Intel's lone ranger and Principal Engineer, Francois Piednoël, published one of the first semi-official Baytrail benchmarks on his Twitter feed earlier today. The score is for the unannounced Atom Z3770, a quad-core Silvermont based (4C/4T) Baytrail implementation running at a nominal frequency of 1.47GHz (with I assume a > 2GHz max turbo). Francois was careful to only run the multithreaded Cinebench 11.5 test, tossing out a score of 1.47. 

To put this score in perspective we need to dig into some of our own reviews. AMD's A4-5000, a quad-core Kabini based SoC running at 1.5GHz, manages a score of 1.5 in the same test. This is also roughly 86% of the performance of a dual-core Sandy Bridge based Pentium processor running at 2.2GHz. Compared to a dual-core Atom Z2760 (Clovertrail) the Atom Z3770 delivers nearly 3x the performance. Finally, this Baytrail SKU delivers similar performance to a mid-2GHz mobile Penryn based Core 2 Duo. Let that sink in for a moment - this tablet SoC delivers better multithreaded FP performance than a 2010 Macbook Air. The quad-core Silvermont vs. dual-core Penryn comparisons are a little unfair as there tends to be no replacement for extra cores in these thread heavy benchmarks. If Intel is able to equal a Core 2 Duo's single threaded performance however...

Cinebench 11.5 - Multi-Threaded

Single threaded performance typically scales down quite linearly in Cinebench, but that's assuming that single core turbo frequencies aren't insane. Regardless it's probably safe to assume a single threaded Cinebench 11.5 score somewhere north of a 1.5GHz Jaguar. We are also only looking at FP performance here, which is less important for most consumer uses than integer based workloads.

It's interesting to note that the test system (likely a tablet) seems to be running a 32-bit version of Windows. As there are no connected standby enabled versions of 64-bit Windows, that's likely why we're seeing the 32-bit version used here. 

Obviously the big unknown here is power consumption. As Baytrail is destined for tablets, I'd expect lower average power than pretty much all of our comparison targets in the graph above. The big question I have is whether or not this is finally performance that is good enough. Although Clovertrail could run legacy Windows applications, it wasn't fast enough to actually run heavy legacy apps well. Paired with a decent IO subsystem (something I'm doubtful most OEMs will deploy), I feel like Baytrail could be on the cusp of delivering performance that's good enough. Part of the problem here is that we're only looking at multithreaded performance, which obviously looks pretty reasonable on a quad-core part. How well Intel is able to deliver good single threaded performance will really determine whether or not Baytrail makes for a great platform. 

With IDF 2013 next week I'm guessing we'll see a lot more of Baytrail's performance soon enough.

POST A COMMENT

33 Comments

View All Comments

  • axien86 - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Intel's mighty marketing honcho AKA Francois claimed Haswell would be ...hot as hell...and in the area of thermodynamics, he was accurate.

    So, if he is involved in dispensing performance tweets you can assume that clock rate was 30-40% more than indicated and real power usage was at minimun 2-3 times Intel's marketing TDP.
    Reply
  • jljaynes - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    * 'SDP' - who knows what the TDP is. Reply
  • Homeles - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Try reading his comment again, bro. Reply
  • jljaynes - Thursday, September 05, 2013 - link

    Intel uses SDP to market a lower number? I'm not disagreeing with what he said Reply
  • zlatan - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    32 bit OS? :o
    So the rumors are true, there won't be 64 bit support this year. It's shame Intel. :(
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Is this Intel's fault for not having a 64bit driver, or MS's fault for not enabling the feature in their 64 bit builds? Reply
  • Wade_Jensen - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Forgive me, but isn't the comparison with a 2010 MBA Core 2 Duo based on the assumption that Baytrail will clock around 2GHz? Do we have anything concrete on clocks or is this an educated guess based on the power savings of FinFET 22nm process? Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Previous reporting said Baytrail will be available in up to 2.4 ghz variants.

    ex:
    liliputing.com/2013/07/intel-atom-z3770-bay-trail-chip-specs-performance-leaked.html
    Reply
  • jljaynes - Wednesday, September 04, 2013 - link

    Dan - based on everything I have seen, I believe 2.4 GHz is the turbo frequency, but the chip is actually a 1.46 GHz part. Reply
  • DanNeely - Thursday, September 05, 2013 - link

    In addition to tablets Intel's launching baytrail under the Celeron and Pentium names. I suspect the latter will be the only ones running at 2.4ghz. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now