-
- 4,483
Thought u might find this link interesting.......
Texas Instruments OMAP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia11-22-09 05:52 PMLike 0 -
- 3,284
Moto/VZW thoroughly thought this out : )Thought u might find this link interesting.......
Texas Instruments OMAP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It's obvious......
I've been saying this for a while11-22-09 07:51 PMLike 0 -
- 4,483
-
- 152
Although Scorpion and Cortex-A8 have many similarities, based on the information released by Qualcomm, the two cores differ in a number of interesting ways. For example, while the Scorpion and Cortex-A8 NEON implementations execute the same SIMD-style instructions, Scorpion’s implementation can process128 bits of data in parallel, compared to 64 bits on Cortex-A8. Half of Scorpion’s SIMD data path can be shut down to conserve power. Scorpion’s pipeline is deeper: It has a 13-stage load/store pipeline and two integer pipelines—one of which is 10 stages and can perform simple arithmetic operations (such as adds and subtracts) while the other is 12 stages and can perform both simple and more complex arithmetic, like MACs. Scorpion also has a 23-stage floating-point/SIMD pipeline, and unlike on Cortex-A8, VFPv3 operations are pipelined. Scorpion uses a number of other microarchitectural tweaks that are intended to either boost speed or reduce power consumption. (Scorpion’s architects previously designed low-power, high-performance processors for IBM.) The core supports multiple clock and voltage domains to enable additional power savings.
In addition to developing a custom microarchitecture, Qualcomm also customized the core’s circuit design and layout in an effort to improve energy efficiency.
Overall, Qualcomm has made a huge investment in creating a custom implementation of the ARMv7 architecture. By way of comparison, Texas Instruments customized just the layout for the Cortex-A8 for its OMAP3 chips, and it has been reported that the process took 45 engineers working for a period of years. If so, Scorpion’s development probably represents an investment on the order of tens of millions of dollars. And what’s the payoff?
At first glance, it doesn’t look like much—as noted earlier, Scorpion is expected to run at 1 GHz in a 65 nm process, which is slightly lower than the 1.1 GHz top speed that ARM currently quotes for the Cortex-A8 in 65 nm. Scorpion is quoted as providing 2100 DMIPS at 1 GHz; Cortex-A8 is quoted at 2000 DMIPS at the same speed. However, a notable difference is that the Cortex-A8 top speed is for a TSMC GP (general-purpose) process, while the Scorpion speed is for the LP (low-power) process. ARM quotes the speed of Cortex-A8 in an LP process as roughly 650 MHz, and although TI does not publicize the exact speed of the hand-crafted, low-power Cortex-A8 core used in its OMAP3 chips, BDTI has estimated that it runs at roughly 450 MHz. (BDTI’s benchmark results for the Cortex-A8 are available at BDTI’s website, BDTI — Insight, Analysis, and Advice.) Thus, Qualcomm expects Scorpion to run significantly faster than Cortex-A8 when both are implemented in the low-power processes commonly used for mobile applications.
What about power consumption? Qualcomm claims that Scorpion will have power consumption of roughly 200 mW at 600 MHz (this figure includes leakage current, though its contribution is typically minimal in low-power processes). In comparison, ARM reports on its website that a Cortex-A8 in a 65 nm LP process consumes .59 mW/MHz (excluding leakage), which translates into about 350 mW at 600 MHz.
BDTI has not independently verified the above clock speeds or power figures, but if they are accurate, it appears that Qualcomm’s efforts have yielded significant benefits in terms of both speed and energy efficiency. Clearly, Qualcomm is betting that its investment will pay off in chip sales, and that these improvements will give Snapdragon an edge over key competitors like TI’s OMAP3430 and Freescale’s i.MX31.11-22-09 09:11 PMLike 0 -
- 4,483
SG thank u very much.............Although Scorpion and Cortex-A8 have many similarities, based on the information released by Qualcomm, the two cores differ in a number of interesting ways. For example, while the Scorpion and Cortex-A8 NEON implementations execute the same SIMD-style instructions, Scorpion�s implementation can process128 bits of data in parallel, compared to 64 bits on Cortex-A8. Half of Scorpion�s SIMD data path can be shut down to conserve power. Scorpion�s pipeline is deeper: It has a 13-stage load/store pipeline and two integer pipelines�one of which is 10 stages and can perform simple arithmetic operations (such as adds and subtracts) while the other is 12 stages and can perform both simple and more complex arithmetic, like MACs. Scorpion also has a 23-stage floating-point/SIMD pipeline, and unlike on Cortex-A8, VFPv3 operations are pipelined. Scorpion uses a number of other microarchitectural tweaks that are intended to either boost speed or reduce power consumption. (Scorpion�s architects previously designed low-power, high-performance processors for IBM.) The core supports multiple clock and voltage domains to enable additional power savings.
In addition to developing a custom microarchitecture, Qualcomm also customized the core�s circuit design and layout in an effort to improve energy efficiency.
Overall, Qualcomm has made a huge investment in creating a custom implementation of the ARMv7 architecture. By way of comparison, Texas Instruments customized just the layout for the Cortex-A8 for its OMAP3 chips, and it has been reported that the process took 45 engineers working for a period of years. If so, Scorpion�s development probably represents an investment on the order of tens of millions of dollars. And what�s the payoff?
At first glance, it doesn�t look like much�as noted earlier, Scorpion is expected to run at 1 GHz in a 65 nm process, which is slightly lower than the 1.1 GHz top speed that ARM currently quotes for the Cortex-A8 in 65 nm. Scorpion is quoted as providing 2100 DMIPS at 1 GHz; Cortex-A8 is quoted at 2000 DMIPS at the same speed. However, a notable difference is that the Cortex-A8 top speed is for a TSMC GP (general-purpose) process, while the Scorpion speed is for the LP (low-power) process. ARM quotes the speed of Cortex-A8 in an LP process as roughly 650 MHz, and although TI does not publicize the exact speed of the hand-crafted, low-power Cortex-A8 core used in its OMAP3 chips, BDTI has estimated that it runs at roughly 450 MHz. (BDTI�s benchmark results for the Cortex-A8 are available at BDTI�s website, BDTI — Insight, Analysis, and Advice.) Thus, Qualcomm expects Scorpion to run significantly faster than Cortex-A8 when both are implemented in the low-power processes commonly used for mobile applications.
What about power consumption? Qualcomm claims that Scorpion will have power consumption of roughly 200 mW at 600 MHz (this figure includes leakage current, though its contribution is typically minimal in low-power processes). In comparison, ARM reports on its website that a Cortex-A8 in a 65 nm LP process consumes .59 mW/MHz (excluding leakage), which translates into about 350 mW at 600 MHz.
BDTI has not independently verified the above clock speeds or power figures, but if they are accurate, it appears that Qualcomm�s efforts have yielded significant benefits in terms of both speed and energy efficiency. Clearly, Qualcomm is betting that its investment will pay off in chip sales, and that these improvements will give Snapdragon an edge over key competitors like TI�s OMAP3430 and Freescale�s i.MX31.11-22-09 09:41 PMLike 0 -
- 319
Good info... without any confirmation before my 30 days are up I'm keeping the DROID... I can't go back to my STORM to wait for the Passion to be announced and then released... only way I could is if I know for sure it'd be released by at least early FEB11-22-09 11:50 PMLike 0 -
- 55
The only thing I have to say in reference to the topic of this thread is, clock speed has nothing, I mean honestly when it comes down to it, nothing on the performance of an architecture. Yes, you may be able to get some form of chip architecture to run at 4 ghz (cough P4 cough) but the AMD Athlons ran at almost half the clock speed, their design architecture was clearly superior to Intel in Most (not all, some minor programs simply flat out crave nothing but speed)
The snapdragon may be almost twice as fast as the ARM cpu used in the Droid, but it very well could have to run that fast just simply to compete with with ARM CPU/GPU combo in terms of actual performance. And honestly, when it comes to a phone, or really any piece of hardware when thinking of use (by that I mean, what a person actually uses the hardware for) more power never meets better expected end results, unless you have a job that requires it. The computer I have is generations (and a laptop to boot) over my AMD Athlon I used to have, but you know, Firefox still pretty much opens just as fast as the old system does it. Now, if I want to hardcore zomg game a thon, naturally my new computer would do better. But again, it's all down to reason of use.
FYI EDIT: Only read to page 3ish...
The main thing I am interested in, is to have the same amount of performance, with better TDP... dead electronics = no use regardless of how powerfulLast edited by Sozoc2k; 11-23-09 at 01:27 AM. Reason: Edit for clarity if repeating
11-23-09 01:27 AMLike 0 -
- 658
The Snap Dragon CPU has a dedicated GPU. It's a multi core SoC having separate cores for Video and Sound. The ATI Imageon Z430 is the GPU on the Snap Dragon.11-23-09 01:38 AMLike 0 -
- 4,483
I cannot blame you like I said I returnded my droid because I got an HP mini.
I went back to my S1 while it has the updated os on it I have to say I'm dying. But I wam determined to wait til the beginning of my next billing cycle.
in Dec before I do anything. So hopefully I will get a chance to see all that
VZ has to offer. If nothing then I am definitely going back to my Droid.
Btw I cannot logically see them putting this device on point and then have
something come right behind it to kick it's arse.......
But then again.11-23-09 08:55 AMLike 0 -
- 319
I did read that you returned you DROID because of the bill and netbook purchase in a thread somewhere.... man I feel for ya. I really don't know If I could go back to my Storm after using the DROID. I was transferring some stuff off my SD card of my Storm the other day and I felt like I had reverted to NES from Xbox 360.I cannot blame you like I said I returnded my droid because I got an HP mini.
I went back to my S1 while it has the updated os on it I have to say I'm dying. But I wam determined to wait til the beginning of my next billing cycle.
in Dec before I do anything. So hopefully I will get a chance to see all that
VZ has to offer. If nothing then I am definitely going back to my Droid.
Btw I cannot logically see them putting this device on point and then have
something come right behind it to kick it's arse.......
But then again.
I hated the idea of the physical keyboard on the DROID at first but as we discussed in another thread the phone experience (esp browsing) is great having the FULL screen to view content. Going back to a touch screen only might be a hidden shocker for me.... i dunno.
VZW is king of the shady deals but I just can not see them 'crushing' their most heavily marketed and advertised phone EVER! Never know with them tho...
I'm happy with this phone. I will def take a look at HTC's new VZW release when it comes but without a definitive time table given before I'd have to return my DROID I'm gonna have to pass up on it and enjoy what's I've got... not that it's too difficult to do that with this beast!Last edited by Martin030908; 11-23-09 at 10:02 AM.
11-23-09 10:00 AMLike 0 -
- 4,483
Funny u said that because I won't even bother with the browser on myI did read that you returned you DROID because of the bill and netbook purchase in a thread somewhere.... man I feel for ya. I really don't know If I could go back to my Storm after using the DROID. I was transferring some stuff off my SD card of my Storm the other day and I felt like I had reverted to NES from Xbox 360.
I hated the idea of the physical keyboard on the DROID at first but as we discussed in another thread the phone experience (esp browsing) is great having the FULL screen to view content. Going back to a touch screen only might be a hidden shocker for me.... i dunno.
VZW is king of the shady deals but I just can not see them 'crushing' their most heavily marketed and advertised phone EVER! Never know with them tho...
I'm happy with this phone. I will def take a look at HTC's new VZW release when it comes but without a definitive time table given before I'd have to return my DROID I'm gonna have to pass up on it and enjoy what's I've got... not that it's too difficult to do that with this beast!
Storm. It's almost like I am carrying around just a plain ole cell phone.
Sorry Stormers11-23-09 10:17 AMLike 0 -
- 3,026
Can you expand on that? Having a separate chip is not the same as having a separate core. Maybe site you sources? I am interested if I am misreading the information I have been seeing. CPU's and GPU's are NOT integrated if they are to be dedicated. Most integrated GPU's suck. (at least from a computer standpoint) I am the first to admit..I am NOT a qualcomm or ARM engineer...I wish I was for this thread though..lol11-23-09 10:38 AMLike 0 -
- 4,483
For that matter I wish u were too...... lolCan you expand on that? Having a separate chip is not the same as having a separate core. Maybe site you sources? I am interested if I am misreading the information I have been seeing. CPU's and GPU's are NOT integrated if they are to be dedicated. Most integrated GPU's suck. (at least from a computer standpoint) I am the first to admit..I am NOT a qualcomm or ARM engineer...I wish I was for this thread though..lol11-23-09 10:47 AMLike 0 -
- 152
As far as graphics go:
The most common measurement for mobile graphics capability is whether or not it has Open GL ES 2.0 support and how many triangles per second it can process. The PowerVR SGX 530 GPU in the TI OMAP 3430 rates at 14 MPolys/s while Qualcomm have benchmarked their Snapdragon chipset at 22 MPolys/s.
If you are wondering, that makes the scorpion 64% faster than the 530 with graphics...11-23-09 10:59 AMLike 0 -
- 4,483
-
- 3,026
You guys! I am reading some amazing stuff. It looks like Intel and amd are geared up to introduce greater phone processors than qualcomm's snapdragon?! I am going to post links, including a nice read that goes into graphics algorithms. It is quite complicated and can't be summed up, so I will just post links here in a bit.11-23-09 12:17 PMLike 0 -
- 142
Well I'm not biased in anyway as I don't have a droid. But I do have a question about power consumption and battery life. Everyones talking about the snapdragon and its effect of battery life. No ones pointed out the fact that the Droid is running a GPU and a CPU to power this phone. Anyone know the power consumption of the GPU? If so is the GPU+CPU power consumption comparable to the snapdragon? I know for a fact my pc's gpu takes a lot more power to run than my cpu. So what's to come of it?
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com11-23-09 12:27 PMLike 0 -
- 3,026
Intel plans to infiltrate the cell phone market with atom processors. It looks like allot of the specs are the same as the cortex 8, (maybe there is more to a fast processor than a few bits of computing architecture) The intel clocks in at 1.6 GHz. Hmm..I am glad I am not going to play the wait for the best processor game. I think that could take a life time. AMD is doing the same thing and I have opted not to post a bunch of links, but in response to the topic, I don't know what phone is going to be the fastest but I think it is going to have to do allot more than just what processor it has, you know, how is it parallel to the rest of the hardware? Here is some interesting links on how intel plans on bidding for your inner geek. Intel bought Marvel to implement production of these chip sets, but as you read, intel seems to think 500 to 600 GHz is some sort of sweet spot for a phone and battery combo though their top shelf atoms will clock in at 1.6 GHz (just need a battery company to catch up, lol!) My point is (then I will post the links) That a phones graphics and computing speed really depend upon allot more than a chip set. The rest of the hardware needs to be tuned in tandem to get good results. I hope this has enlightened anyone that may think a chip set is all you need. Here are the links:
Digital beat Intel to drop atom processors in nokia phones (these are used in net book books!)
Has Intel finally broken into the cell phone market? | VentureBeat
Here is a PDF about the Intel atom phone processor (looks like 1.5 GHz on the second chip they describe
http://download.intel.com/design/chi...brf/319544.pdf11-23-09 12:45 PMLike 0 -
- 4,483
Sounds as though that is going into LTE generation stuff to me.You guys! I am reading some amazing stuff. It looks like Intel and amd are geared up to introduce greater phone processors than qualcomm's snapdragon?! I am going to post links, including a nice read that goes into graphics algorithms. It is quite complicated and can't be summed up, so I will just post links here in a bit.
But thats a whole different topic.11-23-09 12:46 PMLike 0 -
- 3,026
The faster a processor drains power. That is the bottom line. There are some things that can be done to tune the chip to peak efficiency, but I think the snapdragon will have to be clocked down to get a heavy user to be able to last a day on it (I could be wrong) Maybe they have tapped into a battery technology (and tuned the qualcomm) to higher degrees of performance. I wonder if the HTC is going to live up to the hype of the Snapdragon? It will be fun to followWell I'm not biased in anyway as I don't have a droid. But I do have a question about power consumption and battery life. Everyones talking about the snapdragon and its effect of battery life. No ones pointed out the fact that the Droid is running a GPU and a CPU to power this phone. Anyone know the power consumption of the GPU? If so is the GPU+CPU power consumption comparable to the snapdragon? I know for a fact my pc's gpu takes a lot more power to run than my cpu. So what's to come of it?
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
11-23-09 12:49 PMLike 0 -
- 4,483
When U posted that; I went right to LTE devices. Your post was right on topic.
Honestly we all know LTE is going to be rolled out in the next year; in some markets by VZW. Their target date for completion is the end of 2012/13.
With all this new chip tech I am just wondering how much is geared toward
LTE...........
In my minds eye that is where this is going.
My mind is running with the possibilities.
I hope I made sense.11-23-09 01:16 PMLike 0 -
- 3,026
You make sense...I read what I originally posted it seemed I was headed there tooWhen U posted that; I went right to LTE devices. Your post was right on topic.
Honestly we all know LTE is going to be rolled out in the next year; in some markets by VZW. Their target date for completion is the end of 2012/13.
With all this new chip tech I am just wondering how much is geared toward
LTE...........
In my minds eye that is where this is going.
My mind is running with the possibilities.
I hope I made sense.
11-23-09 01:48 PMLike 0
- Forum
- Other Platforms
- Android
Rumored Passion faster than Droid?
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD