INTEL BTFO ANDROID BTFO

File: i7-4710mq.png (43KB, 877x829px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 877x829px

>>61052235
Compared to i7-4710MQ

Yeah faggot, and what are you gonna do with all that power?
It's a fucking tablet. It plays movies and youtube videos.
My 2013 Nexus 7 is still too fucking powerful for what it does. That shit runs Nougat better than my phone or any of my friends' phones, including iPhones if we're talking purely in-menu framerates and multitasking and such.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvIrdg-epwA
Here's what legitimately every sane person sees when they see people arguing about tablets.

>>61052244
>a11x will be better than top of the line Intel mobile CPU's

kek

>>61052283
Fuck off.

2013 Nexus 7 is a shit tier meme.

Every "Nexus" is a meme, wannabe iPhone.

Post the Geekbench.

>>61052309
>x doesn't matter, my z is fine
>LOL BUT POSTS IT X XDDDD
How old are you my friend

>>61052378
10x better

a10x is real good at jpeg compression though

>Geekbench
Average intelligence of a itoddler

>>61052309
he's mad his ebin performance benchmark doesn't mean anything! poor guy, must not have anything to actually feel smug about

>>61052289
>top of the line intel laptop CPUs from 2013-2014
yes

>>61053499
Kek.

3 cores vs 4 cores

i7-7820HK only scores around 15,000.

Cryptobench threads should be instabans

>>61052235
>>61052244

So what you're saying is that a current generation iPad CPU is worse than a several generations old mobile x86 CPU? What else is new?

>>61053801

>3 cores vs 4 cores
Divide each CPU's multicore score by the number of cores.

9343 / 3 = 3114.333...
12852 / 4 = 3213

The Intel CPU is still faster per core.

This thread is a joke right?

>>61053897
Yeah, the single core tells us that on Geekbench genius.

>>61052235
>>61052244
Geekbench isn't made for comparing different platforms. Hell, it's barely made for comparing on the same platform

>>61054122
> run Geekbench on Ubuntu
> scores x
> run Geekbench on WIndows
> scores x
> NOT MADE FOR DIFFERENT PLATFORMS

>>61052235
How will Android ever compete?

>>61054151
Its benching the chip not the OS you chronic retard. The platform is the chip type. As in ARM vs x86.

>>61054681
>implying Geekbench wasn't designed to be cross platform

>>61054681
>implying that the OS doesn't affect how the test can't be delivered or be done
Anandatech tier.

>>61055220
It's not you dumbass.

File: IMG_0087.jpg (255KB, 1668x2020px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1668x2020px

>>61055400
Says right on the website to compare processor architectures.

>geekbench
lol ibabby

>>61055423
>being gullible
This is why people take advantage of you

>>61055423

Geekbench is SH*T.

It actually seems to have gotten worse with version 3, which you should be aware of. On ARM64, that SHA1 performance is hardware-assisted. I don't know if SHA2 is too, but Aarch64 does apparently do SHA256 in the crypto unit, so it might be fully or partially so.

And on both ARM and x86, the AES numbers are similarly just about the crypto unit.

So basically a quarter to a third of the "integer" workloads are just utter BS. They are not comparable across architectures due to the crypto units, and even within one architecture the numbers just don't mean much of anything.

And quite frankly, it's not even just the crypto ones. Looking at the other GB3 "benchmarks", they are mainly small kernels: not really much different from dhrystone. I suspect most of them have a code footprint that basically fits in a L1I cache.

Linus

>>61055452
Linus should replace that fat fuck in the sticky

>>61055452
Were on version 4 now, not 3.

File: IMG_0008.png (288KB, 1668x2224px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1668x2224px

Intel i7 BTFO.

Vega graphics in iPhone when?