Earlier this month, the AnTuTu benchmarking tool raised a bit of a firestorm when it showed Intel's Atom Z2580 out performing offerings from Qualcomm, NVIDIA, and Samsung. This led to BDTI, a ...

Intel has been promising that it’s next-generation of low-power Atom processors for tablets would offer better performance while using less power than any Atom chips to date. Now Intel engineer ...

Comparing tablet chip performance has never been easy. Mobile benchmarks have mostly been limited to just a single platform, but now a new test by a respected outfit—albeit one that’s frequently been ...

Bottom line: Intel's N95 is an upcoming budget friendly processor that is considered to be the successor to Atom processors. The chip punches above its weight class in Geekbench 5 and performs ...

Intel recently announced plans to layoff 11 percent of its workforce as the company shifts its focus from PCs to the cloud… now we’re starting to get an idea of what that will mean for the company’s ...

Today's netbooks are mostly Intel Atom-powered, but that could change with the advent of VIA's Nano processor, which outperforms Intel's CPU in several areas. Despite the rapidly cooling economic ...

Computers have become absurdly cheap. The list of Amazon’s best-selling notebooks is dominated by inexpensive systems that sell for $500 or less, and several best-sellers are priced below $200. That’s ...

First benchmarks of an Intel Atom 2600 netbook show middling CPU results compared to current netbooks, but better graphics than the current Atom. Real-life use shows little fan noise and heat increase ...

While there is a certain degree of overlap between the two processors, it's limited to the relative upper end of Atom's target market and the relative lower end of Nano's. This might not seem so ...

The branding strategy means Intel will aggressively develop and promote silicon for small devices. But this isn't the PC industry. Brooke Crothers writes about mobile computer systems, including ...

Update (11/25/2020): The article below may have been written in 2016, but it still stands up as a postmortem of what went wrong with Intel's mobile efforts -- with one very important omission. Back in ...