Sets the bar at 2GHz
KOREAN HARDWARE GIANT Samsung has announced its latest processor, the Exynos 5250 that is based on the ARM Cortex A15 design.
The dual-core processor is designed for high-end tablets and will run at 2GHz. It is fabbed on a 32nm process and is set to appear in devices in the second half of 2012.
"The ARM Cortex-A15 brings unparalleled performance to our Exynos processor family and the exploding mobile marketplace," said Dojun Rhee, VP of system LSI marketing at Samsung. "The advanced low-power, high-performance processor technology of the new Exynos 5250 continues to deliver an unprecedented level of performance for users to enjoy a completely new mobile experience."
Samsung claims the new chip can process nearly twice the number of instructions per second as the ARM 1.5GHz Cortex A9 chip. The Exynos 5250 will be able to support up to 2560x1600 resolution displays and will have four times the graphics capabilities of the Cortex A9.
To support this high resolution the chip has a doubled memory bandwidth of 12.8GB/s compared to existing chips, which also aids data processing speed. To help with power efficiency the Exynos 5250 also has an embedded Displayport (EDP) interface that is compatible with panel self-refresh technology (PSR). It allows a static image on the screen to be refreshed from a memory buffer instead of using processor cycles. µ
Source: The Inquirer
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that chip is in the Galaxy Note 2.....
I will never turn it off.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Exciting news, just as fun as way back when when following dual core PC chips move to quad core and the drool factor they had. I personally hope ARM keeps up this arms race so fast that x86 never has a chance...
Low cost, low power, high performance, small footprint.
This time next year is really going to be exciting...
Just when I had started enjoying my Galaxy Note :|
Its second half of 2012, long time till then.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
I for one can't wait to hear about what Apples new A6 chip.
Anandtech originally reported that it was a A15 based dual core, which would be a major design win for Apple, since that would be what... 6 months before you seen any Android phone with a A15 SOC out in any substantial numbers!
But now Anandtech is reporting that Apple made their own CPU very closely built on the A15. Sort of a Krait on steroids, if you will.
That choice was apparently the only way they could get close to twice the performance without sacrificing battery life.
The GPU is either the same quad core SG 543 from the new iPad or a version of that chip with three cores. Either way, this means serious GPU muscle for the iPhone 5. I for one sure was blown away by the graphics in the Real Racing 3 game they demonstrated!
It's really exciting, cause it'll push development on all platforms forward. Its getting boring to always see the same 2-3 SOC combinations on Android phones (All the top phones have the same CPU/GPU inside of them these days), and will mean that Android handsets again have their work cut out for them in terms of catching up to Apple. Three of four GPU cores in a phone is crazy powerful!
What does people think powers the iPhone 5/A6? Higher clocked dual core A9? Quad core A9? Apples own custom CPU?
vszulc said:
I for one can't wait to hear about what Apples new A6 chip.
Anandtech originally reported that it was a A15 based dual core, which would be a major design win for Apple, since that would be what... 6 months before you seen any Android phone with a A15 SOC out in any substantial numbers!
But now Anandtech is reporting that Apple made their own CPU very closely built on the A15. Sort of a Krait on steroids, if you will.
That choice was apparently the only way they could get close to twice the performance without sacrificing battery life.
The GPU is either the same quad core SG 543 from the new iPad or a version of that chip with three cores. Either way, this means serious GPU muscle for the iPhone 5. I for one sure was blown away by the graphics in the Real Racing 3 game they demonstrated!
It's really exciting, cause it'll push development on all platforms forward. Its getting boring to always see the same 2-3 SOC combinations on Android phones (All the top phones have the same CPU/GPU inside of them these days), and will mean that Android handsets again have their work cut out for them in terms of catching up to Apple. Three of four GPU cores in a phone is crazy powerful!
What does people think powers the iPhone 5/A6? Higher clocked dual core A9? Quad core A9? Apples own custom CPU?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dualcore a15 1ghz but the real answer isTOTAL CRAP
Please use our sister site for discussing Apple products.
https://www.iphone-developers.com
The future generation Samsung processors looks like to be beast an 8 core processor for a tablet or a mobile is from a scifi movie
please read this article to find out more
Samsung's processor design team has been on a roll with fast chips this year with the Exynos 4 Quad and Exynos 5 Dual. Based on its agenda for the International Solid-State Circuits Conference, that momentum isn't about to stop. A company presentation at the event on February 19th will delve into a new heterogeneous, 8-core processor that relies on ARM's concept of big.LITTLE computing: one half is a quad-core, 1.8GHz ARM Cortex-A15 that will do all the heavy lifting, while the other is a quad 1.2GHz Cortex-A7 that takes over in quieter moments. We don't know much more about the chip beyond the expected 28-nanometer manufacturing process, but it's easy to see a mobile chip that's fast without having to consume much energy in its downtime. Most of the mystery surrounds where Samsung will launch the processor first, rather than what it can do: the big.LITTLE chip would be most valuable in a smartphone, but a potentially large size could relegate it to tablets early on.
I know, this is one of those silly little topics that gets thrown around every time a newer faster arm chip comes out, but this is the first time that I personally have ever seen an Arm chip as a threat to intel. When I saw the Galaxy s6 scoring around a 4800 multi-core I stopped and thought to myself, "hey, that looks pretty darn close to my fancy i5." Sure enough, the I5 5200u only scores around a 5280 in the Geekbench 64 bit multi-core benchmark. I understand that this is only possible because the Galaxy S6 has 8 cores, but it's still very impressive what Arm and Samsung were able to achieve using a fraction of the power intel has on hand. Of course I don't think that this chip will take over the market, but if Arm's performance continues increase at the same rate while maintaining the same low power draw, then intel might have some real competition in the laptop space within the near future. Heck, maybe Microsoft will bring back RT but with full app support.
I also know that I didn't account for how much power the GPU was drawing, but I feel as if that wouldn't be the only factor after seeing the issues with Core M.
I doubt they're worried. intel CPUs are wicked fast. i have a 3 year old i7 and it's faster than most of AMDs current gen CPUs.
if Intel is able to apply the same method/engineering they use on CPUs to the mobile platform, i bet it will smoke anything out there. kind of like how intel CPUs kill basically anything AMDs can put out.
tcb4 said:
I know, this is one of those silly little topics that gets thrown around every time a newer faster arm chip comes out, but this is the first time that I personally have ever seen an Arm chip as a threat to intel. When I saw the Galaxy s6 scoring around a 4800 multi-core I stopped and thought to myself, "hey, that looks pretty darn close to my fancy i5." Sure enough, the I5 5200u only scores around a 5280 in the Geekbench 64 bit multi-core benchmark. I understand that this is only possible because the Galaxy S6 has 8 cores, but it's still very impressive what Arm and Samsung were able to achieve using a fraction of the power intel has on hand. Of course I don't think that this chip will take over the market, but if Arm's performance continues increase at the same rate while maintaining the same low power draw, then intel might have some real competition in the laptop space within the near future. Heck, maybe Microsoft will bring back RT but with full app support.
I also know that I didn't account for how much power the GPU was drawing, but I feel as if that wouldn't be the only factor after seeing the issues with Core M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is important to remember that ultimately the same constraints and limitations will apply to both Intel and ARM CPUs. After all ARM and x86 are just instruction set architectures. There is no evidence to suggest that somehow ARM is at a significant advantage vs Intel in terms of increasing performance while keeping power low. It has been generally accepted now that ISA's have a negligible impact on IPC and performance per watt. Many of these newer ARM socs like the 810 are having overheating issues themselves. The higher performance Nvidia SOCs that have impressive performance are using 10+ watts TDPs too.
Also it is always a bit tricky to make cross platform and cross ISA CPUs comparisons in benchmarks like GeekBench and for whatever reason Intel cpus tend to do relatively poorly in GeekBench compared to other benchmarks. You can try to compare other real world uses between the i5-5200U and the Exynos 7420 and I can assure you that the tiny Exynos will be absolutely no match to the much larger, wider and more complex Broadwell cores. Don't get me wrong, the Exynos 7420 is very impressive for its size and power consumption, but I don't think we can take that GeekBench comparison seriously.
The fastest low power core right now is without a doubt the Broadwell Core M which is a 4.5 watt part. This is built on Intel's 14nm process which is more advanced than Samsungs.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9061/lenovo-yoga-3-pro-review/4
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
"Once again, in web use, the Core M processor is very similar to the outgoing Haswell U based Yoga 2 Pro. Just to put the numbers in a bit more context, I also ran the benchmarks on my Core i7-860 based Desktop (running Chrome, as were the Yogas) and it is pretty clear just how far we have come. The i7-860 is a four core, eight thread 45 nm processor with a 2.8 GHz base clock and 3.46 GHz boost, all in a 95 watt TDP. It was launched in late 2009. Five years later, we have higher performance in a 4.5 watt TDP for many tasks. It really is staggering."
"As a tablet, the Core M powered Yoga 3 Pro will run circles around other tablets when performing CPU tasks. The GPU is a bit behind, but it is ahead of the iPad Air already, so it is not a slouch. The CPU is miles ahead though, even when compared to the Apple A8X which is consistently the best ARM based tablet CPU.
"
---------- Post added at 04:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:33 AM ----------
tft said:
I doubt they're worried. intel CPUs are wicked fast. i have a 3 year old i7 and it's faster than most of AMDs current gen CPUs.
if Intel is able to apply the same method/engineering they use on CPUs to the mobile platform, i bet it will smoke anything out there. kind of like how intel CPUs kill basically anything AMDs can put out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
All of the little atom CPUs we see in mobile right now are much smaller, narrower and simpler cores than Intel Core chips. Once you see Intel big cores trickle down into mobile, it will get much more interesting.
Intel will catch up...quick too just watch. They've been working on 64-bit for over a year now...and they're already onto 14nm. Qualcomm should be worried, I don't think their ready for this competition. They talked trash about octa cores and 64-bits...now their doing both and seems their product is still in beta status, not ready for the real world. Intel and Samsung are gonna give them problems
Sent from my SM-G920T using XDA Free mobile app
rjayflo said:
Intel will catch up...quick too just watch. They've been working on 64-bit for over a year now...and they're already onto 14nm. Qualcomm should be worried, I don't think their ready for this competition. They talked trash about octa cores and 64-bits...now their doing both and seems their product is still in beta status, not ready for the real world. Intel and Samsung are gonna give them problems
Sent from my SM-G920T using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically Intel and AMD have had 64 bit for well over a decade now with AMD64/EM64T and many Intel mobile processors have had it for years, so the HW has supported it for a while but 64 bit enabled tablets/phones haven't started shipping until very recently.
Indeed Intel has been shipping 14nm products since last year and their 14nm process is more advanced than Samsung's. Note that there is no real science behind naming a process node so terms like "14nm" and "20nm" have turned into purely marketing material. For example, TSMC 16nm isn't actually any smaller than their 20nm process. Presumably Intel 14nm also yields higher and allows for higher performance transistors than the Samsung 14nm.
It is likely that Samsung has the most advanced process outside of Intel however. I do agree that Qualcomm is in a bit of trouble at the moment with players like Intel really growing in the tablet space and Samsung coming out with the very formidable Exynos 7420 SOC in the smartphone space. The SD810 just isn't cutting it and has too many problems. Qualcomm should also be considered that both Samsung and Intel have managed to come out with high end LTE radios, this was something that Qualcomm pretty much had a monopoly on for years. Intel now has the 7360 LTE radio and Samsung has the Shannon 333 LTE.
rjayflo said:
Intel will catch up...quick too just watch. They've been working on 64-bit for over a year now...and they're already onto 14nm. Qualcomm should be worried, I don't think their ready for this competition. They talked trash about octa cores and 64-bits...now their doing both and seems their product is still in beta status, not ready for the real world. Intel and Samsung are gonna give them problems
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree about Qualcomm, i actually mentioned that some time ago.
i think Qualcomm will happen what happened to nokia/blackberry, they got huge and stopped innovating and ended up being left in the dust. perhaps Qualcomm thought they had a monopoly and that samsung and other device makers would continue to buy their chips..
in the end, i think the only thing Qualcomm will have left is a bunch of patents..
I understand that Core M is a powerful part, but I'm not sure I believer their TDP figures. I am, however, more inclined to believe Samsung as they achieving this performance with an soc that is within a phone; in other words, they don't have the surface area to displace large quantities of heat. Nvidia has always skewed performance per watt numbers, and, as a result, they haven't been able to put an soc in a phone for years. Now, the reason I doubt intel's claims is because of battery life tests performed by reviewers and because of the low battery life claims made by manufacturers. For instance, the New Macbook and Yoga Pro 3 aren't showing large improvements in battery life when compared to their 15w counterparts.
I'm not sure how I feel about the iPad comparison though; I feel as if you just compounded the issue by showing us a benchmark that was not only cross platform, but also within different browsers.
Also, I think I understand what you mean about how an ISA will not directly impact performance per watt, but is it not possible that Samsung and Arm could just have a better design? I mean intel and AMD both utilize the same instruction set, but Intel will run circles around AMD in terms of efficiency. I may be way off base here, so feel free to correct me.
I think that Qualcomm is busy working on a new Krait of their own, but right now they're in hot water. They got a little lazy milking 32 bit chips, but once Apple announced their 64 bit chip they panicked and went with an ARM design. We'll have to see if they can bring a 64 bit Krait chip to the table, but right now Samsung's 7420 appears to be the best thing on the market.
tcb4 said:
I understand that Core M is a powerful part, but I'm not sure I believer their TDP figures. I am, however, more inclined to believe Samsung as they achieving this performance with an soc that is within a phone; in other words, they don't have the surface area to displace large quantities of heat. Nvidia has always skewed performance per watt numbers, and, as a result, they haven't been able to put an soc in a phone for years. Now, the reason I doubt intel's claims is because of battery life tests performed by reviewers and because of the low battery life claims made by manufacturers. For instance, the New Macbook and Yoga Pro 3 aren't showing large improvements in battery life when compared to their 15w counterparts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically the Core M will dissipate more than 4.5w for "bursty" workloads but under longer steady workloads it will average to 4.5w. The ARM tablet and phone SOCs more or less do the same thing. In terms of actual battery life test results, yes the battery life of most of these devices hasn't really changed since the last generation Intel U series chips but that isn't a real apples to apples comparison. As SOC power consumption continues to drop, it is becoming a smaller and smaller chunk of total system power consumption. Lenovo did a poor job IMO in originally implementing the first Core M device but Apple will almost certainly do a much better job. The SOC is only one part of the system, it is the responsibility of the OEM to properly package up the device and do proper power management, provide an adequate battery etc. Yes the new Macbook doesn't get significantly longer battery life but it also weighs only 2.0 lbs and has a ridiculously small battery. It also has a much higher resolution and more power hungry screen and yet manages to keep battery life equal with the last generation. Benchmarks have also indicated that the newer 14nm Intel CPUs are much better at sustained performance compared to the older 22nm Haswells. This is something that phone and tablets typically are very poor at.
tcb4 said:
I'm not sure how I feel about the iPad comparison though; I feel as if you just compounded the issue by showing us a benchmark that was not only cross platform, but also within different browsers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A very fair point, browser benchmarks are especially notorious in being very misleading. I think in this case Chrome was used in all cases which helps a little. My point in showing this is that we need to take those GeekBench results with a little grain of salt. Outside of that benchmark, I don't think you'll find the A8X or Exynos 7420 getting anywhere near a higher speced Core M let alone a i5-5200U at any real world use or any other benchmark, browser based or not. Even other synthetic benchmarks like 3dmark Physics, etc don't show the Intel CPUs nearly as low as GeekBench does.
tcb4 said:
Also, I think I understand what you mean about how an ISA will not directly impact performance per watt, but is it not possible that Samsung and Arm could just have a better design? I mean intel and AMD both utilize the same instruction set, but Intel will run circles around AMD in terms of efficiency. I may be way off base here, so feel free to correct me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct.
It is certainly possible for Samsung to have a design that is more power efficient than Intel when it comes to making a 2W phone SOC, but that won't be because Samsung uses ARM ISA while Intel uses x86. At this point, ISA is mostly just coincidental and isn't going to greatly impact the characteristics of your CPU. The CPU design and the ISA that the CPU uses are different things. The notion of "better design" is also a little tricky because a design that may be best for a low power SOC may not necessarily be the best for a higher wattage CPU. Intel absolutely rules the CPU landscape from 15w and up. Despite all of the hype around ARM based servers, Intel has continued to dominate servers and has actually continued to increase its lead in that space since Intel's performance per watt is completely unmatched in higher performance applications. Intel's big core design is just better for that application than any ARM based CPU's. It is important to remember that just because you have the best performance per watt 2 watt SOC, doesn't mean you can just scale that design into a beastly 90 watt CPU. If it were that easy, Intel would have probably easily downscaled their big core chips to dominate mobile SOCs.
You frequently find some people trying to reason that at 1.2 Ghz Apple's A8 SOC is very efficient and fast and then they claim that if they could clock that SOC at 3+ Ghz then it should be able to match an Intel Haswell core, but there is no guarantee that the design will allow such high clocks. You have to consider that maybe Apple made design choices to provide great IPC but that IPC came at the cost of limiting clock frequencies.
The rivalry between Intel and AMD has intensified in the past few years, with team red playing catch-up and introducing some really competitive products. On the other hand, Intel released its new 11th-gen Rocket Lake-S processor series earlier this year as an update to the Comet Lake lineup. Numbers suggest that Intel hasn’t done enough to really improve over last year’s offerings. In contrast, AMD’s Ryzen 5000 series has definitely caught a lot of attention from gamers and PC building enthusiasts.
Having said that, Intel has been a leader in the CPU space for years and continues to do so. Their processors offer great IPC (instructions per clock) performance and high clock speeds making them great for gaming purposes. Intel also has top-of-the-line HEDT (high-end desktop) processors that offer excellent performance for the asking price for professional workloads.
Here’s a look at the best Intel processors for performance:
Intel Core i9-10980XEOne of Intel's most powerful commercial processors, the Core i9-10980XE spearheads the company’s Extreme lineup. With a total of 18-cores and 36-threads, this beast can deliver excellent performance for consumers looking for a CPU that can keep with the most demanding tasks. It is overclockable, but with 165W TDP, this chip can get really hot, so make sure you have proper cooling.
Clock speeds: 3.0GHz - 4.6GHz
18-Cores, 36 Threads
24.8MB L3 Cache
48 PCIe 3.0 lanes
165W TDP
~$990
Buy from Amazon
Intel Core i9-11900KUnder the new 11th-gen Rocket Lake-S branding, the latest consumer offering includes the Core i9-11900K as its most powerful processor offering. However, compared to last year’s 10900K, Intel has taken out two of the cores, bringing it down to a total of eight cores. This came as a surprise to many, with reviewers suggesting not to buy the new chip. While that is true to an extent, the fact remains that it is a powerful processor. Sure AMD has great chips that can thrash this chip, but what is important here is that this overclockable chip can run at speeds going over 5GHz, and it comes with an integrated GPU
Clock speeds: 3.5GHz - 5.3GHz
8-Cores, 16 Threads
16MB L3 Cache
20 PCIe 4.0 lanes
95W TDP
~$520
Buy from Amazon
Intel Core i9-10900KThe 10th-gen Core i9-10900K is still an excellent processor if you are looking for core performance. It’s a very capable chip, especially when it comes to its single-core performance, while the 10-core configuration and the ability to go beyond 5GHz clock speeds are in itself commendable. The processor should easily last for a long time but make sure you pair this chip with a reliable cooler.
Clock speeds: 3.7GHz - 5.3GHz
10-Cores, 20 Threads
20MB L3 Cache
16 PCIe 3.0 lanes
95W TDP
$499
Buy from Amazon
Intel Core i9-11980HKIntel recently introduced the new 11th-gen Tiger Lake-H processors for high-end gaming and workstation laptops. The series is headed by the Core i9-11980HK, which is now the most powerful mobile processor from Intel. The eight-core, 16-thread chip comes with a 5GHz maximum boost clock speed on one core and unlocked multipliers. While the chip is slowly reaching markets, early reviews are definitely positive. Expect new laptops with the Core i9-11980HK to reach mainstream laptops later this month.
Clock speeds: 3.3GHz - 5.0GHz
8-Cores, 16 Threads
24MB L3 Cache
20 PCIe 4.0 lanes
45-65W TDP
Go for the Core i9-10900K as it offers the best performance package for the asking price. Agreed that the Core i9-10980XE offers higher cores, it is quite expensive, and it doesn't really justify the performance. Hopefully, Intel will introduce a new Extreme series this year that should trump the shortcomings of the existing Core i9-10980XE. Also, check out the best Intel processors that you should purchase for gaming.