4 ms·
1.7 DMIPS/MHz seems to put it in the range of Cortex A5, maybe Cortex A7. But it also targets significantly higher clock speeds of 1.5GHz, so it may be faster t
by mtgx 9y ago
1.7 DMIPS/MHz seems to put it in the range of Cortex A5, maybe Cortex A7. But it also targets significantly higher clock speeds of 1.5GHz, so it may be faster than Cortex A7 in the real world. Probably not faster than A53/A35, but it should be close enough. Plus it has some additional features.
https://www.cnx-software.com/2015/04/09/relative-performance-of-arm-cortex-a-32-bit-and-64-bit-cores/ https://www.cnx-software.com/2015/04/09/relative-performance...
What may hurt it more in the market is the name. Most companies seem to underestimate its importance. U54-MC Coreplex doesn't exactly roll off the tongue...That means it's that much easier to ignore and forget about it. Hopefully whatever SoC will use it will have a better name.
- makapuf 9y agoWell the esp8266 80386, x86-64 or 741 chips didn't perform too bad either. ( I know x86 64 was an arch and not a chip)
- ant6n 9y agou54 rolls off the tongue. Sounds like a u-boot, too. With a night club.
- userbinator 9y agoTo compare with x86, 1.7 DMIPS/MHz is slightly less than the original Pentium (P5) at 1.88 DMIPS/MHz, and well behind the Pentium Pro (P6) at 2.7 DMIPS/MHz. Later x86 microarchitectures are vastly more efficient, with modern i7s achieving closer to 10 DMIPs/MHz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_instructions_per_second https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_instructions_per_secon...
- jabl 9y agoIsn't this pretty good then? P5-level performance/MHz from a pretty simple in-order scalar processor. And it clocks at 1.5GHz whereas the P5 topped out at around 200MHz. Though I suppose if you'd manufacture a (slightly tweaked) P5 on a modern process you'd reach similar clock speeds too...