Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Qualcomm Announces 64-bit Snapdragon Processors

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by robclark View Post
    fwiw, on the ifc6410/snapdragon-600, it seems pretty stable to overclock the gpu to 487MHz.. also, the android kgsl kernel driver seems to (by default) trade off quite a bit of performance for power. So even the current (already old) stuff has some headroom.

    (btw, thanks for that link.. I didn't actually realize the different a320 variants had different # of ALU)
    That's a decent overclock considering passive cooling and, I'd imagine, a vrm without much headroom.

    Judy found the link today from one of the comments in the anandtech article about the Qualcomm announcement regarding the 808 and 810 today.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Not that I have a problem with 64 bit ARM, but what exactly is the point for non-server purposes? The highest RAM content I've seen on a non-server ARM system was 2GB. Considering the simplicity of the architecture, I doubt there's going to be a significant performance improvement switching to 64 bit. I'd much rather see more plug'n'play features.
    Samsung Note 3 have 3 GB RAM.
    Upcoming OnePlus One have 3 GB RAM too.
    During this year, there will be more phones and tablets with 3 GB RAM.

    Also its not only 64-bit, but its also going from ARMv7 to ARMv8 which is a drastically improved instruction set architecture.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Samsung Note 3 have 3 GB RAM.
    Upcoming OnePlus One have 3 GB RAM too.
    During this year, there will be more phones and tablets with 3 GB RAM.

    Also its not only 64-bit, but its also going from ARMv7 to ARMv8 which is a drastically improved instruction set architecture.
    just fyi, at least some of the SoC's have 2GiB of address space dedicated to I/O, so anything more than 2GiB of RAM requires LPAE (or 64b)..

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Not that I have a problem with 64 bit ARM, but what exactly is the point for non-server purposes? The highest RAM content I've seen on a non-server ARM system was 2GB. Considering the simplicity of the architecture, I doubt there's going to be a significant performance improvement switching to 64 bit. I'd much rather see more plug'n'play features.
    I want an ARM based low power desktop.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Outthere, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rrohbeck View Post
    I want an ARM based low power desktop.
    I want a high powered one

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Not that I have a problem with 64 bit ARM, but what exactly is the point for non-server purposes? The highest RAM content I've seen on a non-server ARM system was 2GB. Considering the simplicity of the architecture, I doubt there's going to be a significant performance improvement switching to 64 bit. I'd much rather see more plug'n'play features.
    ARMv8 is quite drastically different from ARMv7.
    ARMv7 had many flaws, and ARMv8 was not just an incremental version with some new instruction additions.

    I've heard just recompiling software for ARMv8 increases the performance quite much.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    ARMv8 is quite drastically different from ARMv7.
    ARMv7 had many flaws, and ARMv8 was not just an incremental version with some new instruction additions.

    I've heard just recompiling software for ARMv8 increases the performance quite much.
    not sure about "quite much".. extra registers and few other tweaks certainly help. But the big reason apple's 64b chip is faster is that it is so damn wide. Don't expect, for example, a 64b cortex-a53 to be faster than a 32b krait, for example. That is why qcom ended up rolling out 64b first in the mid/low end parts.. I guess a53 available earlier than a57, but not faster than existing top end 32b stuff.. so just the way the timing worked out.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Outthere, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by robclark View Post
    not sure about "quite much".. extra registers and few other tweaks certainly help. But the big reason apple's 64b chip is faster is that it is so damn wide. Don't expect, for example, a 64b cortex-a53 to be faster than a 32b krait, for example. That is why qcom ended up rolling out 64b first in the mid/low end parts.. I guess a53 available earlier than a57, but not faster than existing top end 32b stuff.. so just the way the timing worked out.
    Same as the migration from 32 to 64bit, then? There was no advantage in speed, just a bigger address space, which then resulted in better overall performance if you needed the memory 64bit could address. And because the memory speed was also only ever given to 64-bit, then yes, the CPU speed was also given a boost as well. And numerous other bits and pieces. Is that what you're saying? Or is it a more Intel Gen4-style optimisation that's just seriously actually really better than Gen3 (IvyB)? Or both?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stiiixy View Post
    Same as the migration from 32 to 64bit, then? There was no advantage in speed, just a bigger address space, which then resulted in better overall performance if you needed the memory 64bit could address. And because the memory speed was also only ever given to 64-bit, then yes, the CPU speed was also given a boost as well. And numerous other bits and pieces. Is that what you're saying? Or is it a more Intel Gen4-style optimisation that's just seriously actually really better than Gen3 (IvyB)? Or both?
    well, there are some tweaks (like making the PC not a normal register) which I assume are intended to make it easier to be more out of order, etc. Which I expect will make things easier to implement a fast high-end armv8. Some new instructions, etc. So some improvement. I doubt much of that improvement is realized on a53 (which is in-order short pipeline, designed to be the .little in BIG.little)..

    32bit arm is kind of a nice simple/clean architecture in some ways.. but it was designed in much simpler times. I think some of the choices in armv8 were made to make it easier to scale up to much higher performance parts.

    so, tl;dr: armv8 does not cause fast, but armv8 enables fast ;-)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •