Mediatek 8xA7 @ 2Ghz ?

I forgot to add that the only thing that worries me is the implementation; heck even Samsung didn't get it right with its first attempt. Let's see what Mediatek will make out of it.
 
I don't know if Mediatek can even afford to do their own custom implementation at all, they could very well be using a TSMC hard macro configuration provided by ARM and their partners.
 
Just saw a bit in an analyst note on mediatek, not related to this chip, but their 8135 big.little chip.

"Power consumption issues with Samsung’s Exynos 5 (the first big.LITTLE chip, for Samsung’s captive use for Galaxy S4) have led to skepticism about the Big.LITTLE architecture. Our understanding is the issue has been about implementation. Mediatek had added its own dynamic pairing feature, which allows any combination of cores being switched on or off. Still, given this is a new architecture, we need to watch for stability of a new architecture."
 
To me, this seems aimed at benchmarks more than real-world applications.

That said, A7s are tiny, so it might not cost much more than a "regular" quad-A7 setup.
 
a little OT in this thread, but after your comment about the tiny A7 [ in fact ~0,5mm² @ 28nm ]:

I would like to see a Federation-implementation of an 8 core A7 system.
Federation means that you combine two in-order cores to form one somewhat OOOe Core.
With OOOe the federated "quad A7" CPUs could be quite fast at 2GHz.

Federation means this here:
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~skadron/Papers/boyer_federation_taco.pdf

a few more papers are available.
 
Alexko said:
To me, this seems aimed at benchmarks more than real-world applications.
Click to expand...

Of course does it depend on the benchmark, but given you get better results in benchmarks with some value, how many chances do you have it's not going to also show in real-word applications exactly?

That said, A7s are tiny, so it might not cost much more than a "regular" quad-A7 setup.
Click to expand...

If the implementation is more or less as some of us expect you have at 2GHz peak vs. the first 6589 iterations with quad A7@1.0GHz quite a healthy performance boost. The only other question mark would then be if and by how much power consumption has increased with two quad A7s at 2.0GHz. Since more bets in that market are actually about perf/mW and not just sterile performance, they might have another winner.

As a reminder these SoCs are dirt cheap; folks should keep that in mind.
 
Ailuros said:
Of course does it depend on the benchmark, but given you get better results in benchmarks with some value, how many chances do you have it's not going to also show in real-word applications exactly?
Click to expand...

To be honest I'm having trouble thinking of a cell phone application that might use more than 4 threads, except perhaps for games.
 
Alexko said:
To be honest I'm having trouble thinking of a cell phone application that might use more than 4 threads, except perhaps for games.
Click to expand...

I don't even think there are any games with more than 4 threads simultaneously and I don't think there's any benchmark either, but would like to stand corrected. The point of the 8 cores in this case should be rather perf/mW than just performance by itself.

You have in a MT6589T today 4 A7 cores ranging from 400+ to 1.5GHz. You cannot clock them independently afaik, meaning that despite A7 cores having relatively low power consumption overall you cannot use any within that quad as a power saving core; now having two quad core clusters you could theoretically clock any amount of cores of the two quads up to 2GHz for complicated tasks and any amount of cores of the second quad at very low frequencies.

If implemented as I imagine it you could get in the 6592 higher performance than any of its 6589 predecessors while definitely not burning more power.
 
Frankly I'm very sceptical about the two clusters for perf/power reasons. I suspect the disadvantage of running tasks on a too-high clocked clusters is pretty minimal in real world. If you have some complicated task requiring full clock, the power consumption is probably mostly dictated by that anyway, so the other tasks running on high-core clocked won't contribute that much to overall power consumption (after all the core those smaller tasks are running on will idle a lot of the time, so it is certainly not drawing max power). There's other reasons why I don't think it's a particularly good idea (more complex scheduling) and unlike A7/A15 pairs I think there's other reasons why it's 8 cores (though yes I can't see any other than for some benchmark purposes neither).
 
tangey said:
Just saw a bit in an analyst note on mediatek, not related to this chip, but their 8135 big.little chip.

"Power consumption issues with Samsung’s Exynos 5 (the first big.LITTLE chip, for Samsung’s captive use for Galaxy S4) have led to skepticism about the Big.LITTLE architecture. Our understanding is the issue has been about implementation. Mediatek had added its own dynamic pairing feature, which allows any combination of cores being switched on or off. Still, given this is a new architecture, we need to watch for stability of a new architecture."
Click to expand...

Does this new dynamic feature requires a special Linux kernel or is it there already?
 
tangey said:
Looks like this will come with 554MP4 or 544MP4 depending on which part of the leaked announcement you believe (most likely 544 IMO),

http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.leiphone.com/mt6592-sgx554mp4.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmt6592%26client%3Dsafari%26sa%3DX%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D768%26bih%3D900%26tbs%3Dqdr:d
Click to expand...

WTF is an eight core MP4 :LOL:

I believe even a 544MP4 when I see it, it sounds more like typical chinese marketing bullshit where they're counting Lord knows what. An at least 4x times increase in graphics performance between the 6589 and the 6592 sounds completely unrealistic to me. Sign me up for a MP2@~250MHz if they're really going multi-core.

***edit:

MT6589 = SGX544MP1@250+MHz
MT6589T = SGX544MP1@350+MHz

a viable scenario based on that:

MT6592 (1.7GHz CPU) = 544MP2@250+MHz
MT6592T (2.0GHz CPU) = 544MP2@350+MHz
 
the "8-core" is commentary from the blog, who probably has no knowledge of the matter. The screen-shot is from mediatek's website. They have not misrepresented their single core 544 in the past, so I would assume they are being correct with their naming, although confused between 554 and 544.

We'll have to wait and see.

Regarding 6589 and 6592, remember according to the roadmap they will also be launching MT8135, 2x2 big.little with rogue very shortly (Q3 ?).
 
Sony is reportedly bringing models with the MT6589 later this year.
I could see a 2x2 big.LITTLE SoC with a decent performing Rogue being quite competitive with the Snapdragon 600 (perhaps giving S400 a run for its money?), so Mediatek might actually become more widespread.

To think that some 4 years ago all they had to compete with the OMAP3 and Snapdragon was some piss-poor SoCs with an ARM9 @ 400MHz.. they're really stepping up in the industry.
 
tangey said:
the "8-core" is commentary from the blog, who probably has no knowledge of the matter. The screen-shot is from mediatek's website. They have not misrepresented their single core 544 in the past, so I would assume they are being correct with their naming, although confused between 554 and 544.
Click to expand...

A 2 fold increase at a time makes far more sense unless Mediatek all of the sudden changes pace and wants to go for higher than budget offerings.

We'll have to wait and see.
Click to expand...

Sure but you have to admit that my scenarios aren't exactly absurd either and yes purely speculative always.

Regarding 6589 and 6592, remember according to the roadmap they will also be launching MT8135, 2x2 big.little with rogue very shortly (Q3 ?).
Click to expand...

By the time you see 8xxx in devices that 2*2 big.LITTLE config with its frequency will be mainstream and below. Here's my line of thought:

6589T = CPU 4*A7@1500, GPU= 11+ GFLOPs
6592T = CPU 2*(4*A7)@2000, GPU = 22+ GFLOPs
8135T = CPU 2*A15@1600 + 2*A7, GPU = ~45 GFLOPs
 
I am more interested in its networking side of things. They claim to support FDD/TDD LTE, WCDMA , TD-SCDMA, GSM etc.

Does anyone know which IP they will be using. As far as i know, this is the only LTE SoC not coming from QualComm, Samsung and Huawei. With the later two being an Mobile Network Equipment Provider therefore owning some of the 4G IP.
 
Later reports now suggest that this 8-core mediatek chip will contain 4-core Mali graphics, which will likely be a T6XX as opposed to Mali400.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
ID@Xbox Summer Game Fest Demos [2021 June 15-21]
Replies
7
Views
1K
AzBat
A
Rys
Reopening Architecture and Products + rules and guidelines changes
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
13K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
S
NPD January 2022
Replies
1
Views
1K
Deleted member 11852
D
BRiT
  • Sticky
System Reservations on PS4, 4Pro, PS5, XBox One, One S, One X, and Xbox Series X|S [2019-12, 2020-03]
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
25K
LiveGamer
L
D
Heartbeat Sensor on Dualshock 5
5 6 7
Replies
129
Views
10K
Cyan
Cyan
Back
Top