Memory Subsystems Compared

On the memory subsystem side, there’s quite a few big changes for both the Snapdragon 865 as well as the Exynos 990, as these are the first commercial SoCs on the market using LPDDR5. Qualcomm especially is said to have made huge progress in its memory subsystem, and we’re now able to verify the initially promissing results we saw on the QRD865 back in December with a production device.

And indeed, the news keeps on getting better for Qualcomm, as the new Galaxy S20 showcases even better memory results than we had measured on the reference device. The improvements over the Snapdragon 855 are just enormous and Qualcomm not only manages to catch up but very much now is able to beat the Exynos chips in terms of memory subsystem performance.

Arm very famously quotes that an improvement of 5ns in memory latency corresponds to an increase of around 1% in performance. And if that’s the case, Qualcomm will have had a ~12% improvement in CPU performance just by virtue of the new memory controller and SoC memory subsystem design. Our structural estimate in the memory latency falls in around 106 vs 124ns – most of the improvement seems to be due to how Qualcomm is now handling accesses to the DRAM chips themselves, previously attributing the bad latencies on the Snapdragon 855 due to power management mechanisms.

Samsung’s Exynos 990 also improves in memory latency compared to the Exynos 9820, but by a smaller margin than what the Snapdragon 865 was able to achieve. All latency patterns here are still clearly worse than the Qualcomm chip, and there’s some oddities in the results. Let’s zoom in into a logarithmic graph:

 

Comparing the Exynos 990 results vs the Exynos 9820, it’s now quite visible that the L2 cache has increased dramatically in size, similar to what we’ve described on the previous page, corresponding to the doubling of the available cache to a core from 1MB to 2MB. Samsung’s cores still have some advantages, for example they’re still on a 3-cycle L1 latency design whereas the Arm cores make due with 4-cycle accesses, however in other regards, the design just falls apart.

The TLB issues that we had described last year in the M4 are still very much present in the M5 core, which results in some absurd results such as random accesses over a 2MB region being actually faster than at 1MB. Cache-line accesses with TLB miss penalties now actually have lower access latencies in the L3 than in the L2 regions, and I have no idea what’s happening in the 16-64MB region in that test as it behaves worse than the 9820.

Examining the A76 cores of the Exynos 990, we see a much cleaner set of results more akin to what you’d expect to see from a CPU. Here we also see the 2MB SLC cache hierarchy in the 1-3MB region, meaning the Arm core cluster does have access to this cache, with the M5 cores bypassing it for better latency. Last year I had noted that the A76’s prefetchers had seen some massive improvements, and this is again evident here in the result sets of the two CPUs on the same chip as the middle cores actually handle some access patterns better than the M5 cores.

Samsung has had large issues with its memory subsystem ever since the M3 design, and unfortunately it seems they never addressed them, even with the more recent M5 core.

The Snapdragon 865 here is quite straightforward. The biggest difference to the 855, besides the improved DRAM latency, is the doubling of the L3 from 2 to 4MB which is also immediately visible. It still pales in comparison to the Apple A13’s cache hierarchy, but we do hope that the Arm vendors will be able to catch up in the next few years.

The Exynos 990 SoC: Last of Custom CPUs SPEC2006: Worst Disparity Yet
POST A COMMENT

137 Comments

View All Comments

  • s.yu - Friday, April 3, 2020 - link

    Not just economy of scale, 5G has higher material cost even if cost per unit is the same, for example you easily need over a dozen antennas in a handset. Massive parallelism is fundamental for 5G. Reply
  • Peskarik - Friday, April 3, 2020 - link

    Swiss watch industry consisted of a large number of small firms that bought in parts from China but marketed at premium price. These will not survive. Rolex/AP/Patek have queues years long, now they also stopped production, there is no excess supply, demand is still there just a bit dormant, especially Asian demand. They will be fine. Omega / Longines will survive due to lower price and high numbers produced. IMHO Reply
  • FunBunny2 - Friday, April 3, 2020 - link

    "Swiss watch industry consisted of a large number of small firms that bought in parts from China but marketed at premium price."

    actually, most are required, by law, to buy Swiss. at least horological parts. of those brands, most are either owned by Swatch or buy movements (more or less complete) from Swatch. a few years ago the Swiss government, after Swatch had bought up ETA and other movement suppliers, allowed Swatch to cease supplying movements to the trade. rather a big stink ensued. last I checked, Swatch had in fact cease supplying.
    Reply
  • damianrobertjones - Thursday, April 23, 2020 - link

    It baffles me that you used a capital S for, 'Swatch', yet didn't place any at the start of your sentences?! What the hell is happening to the English language? Reply
  • Peskarik - Friday, April 3, 2020 - link

    wait for corona to hit economy properly, maybe there will not be so much sales of 1000+ handsets Reply
  • Mgz - Saturday, April 4, 2020 - link

    $1400 is absurd ofc, In Vietnam since we made them so price is more reasonable - but we do not have 5G yet and we have that inferior version Exynos :(
    S20 is 680$
    S20+ is 780$
    S20 Ultra is 930$
    Reply
  • s.yu - Tuesday, April 7, 2020 - link

    Haha, I just looked on Taobao and the price of the SK version is comparable while it's SD this generation.
    I sometimes wonder if the locals in SK could even get that Taobao price off contract.
    Reply
  • RoC_17 - Saturday, April 4, 2020 - link

    Not only is the price tag obsurd, also it's the performance disparities between Snapdragon and Exynos, and weighting that with the price tag is Idiocracy². Why would I buy the Exynos crap for the same price than the Snapdragon parts? I've been with Samsung for nearly 10 years for phones and tablets along, but that's it. That I'm European doesn't mean I am an idiot willing to throw my money out of the window. Reply
  • PallavM - Tuesday, April 7, 2020 - link

    It is for sure, if this is how much the 5G phones are gonna cost I'm happy with my 4G phone Reply
  • StrangerGuy - Wednesday, April 8, 2020 - link

    $1400? Geez, I thought $1100 for the Ultra here in Singapore was already stupid overpriced especially when all S20 variants here are only available in 128GB, and the Note 10+ 256GB is just $590. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now