Print 26 comment(s) - last by whyRuCloseMynd.. on May 28 at 10:31 PM

28 nm design is likely to be the most powerful ARM architecture core yet; perfect for PCs

ARM Holdings plc (LON:ARM) has long been known for its lightweight intellectual property cores, which have dominated everything from slot machines to smartphones.  Power and ARM cores weren’t typically words you heard uttered in the same sentence.  But with ARM preparing to invade the laptop space, courtesy of Windows 8 RT (ARM edition), the world is getting its first taste of ARM cores clocked at the speeds usually reserved for PC users.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Comp., Ltd. (TPE:2330) today announced an important milestone, achieving a stable core clock of 3.1 gigahertz with a Cortex-A9 dual-core chip.  The air-cooled chip, built on TSMC's new 28 nm process, typically operates at lower clock speeds. However, the chip is capable of overclocking to over 3 GHz when performance demands it -- much like rival Intel Corp.'s (INTC"Turbo"-equipped chips.

The chips typically cruise at a more battery-friendly 1.5-2.0 GHz.  Thus, while partners' proprietary designs based on the rapidly maturing process will likely be targeted primarily at the laptop market, there's also the possibility of seeing such speedy designs in tablets or even smartphones.

ARM core
ARM and TSMC are showing that Intel isn't the only one who can play the speed game, showing off a 3 GHz core. [Image Source: Maximum PC]

Cliff Hou, TSMC Vice President, Research & Development, brags, "At 3.1 GHz this 28HPM dual-core processor implementation is twice as fast as its counterpart at TSMC 40nm under the same operating conditions.  This work demonstrates how ARM and TSMC can satisfy high performance market demands. With other implementation options, 28HPM [high performance mobile] is also highly suited for a wide range of markets that prize performance and power efficiency."

ARM Holdings and allies like TSMC need the strong showing.  While they have tremendous potential for growth if they can capture some laptop market share from Intel, they're also facing a counterattack on the smartphone front from Intel.  

Intel's first generation Medfield chips have finally arrived in a limited selection of smartphones, and battery life has been better than expected.  Competition will heat up in 2013 when Intel swaps the 32 nm node Atom Medfield's for a die-shrunk 22 nm version, featuring Intel's power-saving 3D tri-gate transistor design.

In other words ARM, et al. and Intel will be fiercely competing to deliver the most powerful chip computationally with the least electric power consumed.  TSMC's latest effort shows that it can crank up core speeds, but does it have the goods power-efficiency wise?  That remains to be seen.

ARM at least has one trick up its sleeve -- the upcoming ARM Cortex-A15 architecture.

Source: TSMC

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Colin1497 on 5/3/2012 2:48:03 PM , Rating: 5

I don't have a dog in the fight but:

1) ARM isn't invading the desktop space with Windows 8 RT. It's become pretty clear that the ARM version of Windows is pretty limited in that respect, essentially only supporting Metro apps. It's more about Windows invading tablets than it is about ARM invading the desktop.

2) A 3GHz A9 (oh, that's turbo peak, not actually sustained) isn't powerful by modern desktop CPU standards. Sure, it is kind of in the range of what AMD and Intel offered half a decade ago, so it's close to adequate for basic PC usage, but it's not what you'd want to buy in a new machine, even a budget one. Even if it were A15 cores and it were 3Ghz continuous it would be a low to midrange CPU by current desktop standards.

By alyarb on 5/3/2012 3:12:38 PM , Rating: 5
Just about everyone knows this. Jason Mick certainly should, yet he runs these kinds of stories anyway. He knows Windows for ARM won't have a desktop environment and he knows ARM SoCs don't have anywhere near the memory performance or bus logic or external interfaces to compare to any modern x86 device, yet he runs these BS stories regardless. This site is practically a tabloid.

At first I thought this was just a junk food news site for gamers and gadgeteers that actually have little underlying technical education or experience, but seeing a story like this so extravagantly extrapolated without any supporting facts... and his personal review of that little Acura, I don't know anymore. It's like it's his little diary of bad wishes or something.

By SPOOFE on 5/3/2012 5:44:36 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't see any mention of power usage. If a "high end" ARM can match (or just in the same ballpark) the low-end of x86 (like, single-core Celerons or something) but still use significantly less power, I'd consider that interesting. But if they're sucking up as much juice as low-end x86, nah.

By vignyan on 5/3/2012 6:17:29 PM , Rating: 2
I think that is intentional. ARM is not really any power efficient than x86. Decoder takes about 2% of processor power in higher end desktops, and ARM may be better by ~30% in the decoder part. That's about 0.6% better.

I am glad that Jason Mick finally stopped using ARM's "power sipping" and x86 "power hungry" ISA comparisons. I guess medfield proved the point I have been making for a long time on these forums.

Believe it or not, there is more to computer architecture than clock speeds and core counts. That's the reason why all x86 cores dont have same performance (Even with similar cache sizes, core counts, frequencies, process technology). AMD Vs Intel proves that point. That's why it is a separate engineering field. Jason, are you reading this?

And no, one can not just say, its simply a better processor (They are not naturally occurring items, they are engineered.)

By B3an on 5/4/2012 10:59:32 AM , Rating: 2
1: Windows RT will have the desktop environment. As anyone should know by now. It will do almost everything the Windows 8 desktop does, minus running x86 software. But it's there and functional and will have software like Office that will come pre-installed on all Windows RT devices.

2: Nowhere in this article has Jason said that a 3.1GHz A9 SoC will compare to Intels best x86 CPU's regarding performance.

While i dont normally like Jasons articles, i cant see anything wrong with this one. He's not made any stupid claims for once. You just come across as an immature fanboy thats scared or ARM getting a little attention.

By SPOOFE on 5/4/2012 1:58:46 PM , Rating: 2
Nowhere in this article has Jason said that a 3.1GHz A9 SoC will compare to Intels best x86 CPU's regarding performance.

Some of us don't care about comparing ARM to Intel's best; some of us would settle for seeing ARM compared to Intel's worst.

By StevoLincolnite on 5/3/2012 3:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
+1 Arm could have it clocked at 4ghz and it would mean little.
Think about it...
Intels medfield has an IPC in the same ballpark as Arm chips... Medfield is very similar to an Intel Atom... And we all know how dog-slow the Atom is on the Desktop.

By Brandon Hill on 5/3/2012 3:50:47 PM , Rating: 2
Interestingly, my dad has an Atom-based all-in-one Lenovo desktop and it's not bad at all. The only thing he does with it is Word/Excel, and browsing the internet with Internet Explorer (ugh!).

The only holdback seems to the dog slow HDD that is in it... I'm sure an SSD would speed things up a bit.

By ritualm on 5/4/2012 12:50:15 AM , Rating: 2
Medfield is alright for smartphones, not so much with full-blown Windows, and it's the latter that gives Atom such a bad rap.

By B3an on 5/4/2012 6:18:31 AM , Rating: 2
Win 8 will change that, it's a lot lighter and i've got it running very well on ancient hardware from the XP days. If anything it actually runs faster than XP does on slow hardware, certainly better than Win 7, and infinitely better than Vista.

Win 8 tablets will have Clover trail, a dual-core and higher clocked version of Medfiend. I think it will be more than enough for a fast and smooth tablet experience, atleast as good as anything the competition has.

By MZperX on 5/4/2012 12:04:15 PM , Rating: 2

I have an old Athlon XP 2600+ with 1GB of RAM on a VIA KM266 chipset in a tiny Shuttle SK41G case. It's been running Windows XP Pro since about 2003. Works like a champ, even used for some limited gaming with a Radeon 9500 AGP video card.

Do you think this relic could run Windows 8 at least semi-decently? I'd like to breathe new life into it but Vista and Win7 were absolute no-go. Of course it's 32-bit only and I'm not sure if Windows 8 is available in 32-bit version. I guess it should be if it's supposed to run on lower end devices...


By fsd on 5/5/2012 3:58:28 PM , Rating: 2
They don't say how long it runs at the faster speed, but it does say it's fanless, which is significant. Not many, if any devices, operating at 3GHz+ with just a fanless heatsink.

"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer

Most Popular ArticlesAMD, Zen Processor might power the upcoming Apple MacBook Pro
September 30, 2016, 5:00 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Are you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Apple’s Siri Speaker is a Game Changer
September 26, 2016, 5:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki