standby time

Article: Medfield, Intel's x86 Phone Chip
By: Anon (, January 27, 2012 10:32 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
anon ( on 1/26/12 wrote:
>Anon ( on 1/26/12 wrote:
>>anon ( on 1/26/12 wrote:
>>>Anon ( on 1/26/12 wrote:
>>>>Doug Siebert ( on 1/26/12 wrote:
>>>>>Foo_ ( on 1/26/12 wrote:
>>>>>>Yes. I think smartphones will trickle down in the coming years, because the price
>>>>>>of entry-level smartphones will decrease and the price of 3G data access will decrease
>>>>>>too. So people like me will soon switch to smartphones even though they won't make
>>>>>>a heavy use of it, and they will expect decent standby times out of them.
>>>>>There are and will be many low end Android phones coming out which will cause smartphones
>>>>>to entirely replace the feature phone market over the next few years. A lot of
>>>>>the "smartphones" will be only in name as their owners will use them only as phones,
>>>>>and never use any smartphone functionality such as browsing or apps. I wouldn't
>>>>>be surprised in fact to see disabling the ability to load apps, removing the browser,
>>>>>Wifi capability etc. on the very lowest end models as a method of artificial market segmentation.
>>>>>I'm sure someone will make (if they aren't already) Android phones that are a bit
>>>>>thicker to accomodate a jumbo battery, which would allow a month of standby time
>>>>>for those who almost never use their phone. You're not the only who has this usage
>>>>>model, my retired parents have a cell phone that they only use when travelling.
>>>>>I think maybe my dad also brings it with him when he goes to the grocery store
>>>>>so he can call my mom if he can't find something on her list :)
>>>>>My point in dismissing the advantage in standby when compared to the iPhone 4S
>>>>>is that customers who buy the iPhone or an Android phone comparable to the Medfield
>>>>>reference platform are buying them to be used heavily as smartphones. The battery
>>>>>life when actually using them is pretty much the same. The difference in standby
>>>>>time is only relevant to a certain segment of the feature phone replacement market,
>>>>>and I doubt Intel plans to (or even can) compete with ARM in that ultimate cut throat
>>>>>market where saving even a few pennies in the BOM rules supreme.
>>>>I would agree pretty much.
>>>>One other thing to consider, I suspect that cutting down a high end phone to such
>>>>minimal capability (smaller dimmer screen, slower cpu, lesser gpu, less memory,
>>>>no 3g, no wireless, no gps, less sensors, etc) would allow a significant increase
>>>>in the standby time without having to look too deeply at the core architecture.
>>>No, you're not looking at the complete picture. I mean, your statement is correct,
>>>but when you have less peripheral power draw, then you have relatively larger idle
>>>core power draw. So it becomes more important to have lower power core.
>>>Manufacturers of course want to put the smallest, cheapest battery on there that they can.
>>I'm not missing the point, thats why I said 'slower cpu' as by my understanding
>>idle power demands also tend to drop heavily with lower end CPUs due to their base
>>silicon being on lower leakage processes.
>>I have not verified that, but it does make a certain amount of sense, no?
>Cutting out a lot of power draw and reducing CPU speed for a phone that will only
>be used for calls and text, makes the CPU's idle power use relatively more important,
>doesn't it? So they certainly could drop Medfield speed and put it in phones without
>sensors and with very small screens, and that would certainly increase standby time.
>But it's idle power consumption would become a relatively much larger issue, so
>nobody would use it when they could just use an ARM instead.

Either I am not explaining well, or you are missing my point.

I am not talking about running the same cpu design slower (all phones do that, throttling is heavy and deep sleep modes critical in phones).

I am talking about using a different actual CPU with a lower peak performance, but built on a slower, lower leakage, lower power process.

There are ARM (and other) CPUs built on very very low leakage, if you dont need GHz performance.Their deep sleep power is very very low.....
< Previous Post in ThreadNext Post in Thread >
TopicPosted ByDate
Medfield article onlineDavid Kanter2012/01/23 02:51 PM
  server errorbakaneko2012/01/24 04:00 AM
    FixedDavid Kanter2012/01/24 05:02 AM
      FixedJoel2012/01/24 08:43 AM
      FixedRicardo B2012/01/24 12:25 PM
        FixedDavid Kanter2012/01/24 06:29 PM
      FixedGabriele Svelto2012/01/24 02:07 PM
        FixedDavid Kanter2012/01/24 06:30 PM
  Reference platform battery lifeDoug Siebert2012/01/24 03:03 PM
    standby timeFoo_2012/01/25 07:58 AM
      standby timeAnon2012/01/26 04:42 AM
        standby timeFoo_2012/01/26 05:02 AM
          standby timeDoug Siebert2012/01/26 01:39 PM
            standby timeAnon2012/01/26 02:22 PM
              standby timeanon2012/01/26 03:08 PM
                standby timeAnon2012/01/26 07:03 PM
                  standby timeanon2012/01/26 09:57 PM
                    standby timeanon2012/01/26 10:01 PM
                    standby timeAnon2012/01/27 10:32 PM
                standby timeDoug Siebert2012/01/27 03:15 PM
                  standby timeanon2012/01/27 03:41 PM
    Reference platform battery lifeDavid Kanter2012/01/27 11:09 AM
  Performance analysis laughableWilco2012/01/24 04:23 PM
    Performance analysis laughableDavid Kanter2012/01/24 06:19 PM
      Performance analysis laughableIntelUser20002012/01/24 08:30 PM
        Performance analysis laughableIntelUser20002012/01/24 08:32 PM
        Performance analysis laughableDavid Kanter2012/01/25 12:34 AM
          Performance analysis laughableIntelUser20002012/01/25 12:56 AM
            Performance analysis laughableDavid Kanter2012/01/25 03:07 AM
              Performance analysis laughableAlberto2012/01/25 01:54 PM
          Atom HT gainWilco2012/01/25 06:43 AM
            Atom HT gainIntelUser20002012/01/25 07:53 AM
              Atom HT gainnone2012/01/25 08:04 AM
                Atom HT gainIntelUser20002012/01/25 08:35 AM
            Atom HT gainFoo_2012/01/25 08:06 AM
      Performance analysis laughableWilco2012/01/24 09:21 PM
        Performance analysis laughableDavid Kanter2012/01/24 11:13 PM
          Performance analysis laughableWilco2012/01/25 05:30 AM
            Performance analysis laughablenone2012/01/25 07:14 AM
              Performance analysis laughableWilco2012/01/25 08:18 AM
                Performance analysis laughableobserver2012/01/26 05:17 AM
                  Performance analysis laughableWilco2012/01/26 07:25 AM
            Process numbersAlberto2012/01/26 10:29 AM
            Performance analysis laughableDavid Kanter2012/02/02 01:38 AM
          Performance analysis laughabletupper2012/01/25 05:27 PM
            Performance analysis laughableLinus Torvalds2012/01/25 09:37 PM
              Performance analysis laughableDoug Siebert2012/01/26 03:12 PM
  Medfield article onlineAndreas2012/01/25 04:10 AM
    Medfield article onlineAlberto2012/01/25 10:44 AM
    Medfield article onlineIntelUser20002012/01/25 11:24 AM
    Medfield article onlineDavid Kanter2012/01/25 10:58 PM
      Medfield article onlineDoug Siebert2012/01/26 02:20 PM
        Medfield article onlineEric2012/01/26 07:10 PM
          Medfield article onlineDoug Siebert2012/01/27 03:40 PM
  64-bitIngeneer2012/01/25 10:28 AM
    64-bitFoo_2012/01/25 11:23 AM
      64-bitIngeneer2012/01/25 03:34 PM
        64-bitUngo2012/01/25 05:08 PM
          64-bitEduardoS2012/01/26 01:55 PM
  Saltwell memcpySHK2012/01/26 03:41 AM
  Medfield WiFi & BluetoothRob Thorpe2012/01/26 04:09 AM
    Medfield WiFi & BluetoothDavid Kanter2012/01/27 06:54 PM
      Medfield WiFi & BluetoothRob Thorpe2012/01/28 03:22 PM
  Medfield article online (NT)Anil2012/01/26 06:57 PM
  Medfield article onlineAnil2012/01/26 07:11 PM
    Medfield article onlineMr. Camel2012/01/26 07:26 PM
    Medfield article onlinenone2012/01/27 02:41 AM
Reply to this Topic
Body: No Text
How do you spell avocado?