Android x86 testing

[lamedude]

The single core Atoms get a beating from a P4 and even the dual core ones lose some. This thing couldn't run Vista, but since it was cheap OEMs ate them up. So much Intel had to put restrictions on netbooks to stop it from cannibalizing the more expensive notebook CPUs.
Intel did manage to get Haswell down to 12w but at 10x the price of an Atom.

(02-03-2014, 09:05 PM)tueidj Wrote: x86 has already been the king of that for a long time. FPU/MMX/MMX-EXT/3DNOW/3DNOW-EXT/SSE/SSE2/SSE3/SSSE3/SSE4/SSE4.1/SSE4.2/AVX/BMI1/BMI2/XOP/AVX2...

If you want to support everything yeah you got your work cut for you, but you used to be able to say Athlon XP to slow SSE2 now required (modders had to send Bethesda that memo for Skyrim), but Intel is selling Pentium Haswell's that don't support AVX so it will be while before AVX only binaries become the norm.

[tueidj]

Conroe is at least 8 years old, Netburst is much older. Even then based on experience I would say they only come close to the Celeron versions.
Thread scheduling has nothing to do with instruction scheduling; you can't jump to another thread when an instruction is taking too long to execute, and without out-of-order you can't execute any future instructions either.

Try reading some reviews for any atom based system (from independent websites, not those that sell the product they are reviewing); they are a joke and have a terrible reputation, for good reason.

[DatKid20]

(02-04-2014, 01:22 AM)lamedude Wrote: The single core Atoms get a beating from a P4 and even the dual core ones lose some. This thing couldn't run Vista, but since it was cheap OEMs ate them up. So much Intel had to put restrictions on netbooks to stop it from cannibalizing the more expensive notebook CPUs.
Intel did manage to get Haswell down to 12w but at 10x the price of an Atom.

(02-03-2014, 09:05 PM)tueidj Wrote: x86 has already been the king of that for a long time. FPU/MMX/MMX-EXT/3DNOW/3DNOW-EXT/SSE/SSE2/SSE3/SSSE3/SSE4/SSE4.1/SSE4.2/AVX/BMI1/BMI2/XOP/AVX2...

If you want to support everything yeah you got your work cut for you, but you used to be able to say Athlon XP to slow SSE2 now required (modders had to send Bethesda that memo for Skyrim), but Intel is selling Pentium Haswell's that don't support AVX so it will be while before AVX only binaries become the norm.

Why the link from 2010? Atoms can run Windows 8.1 no problem and can run PC games well for its performance sector.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9K9ZMJOPMQ

Why are people so insistent that Atom = Horrible?

[tueidj]

Those games aren't CPU intensive, they're running at low resolution/settings and they're not maintaining a steady refresh rate.
The video test at the end is only using the GPU decoder, not the CPU. An atom CPU can't even decode a 60fps 720p H264 video in realtime.
The people who insist atoms are horrible are probably all the people who have actually attempted to use them.

[DatKid20]

One was at 768p and one was at 1440p. Both were HD resolutions. Also, SC2 is a CPU intensive game. It's a widely known fact.

Please use a Atom from 2013-2014 then tell me it's terrible. Otherwise what you're saying is outdated garbage that isn't relavent at all.

[tueidj]

The settings for both games are shown at the beginning. Basically every feature that can be turned off, is turned off (including vsync!).
In both cases it couldn't even sustain 30fps and you think it can run Dolphin satisfactorily?

Unless you just want a low-powered email and facebook machine (and avoid heavy Flash games), paying for a current release atom is shooting yourself in the foot when you can get a system from 5-8 years ago with more power for less money.

[lamedude]

Intel hadn't touched the CPU side of Atom until the recent launch of BayTrail. Other than being a few hundred MHZ faster it was the same PoS that launched in 08. Prior to Flash getting hardware video decoding they could barely handle YT. MS spend a lot of resources making Windows 7/8 leaner probably because Atom netbooks could barely run Vista and the fact than an Atom runs Windows 8 well says they did a damn good job.

[sonicdude13]

I have the iconia tab 8 with Intel x86 and I'm wondering if its possible for the devs to make a dolphin update that works with x86 because right now emulation is slow I mean I can run Mario kart DD at 1-10 fps and I can get to the Mario sunshine memory card select screen but its just slow.

[Link_to_the_past]

(03-25-2015, 12:00 AM)sonicdude13 Wrote: I have the iconia tab 8 with Intel x86 and I'm wondering if its possible for the devs to make a dolphin update that works with x86 because right now emulation is slow I mean I can run Mario kart DD at 1-10 fps and I can get to the Mario sunshine memory card select screen but its just slow.

Atom tablets are weak for dolphin, even if you could use x64 i doubt you could have playable speeds.

[Nintonito]

(03-25-2015, 02:57 AM)Link_to_the_past Wrote:

(03-25-2015, 12:00 AM)sonicdude13 Wrote: I have the iconia tab 8 with Intel x86 and I'm wondering if its possible for the devs to make a dolphin update that works with x86 because right now emulation is slow I mean I can run Mario kart DD at 1-10 fps and I can get to the Mario sunshine memory card select screen but its just slow.

Atom tablets are weak for dolphin, even if you could use x64 i doubt you could have playable speeds.

Atom tablets are basically as fast as the ARM tablets,  so I don't see the issue.  ARM Devices aren't at playable speeds either,  and we still use those.  Any ES 3.0 capable Atom also has x64 capabilities after a 5.0 update.  Remember,  this is an android thread, not a desktop thread,  so it requires an adjustment in perspective.  Atom's are relatively powerful in the mobile space.