I think it's obvious what "performance" means in this context.
> power saving is a performance as well as computation speed.
Relative power saving means how much power is proportionally saved in chip A compared to chip B when performances of both chips is scaled to the same value.
> I've first think that we can multiply them (1.6 * 0.7 = 1.12), that gives the global gain. > But If we think in term of energy cost only ("perf" / watts), it's Gperf / Gwatts. That's > gives 1.6/1.3 ~= 1.23
I'm afraid I don't understand your math.
> I've mabye found how he has obtained 50% : he computes the consumption > relative to the "performances" (so the oposite of power saving at the same > performances). => 1 - 0.7/1.6 ~= 0.56, a gain of 56% on the consumption relative > to the performances.
He's a marketing guy, so I think my explanation of his miscalculation (30 divided by 60) fits his (lack of) math skills better than your explanation ;-)
