OMAP4 & SGX540
- Thread starter roninja
- Start date
TI put up the entire specification for Omap4470.
http://focus.ti.com/pdfs/wtbu/OMAP4470_ES1.0_PUBLIC_TRM_vC.zip
confirms SGX544-SC as the graphics core. Still working thru the various clock definitions,dividers and gates to determine what the clock for it is, anyone else want to have a go, feel free !
Casting a glance over the diagrams shows that the SGX544 is connected to the rest of the Soc via DUAL 128-bit master buses. On the 4460, SGX540 was connected via a single 128-bit master bus.
Also the introduction in the datasheet confirms that the 2D composition engine is a Vivante GC320. The entire section for it is blank however.
http://focus.ti.com/pdfs/wtbu/OMAP4470_ES1.0_PUBLIC_TRM_vC.zip
confirms SGX544-SC as the graphics core. Still working thru the various clock definitions,dividers and gates to determine what the clock for it is, anyone else want to have a go, feel free !
Casting a glance over the diagrams shows that the SGX544 is connected to the rest of the Soc via DUAL 128-bit master buses. On the 4460, SGX540 was connected via a single 128-bit master bus.
Also the introduction in the datasheet confirms that the 2D composition engine is a Vivante GC320. The entire section for it is blank however.
If the 544 in the 4470 is truly clocked only at 384MHz, then it should it have some additional "surrounding" stuff (like for instance more generous caches, more bandwidth etc) compared to the SGX540@304MHz in the 4430 for the 2.5x times performance increase TI claims for the 544 against the former.
I assume the doubling of the master bus to DUAL 128-bits is significant in enhancing the bandwidth.
Either that (could be given it's Series 5 540 vs 5XT 544 I've no idea) or they are just going by the shader flops number...
Nope. The floating point value is damn close to a 3x factor and not just 2.5x. Given that texel fill-rate increases only by roughly 26% I'll just call that 2.5x claim a pure marketing claim. They all do it why shouldn't TI after all?
I think that depends if you count some special ops. Pure mad rate is almost exactly a factor of 2.5 at these clocks.
It is quite possible the number is just marketing though.
Peak theoretical numbers vs. peak theoretical numbers. You're going to get 2 FP32/ALU on a SGX540 also only under specific conditionals. The increase in throughput should depend on the shaders used themselves.
I doubt any embedded application is going to use FP32 throughout; there's a reason why OGL_ES splits up into highp, mediump and lowp. According to their whitepapers each USSE ALU is capable also of Vec2 FP16 and Vec3 or Vec4 INT8, while operating under FP32 as scalar units. No idea how it scales down from 4*FP32 on USEE2 ALUs.
It seems to me we are well and far beyond those levels. We're also def past Xbox 1.
Agreed, although to be fair we're not past the XBox 1 in every way, since NV2A had 4 pixel pipelines with 2 TMUs each at 233MHz. Both Mali-400MP4 and SGX543MP2 have 4 pixel pipelines with 1 TMU each, and in their highest volume implementations (iPad 2 & SGS2) run at 250 and 266MHz so barely more than the XBox1.
Obviously in practice both are massively beyond the XBox1 in most ways (ALU performance, Z rejection, programmability, and even memory bandwidth) and in fact the NV2A's 2 TMUs per pipeline weren't easy to use in bilinear iirc (and that's if you even had enough bandwidth). The one exception is Vertex Shader where Mali-400MP4 is obviously much slower than the NV2A (which is somewhat mitigated by more computation moving to the pixel shader).
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the Mali400MP4 should be 4Vec4 PS + 2 Vec2 VS, 1 TMU per fragment processor and the SGX543MP2 8 Vec4 USC ALUs, 4 TMUs ie 2 TMUs/core.
I wonder is this a 4470 ?
http://www.glbenchmark.com/phonedetails.jsp?D=Vizio+VTAB3010&benchmark=glpro21
Its SGX540, getting 64FPS in pro 720p, and 38fps in egypt offscreen. Both are by far the highest figures we've seen for SGX540.
http://www.glbenchmark.com/phonedetails.jsp?D=Vizio+VTAB3010&benchmark=glpro21
Its SGX540, getting 64FPS in pro 720p, and 38fps in egypt offscreen. Both are by far the highest figures we've seen for SGX540.
Archos's G9 Turbo line, released to Europe and now also to the US, clocks its OMAP4460's CPU to the full specced speed of 1.5 GHz, presumably bringing the SGX540 back up to 384 MHz.
Although always different from an OMAP4430, this puts the difference back to the intended amount between the two steppings of OMAP4.
Although always different from an OMAP4430, this puts the difference back to the intended amount between the two steppings of OMAP4.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I think there are two "turbos". The one with the pre-loaded ICS ROM is claimed to be clocked @ 1.5GHz, the others are just 20% higher clocked than the vanilla version.
They are also saying the 1.5GHz ICS version has 1GB of RAM (the others only have 512MB), putting it confortably above any OMAP4 device in the market so far.
Quite the powerhouse, for a "low-cost" tablet. Both the 80G9 and 101 G9.