Technical Comparisons

As has quickly become tradition for us, to close out our look at the Midgard architecture we want to spend a bit of time comparing it to other SoC GPU architectures. As this is not a performance or benchmark article we aren’t going to dwell on the subject too much, but we find it’s helpful to get a high level overview of theoretical performance.

To do this we’ll take a quick look at theoretical performance for FP32 FLOPS, along with pixel and texel throughput. As this is a purely theoretical comparison it doesn’t (and can’t) take into account architectural efficiency, nor can it take into account real-world clockspeeds. But none the less it gives us something of a baseline.

To that end we asked ARM what a reasonable high-end Mali-T760 configuration might look like. T760 can scale up to 16 shader cores, but as we’ve seen in these scalable designs it’s very rare for anyone to build a SoC that actually takes the number of cores up to the architecture’s limit. And since T760 was only released to customers back in October of 2013, there are only a handful of designs announced so far and none of them are particularly high-end. To that end ARM suggested that a Mali-T760 MP10 would be a reasonable approximation of a high-end shipping configuration, so that is what we’ve gone with.

GPU Specification Comparison
  NVIDIA K1 Imagination PVR GX6650 ARM Mali-T760 MP10 AMD A4-1350
FP32 ALUs 192 192 100 128
FP32 FLOPs 384 384 200 (340) 256
Pixels/Clock (ROPs) 4 12 10 4
Texels/Clock 8 12 10 8
GFLOPS @ 300MHz 115.2 GFLOPS 115.2 GFLOPS 60 (102) GFLOPS 76.8 GFLOPS
Architecture Kepler Rogue (6XT) Midgard (T700) GCN 1.1

Briefly, we can see that as far as theoretical shading performance is concerned, our theoretical Mali-T760 would push 60 GFLOPS when counting MADs (20 FLOPS/clock/core). Or when using ARM’s preferred metric of MAD plus a dot product (34 FLOPS/clock/core) this becomes 102 GLOPS. How you count ends up being important here as it means the theoretical throughput of the T760MP10 is either close to something like AMD’s A4-1350, or close to the very high end configurations that NVIDIA and Imagination will be peddling.

On the other hand T760MP10’s pixel and texel throughput looks very good, easily exceeding both our AMD and NVIDIA configurations on both and specifically more than doubling the pixel throughput. Pixel throughput is going to be especially important going forward as these SoCs get paired with increasingly high resolution displays – the TV industry has in recent years become big SoC consumers and 4K TVs are growing in popularity – so being able to push a lot of pixels will in turn be helpful for pushing such displays. However ARM’s efficiency technology such as Transaction Elimination and AFBC will also have to play a big part here, as writing that many pixels per clock raw would consume a large amount of memory bandwidth, something SoCs rarely have to spare.

Final Words

With apologies in advance to ARM, wrapping up this article the first thing that comes to mind is something we wrote when looking at Imagination’s Rogue architecture earlier this year: “So it’s with some hope and a bit of luck that this might get the ball rolling with the other SoC GPU vendors, getting them to open up their doors a bit more so that we can see what’s inside their designs.”

It’s safe to say then that we have indeed been lucky about getting other SoC GPU vendors to open up about their architectures. ARM’s decision to come take a seat at the “open architecture” table has given us a great opportunity to see into the heart of another SoC GPU and to better understand and appreciate just what’s going on under the hood when we look at Mali powered products. Plus in opening up on their GPU architecture, we have been given the chance to see what just may be the least conventional GPU of the modern era.

When ARM first began to brief me on the Midgard architecture, they told me that it would be something unlike anything else we’ve seen before, and while I believed them I don’t believe that description is quite strong enough to get across just how surprised I was by ARM’s autonomous, TLP insensitive shader design. It took the better part of a few days even after the briefing to really internalize just what they had done, and while it seems simple (and very cool) in retrospect, going for an unorthodox architecture certainly throws you for a loop at first after spending several years covering the world of wavefront-driven architectures.

As for Midgard and its resulting products, this stands to be an interesting and exciting time for ARM. The finalization of OpenGL ES 3.1 and the announcement of the Android Extension Pack means that some of the functionality that ARM has had to sit on thus far is finally going to be exposed and used. And meanwhile with 64bit Android coming up and ARM’s 64bit Cortex-A5x processors similarly near, ARM can begin exploiting some of that shared 64bit development that ARMv8 and Midgard went through.

At the same time however ARM also will face the same struggle for market share that the other SoC GPU vendors also face. As we’ve discussed in the past, the SoC GPU market is full of competitors, some who make their own SoCs and hence won’t be ARM GPU customers, and others who are in the licensing business just as much as ARM. With the latest generation Mali-T700 series parts ARM already has some T760 wins with MediaTek, who will be using T760 with their mid-range Cortex-A53 SoCs. But at the same time I’d love to see what flagship-caliber device would look like with a T760, so hopefully we’ll get that chance over the next year.

This incidentally is all the more reason to be open right now, as it’s that much easier to convince your immediate customers and even build a brand among end users when they can freely learn more about your products and how they operate. To that end the “open architecture” table remains open, and as we shift to the next generation of SoCs and next wave of SoC GPUs, with any luck this won’t be the last time we get to learn more about the GPUs that are increasingly in our everyday devices.

Tricks of the Trade: Transaction Elimination and Frame Buffer Compression
POST A COMMENT

66 Comments

View All Comments

  • 3DPowerFX - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    Once again, AnandTech has published a great article! Thanks ARM and AnandTech.

    Just one point. there is a small mistake in the article about Samsung Exynos 3470 GPU. It's not Mali 450MP but the undead Mali 400MP GPU. Although it would be nice to have the latest one.
    Reply
  • Cogman - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    On transaction elimination. A movie is actually much worse about being eliminated than anything else. The only saving grace for a movie is the fact that the FPS are often much lower than what the device is natively putting out (so 60fps is a typical display refresh rate whereas movies typically operate at 24->30fps). After that, everything changes right down to the smallest detail. This is the grainy effect that you see in movies.

    For games, there could be some benefit assuming the game isn't a high action one. The biggest win will be still images (90% of what these displays are going to be displaying).
    Reply
  • EdvardS - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    Movies are not actually that bad. Remember that videos we watch on our devices have already been compressed with lossy algorithms looking for temporal resemblance, which seems to boost the transaction elimination efficiency as well. Reply
  • BMNify - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    gem did a writup , but i cant find it now !, but take a look here as regards transaction elimination http://community.arm.com/groups/arm-mali-graphics/...

    BTW "the grainy effect that you see in movies" have absolutely nothing to do with frame rate

    its put there (as in artificially) by the post processing due to the fact today everyone's using 8bit per pixel as in Rec. 709 (HDTV) color space that produces banding and other visible anomalies not the new official Rec. 2020 (UHDTV/UHD-1/UHD-2) real 10bit/12bit color space we will see soon.
    Reply
  • tuxRoller - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    Consider asking red hat's rob clark. He's been reverse engineering the adreno arch (his driver, freedreno (https://github.com/freedreno/freedreno/wiki) however, is not a reverse engineered adreno driver) for a few years now and can almost certainly give you at least that much info.
    His blog is at http://bloggingthemonkey.blogspot.com, and he's a super nice guy.
    Reply
  • jwcalla - Friday, July 4, 2014 - link

    Qualcomm is a really closed company. They just did a massive DCMA takedown on GitHub: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-07...

    Their software side isn't that great either.
    Reply
  • tuxRoller - Friday, July 4, 2014 - link

    I'm not sure why this is addressed to me. Although I expect AT will ignore what I've written so as not to upset their corporate friends, what I suggested is what they should do if they are really interested in the tech.
    What's strange to me is that they did something similar with their analysis of Cyclone to what I'm suggesting they do, except in the Qualcomm case the work is done by someone else.
    Reply
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    Awesome to see this here! I hope the Adreno team will follow suite soon and lay their doubts to rest.

    "LG’s Viewty" Holy shit, that way my 2nd ever phone (after my first flip phone got broken when I rammed a car with my bike). That thing was pretty bad all in all. But the slow motion camera was great for its time! :D It broke too while I was in a fight, but that was the last one. Touch Pro 2, Galaxy S2, Galaxy Nexus and LG G2 all working fine till this day. :D
    Reply
  • Willardjuice - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    "From a sales perspective this means ARM can offer the CPU and GPU designs together in a bundle, but perhaps more importantly it means they have the capability design the two in concert with each other, being in the position of the sole creator of the ARM ISA."

    lol, the bundle aspect is far more important for ARM gpu sales. ;)
    Reply
  • skiboysteve - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    Truth. Basically makes it so a competitor needs to show a significant performance, power, feature, or cost difference before it's worth an integrator investing in breaking apart the bundle Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now