Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline News  
#1 Posted : Friday, October 17, 2014 10:08:29 AM(UTC)
News


Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators, Registered
Joined: 9/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 25,073

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)

After months of anticipation, Google finally revealed its Nexus 9 tablet the other day, and overall, it looks sweet. Aesthetically, it's pleasing to the eye, and under-the-hood, it sports a 64-bit SoC, courtesy of NVIDIA's Denver-based Tegra K1. And, if you love pixels, the Nexus 9 sure has a lot of them: 3.1 million, to be exact. All-in-all, an impressive offering.

At the time of announcement, though, we weren't given performance metrics, and that's kind of a big deal given the fact that the Nexus 9 sports the first 64-bit SoC backed by a 64-bit OS. It's also the first device with NVIDIA's 64-bit Tegra K1, as well, and even though its a dual-core, most people figured that the architectural enhancements would help negate its lacking multi-threadedness.

Well, thanks to a leaked result at Geekbench, we can see that's largely true. To start, the 64-bit Tegra K1 scored 1903 in the single-core test, which is a mile ahead of the 32-bit quad-core Tegra K1 found in the SHIELD Tablet, which scored 1129. Here's where things get really impressive: Despite having just two cores, the 64-bit K1 scored 3166 in the multi-core test, which falls just 274 behind the quad-core 32-bit variant (the 32-bit version is 278MHz slower, but that's not enough to warrant that much of a performance difference)..

Nexus 9 Tegra K1 Dual-Denver Benchmarks

It might not be the most expected of comparisons, but NVIDIA's Denver-based K1 also performs well against a circa 2011 MacBook Air, one that sports Intel's Core i7-2677M dual-core processor. That machine hit 1940 in the single-thread test - so, roughly the same - and peaked at 3833 in the multi-core test. Yes - the K1 fails to hit that one, but we're talking about a robust mobile GPU versus an SoC here.

It's not as though we needed more proof, but seeing numbers like this really highlights just how powerful these small mobile chips are becoming. We almost hit the performance of a good Intel mobile CPU from three-years-ago - and there's just no stopping. Had this Denver-based K1 been a quad-core, just imagine the performance results we'd be seeing.

Offline RJeffries  
#2 Posted : Friday, October 17, 2014 11:27:13 AM(UTC)
RJeffries


Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/13/2010(UTC)
Posts: 100
Location: NYC

I wonder if this will be compatible with Nvidia GameStream like the Shield devices.

Offline Ricofrost  
#3 Posted : Friday, October 17, 2014 11:55:38 AM(UTC)
RiCoFrost


Rank: Advanced Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 636

Would be nice to see it compared to other devices.

Offline Ricofrost  
#4 Posted : Friday, October 17, 2014 12:13:42 PM(UTC)
RiCoFrost


Rank: Advanced Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 636

Looks like it compares to older intel i5

Intel Core i5-520M 2400 Single 1877 multi 3658

Offline ShashiBhushanKunda  
#5 Posted : Saturday, October 18, 2014 4:39:59 AM(UTC)
ShashiBhushanKunda


Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/18/2014(UTC)
Posts: 1

This tablet is faster than iphone 6 and 6 plus looking at geekbench scores

iphone 6: geekbench single core:1624 muti core:2911

Offline Dave_HH  
#6 Posted : Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:53:47 AM(UTC)
Dave_HH


Rank: Advanced Member

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators, Editors, Moderator, Registered
Joined: 7/12/2004(UTC)
Posts: 3,693
Man
Location: United States, Massachusetts

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 12 time(s) in 11 post(s)

From a CPU standpoint, yes, it certainly seems to be.

Offline Dave_HH  
#7 Posted : Sunday, October 19, 2014 7:26:14 AM(UTC)
Dave_HH


Rank: Advanced Member

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators, Editors, Moderator, Registered
Joined: 7/12/2004(UTC)
Posts: 3,693
Man
Location: United States, Massachusetts

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 12 time(s) in 11 post(s)

Actually, researching this more, the A8X reportedly is comprised of some 3 billion transistors, versus the A8, which is around 2 billion. So, it would appear the silicon is significantly different, with possibly a beefed-up GPU and more... This will be an interesting comparison when the time comes.

Offline Ricofrost  
#8 Posted : Sunday, October 19, 2014 2:27:30 PM(UTC)
RiCoFrost


Rank: Advanced Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 636

I'll be keeping my eye on the nexus range.

Offline JayHill  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:00:33 PM(UTC)
JayHill


Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/21/2014(UTC)
Posts: 1

The N9 will still fall short of the 3-core iPad Air 2: Geekbench single core - 1812, Multi - 4477. Source: http://www.redmondpie.co...6-plus-68-than-ipad-air/

Offline PereLlopis  
#10 Posted : Tuesday, October 28, 2014 11:21:06 AM(UTC)
PereLlopis


Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/28/2014(UTC)
Posts: 1

And this is a 28nm processor. I guess next year we may have a quadcore Denver thanks to the power savings of 14nm FinFET node and the use of a Maxwell GPU.

Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.