Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: All
****************************************EXCERPT Teaser *******************************************

Texas Instruments’ move from the OMAP 3430, used in phones like the Palm Pre, to the OMAP 3630 used in the Droid X is reminiscent of this sort of steady progress I mentioned above.

The OMAP 3430 was built on a 65nm process (like Qualcomm's Snapdragon), while the 3630 is a 45nm shrink (like Apple's A4). Architecturally the two SoCs are very similar. They both use a standard ARM Cortex A8 CPU paired with an Imagination Technologies PowerVR SGX 530 GPU. The two SoCs fit in the same size package (12mm x 12mm BGA) and are ball compatible. If a customer wanted to, it could simply drop in a 3630 into an existing 3430 design with minimal engineering efforts.

Note that the most direct competitor to the 3630 is Qualcomm’s Snapdragon. While TI uses a standard Cortex A8 core from ARM, Qualcomm designed its own low power ARMv7 based core that is similar, but not identical to the Cortex A8. Both are dual-issue, in-order architectures - they’re like the original Pentium, but in your phone. Qualcomm also integrated the cellular modem into the Snapdragon SoC while TI’s OMAP 3 is a strict application processor - the modem is housed in a separate chip.

On the CPU side TI doubled the L1 cache of the 3430 to 64KB (32KB instruction, 32KB data). The L2 cache remains unchanged at 256KB. We won’t get a larger L2 until the OMAP 4, which will ship with a 1MB L2 shared among its two cores. There are the usual tweaks and bug fixes which may improve performance per clock a little bit over the 3430, but overall the 3630 just gets a larger L1 as a result of the die shrink - oh and a much higher clock speed.

The Cortex A8 now runs at up to 1GHz. The OMAP 3430 topped out at 800MHz in shipping configurations but most vendors ran it at sub-600MHz speeds to save power. The 3630 in the Droid X runs at a full 1GHz. It's worth pointing out that Qualcomm was able to hit 1GHz on a similar architecture at 65nm by designing its core from the ground up. There's clearly value in these custom designs from a performance and time to market standpoint. These advantages will only become more critical as the SoC performance wars heat up.

4 posted on 07/21/2010 12:34:19 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

A lot of chip makers seem to have gotten Intrinsity’s speed-enhancing technology for this generation of mobile processors. Sounds right, as Intrinsity would want to license its technology as widely as possible to make the most money.

But then Apple bought Intrinsity, and I don’t think they’re in a sharing mood for the next generation of mobile processors. It’s going to get interesting.


16 posted on 07/21/2010 2:34:01 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

OMAP Bump!


26 posted on 07/21/2010 3:13:46 PM PDT by Clock King (Ellisworth Toohey was right: My head's gonna explode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson