Samsung's new custom CPU cores 45% faster than A57 Comments
- Anonymous
- 7q9
Kangal, 04 May 2015An integrated modem will be included, as they are competing against Apple and Qualcomm. I t... moreexynos M1 already wipes the floor
- Kangal
- t@L
An integrated modem will be included, as they are competing against Apple and Qualcomm.
I think overall, this is going to be similar to Apple's Cyclone 64-bit cores.
The only difference? Samsung will beef it up:
-Quadcore over Dualcore
-2GHz over 1.5GHz in Clockspeed
-4GB RAM over 1GB
-DDR4 RAM over DDR3
-UFS2 over eMMC5
-MongooseGPU over PowerVR G6450 GPU
It will be interesting to compare the next Galaxy S to the next iPhone Plus. iOS can render its games in 1080p now, and most Android games are rendered in 1080p too. So we will see if Samsung can perform good. The latest iPhones have a max rate of 60fps, and a very stable 50fps average performance. The latest Galaxy S6 had a max rate of 50fps, and an unstable 35fps average performance. So we'll see if Android can come closer to iOS performance wise.
- AnonD-291263
- kiP
mehranbiz, 27 Apr 2015They are just creating hype I don't think that any major improvement will come in Galaxy S7 ma... morelol
USB type C
Metal unibody
Custom CPU
Custom GPU
5.2" screen
14nm LPP
14nm RAM and Memory
More efficient display
More material design
These are all possible improvement.
- socguru
- tT2
A 45 % gain on a single core performance will be really significant. Mangoose is not changing the customer core of A57 and it should be same as 7420. The changes are around the CCI, AXI and Memory interface. Considering these the memory transactions and CCI performance will be critical boost. Obviously Mangoose will run at lease 10~15% faster due to higher clock compared to 7420 but getting 45% gain still doesn't add up. Interesting to see when the actual SOC comes out.
- Someone
- mcm
Anonymous, 28 Apr 2015%45 faster for next year means nothing but may be good for Note 5 if they can manage that.
Seeing how slow the progress has been with various cpu's, I would say 45% is a lot.
I dont know what you think 45% actually is. But most phones dont have an increase of 45%.....
- Anonymous
- rjI
AnonD-292154, 27 Apr 2015Apple is going to destroy all the phones and CPU on the market year after year !! Go to sleep .Yeah probably going to employ their state-of-the-art 480p resolution to get that level of performance without really upgrading the internals
- Anonymous
- 0rS
%45 faster for next year means nothing but may be good for Note 5 if they can manage that.
- AnonD-335213
- v0q
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015The note 5 will probably stick to 7420 like the s6Oh yeah, you maybe right after all. The reason however why I said it was that, in this very fast-paced and almost saturated market of technology, granting that Samsung will still be using the 7420 in the Note 5 and Edge 2, even though crapple's probably then iBend 6s & 6s+ won't be able to surpass the speed, efficiency and overall performance of the Exynos together with the UFS 2.0 and perhaps, 4 to 6GB of RAM, but because Samsung have not been able to produce the immediate successor of the 7420 SoC for its next two phablet flagship offerings, Crapple trollers may still be able to find-a-way to bemock Samsung for not being able to cope and meat the demands of its consumers! And I really believe, that Samsung is very well-aware of this, and for-sure, they will not allow Crapple and probably others as-well to even come close and become a threat to them.
- Anonymous
- nGm
AnonD-292154, 27 Apr 2015Apple is going to destroy all the phones and CPU on the market year after year !! Go to sleep .Hate to break it to you, every apple chip pre A8 was made by samsung, how ever most parts are from Samsung too.
- AnonD-390576
- mTa
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015Nothing original from Samsung. It is just based off from an existing soc from Arm. In reply to Anonymous @ 2015-04-27 22:00 from 4SSC: "Nothing original from Samsung. It is just based off from an existing soc from Arm." ...
And ARM is based off existing RISC. Nothing in the world is original.
- Anonymous
- vGX
Sami - try and get this ready for the Note 5 ... That would be fantastic
- Kettzy
- bER
AnonD-90736, 28 Apr 2015The snapdragon 820 will defeat all, so Samsung why bother Lol... That's cute... We've seen what SD810 has done. It's better, not to comment before it releases. You keep underestimating others and you're doomed. Even Huawei Kirin chipset has proved to be better than SD 810. Exynos is in league of it's own nothing even comes closer to it at the moment, it is not one but two steps ahead of the competition already. Play catchup with 820 now. :)
- Anonymous
- uvF
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015Though someone said the Mali T880 that GPU won't be ready until 2016 supposedly. So it will l... moreSamsung was maiing own gpu month ago...
- AnonD-363711
- UPc
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015Nothing original from Samsung. It is just based off from an existing soc from Arm. a7 or snap810 also ARM based sytem
- TechExpert
- PBq
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015Nothing original from Samsung. It is just based off from an existing soc from Arm. Did you even read the article?
- Anonymous
- fxT
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015Nothing original from Samsung. It is just based off from an existing soc from Arm. Same thing, nothing original from Apple and Qualcomm, both of them also based off from an existing ARM SoC.
- AnonD-291263
- kiP
Anonymous, 27 Apr 2015It's nice that this will be faster than Cortex A57, but by this time next year ARM (and other)... moreIf it can hold its performance over a long period of time with that massive improvement with 14nm LPP I will be so glad.
- Anonym
- NCe
AnonD-85193, 27 Apr 2015Not sure why everyone thinks increased instructions per clock = higher power usage and more he... moreAgreed, it's actually quite the opposite... every freshman in a Computer Science-related course knows the power consumption of a CMOS-based circuitry happens when there is a change of state (which is controlled by the clock), so (for the same transistor count and same fabrication) higher frequency implies higher power consumption.
Thus it becomes paramount to achieve better clock efficiency in order to get the more power efficient circuit.
The only caveat is that one needs to account for the increase in surface/transistor count to achieved that added IPC. More surface equals more power consumption, but as long as the efficiency gained is higher than the added power, then the net result will be a reduction in overall power consumption.
Practice (in the x86 camp and Intel vs AMD) shows how the overall power consumption is significantly reduced by the added efficiency.
Tip us
881k
144k 87k
514k
RSS
Log in I forgot my password Sign up