aztec high frequency screen

mobile screen plants - astec

mobile screen plants - astec

The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.

gpu performance & power - the iphone xs & xs max review: unveiling the silicon secrets

gpu performance & power - the iphone xs & xs max review: unveiling the silicon secrets

The performance improvement of the A12 GPU was one of the biggest highlights of the keynote presentation, promising up to 50% higher performance versus the A11 GPU. Apple has achieved this by "simply" adding in a fourth GPU core, up from three on the A11, and by introducing memory compression on the GPU. The memory compression is what I think the most contributing factor to the increased microarchitectural performance of the GPU, as it really is a huge one-time shift, which admittedly, took Apple a long time to make.

One thing that Id like to mention before going into the benchmarks, is that peak performance and peak power consumption of the latest Apple GPUs is a problem. Weve seen Apple transition from promoting its sustained performance over time, to actually being one of the worst offenders in terms of actual performance degradation from the peak capabilities of the SoC. Theres reasons to this, but Ill be addressing them shortly.

In the 3DMark Physics test, which is mostly a CPU-bound test that also stresses the overall platform power limits while the GPU is also doing work, we see the iPhone XS and the A12 achieve some great gains over last years iPhone. This had been a test that in the past had been particularly problematic for Apple CPUs, however it seems that this microarchitectural hiccup was solved in the A11 and the Monsoon cores. The Vortex cores along with the generally improved power efficiency of the SoC further raises the performance, finally matching the Arms cores in this particular test.

In the Graphics part of the 3DMark test, the iPhone XS showcases 41% better sustained performance over last years iPhone X. In this particular test, the OnePlus 6s more generous thermals still allow the Snapdragon 845 to outperform the new chip.

In terms of peak performance, I encountered some great issues in 3DMark: I was completely unable to complete a single run on either the iPhone XS or XS Max while the devices were cool. If the device is cool enough, the GPU will boost to such high performance states that it will actually crash. I was consistently able to reproduce this over and over again. I attempted to measure power during this test, and the platform had instantaneous average power of 7-8 watts, figures above this which I suspect werent recorded by my measurement methodology. For the GPU to crash, it means that the power delivery is failing to deliver the necessary transient currents during operation and well see a voltage dip that corrupts the GPU.

Kishonti most recently released the new GFXBench 5 Aztec Ruins test, which brings a newer, more modern, and complex workload to our test suite. In an ideal world we would be testing real games, however this is an incredible headache on mobile devices as there are essentially no games with built-in benchmarking modes. There are some tools to gather fps values, but the biggest concern here is repeatability of the workload when one manually plays the game also a huge concern for many of the online games of today.

I still think synthetic benchmark testing has a very solid place here as long as you understand the characteristics of the benchmark. Kishontis GFXBench here has been an industry standard for years now, and the new Aztec test gives us a different kind of workload. The new tests are a lot more shader heavy, making use of more complex effects which stress the arithmetic power of the GPUs. While the data in the above table has been collected on an Arm Mali G72 GPU it still should give an overall indication of what to expect on other architectures. The new tests are also very bandwidth hungry due to their larger textures.

In general games will correlate with benchmarks depending on the percentage of the various graphical workloads, being fillrate or texture heavy, having complex geometries, or simply the ever more increasing complexity of shader effects which demand more arithmetic power of a GPU.

In terms of sustained performance, the figures quickly reduce after a few minutes and stabilise further down the road. Here, the iPhone XS outperforms the iPhone X by 61%. The Apple A12 is also able to beat the current leader, the Snapdragon 845 inside the OnePlus 6, by 45% in sustained performance.

In the High mode of Aztec Ruins, were seeing an eerily similar performance ranking. The iPhone XSs peak performance is again great, but what should matter is the sustained score. Here again the iPhone XSs performance is 61% better over the iPhone X. The performance delta to the OnePlus 6s Snapdragon 845 is reduced to 31% here, which is a tad less than the Normal run, its possible were hitting some bottlenecks here in some aspects of the microarchitecture.

Platform and GPU power for Apple devices has been something I wanted to publish for some time, but there complexities in achieving this. I was able to get reasonable figures for the new iPhone XS however data on older SoCs is still something that might have to wait for a future opportunity.

Again in Manhattan 3.1, the new iPhone XS performs an extraordinary 75% better than the iPhone X. The improvements here are not just because of the microarchitectural improvements of the GPU, and having an extra core, all along with the new process node of the SoC, but also thanks to the new memory compression which will reduce power consumption of the external DRAM, something that can represent up to 20-30% of system power in bandwidth heavy 3D workloads. Saved power on the DRAM means more thermal envelope that can be used by the GPU and SoC, increasing performance.

At peak performance, when the device is cool under 22C ambient temperatures, the Apple A12s GPU can get quite power hungry, reaching 6W of power. This wasnt really the peak average of the GPU as I did mention that I saw 3DMark reach around 7.5W (before crashing).

Even at this high power figure, the efficiency of the A12 beats all other SoCs. While this is somewhat interesting, its incredibly important to emphasise Apples throttling behaviour. After only 3 minutes, or 3 benchmark runs, the phone will throttle by around 25%, to what I describe in the efficiency table as the Warm state. Here power reaches reasonable 3.79W. Its to be noted that the power efficiency did not drastically go up, only improving by 16% over the peak figures. What this could point out is that the platform has a relatively shallow power curve, and performance is mostly limited by thermals.

Power consumption for T-Rex is in-line with what we saw in Manhattan, with the peak figures on a cold device reaching a little over 6W. After 3 runs, this again reduces to under 4W, at a 28% reduction in performance. Efficiency again doesnt improve by much here, pointing out to a shallow power curve again.

Its to be noted that the power measurements of the Warm runs dont represent sustained performance, and I simply wanted to add an additional data-point to the table alongside the peak figures. Sustained power envelopes for most devices are in the 3-3.5W range.

So why does Apple post such big discrepancies between peak performance and sustained performance, when the latter was a keynote focus point for Apple as recent as the iPhone 6 and the A8? The change is due to how everyday GPU use-cases have changed, and how Apple uses the GPU for non 3D related workloads.

Apple makes heavy use of GPU compute for various uses, such as general hardware acceleration in apps to using the GPU compute for camera image processing. These are use-cases where sustained performance doesnt really matter because theyre transactional workloads, meaning fixed workloads that need to be processed as fast as possible.

Android GPU compute has been a literal disaster over the last few years, and I primarily blame Google for not supporting OpenCL in AOSP leaving support to be extremely patchy among vendors. RenderScript has never picked up much as it just doesnt guarantee performance. The fragmentation of Android devices and SoCs has meant that in third-party apps GPU compute is essentially non-existent (Please correct me if Im wrong!).

Now while this does explain the throttling, I still do think Apple can do some kind of optimisation in regards to the thermals. I played some Fortnite on the iPhone XS, and the way that the phones heated up isnt something that I was very much fan of. Here the must be some kind of way to let actual games and applications which have a characteristic of sustained performance, actually start off with the GPU limited to this sustained performance state.

Other than the thermal and peak performance considerations, the iPhone XS and XS Max, thanks to the new A12 SoC, showcase industry leading performance and efficiency, and currently are the best mobile platforms for gaming, period.

built to connect - astec

built to connect - astec

The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.

new astec gt205 multi-frequency screen aggregate research international

new astec gt205 multi-frequency screen aggregate research international

The new track-mounted GT205 multi-frequency screen from KPI-JCI and Astec Mobile Screens blends the technology of conventional incline and high frequency screens to create a screening tool that increases fines separation, the companies says.

Conventional incline screens function by applying a lower speed (900-950 RPM) and increased stroke (1/4-3/8) to the entire screen box to convey the material down the screen and maintain consistent bed depth. High frequency screens apply high speed vibration (3,600-4,200 RPM) directly to the screen media to allow for increased stratification and separation of material.

The GT205 Multi-Frequency Screen combines the two screening theories to produce a one-of-a-kind vibration that creates a versatile screen prepared to tackle any application. KPI-JCI and Astec Mobile Screens pioneered the design of the industrys first multi-frequency screen.

We know that coarser material requires more amplitude and less frequency, while finer material requires less amplitude and more frequency. By combining these theories, we can take advantage of the power of our high frequency screen, which offers the highest screen capacity in the market for fines removal, chip sizing, dry-manufactured sand and more, said Stephen Whyte, product manager for KPI-JCI and Astec Mobile Screens.

Our new GT205 Multi-Frequency Screen allows producers to process finer materials with higher moisture content that no conventional screen could process, all while being operated at a lower angle than a high frequency screen.

The Feature Your Company listing is your custom-made (by us) profile page that allows you to add any of the following content: text, videos, links, images. The page will also be listed on the Featured Company landing page. Over 560 unique aggregates users visit the site per day! Complete the enquiry form now to contact us.

Reach thousands of budget holders and decision makers by promoting your company on the longest established aggregate website in the US & Canada. Or advertise in our emails which are sent to opted-in subscribers according to their chosen categories. All advertising will display correctly on tablets and mobiles as this site is responsive.

Related Equipments