Boost, Security, and Conclusion
Boost, Power Management, and STAPM
Note that I mention “Max” clockspeed. While Kabini did not utilize a “boost” style clock, it typically ran at the top speed all the time when at load. Beema/Mullins will actually go into a turbo mode when conditions allow it. AMD has a fairly complex power management controller which looks at workload, temperature, and power consumption and clocks the cores up or down to maximize power efficiency. When the controller detects an application that can be finished quickly to save power, it can boost the cores to allow them to finish the work and get back to idle as soon as possible. This improves performance and can improve battery life under such applications.
Through what I assume is a lot of simulation from AMD, the power management controller is very aware of what applications can be boosted to improve performance and battery life, it also knows what applications should NOT be boosted. I would guess an example of an application that should not be boosted would be the Cinebench application. Each run of Cinebench is a prolonged process, and in a boosted state would likely drain the battery of a mobile device to a great degree. Operations that can be boosted would be potentially some simple filters or resizing operations for photo manipulation.
This plays into STAPM. STAPM stands for Skin Temperature Aware Power Management. This is aimed at tablet usage. The APU can go to +60C temperatures quite comfortably, but the hand that holds onto the tablet chassis cannot comfortably handle a part that is approaching 60C. AMD has implemented algorithms that take the max temperature that a user can typically handle into consideration when applying boost. STAPM will boost an APU for as long as possible, and then cut the speed down before the temperature of the heatsink/chassis becomes uncomfortable for the user.
Battery Boost is another aspect of this control mechanism. It monitors the processes being performed by the APU, and adjusts speeds to optimize performance with an emphasis towards battery usage. This “Race-to-Idle” usage scenario is well know, but had previously not been implemented into AMD’s APUs in this TDP range.
The implementation of these applications in the Beema/Mullins APUs allows them to achieve the performance and TDP levels that we see today. Without these power optimizations the battery life would be abysmal and the heat produced by these APUs would quickly burn a user. AMD has taken these technologies to the next level to deliver a next generation APU without having to utilize a new process node.
Security
There is one new design feature in Beema/Mullins that is not present in Kabini. Some years back we heard that AMD was going to license a security processor from ARM. We finally get to see this particular piece of technology in action. AMD has licensed the ARM Cortex A5 processor which includes TrustZone technology. This is a hardware security feature that has a fair amount of support due to the proliferation of ARM Cortex-based processors which integrate this functionality. AMD could have attempted their own security processor/technology, but with ARM offering a ready-made solution at a compelling price, it really made no sense to introduce a new security infrastructure that would directly compete with what Intel has to offer.
AMD brands this the PSP, which stands for Platform Security Processor. This chip does not run its own OS, but it is isolated from the other processor cores. It features its own ROM and cache as well as access to main system memory. It also features its own cryptographic co-processor that handles RSA, SHA, ECC, AES engine, Zlib decompression, and TRNG. It also has control over whether or not the x86 cores can actually boot. If things are not right at boot time, then it will not allow those x86 processors to boot normally.
A hardware based security system does have some inherent strengths over purely software based solutions. This does not mean that there are not exploitable flaws to any solution, but it should be far less common than what we deal with in software.
Conclusion
These Beema and Mullins parts are not yet available, but if they deliver on their promises, they will be a significant improvement for AMD over their previous generation parts. Dropping the TDP, while raising the clocks as significantly as they have will allow AMD to more adequately compete against Intel’s Bay Trail parts as well as the low power Haswell units. AMD continues to outperform Intel on the graphics front with these APUs, and that does not look to change until Intel releases their next generation Broadwell processors.
These APUs are aimed at tablets and low end notebooks, but it is quite likely that they will be making it to the AM1 platform sooner as opposed to later. AMD has an instant competitor in the tablet sphere with its much higher performing APU based on Mullins. Having a TDP of 4.5 watts and a SDP of 2.8 watts for the highest performing part will allow it to fit in even the slimmest of tablets and still provide plenty of battery lifespan. Beema will allow for a lot better performance than we have seen with even the AM1 platform with the 25 watt TDP Athlon-5350.
The combination of process enhancements, design enhancements, and the new security functionality will make Beema/Mullins a pretty formidable part in the mobile landscape. Add in the impressive graphics performance and support that the GCN architecture brings to the x86 market, I think that quite a few manufacturers will pick up this part.
Numbers are great and all, but we have not actually seen these APUs in person. If AMD can hold to their promises in terms of specs and functionality, this could be their most successful part in the mobile and ultra-mobile marketplaces. This could be saying something since Brazos sold many tens of millions of parts around the world. Mobile is the fastest growing segment for semiconductor designers, and AMD does not want to be left behind. They look to have improved their designs to the point where it would seem foolish to ignore their offerings. Intel has Bay Trail and mobile Haswell, but each of those implementations have drawbacks as compared to the total package that AMD is introducing with Beema and Mullins. If AMD can get these out in a timely manner they can capture a significant amount of market share and mind share. These products look impressive on paper, but we will have to see how they are actually implemented into the market. The end product will really dictate the success of these products.
Bravo AMD! 😀
I only hope to
Bravo AMD! 😀
I only hope to see these parts to be compatible with existing AM1 boards. A scenario in which only a BIOS update will be enough would be great, but there seems to be many upgrades to the cores, especially that PSP(which unfortunately is not a hardware PSP emulator :p).
I am almost sold to the idea of buying a Sempron 3850 to become my next HTPC, but Beema’s announcement and all the question marks around AM1 platform and Beema, is holding me back temporarily.
man ddr3 again, this sux,
man ddr3 again, this sux, these apu will never make it if they dont change the memory.
Do you have the money to give
Do you have the money to give them, so they can push DDR4 first into the market? If you don’t then AMD is doing the right thing, waiting for Intel to open the road and then just walk on it, free of charge.
yea but the point of the APU
yea but the point of the APU is the graphics, and gddr3 limits it alot, at least for desktop, too bad that mddr thingy didnt work could have made APU way more attractive on desktop and maybe higher end.
but am guessing with the lack of good memory AMD is focused on laptops and mobiles anyway and low end desktop, hope AMD brings something good on 2015 for desktop
128 stream processors aren’t
128 stream processors aren’t going to play Crysis any time soon. So, more performance in the GPU part would have been good, but maybe not enough to convince people that this could be a low power gaming platform. It would gather much more positive opinions, but maybe not so many buyers.
In the case of cpu performance, dual channel usually gives an extra 3-5% over single channel. So faster memory there would also help, but not much.
In the end you just look at these facts and consider the expenses from your side to push a brand new memory or the extra cost that will be added to the platform by using a new memory standard or implementing dual channel. That could eliminate maybe it’s biggest advantage which is, enough performance at ridiculously low price.
AMD did all the right choices with this platform in my opinion.
DDR3 is not the same as
DDR3 is not the same as GDDR3. GDDR3 is based on DDR2 while DDR3 is a the base for GDDR5. DDR3 = DDR3 even when used for graphics.
Wow I am amazed by what has
Wow I am amazed by what has been written, love to see this new iteration in real world reviews soon. AMD could potentially be powering my new HTPC and tablet.
But part of me after reading all this is saying: Please apply this level of detail/work to your enthusiast level APU aspirations (should they exist)! I would love to see a 12/16 core high end consumer APU!
2 to 16 cores would sell to
2 to 16 cores would sell to people wishing to do rendering workloads, but the Beema SKUs coud be great for a render farm, the A6 6310 on a low cost motherboard would be an affordable low power SKU with 4 or 5 boards(AM1 style LANed up into a small low cost cluster configuration). Can’t wait to see what the Puma cores can do as far as raytracing and rendering, with their refinements over the previous Jaguar cores. I only hope that the included ARM security core is not used to permanently lock any Tablet hardware to a closed ecosystem! Hopefully the low power Mullins cores are not restricted to OEMs only, people are designing working smartphones around the Raspberry PI, with the off the shelf parts that are available for that platform. Hopefully there will be future SOCs with more cores, once the 14nm process becomes the standard.
The claim that Intel has a
The claim that Intel has a ‘smaller’ process is hilarious. There are ZERO industry standards for defining a ‘process’- a fact Intel exploits when describing its chips as 22nm.
Ask yourself a question. Why is Intel’s transistor density (transistors per mm2) LOWER on its 22nm process than TSMC’s 28nm half-node process? And Intel uses FinFETS, which are smaller than traditional transistors anyway.
Intel’s process is good for exactly one thing- making power efficient x86 parts. Other types of chip on Intel’s process have proven to be terrible, which is why no major ARM SoC company has partnered with Intel to use its incredible amounts of spare foundry space. You think Nvidia, for instance, wouldn’t jump ship from TSMC to Intel, if Intel could actually fabricate a decent non-x86 chip?
Nvidia is partnering with
Nvidia is partnering with IBM, and IBM’s technology foundations, including the IBM’s OpenPower consortium. I would expect if Nvidia Licenses the Power IP/ISA from IBM that Nvidia could have a more powerfull CPU competitor and chip fab process by working with Samsung and GlobalFoundrys(Both part of IBM’s technology shareing consortium/foundations). NvLink being derived from IBM’s CAPI (Coherent Accelerator Processor Initiative). IBM is spreading a lot of its chip fab IP, and power ISA IP around these days, in preperation of IBM getting out of the fab business(except for IBM’s research FAB unit). IBM’s chip fab process and technology shareing has helped both Samsung and GlobalFoundrys, and will provide IBM with a steady supply of power based CPU parts at the 14nm node, this IBM tech sharing will have side benifits for both AMD and Nvidia, and anyone that uses Samsung or GlobalFoundrys for their foundry work. Hopefully AMD will bring HSA and hUMA to their next iteration after the Beema and Mullins SKUs.
I hope these new chips will
I hope these new chips will make my linux gaming rig fly! Can’t wait for the release, been wanting a linux based laptop for a long time.
I had an AMD CPU BACK IN
I had an AMD CPU BACK IN 1999-early 2000`s
Any word on availability or
Any word on availability or pricing?