Samsung on Thursday said it had begun to mass-produce its first SoC for miniature IoT devices, the Exynos i T200. Aimed at devices that do not need a lot of compute power, but require ultra-low standby power consumption, the first Exynos i SoC integrates processing, connectivity, security and other capabilities.

The Samsung Exynos i T200 SoC uses one ARM Cortex-R4 CPU core and one ARM Cortex-M0+ CPU core for real time processing and microcontroller applications, with both cores running at 320MHz. For connectivity, the chip also contains a 802.11 b/g/n single-band (2.4 GHz) Wi-Fi controller and supports IoTivity protocol that enables interoperability between IoT devices over various protocols. In addition, Samsung’s Exynos i SoC has a security hardware block called the Security Sub-System (SSS) as well as a physical unclonable function (PUF) for secure data storage and device authentication.

The Exynos i T200 chip is made using Samsung’s “low power 28 nm HKMG” process technology, but Samsung does not specify which one. As for packaging, the SoC comes in an FCBGA form-factor.

Samsung did not indicate if and when it plans to start using the i T200 chip internally. Since Samsung also sells Exynos SoCs to third parties, it is possible that the Exynos i T200 ends up in devices made by other makers. As for pricing, the SoC uses a Cortex-R4 and a Cortex-M0+ cores, which are very small and optimized for low costs, therefore, it is unlikely that the Exynos i T200 will be expensive.

Related Reading:

Source: Samsung

POST A COMMENT

16 Comments

View All Comments

  • ddriver - Friday, June 23, 2017 - link

    Sounds like overkill for most iot applications, nevertheless the M + R core combination makes it quite versatile. Reply
  • name99 - Saturday, June 24, 2017 - link

    IoT is a huge space...
    It's overkill for a FitBit, sure.
    But for an Apple Watch?
    A HomePod has VASTLY MORE compute power.
    It remains unclear just how much we want to put into things like AirPods (in a perfect world they would, for example, act as a babelfish and translate language in real-time on-device --- and I don't think R4+M0 and no GPU is up to that :-) )

    Even basic things like a thermometer right now are garbage IoT devices. Why don't they come with a decent UI (not this BS "double tap button A then hold button B for 2 seconds"), draw a graph of temperature over the past day and few days, etc? A digital thermometer might seem like a simple product that doesn't need this level of controller, but I want a DECENT digital thermometer, not the crap that's on sale right now.
    etc etc

    If Samsung had a brain, they'd sell this as part of a unified package that also included a minimal OS and (most important) a recent UI framework allowing for the construction of reasonable UIs hooked up to a cheap screen and some reasonable input modalities. Let's see if they have that level of vision...
    Reply
  • lilmoe - Sunday, June 25, 2017 - link

    "Let's see if they have that level of vision"

    They don't, since they have no brains. Go to your nearest iStore and knock yourself out with their latest iThermo (tm) running their latest iThermoOS.

    One company is trying to design, fab and sell an advanced, multipurpose, relatively high-performance IoT SoC solution for 3rd parties to utilize, which can also work with vertically integrated solutions of their own, and ^this guy is complaining why they haven't used said SoC for his imaginary thermometer that has a touchscreen. SMH...

    Oh, and once they do, same dude would certainly accuse them of throwing everything at the wall and see what sticks. Lol, can you guys be ant more pretty?
    Reply
  • name99 - Sunday, June 25, 2017 - link

    Nest uses a Cortex-A8...
    What exactly is your complaint? You are against IoT things getting better UIs? You are against using Samsung products in thermometers?
    I was responding to the suggestion that this is a product without a use case by suggesting that many devices that use micro controllers today could use a product like this and provide a BETTER UI.

    So I ask again, what is your complaint?
    Reply
  • lilmoe - Monday, June 26, 2017 - link

    Pretty damn sure they know what they're doing. System LSI doesn't design consumer products. Like AMD, Intel and Qualcomm, they design silicon that satisfies the widest array of system integrators and OEMs.

    The one complaining was you. You're complaining why isn't everyone making products and also designing the silicon AND OS running said product. That's not realistic. That's not how the supply chain works. Unless it sells as good and is as profitable as their Galaxy S, they won't bother, and even that doesn't get a unified tightly integrated SoC.

    To answer your question, my complaint is about those who apply their understanding of the makings of a particular product from their favorite company to the entire product development of the entire tech industry. Just stop.
    Reply
  • name99 - Monday, June 26, 2017 - link

    "If Samsung had a brain, they'd sell this as part of a unified package that also included a minimal OS and (most important) a recent UI framework"

    So let's see. I was saying that Samsung should ensure that they sell this not as a bare SoC but ensure that it can also run an OS AND that that OS include a rudimentary UI system.
    You're opposed to this? You think it's unimportant that a SoC vendor include OS support or UI support?
    Reply
  • GreenMeters - Friday, June 23, 2017 - link

    Targets ultra-low power applications. Only includes Wi-Fi, no 802.15.4 capability. Not smart, Samsung. Reply
  • kfishy - Friday, June 23, 2017 - link

    I'm guessing this is to compete with the likes of ESP8266/ESP32 and Intel's new Xtensa-based Quark. Not quite ultra low power but also not a full Linux SoC. Reply
  • elabdump - Saturday, June 24, 2017 - link

    Is this chip well documented? Or will this chip end up as a weapon in internet wars? Reply
  • StevoLincolnite - Saturday, June 24, 2017 - link

    The adverts on this website have turned shitty since the Purch buyout.

    On what planet is "The Reason Amazon Doesn't Want Women to Find This" relevant to me or this website?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now