The Intel Atom Z3580 processor that powers the Asus Zenfone 2 I tested recently is pretty fast. But now Intel has an even faster chip designed for smartphones and tablets.

The new Atom Z3590 is based on the same “Moorefield” architecture as the Z3580, but it supports faster CPU and graphics burst speeds.

intel atom logo

Intel’s new chip supports CPU burst speeds up to 2.5 GHz and GPU speeds up to 640 MHz. That’s compared with top speeds of 2.33 GHz and 533 MHz for the Z3580, which had been the most powerful Moorefield chip until now.

Other specs are pretty much the same. Both chips are 22nm, 64-bit quad-core processors with support for up to 4GB of RAM, support for USB 2.0 and USB 3.0, and support for Intel virtualization, SpeedStep, Smart Idle, and AES encryption technology.

While they’re x86 processors, the chips are designed for smartphones and tablets running mobile operating systems such as Android. Intel positions its Atom Bay Trail and Cherry Trail processors as entry-level chips for desktop operating systems such as Windows and Ubuntu.

via CPU World

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign

or...

Contribute via PayPal

18 replies on “Intel launches Atom Z3590 chip for phones, tablets”

  1. Ha, ha! I remember just a few years back when Intel tried so desperatly tried to keep dual core Atom N330 processors out of Linux Netbooks. Now Intel is begging hardware manufactures to put Atom processors in phones and tablets instead of Samsung Exynos Octa Core or Nvidia ARM quad core processors.

  2. That’s interesting but no integrated modem and they still need subs no matter what so won’t be used much. Plus other new SoCs will be much faster while this is a minor upgrade. Too bad they didn’t had this one 6 months ago.

    1. Except for Qualcomm and MediaTek, most have given up on fully integrated modems and it’s mainly for really low cost phone products… Non-Integrated modems can still be pretty power efficient and have the advantage of being more versatile and able to support a greater range of standards for better world wide usages and supporting the highest bandwidth speeds… along with being easier to customize for a specific region/country without needing to redesign the SoC… So that’s not really much of a issue these days…

      Though, Intel is pretty much the only other company still trying for full Integration with the x3 (SoFIA) SoCs and that’ll be going onto their 14nm next year.

      While Intel’s other offerings, like the Z3590, can still compete in the mid-range for now… Not having a top performing SoC only means they can’t compete on the premium range but there’s plenty of room in the mid and lower ranges.

      Though, there are indications that Intel will also be offering their x5 and x7 Cherry Trail SoCs for phone use as well and those may be good enough for at least the low premium range, if not upper range for flagship phones… at least until next year’s Broxton comes out, and we’ll see how it stands then…

    2. I just love the way you love to write something off completely based on one single, doubtful assertion. There’s a lot of ground between “failure” and “complete success” and I’m sure Intel will do just fine with their new chip.

      It should also be noted that phones are just one of many applications for SOCs these days. Just because it might not be the best fit for high-end consumer smartphones doesn’t mean much when you have lots of other irons in the fire.

      1. I really don’t see any interesting field of application for this. More expensive less fast and less energy efficient than arm counterparts. Who does want to buy those ecpansives e-wastes?

        1. Well, first they’re not less energy efficient… these are phone optimized SoCs that compete with ARM on power efficiency within the performance range they offer. There have been numerous power efficiency reviews done by Anandtech and other respected sources that have all shown the Intel mobile SoCs are power efficient competitive…

          Second, cost difference isn’t very large but is why Intel still subsidizes the costs to OEMs and so as far as the OEMs are concerned they’re priced competitively…

          While Intel is working to eliminate the need for subsidizing, which is one of the reasons Intel developed the x3 (SoFIA) SoCs… and there’s a good chance they can become cost competitive by the time they get the 10nm FAB out by the end of 2017… we’ll see but the OEMs don’t have to deal with that issue and Intel provides additional benefits like a database of 3rd party parts that will work without the OEM needing to do any R&D and a bunch of reference designs, which can make them appealing to OEMs that don’t want to spend too much in developing a new product…

          The only area they are really behind is in GPU performance but with a new GPU coming out seemingly every year now they’re starting to close that gap, though it may be another three years before they can offer premium range but they already got 4K video, light casual gaming, etc covered… Though, these Phone SoCs don’t use Intel GPUs but Imagination PowerVR GPU and those compete with ARM SoCs just fine…

          While CPU performance is more a mixed bag, because Intel hasn’t updated the CPU architecture in over two years now but the next update coming out next year will and we’ll see then if they can compete in the premium range but CPU performance isn’t really increasing as rapidly as GPU performance in mobile devices and that gives Intel time to close the gap, but in the meantime they can easily compete in the mid-range…

          Though, they do have advantages in that x86 can run a wider range of software than ARM can but until they start pushing a wider range of software on mobile devices that isn’t much of an advantage but for a mid range devices these SoCs will fit right in with all the others in that class…

    1. It’s not ready, the phone SoCs aren’t getting it until next year… and they’ll likely skip right over Airmont and go straight to Goldmont architecture to make the most of the update… Though, the low cost phone SoCs, like the x3 (SoFIA) will mostly just make the switch to 14nm next year and won’t get anything advance until probably 2017, leaving the significant update to just the mid and higher range offerings next year.

      1. Samsung Exynos 7 used in s6 and note5 already uses 14nm tech since 6months. Snapdragon Will follow this year. That’s another source of compute power/watt on arm, beside better integration, design and RISC vs CISC bas is.

        1. No, you’re talking about very limited production and no, ARM’s 14nm is not equivalent to Intel’s.

          While the vast majority of ARM SoCs won’t go 14nm until well into next year.

          The CISC vs RISC debate is also mostly irrelevant these days. Intel has long moved on from a pure CISC solution and the only pure RISC solution these days is MIPs!… Both methods had different advantages and disadvantages anyway.

          Differences these day matter more on overall architecture and customization/optimization factors…

  3. Hmm… .Intel Atom on a phone. Am I the only one getting more and more intrigued by the notion of Continuum on a Windows Mobile device and what this could one day mean?

    1. Maybe one day… but for now Continuum does not work for X86 apps, only newer “metro style modern” apps. So having an x86 chip gives you no more capability when used on a phone then one using ARM.

    2. This is the only way to have a mobile phone with an integrated desktop version and when someone connects is to an external keyboard and monitor to have a system that can run desktop apps…. That will be super and can be done only with intel inside.

      I have zenfone 2 and kicks the butt to many other arm devices with Antutu to 50k and is the fastest mobile phone on the planet in pcmark for android. It kills s6 and other super phones.

      1. There is no relation between cpu and desktop integration. Desktop or mobile version are the same on arm, mips or x86 on linux, with all the sa me applications. And in zvery case y ou can switch from mobile tout desktop environment. The tdp of Intel chips are computed each time with less components than arm socs, and, no high end arm socs have the same performances than middle range Intel chips like core i5, but with a really lower tdp. Samsung bloatwares have tout be blamed first when things slowdown on those powerfull chips. They can be easily removed or locked with specific applications. And phone immediatly fly and gain twice power time.

Comments are closed.