3 ms·
> significant memory bandwidth and latency advantage This is to cache or the main memory? I remember x86 based PCs taking 100ns for RAM access. Is it faster i
by actuator 5y ago
> significant memory bandwidth and latency advantage
This is to cache or the main memory?
I remember x86 based PCs taking 100ns for RAM access. Is it faster in ARM?
> They use the same memory for the CPU and GPU, so the memory interface was optimized more like a GPU and the CPU benefits in a few memory-constrained benchmarks (machine learning, AES-XT streaming)
This would mean each core having some dedicated RAM section better connected. Wouldn't this be more like L3 section in x86 but bigger? Maybe this is the advantage of having everything on the same die.
Beyond a certain size gains should also flat out, no?
- humanwhosits 5y ago> Is it faster in ARM? Not in the general case, but specifically with how Apple has brought the ram chips so physically close to the cpu cores
- actuator 5y agoI wonder what stops AMD, Intel in trying this, except loss of modularity. It is not like the architecture will change by bringing it into the die. As far as I remember, CPU is the only thing that does RAM access even in x86
- kube-system 5y agoI would be surprised if they’re not evaluating this. The only difference I can see is that it complicates the number of SKUs they’d need to provide to their customers. It’s a little easier for Apple in this regard because they’re also building the final machines, whereas Intel/AMD are making chips that are going in a wider range of devices.
- wmf 5y agoThe physical distance confers no latency advantage.
- actuator 5y agoIs this because of signal speed anyway reaching almost speed of light?
- willis936 5y agoMaybe 70% the speed of light. That's a handful of cycles at a few GHz for any SDRAM channel. The latency limitation is caked in to the scanning, strobed nature of SDRAM. It's dense and cheap, but it will never respond faster than ~20 ns (100+ cycles).