Slashdot Mirror


ARM Announces Next-Gen 64-Bit Artemis Mobile Chip On 10nm TSMC FinFET Process (hothardware.com)

MojoKid writes from a report via Hot Hardware: ARM has been working closely with TSMC for years now. Over the last six years or so especially, ARM and TSMC have collaborated to ensure that TSMC's cutting-edge process technologies work well with ARM's processor IP. However recently, ARM just announced the successful tape-out of a test chip featuring next-generation, 64-Bit ARM v8-A mobile processor cores, codenamed Artemis, manufactured using TSMC's upcoming 10nm FinFET process technology. The test chip features what ARM calls an Artemis cluster. It's essentially a quad-core processor with power management IP, a single-shader Mali graphics core, AMBA AXI interconnect, and test ROMs connected to a second cluster by an asynchronous bridge that features the memory subsystem, which is stacked with a Cortex M core that handles control logic, some timers, SRAM, and external IO. Compared to 16nm FinFET+, at nominal voltage, the 10nm test chip offered a 12% performance improvement in a similar power envelope. In super-overdrive mode (Vsod), the Artemis test chip offered similar performance, but at 30% lower power.SoCs for premium mobile devices with next-generation cores produced on the 10nm process node are expected to arrive later in the second half of this year.

51 comments

  1. Uhh .. by erktrek · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. Bingo?

    1. Re:Uhh .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey look, this guy is playing buzzword bingo, and he won!

    2. Re:Uhh .. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      .. Bingo?

      Yes, Squiffy?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  2. Super-Overdrive Mode! by lobiusmoop · · Score: 2

    I think Intel needs to get some super-overdrive mode too if it wants to get down to 10nm as well... I think they're struggling with 14nm just now.

    Does anybody know what's going on in the left of this picture from TFA?

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    1. Re:Super-Overdrive Mode! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Looks like "bring your kid to work day" and one of the little darlings had their watercolors with them.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Intel needs to get some super-overdrive mode too if it wants to get down to 10nm as well... I think they're struggling with 14nm just now.

      Does anybody know what's going on in the left of this picture from TFA?

      That is probably heat or say temperature representation, for the particular test case.

    3. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it's true that TSMC can do volume at 10 nm then it really is a watershed. Intel is struggling to do volume at 10 nm http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2447789/intel-denies-further-delays-to-10nm-chips-beyond-2017

      It would be a watershed because Intel has been ahead in process node technology for decades. If it looses it's edge on the node then its a huge event.

      I'm skeptical that TSMC can really crank out volume at 10 nm beating Intel which apparently can't. Volume is the difference between a science project that produces one usable chip in one hundred and reliable mass production of millions of chips.

      Has the ARM world really beaten the x86 world in process lithography?

    4. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This happens every process node.

      Just before intel starts shipping volume on a production ready process, someone else announces their process that's at the same pitch to give the impression of being 'almost caught up' when they aren't even close.

      Don't think that 10nm TSMC is the same thing as 10nm Intel either. In node naming, nanometers are a marketing term.
       

    5. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The arm chip is tiny compared to an i7 so the "volume" or yield isn't likely to compare easily.

      Also remember its this way: his,hers,its - no apostrophe.

    6. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It isnt true. TMSC can NOT do 10nm yet. The whole 10nm rating is a scam.

      When they say 10nm, what they really mean is 12nm-14nm. Effectivley TMSC 10nm process is really the same size as Intels 14nm process.

      http://wccftech.com/tsmc-10nm-volume-production-begins-2016-7nm/

    7. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wellll check that out, someone left on slash who isnt a retard. he/she is right btw, TMSC 16nm process really had 20nm gates and its forthcoming 7nm process has 10nm gates. its marketing bullshit so they dont appear to be behind in the big shrink race.

    8. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it's true that TSMC can do volume at 10 nm then it really is a watershed. Intel is struggling to do volume at 10 nm

      We'll see. As far as I know, Intel doesn't announce test tapeouts since they're not in the business of selling design and process tech but rather actual processors. But if you look at slides from their 14nm release you see PRQ = product release qualification = volume production was late Q2 2014 and there's yield graphs back to May 2013. Considering Intel was on a two-year tick-tock I would think it's natural if their first test was mid-2015 and Kaby Lake was announced in July because the yields were way too low.

      A full 300mm wafer is 70695 mm^2, a Skylake quad is 122mm^2 and at 10nm you're probably looking at ~1000 CPUs/wafer. So with 0,1% yield you can issue the PR release saying you've made a 10nm chip, but if you don't have consistency in the process it's not worth launching because the net result costs more than a mature 14nm process. In any case parity is pretty good too, being a half-node behind is fighting with a cost handicap that's really tough to beat as AMD has noticed. When they launch Zen/Polaris it's the first time in forever they're on roughly even footing with Intel.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You honestly think Zen or Polaris will put AMD on an even footing with Intel?

      If so what makes you think that?

    10. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Kjella · · Score: 2

      You honestly think Zen or Polaris will put AMD on an even footing with Intel? If so what makes you think that?

      Well the entire paragraph was about process tech. Polaris and Zen is launching on GlobalFoundries' 14nm process, Intel has announced that for the next year or they'll stay on 14nm with Kaby Lake. So give or take a little marketing bullshit 14 ~= 14. Whether the design is any good, we'll see...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    11. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's" has an apostrophe when it means "it is" but not when it indicates possession (eg: "the turtle loved its shell").

    12. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to mention all reports so far put Zen at least 40% faster than their fastest Vishera chips, that puts it squarely in Ivy Bridge territory if not better which if they keep their prices close to what they are now? We're talking 8 cores/16 threads for less than $300, those are gonna sell like hotcakes.

      As for TFA? Honestly I don't think its gonna help ARM much at all, and here is why...dark silicon. With phones and tablets being made so thin frankly your average ARM chip can't really even stretch their legs now because it would cause battery life to be measured in minutes and any power gains they get by going to the smaller process? The OEMs will just fuck them out of by making the devices thinner and the batteries smaller, hamstringing the chips yet again. We probably won't get to see what these chips can actually do until they start getting put in those "Android desktops" you see coming out of China and since those usually stay one or two chips behind? It'll probably be awhile.

      Its a shame really, as I'm sure there are a lot of guys just like me that would be happy to tell the OEMs to stick their ultra thin designs in return for more battery and better heat dissipation so we could get the most of these quad and octocore ARM chips but as long as the OEMs are all trying to copy iCrap? Its just not gonna happen.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    13. Re:Super-Overdrive Mode! by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      I think Intel needs to get some super-overdrive mode too if it wants to get down to 10nm as well...

      But the dilithium crystals 'l never take it Captain!

    14. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And no one i know at Intel is sleeping well, still. They are challenged, and struggling, to keep innovating all the way to the 0.1nm process.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    15. Re:Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks redacted.

    16. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      TSMC delivered their last node ahead of schedule, so it's pretty certain that they will deliver 10nm on time - i.e. Autumn 2017 - ready for the Apple A11. The latest rumour says that Samsung will pip them to the post, though and Intel will only be a few months behind.
      Intel are more agressive on tolerances, so their 10nm will be more dense than TSMC's. This comes at a cost though, because it's much harder to get good yields.
      You should bear in mind Intel's processes are built for high end SoC's costing around $200, while TSMC's process is designed for much cheaper SoCs ($5 - $30). Although Intel's process is denser and better performing than TSMC's, it is also more expensive to manufacture.

    17. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a shame really, as I'm sure there are a lot of guys just like me that would be happy to tell the OEMs to stick their ultra thin designs in return for more battery and better heat dissipation so we could get the most of these quad and octocore ARM chips...

      I'd rather have crisp performance and 2x the battery life in a thicker phone. I'm willing to carry it in a belt-holster. Just make a thick phone with super bad-ass performance and it will sell for a premium. As I watch the crowds of people waddle by, I think our obsession with "thin" devices is some sort of compensation mechanism.

    18. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      keep innovating all the way to the 0.1nm process.

      Since the diameter of a single silicon atom is 0.2nm, I don't think they will reach 0.1nm.

    19. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The numbers mean what? Don't they mean the distance between source and drain, where the size of the gate is irrelevant?

    20. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      You're still thinking in Silicon. Intel isn't.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    21. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      You're still thinking in Silicon. Intel isn't.

      Ok, then the diameter of a carbon atom is 0.17 nm, so 0.1 nm would still be impossible. Even a hydrogen atom has a van der waals diameter of 0.12 nm.

    22. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And you're also thinking literally.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    23. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because the new CEO of Intel is not that good if they get their ass handed by TSMC...

    24. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he isnt, you just dont have the slightest idea what youre commenting about

    25. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      My comment was intended to be figurative; that the industry is driven to smaller and smaller processes, and eventually must, in the instance of silicon, reach unavoidable limits. Intel is looking at new materials, as all others must be, in the drive to minimum process size. And management's answer to engineering's complaint that 'it can't be done yet' is 'try harder'.

      No one I know at Intel is happy. They have, so far, missed the mobile market, are under enormous pressure in every other market, and their most competitive and profitable products serve apparently declining demand.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    26. Re: Super-Overdrive Mode! by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      "The whole 10nm rating is a scam."

      It is a scam only in the sense that *no semiconductor manufacturer* has used the node name to represent any particular dimension of that node for years. 10nm just means comes after 16/14nm and before 7nm.

    27. Re:Super-Overdrive Mode! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Full size: http://hothardware.com/ContentImages/Article/2465/content/big_10nm-arm-chip-plots.jpg

  3. Re: half inch pipe repair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which cutting edge process do you recommend? I like hand held oil stone, but sometimes it's hard to get a consistent edge.

  4. Re: half inch pipe repair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fwiw a cheap pex cut tool distorts pipe slightly to be unusable / eventually cause another leak

  5. Awesome news for Web 2.0! by monkeyxpress · · Score: 1

    Mobile angular web apps might become usable now.

    1. Re:Awesome news for Web 2.0! by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Only if they are Agile and use NodeJS.

  6. Are we getting more RAM to go with these suckers? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    While there certainly are devices with more than 2GB, 1GB and 2GB are still the norm for budget and non-budget devices respectively (in the credible device space, that is. I know some PAYG phones are still 512M.) Are we going to see that come up to 2GB and 4GB any time soon?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. Re: half inch pipe repair by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

    Oh my, they found Slashdot!

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  8. What's with the ARM to x86 comparisons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comparing ARM to x86 is almost an apples to oranges thing. Stating that an improvement in ARM makes their chips faster than Intel is like saying the latest Prius B hauls more than a dump truck because it is faster 0-60. Different architectures. ARM is great for iOS and devices, with a very good bang per watt, but on the server end, x86 (and POWER7/8) are still king for the tasks that require heavy lifting. You definitely wouldn't use ARM for servers (as opposed to a VM or container on an x86), nor would you want to use a 12 core POWER8 in a smartphone.

    1. Re: What's with the ARM to x86 comparisons? by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      Intel was trying to get into smartphones and failed. They're still in the tablet space though, where ARM still dominates, so the comparison is still valid.

    2. Re:What's with the ARM to x86 comparisons? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      You definitely wouldn't use ARM for servers

      Oh you would if you had proper fabric and skilled programmers. Currently there's lack of both.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:What's with the ARM to x86 comparisons? by jcdr · · Score: 1

      The Aarch64 will certainly attract the required focus on proper fabric and skilled programmers. The result would take some years to show up, but it will.

  9. Re:Are we getting more RAM to go with these sucker by afidel · · Score: 1

    Moto G4 Plus is $300 and comes with 4GB ram and 64GB of flash (plus SD card support!), the regular G4 is going to be ~$200 and 2GB of ram so I'd say they're coming and much sooner than this processor (released already in certain markets, coming to the US soon). The G4 also has a 5.5" 1080P screen so there's plenty of room to come in even cheaper by using a smaller and/or lower resolution screen.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  10. Is it really 10nm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impressive if a company can beat intel to volume production using a new (10nm) process.

    1. Re:Is it really 10nm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately Intel's 10nm and TSMC's 10nm are two different processes and it's comparing apples to potatoes. TSMC is typical a half of a generation behind the leading foundries, and they have a tendency of stating a smaller process generation than they are really capable of producing. All TSMC's elements for 16nmFF are larger than 16nm in size. The same goes for their 10nm, there are always some big bullshit marketing slides in the presentations they give us to explain away the size discrepency. It boils down to different foundries using different standards for the "process size" of a generation.

    2. Re:Is it really 10nm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, this was really informative. Are the mods sleeping?

  11. Re:Are we getting more RAM to go with these sucker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If these are the memory limits, I'm still not getting why ARM had to go 64-bit

  12. Re:Are we getting more RAM to go with these sucker by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I might have to get a G4+ after the first price drop. I have a G 2nd right now and the lack of ram is galling

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. Ummm, what? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Intel has been producing 14nm in volume for quite some time now. Starting with Broadwell their chips have been 14nm. So any system you see with a 5000 or 6000 CPU is 14nm. That started in 2014.

    In terms of 10nm, well let's see what happens. TSMC has a history of over promising. 40nm, 28nm and 16nm have all been cases where they've talked a big game about availability and then it has been large delays before it finally started happening, and small quantities/yield problems in the beginning even still. That doesn't mean they won't have 10nm out soon, but I'm not holding my breath based on past performance. As eve, I'll believe it when I see it.

  14. Re:Are we getting more RAM to go with these sucker by afidel · · Score: 1

    There was no need to go to 64bit for additional ram anyways, ARMv7 supports a 40bit PAE which supports up to 1TB of ram.

    The primary advantage of AArch64 is that it more than doubles the number of GP registers and the new SIMD instructions that leverage the larger registers.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  15. Re:Are we getting more RAM to go with these sucker by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    Well there's the Cortex-A32 which provides a 32bit version of ARMv8.

    I'm not sure the jump to 64bit will be instantaneously universal if budget Cortex-A7 phones migrate to the A32.