common Platform" Alliance vs. TSMC, not Samsung vs TSMC	Mark Roulo	2013-07-19 20:12 UTC
It is "Common Platform" Alliance vs. TSMC, not Samsung vs TSMC	Doug S	2013-07-19 21:01 UTC
It is "Common Platform" Alliance vs. TSMC, not Samsung vs TSMC	Alberto	2013-07-19 22:32 UTC
Nope	Michael S	2013-07-20 19:22 UTC
Nope	Alberto	2013-07-20 21:24 UTC
Nope	Doug S	2013-07-20 22:08 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Wilco	2013-07-17 18:46 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Klimax	2013-07-17 20:10 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Wilco	2013-07-17 22:15 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Klimax	2013-07-18 06:25 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-08-17 03:13 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench and some so so SPEC data	Alberto	2013-08-18 12:57 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench and some so so SPEC data	Linus Torvalds	2013-08-18 16:42 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench and some so so SPEC data	Alberto	2013-08-18 19:45 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench and some so so SPEC data	ABR	2013-08-19 06:56 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench and some so so SPEC data	ABR	2013-08-19 07:28 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench and some so so SPEC data	Alberto	2013-08-19 08:02 UTC
Athlon 64 FX-55 had a TDP of 104W and was $827 in 2004 (NT)	iz	2013-08-19 08:37 UTC
Yes sure, five process nodes ago, come one	Alberto	2013-08-19 11:24 UTC
Yes sure, five process nodes ago, come one	anon	2013-08-19 11:51 UTC
Yes sure, five process nodes ago, come one	Alberto	2013-08-19 13:34 UTC
Yes sure, five process nodes ago, come one	anon	2013-08-19 17:20 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-18 13:11 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-05 12:14 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-05 19:57 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Linus Torvalds	2013-08-05 20:21 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-05 23:10 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-06 00:59 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-06 07:30 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-06 08:15 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-06 09:58 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Exophase	2013-08-06 15:51 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Gabriele Svelto	2013-08-07 10:55 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Foo_	2013-08-10 12:28 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Gabriele Svelto	2013-08-12 07:58 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Foo_	2013-08-12 22:07 UTC
FP in Java Script	David Kanter	2013-08-10 11:10 UTC
FP in Java Script	EduardoS	2013-08-10 14:25 UTC
FP in Java Script	⚛	2013-08-11 07:44 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-08-06 08:27 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-06 09:08 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-08-06 10:06 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Exophase	2013-08-06 16:00 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-08-06 17:04 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Exophase	2013-08-06 17:40 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Exophase	2013-08-06 17:41 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-06 20:36 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-06 22:30 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-07 08:20 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Michael S	2013-08-07 08:45 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	mas	2013-08-07 21:20 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	none	2013-08-08 07:55 UTC
1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench	Alberto	2013-08-05 23:09 UTC

Reply to this Topic
Name:
Email:
Topic:
Body:	No Text mas (a.delete@this.b.com) on 2013-07-17 12:20 UTC wrote: > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/2068301 > > compared to other relevant chips > > vs 1.6 GHz Exynos 5 (A15) > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2112298 > > vs 1.9 GHz Tegra 4 (A15) > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2025974 > > vs 1.9 GHz S600 > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/1999761 > > vs 2.3 GHz S800 > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2063809 > > vs 1.8 GHz Clovertrail > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2138712 > > vs 2.0 GHz Clovertrail+ > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2161128 > > vs 1.4 GHz Ivy Bridge Y > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2027454 > > vs 1.0 GHz AMD A6-1450 > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2157740 > > vs 1.5 GHz AMD A4-5000 > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2068301/2139838 > > > > >
Explain 🐈🐕:	(no spaces, 6 letters, lowercase)

1.46 GHz Bay Trail geekbench

Editor’s Picks

PhysX87: Software Deficiency

Intel’s Haswell CPU Microarchitecture

Silvermont, Intel’s Low Power Architecture