NVIDIA Enters the Mobile CPU Market 97
Vigile writes "NVIDIA just announced the new Tegra line, a complete system architecture on one chip. Built around a licensed x86 ARM 11 CPU, this tiny chip (smaller than a US dime) includes a processor, memory controller, southbridge, and 3D and video processors. The SoC design is meant to give iPhone-type devices a more impressive visual experiences while maintaining idle power consumption under 100 mW. While not a direct competitor to Intel's Atom or VIA's Nano processors, the NVIDIA Tegra will no doubt push the envelope in handhelds and cement NVIDIA's place in the world of computing going forward."
Not x86 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Okay, sometimes they get it right by accident. (Score:4, Insightful)
The title of the referenced article is "Its not X86, but who cares?" There's no X86 in an ARM processor. It's a licensed design.
It was too much for the Slashdot editor to read even the first 3 words of the summary?
To much work to read the title of the article? (Score:2)
Re:Not x86 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It can emulate with Java (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not x86 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The kdawson we are stuck using now is the 4.0 version, which is still quite buggy. But I hear that kdawson 4.1 is testing well and will be out any day now. The good people at TrollTech have been working on it night and day. At home, I prefer the gdawson myself...
Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to (Score:5, Informative)
Stupid lameness filter.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Not x86 (Score:5, Insightful)
Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/02/1441214 [slashdot.org]
Re:Dupe (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Dupe (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
WinCE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows CE just isn't a very pleasant OS period, and its flaws really start to show once you get outside of the smartphone market, where at least it has some experience, or the thin-client market, where abject suck doesn't matter too much. Whether or not you like Linux or Windows better, you'd be hard pressed to argue that Windows CE is better for anything resembling a real computer. Unfortunately, given that this is Nvidia, and the chip looks tuned to "support premium content" I'm not going to be holding my breath. It's a pity, really. This setup looks rather cooler than Atom, and capable of some really fun stuff, but I'm not sure how good the odds are of it ever making its way into a mininotebook or small desktop form factor.
Re: (Score:2)
So what's the difference?? (Score:4, Informative)
If you were really keen you could stuff a few extra 1x2inch ARM cards in the box and have a Beowulf cluster in a sub-laptop box.
The sub-notebook is nothing new. I have an old Psion7 (http://newth.net/psion7/index.html) that must be 6 or seven years old now. It was a bit slow, but only had a 100MHz StrongARM CPU. A re-jig with a modern 600MHz+ ARM would fly!
Like on the Handheld PC (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Like on the Handheld PC (Score:4, Insightful)
As for WinCE, I know that it can be made to act something like a real desktop/notebook OS, I've used and deployed loads of HP "semithin" clients(mostly citrix or RDP; but limited builds of IE, WMP, etc are available locally) running WinCE of various versions, and I've used a few PDAs running it. It just doesn't measure up as a desktop OS. It looks just enough like Windows to screw with your expectations; but doesn't run Windows programs, use Windows drivers, or even behave all that much like Windows in terms of shell look and feel. Given their sterling performance with "Vista capable/ready" I'm sure that MS marketing would have no trouble explaining to Cletus and Maybell User why their bargain bin software won't run on that Windows...
Essentially, WinCE suffers from the majority of the shortcomings commonly ascribed to running a non-Windows OS on the desktop, without possessing any significant upsides.
Re: (Score:2)
I was a mutineer on the Bounty, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
Please not WinCE (Score:4, Informative)
The only valid reason to design in x86 these days is to run Windows. ARM is lower wattage and cheaper. Once you look at whole systems costs (battery etc) ARM comes out streets ahead. Most OSS can be readily redeployed on ARM. There is even an ARM Ubuntu.
WinCE is a very limited architecture and has no support for SMP etc. It is basically a toy version of Windows.
I don't think so. (Score:5, Informative)
No SMP in sight, not even in the emulator. If you know differently, I'd like to know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I don't think so. (Score:4, Informative)
For the same reason 640k is not enough (Score:2)
WinCE is also targetted at other functions such as set top boxes etc. where SMP is could be very handy.
Re:WinCE... (Score:4, Informative)
Seriously, with Via making a complete reference design freely available, what could stop someone from making a compatible motherboard that could fit in the place intended for a VIA-based motherboard?
The Eee shows that any processor that can drive a web browser and an e-mail program can be the core of a successful sub-notebook. In NVidia's shoes, I would invest a decent amount of money to make sure Gnash runs fine on it and is as compatible with Flash as compatibility can be.
I would love to see a small sub-notebook with a fast multi-core, multi-threaded, ARM-based CPU, an XO-derived widescreen display, an iPod-class HDD and a battery that could power it all for 24 hours of continued abuse.
And I bet it could be done for peanuts, which means a huge profit margin beyond the wildest dreams of the commodity PC-compatible market.
Of course, I assume someone from Microsoft mentioned casually to someone at NVidia, perhaps during golf, that they could consider dropping some NVidia support on an upcoming Vista service pack if those Linux-running small CPUs start making inroads in the undead XP camp.
Re: (Score:2)
Not the huge profit you might think, because competitors would also be making it, and selling it, for peanuts. Unless you were able to lock it up with patents, which involves its own costs in getting them passed and in keeping the lawyers available for the inevitable violations of such an attractive market.
Vista and NVidia makes me shudder anyway: the high-end graphic
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even in a mature market, you can offer your goods for significantly more than your competition (and what they cost you), as long as you can present an attractive deal. Apple sells iPods for much more than they cost to build even when they compete with no-name bottom-feeders for what is, more or less, the same product.
Re: (Score:2)
And the Apple product is _not_ the same. The support for Apple and subtle integration differences make a big difference to many users, just as a BMW handles better and is more reliable than a Volvo of the same overall size and carrying capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? Windows currently runs on X86 and Itanium architectures. NT4 also ran on MIPS, and Alpha, if I remember correctly. If a processor gets popular enough, you better believe that MS will support it to generate sales. (BTW, Windows Mobile runs on ARM cores.)
Re:WinCE... (Score:4, Insightful)
As for the various NT ports, they aren't an encouraging picture. NT MIPS and Alpha are dead, XP for Itanium is dead, and there is no Vista for Itanium. Only Windows Server and a few of its variants are still alive. And look at the slow pace of the x86/x86_64 transition.
I suspect that limited platform support is a decent business decision for MS, they aren't stupid, and they probably know better than we do how much fun it would be to attempt to bludgeon every last software vendor for Windows into shipping multiarchitecture support; but I seriously doubt that anything short of the probable extinction of the x86 architecture would motiveate a wholesale move on MS' part.(Maybe a stopgap of some sort, x86 virtualization built into the kernel or similar, or a move of existing MS tech to a new environment
Re: (Score:2)
Linux runs on the ARM. I understand that even Debian has an ARM port...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WinCE... (Score:4, Informative)
To support a CPU is not enough. ARM cpu cores will typically connect to an AMBA bus (like hypertransport), but these SoCs will usually have the entire bus internal. You'll have a whole set of peripherals which need to be programmed all over again with little or no code reuse from existing projects. You need to understand how these peripherals interact with the boot rom and CPU in order just to load a bootloader onto it. If you have perfect documentation, you'll still probably need at least a decent oscilloscope or logic analyzer to get a heartbeat out of it. Talk to any firmware or digital design engineer about 'board bring up' on an unproven cpu platform, and you'll likely hear quite a few nasty anecdotes.
All this can be done, but it would save everyone a lot of time if nvidia supports Linux with a real board support package.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't underestimate ARM. (Score:4, Interesting)
Secondly, the ASUS EEE has shown that it may not br necessary to be x86 compatible any more. It is compatible, but it has sold many copies running Linux. That means that x86 compatibility is not required, since Linux runs well on many processor types.
OoO ?? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:OoO ?? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I doubt it. After all the die is less than one square meter.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Don't underestimate ARM. (Score:5, Informative)
Linux being OK implies that x86 is unnecessary.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
YES, the XScale is an ARMv5TE type core.
What the OP was referring to was the fact that this device is spartan in comparison to the ARMv6 and ARMv7 cores that're available and about to show up for use- they weren't implying in the slightest that the XScale wasn't ARM.
Re: (Score:2)
Xscale IS ARM. Look it up.
Re: (Score:2)
ARMv6 and ARMv7 derived systems are much nicer devices, esp. if you're using one that includes the FP, SIMD, Jazelle, and other feature sets provided in these cores. With XScale, you get an ARM5TE core. With these you're getting an ARM6TE or an ARM7TE capable device. Which would YOU rather work with?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Being open source does mean that the code can be ported, doesn't guarantee it will compile & be stable on all architectures. Even in the kernel non-x86 is generally 1-2 kernel releases behind before new features are properly supported and there's a lot more to an OS than the kerne
Re: (Score:2)
Just because YOU don't get to deal with it doesn't mean it exists or that it's not pervasive. Roughly 1/3-1/2 the mobile phones out there (Just not the smart phones yet, perversely...) use it. It's used in mission critical systems where you need an armored POSIX compliant OS but don't need "real-time" support like LynxOS provides. It's used all over the place in telecom for monitoring and analysis (I should know, I work for one of the primary player
Re: (Score:2)
If my recollection is correct (and it may not be...), only the Cortex-A8 and Cortex-A9 core designs are superscalar in nature, and only the A9 is out-of-order.
As it stands, though, the A8 seems to be in a position to paste most of the ARM11 derived designs (Which are awesome to begin with...), being something on the order of twice as fast per clock without any appreciable power consumption increase- based off the comparisons made so far. An A9 will be even faster.
Performance (Score:2, Funny)
More Details Here With Chip Arch (Score:1, Informative)
The mother of all UARTS (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the real reason is that, if the UART were smaller, it wouldn't cover up enough of the secret design in the next layer down, which you ca
Re: (Score:2)
I can tell you for certain that AT91SAM7X are not done with the method you describe.
Idle power (Score:2)
Qualcomm's 7200 already maintains idle power consumption under about 50mW on HTC devices even with screen drawing power. Of course, the claimed "impressive visual experiences" on this chip can't be verified since Qualcomm/HTC neglected to provide any drivers and their chips run slower than 4yr old hardware. Turns out to be a licensing issue, not a technical issue.
So depending how nVIDIA prices their chip, we may once agai
Re: (Score:2)
these devices will carry a "Powered by nVidia" sticker and I seriously doubt that nVidia would allow manufacturers to use these chips and disable the features.
We know that nVidia prefers a unified driver structure. I doubt they'd make special drivers for certain devices.
Death by interactive TV (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah, ATI and Intel were both destroyed by their interactive television ventures.
Awesome! (Score:2)
Thanks Nvidia!
Re: (Score:1)
OLPC should have gone with ARM (Score:2)
No danger of ever running MS on one. And much less power consumption. Well, maybe next generation will feature something like this SOC from Nvidia.
DIP, release a DIP please Nvidia. (Score:1)
Stick like eight of these breadboarded in a stack on a KVM with an LCD monito
Don't fuck it up nVidia (Score:1)
I hate you all....