You speak of the Nexus 9 right? If so I agree, no matter the lack of 64 bit support I find the Shield tablet and Xiaomi Mipad more attractive than the Nexus 9.Well that's progress. Software updates can't fix the build and design problems though
| SHIELD Tablet | iPad Air 2
Battery (Wh) | 19.75 | 27.62
Time (h) | 2.24 | 3.84
Perf (FPS) | 46.13 | 49.49
Pixels | 2304000 | 3145728
Perf (Mpix/s) | 106.28 | 155.68
Watts | 8.82 | 7.19
Perf/W | 12.05 | 21.64
Now that the Anandtech iPad Air 2 review is out, I thought it'd be interesting to compare Kepler's performance per watt to the GX6650 in the iPad Air 2. It's never possible to get a fair comparison, since they're on different processes, have different costs and different displays, but still, it's worth taking a look. The Time and FPS numbers come from the GFXBench 3.0 battery test in Anand's review.
Looks like the iPad Air manages almost 2x the perf/w of the SHIELD Tablet.Code:| SHIELD Tablet | iPad Air 2 Battery (Wh) | 19.75 | 27.62 Time (h) | 2.24 | 3.84 Perf (FPS) | 46.13 | 49.49 Pixels | 2304000 | 3145728 Perf (Mpix/s) | 106.28 | 155.68 Watts | 8.82 | 7.19 Perf/W | 12.05 | 21.64
It'll get easier to decypher if you consider two things as a start:
1. It's not a GX6650 but most likely a GX6850 which means 16 TMUs and 256 FP32 SPs @~500MHz.
2. It's a DX10.0 vs. DX11.0 GPU.
Anand seems to think it's a GX6650 - what makes you think otherwise?
I suppose if it's a GX6850, Apple has traded off perf/mm^2 to improve perf/w - and a theoretical GK20A that had 2 SMs but ran slower might do better.
I don't think DX10 vs 11 should impact perf/w that much - GFXBench 3.0 doesn't use any of the new features, and I don't think DX11 GPUs require that much more abstraction than DX10.
Makes me curious for the upcoming Erista comparisons. =)
Well there are a few holes in such a statement:Now that the Anandtech iPad Air 2 review is out, I thought it'd be interesting to compare Kepler's performance per watt to the GX6650 in the iPad Air 2. It's never possible to get a fair comparison, since they're on different processes, have different costs and different displays, but still, it's worth taking a look. The Time and FPS numbers come from the GFXBench 3.0 battery test in Anand's review.
Code:| SHIELD Tablet | iPad Air 2 Battery (Wh) | 19.75 | 27.62 Time (h) | 2.24 | 3.84 Perf (FPS) | 46.13 | 49.49 Pixels | 2304000 | 3145728 Perf (Mpix/s) | 106.28 | 155.68 Watts | 8.82 | 7.19 Perf/W | 12.05 | 21.64
Looks like the iPad Air manages almost 2x the perf/w of the SHIELD Tablet.
Actually Ryan wrote the SoC page, to be correct.Joshua seems to think so lack of any other data, not Anand himself (just to avoid mistunderstandings).
Correct.Actually Ryan wrote the SoC page, to be correct.
Actually Ryan wrote the SoC page, to be correct.
What would be really nice is a devkit based on TK1-Denver, so that we could install a standard Linux distribution on it and run a whole bunch of real benchmarks. Those might not be terribly representative of the sort of workload a tablet will face, but they would tell us a lot about Denver.
Not that is has any relevance but looking at the current Nexus line I keep thinking that the Tegra k1 should have ended up in the STB and the Atom should have ended in the tablet.What would be really nice is a devkit based on TK1-Denver, so that we could install a standard Linux distribution on it and run a whole bunch of real benchmarks. Those might not be terribly representative of the sort of workload a tablet will face, but they would tell us a lot about Denver.
Atom CPU performance is just meh.the Atom should have ended in the tablet.