3 ms·

Intel should be worried. With support for 1TB of memory this seems like the first ARM chip that can really make a dent in the server market. I expect the big pl

Intel should be worried. With support for 1TB of memory this seems like the first ARM chip that can really make a dent in the server market. I expect the big players with significant energy bills to be very interested in this.

modeless 16y ago
Supporting 1 TB of memory on a 32-bit system reminds me of the bad old days of DOS extended memory. Are there any plans for a 64-bit ARM chip?
- noelwelsh 16y ago
  I don't know, but it's the obvious next step. There are certainly rumours that ARM is going to go that way. I'm not plugged in to the chip manufacturer gossip network but my guess is that ARM doesn't want to start an open fight with Intel before they have 1) Tested the server market. A 32-bit chip has its limitations, but for things like caches that are IO limited it is fine, and 2) Got their 64-bit architecture nailed down. I expect they don't want to give Intel a long lead time to respond.
  - mansr 16y ago
    When power is a major concern, and that is the applications ARM is targeting, using a 64-bit system when 32-bit would suffice is counter-productive. A 64-bit CPU naturally requires more transistors and thus more power than a 32-bit one. There are other overheads (in OS etc) associated with a 64-bit system. The difference may not be great, but for many applications it is a cost with no reward. Comparing to MIPS, they have had a 64-bit ISA variant for a very long time, yet all the recent cores have been 32-bit as this is all their current target markets require. A full 64-bit system is really required only for HPC-type applications, a domain currently owned by Intel and IBM. If ARM are interested in eating into this market segment, it is most likely a very long-term goal, and obtaining a foothold in the 32-bit server space would serve as a first step in that direction.
    - froydnj 16y ago
      Networking equipment is another place where 64-bit systems are useful. See chip offerings from places like NetLogic and Cavium, for instance: their multicore MIPS chips are 64-bit. Databases are another place where 64-bit systems shine. Maybe you already assumed that was included under "HPC-type applications", though. When I hear HPC, I think number-crunching, not databases, though.
  - Tamerlin 16y ago
    40-bit addressing is probably enough for a lot of applications that Intel isn't a significant player in yet, also -- like console gaming, streaming video, and that sort of thing. That would also explain the target 2.5 GHz clock speed, 8 cores, and media and vector instructions. I'd also guess that limiting the addressing to 40 bits is partly for power consumption, as mentioned elsewhere. You're probably right about not wanting to start an open fight with Intel, but it's hard to not see this as a shot across the bow, especially compared to Atom. If nothing else, it should make the competition between Atom and Bobcat more interesting :)
- mansr 16y ago
  This is nothing like DOS extended memory. It is quite similar to Intel PAE, allowing more than 4GB of physical memory. Each process has the usual 4GB virtual address space; the MMU simply maps it into pages taken from a larger pool. It makes perfect sense when running multiple large processes or doing virtualisation.
rakkhi 16y ago
I could see ARM processors really threatening the server market. Do you know how much power is used in a typical data center? In fact Smoothstone just raised a lot of funding just to pursue this: http://www.smoothstone.com/ http://www.smoothstone.com/ Also with increased virtualization you have beefier and beefier single servers running 100's of servers / desktops. Imagin running your entire VDI estate on a single 16 core blade powered by ARM processors that uses as much power as a single desktop, can you smell the $$$

modeless 16y ago

Supporting 1 TB of memory on a 32-bit system reminds me of the bad old days of DOS extended memory. Are there any plans for a 64-bit ARM chip?

noelwelsh 16y ago
I don't know, but it's the obvious next step. There are certainly rumours that ARM is going to go that way. I'm not plugged in to the chip manufacturer gossip network but my guess is that ARM doesn't want to start an open fight with Intel before they have 1) Tested the server market. A 32-bit chip has its limitations, but for things like caches that are IO limited it is fine, and 2) Got their 64-bit architecture nailed down. I expect they don't want to give Intel a long lead time to respond.
- mansr 16y ago
  When power is a major concern, and that is the applications ARM is targeting, using a 64-bit system when 32-bit would suffice is counter-productive. A 64-bit CPU naturally requires more transistors and thus more power than a 32-bit one. There are other overheads (in OS etc) associated with a 64-bit system. The difference may not be great, but for many applications it is a cost with no reward. Comparing to MIPS, they have had a 64-bit ISA variant for a very long time, yet all the recent cores have been 32-bit as this is all their current target markets require. A full 64-bit system is really required only for HPC-type applications, a domain currently owned by Intel and IBM. If ARM are interested in eating into this market segment, it is most likely a very long-term goal, and obtaining a foothold in the 32-bit server space would serve as a first step in that direction.
  - froydnj 16y ago
    Networking equipment is another place where 64-bit systems are useful. See chip offerings from places like NetLogic and Cavium, for instance: their multicore MIPS chips are 64-bit. Databases are another place where 64-bit systems shine. Maybe you already assumed that was included under "HPC-type applications", though. When I hear HPC, I think number-crunching, not databases, though.
- Tamerlin 16y ago
  40-bit addressing is probably enough for a lot of applications that Intel isn't a significant player in yet, also -- like console gaming, streaming video, and that sort of thing. That would also explain the target 2.5 GHz clock speed, 8 cores, and media and vector instructions. I'd also guess that limiting the addressing to 40 bits is partly for power consumption, as mentioned elsewhere. You're probably right about not wanting to start an open fight with Intel, but it's hard to not see this as a shot across the bow, especially compared to Atom. If nothing else, it should make the competition between Atom and Bobcat more interesting :)
mansr 16y ago
This is nothing like DOS extended memory. It is quite similar to Intel PAE, allowing more than 4GB of physical memory. Each process has the usual 4GB virtual address space; the MMU simply maps it into pages taken from a larger pool. It makes perfect sense when running multiple large processes or doing virtualisation.

rakkhi 16y ago

I could see ARM processors really threatening the server market. Do you know how much power is used in a typical data center? In fact Smoothstone just raised a lot of funding just to pursue this: http://www.smoothstone.com/ http://www.smoothstone.com/ Also with increased virtualization you have beefier and beefier single servers running 100's of servers / desktops. Imagin running your entire VDI estate on a single 16 core blade powered by ARM processors that uses as much power as a single desktop, can you smell the $$$