Kevin G (kevin.delete@this.cubitdesigns.com) on June 8, 2013 2:18 pm wrote:
> John (Jngu14.delete@this.gmail.com) on June 8, 2013 6:28 am wrote:
> > Jason (oxkct.delete@this.7tags.com) on June 7, 2013 1:56 pm wrote:
> > > I guess this explains why Samsung went with Intel over their own Exynos on the Galaxy
> > > Tab. Look at how the Lenovo K800 (Atom) compared to Galaxy S4 (Exynos/SnapDragon) :
> > >
> > > http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130607005475/en/Intel-Apps-Processor-Outperforms-NVIDIA-Qualcomm-Samsung
> > >
> > > http://mms.businesswire.com/media/20130607005475/en/371984/5/intel_chart.jpg?download=1
> >
> > What the heck are they testing?
> >
> > I can make a spreadsheet say anything I want. There are absolutely
> > no details or methodology to those number. It is useless.
>
> A bit of Google-fu points toward any relevant information being behind a paywall at
> ABI Research. Everywhere else seems to be parroting the same Business Wire story.

Honestly, I'd take this with a giant grain of salt. There must be some caveat like "outperforms at 750mW/core" or something like that.

David