Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: The Cortex-A15 Continues Running Strong On Linux

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,301

    Default The Cortex-A15 Continues Running Strong On Linux

    Phoronix: The Cortex-A15 Continues Running Strong On Linux

    Over the past several weeks of running the Samsung Chromebook with its Exynos 5 Dual SoC that is comprised of an ARM Cortex-A15 dual-core processor, I've grown quite fond of this latest ARM processor...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI0NzA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    this is unbelievable, almost literally speaking. imagine how much performance would come out of a quad core - tegra 3 would be obliterated. intel is under some serious treat with this CPU. even the A9 was close in performance.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    this is unbelievable, almost literally speaking. imagine how much performance would come out of a quad core - tegra 3 would be obliterated. intel is under some serious treat with this CPU. even the A9 was close in performance.
    should be close to the i3 something but then even the new current http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...621#post300621 Exynos 4 ODROID-U2 Prime 1.7GHz quad (up to 2GHz Over-Clock ) Mali-400 440MHz (600MHz), 2 GB of memory $89


    http://www.hardkernel.com/renewal_2011/main.php

    would probably get there already before the
    Exynos 5 quad/Octo core arrives at least... but then they will finally have the Intel ivy atom refresh by then too i think !
    Last edited by popper; 12-09-2012 at 05:28 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    this is unbelievable, almost literally speaking. imagine how much performance would come out of a quad core - tegra 3 would be obliterated. intel is under some serious treat with this CPU. even the A9 was close in performance.
    In terms of performance, ARM is nowhere close to Intel. The lowest end (non-Atom) Intel CPUs blow the ARM CPUs out of the water, and the Intel CPUs are getting better at almost the same rate as the ARM CPUs are (despite being so far ahead).

    Of course, the ARMs aren't trying to compete with desktop Intel CPUs. Intel CPUs are made to be _fast_. ARM CPUs are made to be _efficient_, which means balancing fast with a very low power envelop. Intel's Atom CPUs might be in trouble, but I don't think that'll be a big problem; if Atom loses out, Intel will just start making ARM CPUs (which they used to, years and years and years ago, iirc; as did AMD).

    Tegra is getting its ass kicked because Tegra is a piece of crap, which is 100% on NVIDIA, and has nothing to do with Intel. Tegra is an ARM core and a custom NVIDIA GPU (which has no relation to the GPU parts in your desktop/laptop GPUs), and has been kind of a baffling flop its whole life. The Tegra 1 and 2 didn't even have a SIMD unit, and the Tegra 3 has an 8+8 non-unified ALU cores in its GPU ("8+8 non-unified" meaning that the GPU is horribly under-utilized unless you have a perfectly balanced GPU workload), compared to a PowerVR *MP8 which has 8 unified SIMD cores (e.g. 2x as much processing power plus the capability to get closer to 100% utilization on the usual mixed GPU workloads). Even the PowerVR *MP4 GPUs get somewhere close to 4x the GFLOPS of the Tegra 3's GPU, due to a combination of better utilization of the hardware and the native SIMD-approach. People put a lot of hype around Tegra ("omg it's NVIDIA it's gonna be so fast and I'll have a GeForce in my phone!!~`1!1") but the reality is that it's just a mediocre ARM CPU with an even worse GPU. NVIDIA's expertise is not transitioning well to moble, and it's no surprise: how you make a power-hungry 1500-core high-bandwidth desktop GPU fast has absolutely nothing to do with how you make a power-efficient 8-core bandwidth-starved mobile GPU fast.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    well CO elanthis, you did take into consideration that the older tests show this first foundry run (TRAY priced at $20-$30 ?) slower clocked dual core A15 with slower RAM etc was still doing rather well at 50% or more against the i3-330M, 2.13 GHz, 4 Threads, 1066 DDR3, 35 W,TRAY priced at $225.00

    i forget is this
    Samsung A15 a dual channel or single channel ram SOC ! so potentially artificially slowed down throughput by a lot there too, and its not like they even have any Samsung wideIO mobile ram on there yet ether, so theres a potential massive throughput speed boost in the future for any SOC using that OC, (supposed to be available in 2013 but possibly delayed 2 years now).
    Last edited by popper; 12-09-2012 at 06:38 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Right, where are the power consupmtion and performance per watt benchmarks? Especially compared to Intel / x86(-64).

    Or are they not coming seeing Intel i7 (I think) embarrassed the ARM processors last time?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    719

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    In terms of performance, ARM is nowhere close to Intel. The lowest end (non-Atom) Intel CPUs blow the ARM CPUs out of the water, and the Intel CPUs are getting better at almost the same rate as the ARM CPUs are (despite being so far ahead).

    Of course, the ARMs aren't trying to compete with desktop Intel CPUs.
    maybe they dont try to but they do... I will not be overduing it arm is such long crap as the opensource grafics drivers are worse than lets say the amd-driver or maybe even the nouvou driver... it stands and falls with that.

    That is btw also my most important question can you view 1080p videos with the free drivers with doing by some hardware-parts not the cpu? I mean is there something like va-api working?

    So for what desktop operation is a amd x2 3800+ not fast enough? current games... that is all... all other tasks are some specialist things... I would not call that desktop I would call that workstation or something like that. The same is true for my E350 Systems they are aproximitly nearly at the same speed. So if there would be quadcore version of this cpu here... I think its fast enough for desktop or call it office... it would be not fast enough for gaming what maybe 5% of the "desktop" systems are used to... so replace gaming for your desktop and your statement is true...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    this is unbelievable, almost literally speaking. imagine how much performance would come out of a quad core - tegra 3 would be obliterated. intel is under some serious treat with this CPU. even the A9 was close in performance.
    If you feel up to it, buy a nexus4 smartphone and run some benchmarks on it. Its a quad-core krait (i.e. A15 with alternative branding).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    If you feel up to it, buy a nexus4 smartphone and run some benchmarks on it. Its a quad-core krait (i.e. A15 with alternative branding).
    while the Krait' With (quad?) Adreno 320 smartphone seems fine even though its not a real Corex core, it would be far more cost effective to buy 2 of those cheap Exynos 4 quad ODROID-U2 Prime with quad Mali-400 440MHz (600MHz) for linux use at the same price as the single phone ,and OC you get to use HW assisted driver blob's when they make them generally available perhaps this month! or at least before march/April when the real cortex A15 quad should be available, the question is also which OSS 2d/3d driver gets released first OC and do you want to be messing around rooting your device etc....
    Last edited by popper; 12-10-2012 at 12:34 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    43

    Default LAME results are rather, err, lame.

    Any idea why the LAME results are so poor? Is this a threaded version of LAME (LAME-MP) or the normal single threaded version. If the latter, then I'm very confused why the A15 does so poorly.

Posting Permissions

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