The SoC: TI's OMAP 4460

The launch platform for Ice Cream Sandwich was TI's OMAP 4460. Unlike previous Android releases however, it seems that other SoCs will see their ICS ports done in a much quicker manner. It took a very long time for Honeycomb to be ported to other SoCs, whereas a number of companies have already demonstrated ICS running on their hardware (e.g. Intel, NVIDIA). If this is the case going forward, the launch vehicle for a new Android version may not mean what it used to.

The OMAP 4460 is a fairly standard, yet full featured dual-core ARM Cortex A9 SoC. You get two A9 cores complete with MPE (NEON support), behind a shared 1MB L2 cache. The SoC features two 32-bit LPDDR2 memory channels as well. The GPU is provided by Imagination Technologies in the form of a PowerVR SGX 540.

Max clocks for the OMAP 4460 are 1.5GHz for the CPUs and 384MHz for the GPU. As with all SoCs, all final clocks are OEM customizable to hit their desired point on the performance/battery life curve. Google and Samsung settled on 1.2GHz for the cores and 307MHz for the GPU, both exactly 80% of the OMAP 4460's max frequencies. Sprint recently announced its Galaxy Nexus would run at 1.5GHz. It's quite possible that we'll see a jump in GPU clocks there as well since the two may run in lockstep.

From a CPU standpoint the 4460 is competitive with pretty much everything else on the market (A5, Exynos, Tegra 2, Snapdragon S3). The 4460 does have more memory bandwidth than Tegra 2, Tegra 3 and Snapdragon, but it's comparable to Apple's A5 and Samsung's Exynos 4210. It's the GPU that's a bit dated at this point; the PowerVR SGX 540 typically delivers Tegra 2-class performance. A quick look at GLBenchmark and Basemark results echoes our findings:

GLBenchmark 2.1 - Egypt - Offscreen (720p)
 
GLBenchmark 2.1 - Pro - Offscreen (720p)
 
RightWare Basemark ES 2.0 V1 - Taiji
 
RightWare Basemark ES 2.0 V1 - Hoverjet

At 720p, which happens to be the GN's native resolution, the OMAP 4460 is much faster than Tegra 2. It's also important to note just how much faster Tegra 3's GPU is by comparison.

I understand why Google didn't wait for a Krait based SoC, however I don't believe the OMAP 4460 was the best bet given the launch timeframe of the Galaxy Nexus. Based on performance alone, Google should have picked Tegra 3 as the launch platform for ICS. GPU performance is much better than the SGX 540 and there's comparable CPU performance. It's possible that Google needed the memory bandwidth offered by OMAP 4, but we'll find out for sure soon enough as the first Tegra 3 device (ASUS' TF Prime) is slated to get ICS this week.

I'm also less concerned about power consumption being an issue since NVIDIA added full power gating to all of the cores in Tegra 3. With a conservative enough power profile Google could have guaranteed battery life similar to OMAP 4460 out of Tegra 3.

I get the feeling that Google wasn't very pleased with NVIDIA after Honeycomb and chose to work with TI this time around for reasons other than absolute performance. If it weren't for the fact that Tegra 3 and other SoCs appear to be getting ICS in fairly short form I'd be more upset over this decision. To be honest, the choice of SoC simply hurts the Galaxy Nexus as a phone. If I were you, I'd wait for a Krait based device.

The Galaxy Nexus - Hardware and Aesthetics Camera - Stills and Video
POST A COMMENT

185 Comments

View All Comments

  • Insomniator - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    I wonder if the Rezound's Adreno 220 will help with the delays using the ICS buttons. Reply
  • tipoo - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    The chip in this one generally benchmarks right after the Mali 400, the fastest GPU in an Android phone right now. Its probably a software thing, not hardware. Reply
  • Insomniator - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    According to anand's own benchmarks (can't find much else on the 220) the SGX540 is significantly slower...

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4243/dual-core-snapd...
    Reply
  • tipoo - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    I know, but its still one of the faster GPU's out there. I don't see why the GPU would be a limitation on just the function buttons while the rest of the UI is buttery smooth. Reply
  • tipoo - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    Also, one of the comments below ours show Android 4.03 being faster and almost eliminating that lag, so it was a software thing. Reply
  • doobydoo - Thursday, January 19, 2012 - link

    Fair enough - it may have been a software thing.

    Nevertheless, it's a software thing which doesn't happen on the faster GPU of the Samsung Galaxy S2. So I'd say it's a bit of both.
    Reply
  • zorxd - Friday, January 20, 2012 - link

    Is the iPhone 4 with the slow SGX535 lagging? If not, how can it be a hardware thing? Reply
  • zorxd - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    You are comparing a 1GHz TI OMAP4 SGX540 to a 1.5 GHz Snapdragon S3 Adreno 220.
    The CPU alone can explain the difference between the Optimus 3D (31 fps) and the qualcom developement platform (37-38 fps).

    As you can see, single core devices using the SGX540 are even slower.

    At a given CPU clock speed (let say the common 1.2 GHz) I think the SGX540 is faster than the Adreno 220.
    Reply
  • jeremyshaw - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    Different architecture. Snapdragon at 1.5GHz is probably a smidgen slower than Cortex-A9 at 1.2GHz. Remember Snapdragon as an amped-up Cortex A8. Reply
  • french toast - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link

    Scorpion is not an amped up A8, they are not related in any way other than the v7 ISA.
    The adreno 220 is way more powerfull than a 540, the problem with it was the poor bandwidth and the terrible drivers qualcomm released it with, it you check out the scores of the samsung galaxy s2 skyrocket with those new drivers it is much faster.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now