Ahem...you are comparing a state-of-the-art 28nm SoC on the ARM side with a several years old 45 nm Intel netbook that includes a separate chipset.

I find it hilarious that you only looked at that one part of the Anandtech review and declared victory for ARM when even you know that 32nm Medfield SoCs were on sale before the Exynos 5 even launched and have substantially better power/performance ratios than were exhibited in the Anandtech numbers.

I find it even more hilarious that you summarily ignored the Haswell demos I mentioned since you must think that denying the results will make ARM win...

You haven't bothered to look at Anandtech's review of this system then. Considering the Exynos SoC is sucking down 8 watts of power running a single-threaded non-GPU Mozilla Kraken benchmark, you better believe that Samsung is going to have to cut down this chip's performance to run in a smartphone power envelope.

Well, these benchmarks don't include power consumption but when Haswell has been demoed at 8 watts running Unigine Heaven and other benchmarks of the Exynos 5 at Anandtech show it running at 8 watts while doing the single-threaded non-GPU Mozilla Kraken benchmark, you kind of have to wonder who is doing the "catching up" and who is "running scared"....

Now that the latest ARM chips from late 2012 are actually faster than a similarly clocked Atoms using the exact same architecture that was introduced in 2008 (well at least in some of those benchmarks, the Atom won some too), will we finally see the ARM fanboys talk-up Atom as Intel's best chip of all time?

Remember, when you say that Atom is a complete PoS and simultaneously crow that you finally beat it in performance 4 years after it hit the market, you kind of sound like someone who bragged about cheating to win the Special Olympics...

If your ancestors hadn't been kidnapped from Africa, then you might be considered property in 2012 considering slavery is alive and well in many regions of Africa right now...

The Slashdot Test: Any submission that includes references to Kickstarter and 3D printing is always posted to the front page.

STOP POINTING OUT FACTS! We just want to hear reinforcement of our stereotype that all white people are evil racists and all minorities are racially superior since they are completely incapable of being bigots towards anyone!

Now excuse me while I go to the Black Panther meeting where we discuss how we will be "poll volunteers" again in 2016 to make sure that [insert name of Democrate here] wins because any other vote is automatically racist.

I'm not an iOS/Mac person but for all the people who say that Apple can just dump Intel for ARM* consider this:
Every iOS application you have on your ARM phone was compiled for x86 and run on x86 *before* it ever was released into the App store. That's because of the development environment on Macs for iOS applications. Note that I used the word "compiled" deliberately and correctly in that statement: The applications are *not* run in an emulator that simulates an ARM CPU, the applications are compiled down to native x86 code.... portabiliity is a 2-way street, not a one-way street that only goes toward ARM.

Quote from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_SDK): "Note that the iPhone Simulator is not an emulator and runs code generated for an x86 target rather than ARM."

* Could Apple do that? Yes, but unless you want your new 2014 Macbook Air to be slower than the one from 2010, you'd better hope that Apple greatly outstrips even ARM's most optimistic estimates for the performance of the Cortex A57 cores...

OK, so all those snarky posts about how the U.S. is a worthless third world country because Foxconn was going to open factories here?
GUESS WHAT: Now the U.S. is a worthless third world country because Foxconn isn't going to open factories here!

That's the beuatiful thing about already have a predetermined conclusion, the facts always fit.

Funny you should hate on Medfield when a Razer I with Medfield has better battery life than a krait Razer M with the exact same screen and battery. But it looks like you never let facts get in the way of your koolaid.

You know what I love? When the exact same people who say that an Intel workstation with a 6-core CPU being used for heavy compiling/CAD/etc. etc. is "wasted" and "overkill" but that a 256 core ARM chip on your cellphone will be insanely great... because... uh... Angry Birds is the most parellizable program in human history?

Haswell is a (probably) ~1.6 Billion transistor chip that obviously costs more than a SoC that is really designed for tablets. Interesting then that a ~1.6 Billion transistor chip that includes similar functionality to the SoC uses about the same amount of power as that tablet SoC while including vastly more performance.

If you want cheap, Atoms are already out now that are quite cost competitive with ARM chips, and 22nm Atoms will be out next year.

Oh and as for "release dates" the Exynos has just barely begun to reach the market and Haswell will be out and about at around the same time that most Cortex A-15s really come into the market as well. Considering I've had to listen to "A15 will kill Intel!!!!" for over 2 years as if they were already coming out of faucets like water, I'm not too worried about part availability.

So here we are in the ARM vs. Intel Evolution:
2008: ARM is superior, Intel can NEVER scale its power consumption down below 100 watts!!

2009-2010: ARM is still superior! Atom sucks at performance and uses 10 WHOLE WATTS, thats more than 10X ARM! The Cortex A9 will annihilate Intel!

2011: ARM performance dominance is just around the corner! Ignore those useless benchmarks of Cortex A9 vs. Atom! So what if Atom has higher performance, IT SUCKS DOWN MORE POWER AND POWER CONSUMPTION IS ALL THAT MATTERS!

2012: Medfield sucks! Who cares if it gets better battery life than a dual-core 28nm Krait when put into Motorala Razers with the exact same! See, we have benchmarks where the higher-clocked Krait gets 10% better performance (in some benchmarks while losing in others that we ignore)! WHO CARES THAT ATOM IS MORE POWER EFFICIENT THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS MORE PERFORMANCE!
INTEL IS STILL OVERPRICED EVEN THOUGH THE RAZER I AND RAZER M HAVE THE SAME PRICE!

2013: Uh... at least ARMs are cheap when you intentionally compare chips desiged for cellphones to Intel's desktop chips and pretend that Atom doesn't exist. ARM WILL DESTROY INTEL!

Really.. please show me the same demo running on... let's say... the A6 on the newest iPad. I'm sure it will get *much* better framerates.... (or not).

You completely missed the point of my post, but I can see that Intel is gradually working its way up Ghandi's list. It's getting to be between the "then they laugh at you" and the "then they fight you" stages....

Good thing then that Haswell's idle power draw is 20x better than Ivy Bridge's, meaning that it is probably about the same as the Cortex A-15 (or maybe even better).

I'm not saying that Haswell belongs in a smartphone.. I'm also saying that unless you downclock that Exynos you don't want it in a smartphone either. I *am* saying that the blind assumption that ARM == efficiency tends to disintegrate when confronted with facts. I'm also saying that if Haswell can run at 8 watts, the whole "x86 wastes powar!" line is going to sound pretty silly when next-generation 22nm Atoms show up.

No, I'm saying that on a chromebook with a SoC (that stands for "system on a chip" you know...) the total power consumption of the SoC running a web benchmark that likely requires little or no wireless network power due to caching is equivalent to the power consumption of a low-power Haswell part (that is similar to a SoC but with a separate south-bridge MCM).

Oh, and if the Kraken benchmark is anything remotely similar to any other web browser benchmark I've ever seen, the CPU/GPU on the SoC are not being taxed at 100% for the whole time the benchmark is running, so an *average* power consumption of 8 watts is even *worse* than it looks compared to the Heaven benchmark which is one of the most CPU & GPU intensive benchmarks available anywhere.

Thanks for making me think about the comparison a bit more, it looks like I was being a little too nice to ARM when I said the power consumption was "equal" when in fact it is likely skewed in ARM's favor due to the lighter workload on the ARM chip that would consume even more power if truly stressed.