4 ms·

The server focussed SOCs shipping currently (none of which are listed in those benchmark links) can have much better performance than Atom. There's a broad spec

The server focussed SOCs shipping currently (none of which are listed in those benchmark links) can have much better performance than Atom. There's a broad spectrum of ARM cores for different markets, and different optimisations that can be applied to SoC design decisions to target a part at different markets.

dogma1138 11y ago
The OP was talking about mobile not server SOC's but fine.... The server SOC's also have a power consumption several times greater. So if that's what you want lets look at the Xeon-D performance wise they are very competitive to Intel's discrete CPU's, and beat the AppliedMicro X-Gene 2.4 quite harshly... http://www.anandtech.com/show/9185/intel-xeon-d-review-performance-per-watt-server-soc-champion http://www.anandtech.com/show/9185/intel-xeon-d-review-perfo...
- rwmj 11y ago
  The X-Gene 1 was a development platform designed to work out the software bugs (and it's also obsolete now, since it was first produced in 40nm in 2013). Obviously if you compare latest Intel SoC with some 2+ year old dev-kit, the latest Intel looks great! They should compare Xeon with Cavium ThunderX, X-Gene 2/3, AMD Seattle, Qualcomm's latest server SoC or the HiSilicon D0x. http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/uploads/hc_archives/hc26/HC26-11-day1-epub/HC26.11-4-ARM-Servers-epub/HC26.11.430-X-Gene-Singh-AppMicro-HotChips-2014-v5.pdf http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/uploads/hc_archives/hc26/... http://www.cavium.com/ThunderX_ARM_Processors.html http://www.cavium.com/ThunderX_ARM_Processors.html
  - dogma1138 11y ago
    Well the Xeon-D 1540 sits just below the E5 in most benchmarks, unfortunately I can't conjure benchmarks out of think air, but you don't seem to be able to do so either (but for all accounts Cavium isn't shipping anything yet, all i could find are press releases that some one said they'll be building servers based on their SOC bot nothing else). I wasn't comparing anything, anantech was they compared an available Intel Xeon-D SOC against a commercially available HP micro-server that was launched 6 months prior so either HP chose to use an "obsolete development platform that was designed to work out software bugs" or that what was available for them at the time. Again I wasn't saying that ARM CPU's are bad, I was saying that anyone that is saying that they currently can beat Intel on either price/performance or performance/wattage across the board is delusional.
    - rwmj 11y ago
      Delusional?? 12 billion ARM processors were sold in 2014. Intel sold 400 million. I wouldn't bet against those volumes if ARM partners become serious about the server market. It's quite clear that 64 bit ARM processors are good enough to use for some servers, with some very high end offerings coming along soon as I've posted about in other comments. Disruptive innovations happen from below. Sources: https://atlas.qz.com/charts/Ek18VmbP https://atlas.qz.com/charts/Ek18VmbP http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-02-04/arm-chips-are-the-most-used-consumer-product-dot-where-s-the-money http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-02-04/arm-chips-ar...
      - jacquesm 11y ago
        That cavium looks extremely interesting. Any idea on how I could get my hands on one?
        rwmj 11y ago
        We (Red Hat) have one for testing, but I can only say limited things about it[1]. So I guess call Cavium and have a very solid business case for it :-) It seems they may be available for sale, but I have no idea how much they cost or what their availability is. [1] https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2015/11/24/48-core-arm-64-bit-server/ https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2015/11/24/48-core-arm-64-bit-ser...
        jacquesm 11y ago
        Ok, thank you. I'll read your article. Hm, ok, that was quick :) I believed you beforehand. Ok, will call Cavium. Thanks for the pointer!
  - makomk 11y ago
    It's not just the latest Intel SoC, it's a Xeon on a bleeding-edge process node with cutthroat pricing, both of which are rather uncommon for Xeons. It's clear that ARM has got Intel spooked in the low-end server arena.

dogma1138 11y ago

The OP was talking about mobile not server SOC's but fine.... The server SOC's also have a power consumption several times greater. So if that's what you want lets look at the Xeon-D performance wise they are very competitive to Intel's discrete CPU's, and beat the AppliedMicro X-Gene 2.4 quite harshly... http://www.anandtech.com/show/9185/intel-xeon-d-review-performance-per-watt-server-soc-champion http://www.anandtech.com/show/9185/intel-xeon-d-review-perfo...

rwmj 11y ago
The X-Gene 1 was a development platform designed to work out the software bugs (and it's also obsolete now, since it was first produced in 40nm in 2013). Obviously if you compare latest Intel SoC with some 2+ year old dev-kit, the latest Intel looks great! They should compare Xeon with Cavium ThunderX, X-Gene 2/3, AMD Seattle, Qualcomm's latest server SoC or the HiSilicon D0x. http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/uploads/hc_archives/hc26/HC26-11-day1-epub/HC26.11-4-ARM-Servers-epub/HC26.11.430-X-Gene-Singh-AppMicro-HotChips-2014-v5.pdf http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/uploads/hc_archives/hc26/... http://www.cavium.com/ThunderX_ARM_Processors.html http://www.cavium.com/ThunderX_ARM_Processors.html
- dogma1138 11y ago
  Well the Xeon-D 1540 sits just below the E5 in most benchmarks, unfortunately I can't conjure benchmarks out of think air, but you don't seem to be able to do so either (but for all accounts Cavium isn't shipping anything yet, all i could find are press releases that some one said they'll be building servers based on their SOC bot nothing else). I wasn't comparing anything, anantech was they compared an available Intel Xeon-D SOC against a commercially available HP micro-server that was launched 6 months prior so either HP chose to use an "obsolete development platform that was designed to work out software bugs" or that what was available for them at the time. Again I wasn't saying that ARM CPU's are bad, I was saying that anyone that is saying that they currently can beat Intel on either price/performance or performance/wattage across the board is delusional.
  - rwmj 11y ago
    Delusional?? 12 billion ARM processors were sold in 2014. Intel sold 400 million. I wouldn't bet against those volumes if ARM partners become serious about the server market. It's quite clear that 64 bit ARM processors are good enough to use for some servers, with some very high end offerings coming along soon as I've posted about in other comments. Disruptive innovations happen from below. Sources: https://atlas.qz.com/charts/Ek18VmbP https://atlas.qz.com/charts/Ek18VmbP http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-02-04/arm-chips-are-the-most-used-consumer-product-dot-where-s-the-money http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-02-04/arm-chips-ar...
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      That cavium looks extremely interesting. Any idea on how I could get my hands on one?
      - rwmj 11y ago
        We (Red Hat) have one for testing, but I can only say limited things about it[1]. So I guess call Cavium and have a very solid business case for it :-) It seems they may be available for sale, but I have no idea how much they cost or what their availability is. [1] https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2015/11/24/48-core-arm-64-bit-server/ https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2015/11/24/48-core-arm-64-bit-ser...
        jacquesm 11y ago
        Ok, thank you. I'll read your article. Hm, ok, that was quick :) I believed you beforehand. Ok, will call Cavium. Thanks for the pointer!
- makomk 11y ago
  It's not just the latest Intel SoC, it's a Xeon on a bleeding-edge process node with cutthroat pricing, both of which are rather uncommon for Xeons. It's clear that ARM has got Intel spooked in the low-end server arena.