Silicon slingers prep 64-bit, quad-core processors
The report notes that MediaTek has already received orders for its octa-core chip from top and middle tier Chinese smartphone manufacturers. Despite this, the big name chip producers remain focused on trying to catch up with Apple. In order to get their 64 bit quad-core chips out during the first half of the year, Qualcomm, Broadcomm and NVIDIA have each reworked their roadmaps. Ironically, as the big names all work on matching Apple, MediaTek's own 64 bit silicon has to be delayed because of the company's focus on its octa-core product.
1. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)
64bit doesnt mean a ton. The fact that their competitors SoCs are so much more powerful and advanced per core is their real concern.
The architecture in the A7 and the new Bay Trail are superior running at 1.3Ghz with half the cores while Qualcomm has been using increasing clock speed upwards of 2.5Ghz now to cover up more primative architecture for the last year or so. There's not much difference between the Snapdragon Pro Quad, the Snapdragon 600 and 800 CPU's performance wise other than a straight increase in clockspeed. GPU's aside of course.
2. vincelongman (Posts: 929; Member since: 10 Feb 2013)
Yea, I was kind of disappointed the Snapdragon 805 wasn't based of ARM's A8 architecture.
By the way, Bay Trail are also quad core, though you right that they are clocked much lower.
3. Shatter (Posts: 1957; Member since: 29 May 2013)
A quad core baytrail at the same GHz as a snapdragon 800 is about 2x the performance.
10. Diazene (Posts: 123; Member since: 01 May 2013)
I think it's ARM v8, not A8
EDIT: sorry, someone else noticed that before me
12. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
It runs at up to 2.4Ghz and has four cores.
In overall CPU performance, it is comparable to Snapdragon 800, but has a seriously inferior GPU.
Snapdragon 805 is a clean sweep across the board though.
My point - do not compare bay trail architecture to Apple A7, which is much more advanced, ARM v8 based design
33. jos_031 (Posts: 30; Member since: 12 Jun 2012)
cant compare baytrail and apple a7.. cant even tell which is superior until you say which area you are comparing.... eg instruction per cycle, tdp, wattage per core etc.. some area a7 may shine in others baytrail
14. JakeLee (Posts: 534; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
I don't quite agree with you on this.
Maybe you already read them, but check my long comments at below link :
22. taikucing (unregistered)
Yeah, let's not forget the transistor count. Why? Because transistor count matters.
Intel Core i7 2600K (desktop CPU): 1,16 billion
Apple A7: > 1 billion
Qualcomm SD 800: > 600 million
The core inside the A7 chip is a big fat core.
Even 8 core mediatek has less transistor count than qual core SD 800.
Transistor count + improved architecture = win
4. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 2287; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)
Broadcom's SoCs are not that good as compared to Qualcomm and NVIDIA.
8. ajonly (Posts: 14; Member since: 25 May 2013)
Need a clarification. Is goolge planning to launch a 64 bit andriod by that time? Unless the OS is able to run on 64bit, what's the use of having these 'andriod' SoCs around?
26. JakeLee (Posts: 534; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
You are talking about the x64 version of Linux kernel.
The 64-bit Linaro toolchain is the only thing they have for ARM.
They "only" have to port :
- surface flinger
with the *immature* toolchain.
You can be glad when 64-bit Android arrives late next year.
9. spectrums (Posts: 127; Member since: 14 Nov 2013)
if must chose, i will choose this beter than apple chipset procesor :)
11. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
For the tenth time, this DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH APPLE!
IT HAS TO DO WITH 64BIT ARM V8 INSTRUCTION SET THAT WAS ANNOUNCED MORE THAN TWO YEARS AGO
23. taikucing (unregistered)
agree, ARM is the one who creates the 64 bit for its ARM architecture. Apple just bought the license from ARM and modify the CPU.
27. JakeLee (Posts: 534; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
Obviously you know nothing about SoC.
Apple licensed only the instruction set (for compatibility), not the architecture.
A7 Cyclone is Apple's own design.
The ISA itself is nothing more than a PDF file.
34. jos_031 (Posts: 30; Member since: 12 Jun 2012)
that does not make any sense... the architecture is in a piece of pdf... all tech in the world are... why to buy instruction if architecture is new and apple creates the os...and apple had told processor is based on cortex a57 and coprocessor forgot contain a7 or m7 architecture
35. JakeLee (Posts: 534; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
You have a point. I exaggerated quite a bit.
Apple took the CA57 design as a reference to save time/cost which is included in the ISA license.
It doesn't mean however that the design is the same. Most parts of the reference design wouldn't be any different if Apple did it from scratch.
Apple took a careful look at the reference design, optimized and customized the way they saw it fit. And that's quite a demanding job in its own and deserves respect.
13. _Bone_ (Posts: 2103; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)
The A7 shocked the industry. Look at how much performance and mileage the iPhone 5S can get out it despite the small battery, now imagine that tech packed in a 3500mAh 5.5" superphone and you get 3 days of heavy usage.
The key is HW and SW development going hand in hand, no wonder Sammy's into building Tizen, they know infinitely more about it's nuances over the licensed Google OS. Wake locks, unusual drainage and performance hiccups, Android has was to go before properly implementing seamless 64-bit processing, and at the same time silicon ppl. have many rounds before they make these absolutely out of control GPUs efficient, cause the Adreno 330 killing a 3000mAh battery in 90 minutes is something gone horribly wrong.
Google needs to let SoC makers be part of the Android development so they know what to develop for, the Moto X is a good example where that inside information went right (
15. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
There isn't much difference between the A7's and SD 800's power consumption.
Count in the screen size difference, and Snapdragon 800 actually seems more impressive.
Apple's SoC is quite large actually.. the Cyclone cores are huge compared to Kraits .
Dont get mislead by the superficial numbers
16. _Bone_ (Posts: 2103; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)
The G2 burns trough 3000mAh playing NFSMW in 90 minutes according to Erica Griffin, that's the only real world information you need. What's the point of the efficient CPU if the GPU drainage is all over the place? There's also a reason they don't make 4" SD800/A330 phones with 1500mAh. Imagine how long that phone last in real world usage! And now add wakelocks and bad optimizations, feeling sick already?
17. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
I've just noticed that the nexus 5 seems to have higher full load consumption than the LG G2 ..I suspect that could be due to the less efficient LCD tech.
Anyway, you have some points but none of that goes to the implied A7 's efficiency superiority.
The GPU gripe holds to some extent, but that is in no way Android exclusive.. put an iPhone 5S or iPad air to some serious gaming and they will drain just as quickly..heck, and what about laptops?
My Note 3 can put out about 3,5 hours gaming session on the go.
Given the 130GFLOPS GPU, that is mightily efficient in any book
18. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
..the 3,5 hour is my own estimate based on the fact that my battery loses 25-30 percent during a hour of Real Racing 3.
Erica Griffin is great, but her personal experience isn't going to make me doubt the most professional expert measurements.
20. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
..and there is no Snapdragon 800 based 4" phone because it would be pointless.
The new Xperia will be a 4.3" one though.
But I don't see why a small screen would need a heavy duty chip. To make use of it, having a large screen only make sense.
Which power user would go for a 4" screen?
21. livyatan (Posts: 642; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
Haven't noticed, really.
FYI, the Note 3 is lighter than Lumia 920.
24. taikucing (unregistered)
read my comment @ #22
A7 chip has more transistor count than snapdragon. To match the performance, Qualcomm needs to increase the frequency clock of the SD800. This case is like Nvidia Titan vs AMD R290X. AMD R290X has 6.2 billion transistors but has the same performance as Nvidia Titan which is 7.1 billion transistors. AMD R290X has higher clock, but the consequence is its power consumption becomes higher (worse than Titan)
28. darkkjedii (Posts: 10053; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Uh ohhhh apples got em shakin. Can't wait to see the A-8 in action.
29. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5519; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
You will have to wait almost a year. How good/strong is your patience?
32. darkkjedii (Posts: 10053; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)