Arm Announces Mobile Armv9 CPU Microarchitectures: Cortex-X2, Cortex-A710 & Cortex-A510
by Andrei Frumusanu on May 25, 2021 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- SoCs
- CPUs
- Arm
- Smartphones
- Mobile
- Cortex
- ARMv9
- Cortex-X2
- Cortex-A710
- Cortex-A510
New DSU-110 L3 & Cluster: Massively More Bandwidth
Alongside the new CPU microarchitectures, Arm today is also announcing a new L3 design in the form of the new DSU-110. The “DynamIQ Shared Unit” had been the company’s go-to cluster and “core complex” block ever since it was introduced in 2017 with the Cortex-A75 and Cortex-A55. While we’ve seen small iterative improvements, today’s DSU-110 marks a major change in how the DSU operates and how it promises to scale up in cache size and bandwidth.
The new DSU-110 is a ground-up redesign with an emphasis on more bandwidth and more power efficiency. It continues to be the core building block for all of Arm’s mobile and lower tier market segments.
A key metric is of course the increase of L3 cache configuration which will now go up to 16MB this generation. This is of course the high-end of the spectrum and generally we shouldn’t expect such a configuration in a mobile SoC soon, but Arm has had several slides depicting larger form-factor implementations using such a larger design housing up to 8 Cortex-X2 cores. This is undoubtedly extremely interesting for a higher-performance laptop use-case.
The bandwidth increase of the new design is also significant, and applies from single-thread to multi-threaded scenarios. The new DSU-110 promises aggregate bandwidth increases of up to 5x compared to the contemporary design. More interesting is the fact that it also significantly boosts single-core bandwidth, and Arm here actually notes that the new DSU can actually support more bandwidth than what’s actually capable of the new core microarchitectures for the time being.
Arm never really disclosed the internal topology of the previous generation DSU, but remarks that with the DSU-110 the company has shifted over to a bi-directional dual-ring transport topology, each with four ring-stops, and now supporting up to 8 cache slices. The dual-ring structure is used to reduce the latencies and hops between ring-stops and in shorten the paths between the cache slices and cores. Arm notes that they’ve tried to retain the same lower access latencies as on the current generation DSU (cache size increases aside), so we should be seeing very similar average latencies between the two generations.
Parallel access increases for bandwidth as well as more outstanding transactions seem to have been also very important in order to improve performance, which seems very exciting for upcoming SoC designs, but also puts into more question the previously presented CPU IPC improvements and exactly how much the new DSU-110 contributes to those numbers.
Architecturally, one important change to the capabilities of the DSU-110 is support for MTE tags, a upcoming security and debugging feature promising to greatly help with memory safety issues.
The new DSU can scale up to 4x AMBA CHI ports, meaning we’ll have up to 1024-bit total bi-directional bandwidth to the system memory. With a theoretical DSU clock of around 2GHz this would enable bandwidth of up to 256GB/s reads or writes, or double that when combined, plenty enough to be able to saturate also eventual high-end laptop configurations.
In terms of power efficiency, the new DSU offers more options for low-power operation when in idle situations, implementing partial L3 power-down, able to reduce leakage power of up to 75% compared to the current DSU.
In general idle situations but still having the full L3 powered on, the new design promises up to 25% reduction in leakage power all whilst offering 2x the bandwidth capabilities.
It’s important to note that we’re talking about leakage power here- active dynamic power is expected to generally scale linearly with the bandwidth increase of the new design, meaning 5x the bandwidth would also cost 5x the power. This would be an important factor to note into system power and in general the expected power behaviour of the next-gen SoCs when they’re put under heavy memory workloads.
Arm describes the DSU-110 as the backbone of the Armv9 cluster and that seemingly seems to be an apt description. The new bandwidth capabilities are sure to help out both with single-threaded, but also with multi-threaded performance of upcoming SoCs. Generally, the new 16MB L3 capability, while it’s possible somebody might do a high-end laptop SoC configuration, isn’t as exciting as the now finally expected move to a new 8MB L3 on mobile SoCs, hopefully also enabling higher power efficiency and more battery life for devices.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
181 Comments
View All Comments
Ppietra - Tuesday, May 25, 2021 - link
I believe that he was talking about the overall SPEC2006 score and not just SPECint. Still he would be wrong about the X1 score, which would be 50 and not 40 (probably a typo).Anyway a 16% improvement for X2 over X1 would mean a score of 58 which, like he said, would still be behind the A13 performance core and well behind the 72 score for the A14.
X1 is already being manufactured at 5nm, so it makes no sense to factor in a transition from 7nm.
Wilco1 - Tuesday, May 25, 2021 - link
Cortex-X1 can reach 3.2GHz in Samsung's 5nm process but the power is too high: https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16463/2100-volta...TSMC 5nm is faster and lower power, which allows for higher frequencies. At a conservative 3.3GHz X2 would have a combined score of ~66.7 (only 7% slower than A14).
Ppietra - Tuesday, May 25, 2021 - link
That is not how it works!First of all you have no idea what would be the advantage from using TSMC instead of Samsung, so you are just throwing numbers with no substance. Secondly, X1 energy consumption is already very high (it is less efficient than the A14 Firestorm core), so no, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of room to improve X2 clock speed to 3.3GHz. Thirdly even with your assumption you would still have X2 performing worse than a 1 year old core
Wilco1 - Tuesday, May 25, 2021 - link
We absolutely do know. TSMC 5nm is ~15% faster than 7nm at the same power (or 30% lower power at the same frequency). We know that SD865+ achieves 3.1GHz on 7nm and that the frequency gain from A13 on 7nm to A14 on 5nm was around 13%. So 3.3GHz should be feasible on 5nm without increasing power.The point is that TSMC 5nm will give a significant perf/power boost (that A14 already benefits from). And that means the gap has narrowed to only one generation rather than 2.
melgross - Tuesday, May 25, 2021 - link
It’s not that simple. The cores would require a bit of a redesign for the different process, and each design would fare differently. Some might get a good boost, and others may not.michael2k - Tuesday, May 25, 2021 - link
You're comparing the X2 to the A14? I mean, if we're lucky we will see the X2 in 2022 alongside the A16. The A15 will be released this year, in 2021. We already have some X1 baselines:https://www.anandtech.com/show/16463/snapdragon-88...
So in terms of generation:
2021 X1 not competitive with the 2019 A13 now
2021 X1 competitive with the 2019 A13 on TSMC 5nm
2021 X1 not competitive with the 2021 A15 (est 10% boost to hit 70 SPECint)
2022 X2 competitive with the 2020 A14 on TSMC 5nm
2022 X2 not competitive with the 2021 A15
That still sounds like a 2 generation gap to me. The real problem isn't fundamentally the core, but the OEM choosing not to use a 2x2 design (2 X1 and 2 A77) or (2 X2 and 2 A710), so even if the cores get faster each generation, overall performance is hobbled by using 3 medium cores instead of a pair of higher performance X1 or X2 cores.
Fulljack - Wednesday, May 26, 2021 - link
it's cat and mouse, really. Apple release their phones in late Q3, while Samsung S-series are released in late Q1. there's 5 to 6 month difference.Ppietra - Wednesday, May 26, 2021 - link
Nothing of what you said gives you any data to infer about a transition from Samsung to TSMC.SD865+ does not use a X1 core, as such you have no commonality to make that kind jump in analysis, secondly the X1 core already consumes significantly more than the SD865+ core, so clearly there is no much room to increase clock speed from that perspective. If you want to increase clock speed you need to keep power consumption under control.
Wilco1 - Wednesday, May 26, 2021 - link
These are different generations of the same microarchitecture from the same design team with the same frequency capability (as reported by AnandTech). So yes there is obvious commonality.We also know this microarchitecture is capable of higher frequencies, for example AnandTech reports Cortex-X1 can reach 3.2GHz. The main problem is power however, which is what limited Cortex-X1 on Samsung's process. TSMC 5nm reduces power by 30% which enables higher clock speeds.
Ppietra - Wednesday, May 26, 2021 - link
actually they aren’t different generations from the same microarchitecture. The next generation for the A77 is the A78. The X1 goes for a bigger core design, and as such consumes more.Being capable of higher frequencies doesn't mean that Qualcomm (, etc) finds it viable to use those higher frequencies in a smartphone SoC...
NODE power reduction is stated for same performance and microarchitecture (which X1 is not) and only as an internal TSMC comparison... The data you give tells you nothing about X1 (already at 5nm) transitioning to TSMC. You are making an analysis based on wrong assumptions.