[HN Gopher] ARM's Cortex A710: Winning by Default
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       ARM's Cortex A710: Winning by Default
        
       Author : ingve
       Score  : 26 points
       Date   : 2023-08-11 20:22 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (chipsandcheese.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (chipsandcheese.com)
        
       | packetlost wrote:
       | I wish I could buy a A710 in a SBC. I'd love to cluster up as
       | many ARM cores as I can.
        
         | CameronNemo wrote:
         | Don't SBCs have a lot of peripherals that aren't particularly
         | useful for a generic compute cluster but balloon up the cost?
         | 
         | Anyway you can find A78s these days if you look hard:
         | 
         | https://www.ipi.wiki/pages/i-pi-smarc-1200
         | 
         | And Rockchip is pushing A76s in their rk3588. Bit of a joke,
         | but it seems like that is the best we got.
        
           | packetlost wrote:
           | I mean, sure. Less than all the extras that a phone would
           | have. I already have a few RK3588 boards, and they're pretty
           | good.
        
       | modeless wrote:
       | I wish someone, anyone, would attempt to compete with Apple on
       | single threaded performance in phone SoCs. Nobody is even trying.
       | They all have business strategies that prioritize other things.
        
         | sliken wrote:
         | Or memory bandwidth (800GB/sec).
         | 
         | Or iGPU perf, which of course needs the above mentioned
         | bandwidth.
         | 
         | Or ML inference performance (5 tokens/sec with llama 65B).
        
         | MikusR wrote:
         | They are trying, but ARM is suing and demanding that the cores
         | that are faster than ARM cortex ones be destroyed.
        
         | brucethemoose2 wrote:
         | Huge, GPU heavy SoCs are not economical without the huge
         | volume, software ecosystem _and_ margins of Apple.
         | 
         | Smaller, higher clocked SoCs make sense for Android.
         | 
         | And seperate CPUs+dGPUs are what users want on PCs. Intel and
         | AMD _tried_ to sell GPU heavy designs (eDRAM Broadwell, Vega M,
         | Van Gogh (the Steam Deck SoC)) and PC OEMs unequivocally
         | rejected them. And they are trying to make better cores, but
         | again they have to balance die area and target servers and
         | cheap consumer PCs with the same cores.
        
         | lnsru wrote:
         | The question is if customers care about that. Crazy engineering
         | is cool for sure, but it must be profitable too. In my
         | environment people stopped buying newest phones years ago
         | anyway.
        
           | makapuf wrote:
           | People around me didnt buy the newest phones for benchmarks
           | then either. They just wanted to have the last one, maybe a
           | better screen or better camera, more storage or radio but cpu
           | was way down the list.
        
         | beebmam wrote:
         | Who cares? I genuinely haven't needed my phone to be faster for
         | at least 5 years. The only reason my phone becomes slower is
         | because of operating system bloat that they keep introducing on
         | phones.
         | 
         | Just give me an open OS, an old phone, and a web browser and
         | I'm good. If I need serious computation I'll use a 400-core
         | ephemeral cloud computer with 12 TB of RAM, or a modern GPU,
         | depending on workload.
        
         | wyldfire wrote:
         | > Nobody is even trying.
         | 
         | Qualcomm has a $1.5B wager that they can, with the same
         | engineers from Apple who helped them get where they are now.
         | 
         | > . Qualcomm, and then Samsung decided licensing ARM's cores
         | would be easier than trying to outdo them.
         | 
         | ...
         | 
         | > ARM has a firm grip on the Android market. Samsung, Qualcomm,
         | and MediaTek may develop their own SoCs, but all use CPU core
         | designs from ARM (the company).
         | 
         | But they've now reversed that decision, so we'll see whether
         | they can change it.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | The problem that Qualcomm and all the other ARM manufacturers
           | have: they're _impossible_ for tinkerers to get ahold of,
           | outside of Raspberry Pi and a truckload of shitty, barely
           | supported clones. And even then, the RPi _still_ doesn 't
           | have the basics of PCIe working - in 2023 [1]. What. The.
           | Fuck. Yes, Apple theoretically offers ARM devices, but they
           | are not cheap, not extendable _at all_ beyond USB-C and a ton
           | of stuff doesn 't work on Linux.
           | 
           | In contrast, say I want to develop something on Intel? No
           | problem, I head to Amazon, buy a CPU, a motherboard and try
           | if that old ATX power supply is still working. I plug in
           | whatever card I need and it Just Works.
           | 
           | Steve Ballmer was right on track with "developers,
           | developers, developers" - because if the ecosystem is crap or
           | impossible to use for creative people on a low budget, guess
           | what, they won't and go for the alternative. Linux started
           | out on x86 for a reason, and Android blasted Windows Mobile
           | (and everyone else but Apple) to pieces despite it being a
           | solidly established player. A large part was due to neglected
           | developers: outdated APIs, expensive and half-broken dev
           | tools (developing for WinCE was a _real_ pain in the
           | proverbial arse), and a complete inability to even try to
           | match Apple 's innovation. Apple had a monopoly on capacitive
           | touchscreens for years!
           | 
           | If the ARM ecosystem players actually want to throw punches
           | towards the unholy duopoly of Intel/AMD, they need to
           | standardize on a common core of UEFI and get modular, working
           | components out on the market.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2022/external-graphics-
           | car...
        
             | geerlingguy wrote:
             | To be fair, the PCI Express bus on the current Pi was kind
             | of an afterthought, only meant to work with a very limited
             | set of devices, so I'm pretty sure nobody at Broadcom, and
             | few in the design stages at Raspberry Pi, had ever tested
             | more complex devices with it.
             | 
             | It works fine in _most_ cases for simple devices (USB
             | controllers, SATA, NVMe, WiFi, and the like), but really
             | falls apart for more advanced devices (hardware RAID, GPU,
             | TPU, etc.).
             | 
             | And all Arm processors have to deal with cache coherence
             | issues (which aren't a problem on X86), meaning some
             | drivers (notably, AMD still) need to program for the
             | different architecture (some patches exist but they're not
             | perfect yet, and not in mainline Linux).
        
               | mschuster91 wrote:
               | > To be fair, the PCI Express bus on the current Pi was
               | kind of an afterthought, only meant to work with a very
               | limited set of devices, so I'm pretty sure nobody at
               | Broadcom, and few in the design stages at Raspberry Pi,
               | had ever tested more complex devices with it.
               | 
               | The first Raspberry Pi was sold over a decade ago and I
               | 'member people actually using them as embedded boards for
               | whatever stuff they were working with eight years ago
               | (especially once the GPU performance became powerful
               | enough to run digital signage). Sorry but that a company
               | like Broadcom can't be arsed to develop a standards-
               | compliant PCIe interface is a joke, and with this kind of
               | attitude the ARM world complains that no one buys their
               | chips?!
               | 
               | (Edit: Oh, just noticed whom I replied to - the person
               | who wrote the article I referred to. HN is a small world
               | indeed, and I guess we share at least some of our
               | frustrations)
               | 
               | > meaning some drivers (notably, AMD still) need to
               | program for the different architecture (some patches
               | exist but they're not perfect yet, and not in mainline
               | Linux).
               | 
               | Drivers... oh don't get me started on _that_ front.
               | Everyone in the x86 space seems to have learned over the
               | last two decades that it is a good idea to submit drivers
               | to the Linux kernel _early_. Intel and AMD both do that
               | for CPUs and also for a lot of their other stuff. In
               | contrast, the entire embedded world _still_ locks away
               | drivers behind years-old kernel forks, ridiculous NDAs,
               | absurdly expensive dev boards, completely whack u-boot
               | forks and even more whack BSPs.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-11 23:00 UTC)