Intel reaches for the 'smartphone zone' with Moorestown-based Atom Z6, comes up shorthanded
By Sean Hollister 
posted May 5th 2010 2:44AM
posted May 5th 2010 2:44AM
None of this is to say that Intel won't continue to dominate in the netbook marketplace -- we shudder to think at the potential when combining a nice, chunky battery with Intel's nearly leakproof new chips, and perhaps a small serving of switchable graphics while we're at it. But without a single new MID or smartphone to show us this morning -- Aava Mobile and OpenPeak's offerings seemed unchanged from our previous encounters -- we're not sure if the company's other mobile ambitions have any sway. Not technical enough of a discussion for you? Peruse our gallery for the nitty-gritty.
Apple and others sticking with ARM based processors is looking better everyday.
@kangoljas
IDK this sounds decent, it's nice to see a little competition for ARM even if they seem to be doing a hell of a job.
I wonder when exactly it will be released, Qualcomm has a 1.3Ghz and dual 1.5Ghz Snapdragon in the works.
@smover atom based cellphone looks more and more promising to me now, I'd love to run XP on my phone plus a 7" tablet.
@kangoljas Man...intel's own charts mostly show that their processor is eating way too much power compared to the competition. It does appear to be more powerful but being able to run 1080P video on a 4" screen is rather pointless...it's good for hdmi output of course, but for the 99% of the time you're using it as just a phone it's just eating away at your battery life compared to the competition.
@tekdemon exactly. Who really cares if you can output 1080P on such a small screen, not to mention the battery life is not all that great. I will take an Arm chip that is getting somewhere between 6-10 hours of use thank you very much.
ARM can do even better than that even, some S60 5th phones can be productive for more than 24 hours. Standby for days.
Chipzilla ain't dead yet.
Remember, with MeeGo you have one framework (Qt) and you can target both processor families (ARM & Atom)... That's a huge advantage for developers.
@Kensai
>>Remember, with MeeGo you have one framework (Qt) and you can
>>target both processor families (ARM & Atom)
Is this different when you use Android (leaving out WP7 since they are not yet ready)?
For those short-life applications, I will always prefer Java and C# to C++ based toolkit.
@NewBie have you tested Qt before speaking ?
@boulabiar Yes, I have. Hope you are not comparing it to Microsoft's MFC, since that is the only comparison that makes sense.
Again, if I want to develop short-life app I will not choose C/C++ toolkit, Qt or whatever.
@NewBie
by your reply I understand you probably haven't played much with Qt. By comparing it with the mess MFC is you seem to miss its point. It's your call to use Java or C# but the Qt toolkit makes RAD and GUI apps a snap.
PS. By the way, there is no such beast as a C/C++. Are you a real programmer or just a script kiddie?! Qt is C++ and has some bindings in other languages, most notably Python.
The slide show is very informative, and they know their chip business so I cannot rule them out.
Now, they just have to pray for the apple magician to grab ARM then it will be an easy path.
This is exciting, but Anandtech pointed out one thing:
"Carriers aren’t very happy with Apple and Google. They’ve effectively wrestled power away from the carriers and left them as nothing but network providers. ... Intel wants to capitalize on that frustration by offering the carriers an alternative. Moblin won’t be branded, carriers could customize their own builds and do whatever they want with them. The carriers would ultimately limit what could run on their phones, much like Apple does today. It puts power back in the hands of the carrier, which is something they obviously like."
Are we going back in time to where carriers are back in control to screw up the phones even more? I mean really? This is bad news. Apparently the move Apple and Google (note Google, aka the Nexus One, not Android in general) made is not enough. intel, if you're promoting the ancient idea of carrier-locked-down OS, you're a d0uchebag.
@pika2000 Well sure they can promote it, but given that they don't seem to have a product more compelling than current ARM-driven Google and Apple devices, why do you fear it? Consumers would only jump on the carrier-controlled bandwagon if they have something to gain from it.
@Vlad Savov Consumers won't have a choice. Just look at things today in the US. AT&T/Motorola Backflip is a great example. With manufactures being d0uches, and draconian carriers, we don't want to rewind the baby-step progress of carriers staying out of the OS of the our phones (iPhone, Nexus One). Imagine all the supposedly great moorestown phones coming out, but all of them come with bloaty and locked-down meego OS filled with carriers' junk, just like the way things were with provider-locked dumbphones.
@pika2000
I do not know, but my personal view of Nexus One is to jump start the Android 2.1 (a PR), since the hardware requirement was not really available in the existing phone - that is why the Drois Eris and others are still telling their 2.1.
So to me, the Nexus One is a success in what it is meant to do. My boss here in Japan is about to change his HTC Hero (Docomo) to Desire (Softbank) and I am about to grab the Desire...we will not use anything running less 2.1, so Sony Xpedia 10 (Docomo) is not in our books.
Here in Japan, we have number portability, so if you do not like the carrier, just move with your number to another, you will even get a discount for it :)
@NewBie We in the US also have number portability. That is not the issue. The issue is, Apple and Google's Nexus One were milestones on where the phone and the software are independent from the carrier. Yeah, AT&T does have a say on Apple's iPhone app approval, but Apple is in control of the OS. What intel is saying is that they're giving the carriers the control over meego. That's like turning back the clock when phones are filled with carrier specific junk, and locked down with features disabled (eg. Verizon used to disable things like bluetooth file transfer on their phones). So imagine having a Moorestown phone with meego, but all the advantages of higher performance and better battery life are gone thanks to carriers screwing up the OS with junk. So much for progress.
@pika2000
>>We in the US also have number portability.
Then you do not have a problem :)
>>...but all the advantages of higher performance and better battery life
>>are gone thanks to carriers screwing up the OS with junk.
Unless it is a single vendor business, the carriers are going to compete for the same customer, so there is little to worry about. Just us you see Verizon working hard to beat Sprint EVO game.
@pika2000 At least looking from here in Europe Apple is bringing the carrier locked phones that previously have not even been legal in many countries.
Oh well hopefully someday you people there can actually pay full price of the phone and actually get cheap data plans rather than the most expensive there are.
In Finland 60% of phones are bought unlocked and they got one the world cheapest data plans and every data plan is unlimited, because of all this 700 000 people from a nation of 5,3 million got second data plan for laptop or other phone.
So people get cheap data plans and operators are still making huge profits and those operators are actually growing to here Germany too.
@NewBie Well, the problem is each carrier in the US use different radio frequencies/technologies. AT&T 3G is not compatible with T-Mobile. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA. That coupled with provider-locked phones and exclusivity, consumers are left with almost no choice at all. In contrast, most carriers in Europe/Asia are using the same 3G UMTS frequency, so all one need is buy one phone and one can do a switcharoo to one's heart's content.
@Pdexter Well, subsidy != provider locking. I don't mind the business model of subsidizing phones under contracts (eg. iPhone in Singapore is subsidized and not provider locked). My biggest beef is with provider-locking, which makes zero sense and is anti-competitive, something that is ironically well supported by the masses in the US.
@pika2000
>>Well, the problem is each carrier in the US use different radio
>>frequencies/technologies.
That is the real problem.
>>...3G UMTS frequency, so all one need is buy one phone and one can
>>do a switcharoo to one's heart's content.
Here in Japan, you usually do not buy a phone! iPhone is 1Yen (one) here, so there is hardly any cost changing (except for early contract termination).
Previously, if you need a new phone and you do not have enough points to get one free, you just stop the service and start a new one, but with the number portability, you simply move to another carrier.
@pika2000 In many cases carrier-locking serves the individuals, which it's why it's supported. Yes, it has down-stream affects that make it the most visible option to the masses. Two of the most common examples I've read about:
Only one carrier has the network performance in your area that you require, carrier-locking has a negligible effect and, in theory and seemingly in practice, will bring a greater subsidy due to the revenue stream that a carrier can expect from the phone.
Consumer has financial incentive to stay with the carrier, such as a corporate pricing plan, so again, the greater subsidy will pay off here.
In Singapore it's illegal for carrier lock and this is the only country with such a law, however, the phone requires a contract so for the typical case you're still locked into a carrier or paying a big price to get out of it. If consumers in the US wanted to have non-carrier locked phones that would cost as much as this scenario, they have the option of buying an unlocked phone quite often. I think it's fair to say that without a carrier lock there will be more competition, but for this to ever come people have to utilize carriers outside the top 3 and purchase more unlocked phones (this is probably only in their financial interest on T-Mo but maybe also from the regional carriers and/or the Boost mobiles)...convincing people that this is in their financial interest would be hard.
@NewBie See, that's the thing. That's how subsidy should work, have the phone for free. In the US, we have "subsidy" yet we're still paying $200+ for a provider-locked phone. It's mind boggling.
@juanvaldez
"In many cases carrier-locking serves the individuals, which it's why it's supported."
No it's not. Speaking of subsidy, for example, in other countries, you can get an iPhone for free. That's right, free, under contract. Now that's subsidy. Still paying $$$ for a supposedly "subsidized" provider-locked phone only serve the wireless carriers.
"Only one carrier has the network performance in your area that you require, carrier-locking has a negligible effect and, in theory and seemingly in practice, will bring a greater subsidy due to the revenue stream that a carrier can expect from the phone."
1st, you're assuming that people never leaves the country. 2nd, as I already pointed out, where's the greater subsidy? We're still paying $$$ for locked phones. It's fake subsidy.
"Consumer has financial incentive to stay with the carrier"
Consumer already have a financial incentive to stay due to the contract, no need for the phone itself to be provider-locked. Also, once the contract is over, then technically the phone shall be unlocked, but only T-Mobile does this. And again, where's the "greater" subsidy? I have yet to see AT&T selling iPhones for free. Look at the Kin and Verizon's mail-in-rebate scam.
I can get five hours of web browsing on my Pre? Hot damn. Sign me up!
Believe me, you're not going to get any better battery life out of an x86 processor than an ARM one.
ARM is still at least a degree of magnitude more power-thrifty.
Yes, the Pre's battery sucks, but there's much more in play than the CPU itself.
I don't see why anyone would want x86 CPUs in their phone. ARM's upcoming stuff like the Cortex A9 in the worst-case scenario competes very favorably with Atom performance wise, and still uses much less power. Intel is fighting a moving target here that they just can't keep up with.
Would love to see a real world comparison with battery life and speed against the a4.
@Shanebenn
the A4 is a 1Ghz Cortex A8, so no match in either performance or battery life. (the iPad has a much larger battery (5times) than the 1500mAh battery from Intel's slides)
@WiesiAut
in Web- Browsing the Moorestown platform needs roughly 1,1 Watt. So you can calculate how long a device with the battery capacity of an iPad (24,8 Wh) would last. Another Watt added for the bigger screen compared to a smartphone, than you have roughly the same 10 hours battery life, although with much more performance.
You know that a version of the A4 is going into the next gen. iPhone, I wonder how these processors will stack up. I am imagining some crazy battery life and speed out of an A4 on the iPhone, so whomever decided to use these chips let's hope it spurs some inovation.
@kangoljas "so whomever decided to use these chips" you mean the Samsung Hummingbird?
@Schmich in that case forget the innovation, Samsung and mobile, color me uninterested.
Pretty good showing by Intel. Would like to see how the two platforms stack up, however, I foresee the chips excelling in different areas. Only time will tell.
Who cares what kind of chip is in his phone anyway, as long as it's fast and power efficient? Right now that means ARM, not x86, and this is not likely to change anytime soon, for the simple reason that it's much easier to create and modify an ARM design than a design that is limited by all the stupid legacy crap x86 lugs around.
Kind of ironic that Intel sold their PXA division to Marvell awhile back and now they want a chunk of this mobile market place.
Here's what I don't get... these things (ALL Atoms actually) are 45nm!
You'd think they'd be the first family of processors to adopt 32nm. Instead they are making the transition sometime in 2011. Why?
@lexgr
Because process shrinks are difficult and expensive. You may as well ask why they don't just go to 22nm. Just knowing where you want to go doesn't get you there.
@lexgr The thing is, they probably haven't ramped their 32nm process all the way, and it's currently making much more profitable Core 2010 CPUs.
Also, sometimes a processor performs better on an OLDER process - I've heard of ARM9 designs that use so little power, the leakage is higher than the CPU power consumption on small proceses, and 180 nm is better than 65 nm in that case.
Looking at the slides, it appear that they are getting their power saving simply by moving down in process. Specifically the north / south bridge. Whilst this works fine, I can see that ARM do not rely on process to get the power down.
Also some of the slides are showing misleading information - for example claiming that no competitor devices are able to do 1080p 30fps.. Tegra2????
@Andrew Jones
but Tegra 2 is only capable of the Baseline Profile, as mentioned in the slides (Tegra 2 probably Device A)
@Andrew Jones
Well, the slide says "based on top 5 leading smartphones". They can only compare to existing devices.
@WiesiAut
I don't think "Device A" is referring to Tegra2. More likely as GnillGnoll states - existing handsets. In which case, it's not and Apples for Apples comparison (no pun intended). You can't compare chips that are not to market with devices that have been around for the last 12 months
Its nice to see the second generation ultra-mobile Atom processor from Intel. But what makes it even more tempting is that it is being used in the SmartPhones, which currently is dominating the mobile market. On a personal node, I would be happy to see the Apple geniuses getting the ARM processor, this will make the path easy for Intel.
@jamesclayton Why would you want to see the path made easier for Intel, rather than just having the best product available to anyone who wants it?
Intel SHOULD have to work hard in this case. Their product just doesn't compare to the competition.
competition ftw! man even if they're not quite up to spec, just think of the pressure this puts on nvidia and t.i. and qualcomm and even apple to step up their game. and when intel does go 32nm and starts combining chipsets (the same way they've done with the newest atom) then we're talking. i can haz 1080p on my phone? hell yes!
@Wildman Haha! +1
I may have missed it, but was there any mention in the slides of the battery capacity used to generate their battery life metrics? They claim ~5 hours of 720P video but have it consuming >1W of power. Wondering about the current draw, seems like this would need something like a 3000mAh battery to last that long with that high of power consumption?
@sd11
It makes more sense to measure battery capacity in Wh, Ah doesn't tell you much without knowing the voltage. At 1.2W power draw 5 hours of video take 6Wh.
Assuming a typical 3.7V Li-ion cell this means 1.62Ah. Adding some margin, they probably used something close to 1.8Ah .