Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on July 11, 2013 7:40 am wrote:
> none (none.delete@this.none.com) on July 11, 2013 5:58 am wrote:
> > Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on July 11, 2013 5:33 am wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I don't follow. How disassembly tells us anything about denormals handling?
> > > It's in control flags that we can't see.
> >
> > It doesn't. But as I had read that some people thought that the Android x86 version was
> > using x87 (the Windows 32-bit version does use x87), I thought it made sense to say it.
> >
> > > > Now if you can also explain with denormals why CT+ is beaten by A15 and
> > > > Krait even for single threaded integer tasks, I'm very interested :-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > It's beaten by the margin that one would expect:
> > > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2122693/1970335
> > > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2147177/1970335
> > > The difference is probably very similar to the difference in power consumption. Which, of course, means
> > > that A15 and Krait are better CPUs since they got equal perf/Watt with higher absolute performance.
> >
> > Which makes me think I have always found the Lua score odd. ARM chips are doing very
> > well on it (even a Cortex-A9 @ 1.4 GHz crushes a CT+ @ 2.0 GHz), and I wonder why.
> >
> > http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2085507/1970892
> >
> > The sum of the single-threaded benches is 4482 for the A9 and 4371 for the Z2580.
>
> Yes even an old slow A9 beats the latest and fastest Atom on single threaded integer despite
> a significant memory system disadvantage - and no denormals to take the blame :-)
>
> Note: use geomean to compute the average, not a sum - another thing AnTuTu gets wrong
> and a reason for allowing their scores to be easily gamed by a single outlier.
>
> Wilco

But by geometric mean Clovertrail+ wins over cortex-A9 :(
BTW, is not "old slow A9", even today, the most popular "high end" phone core from the famous "ARM implementer 65" ? ;-)