Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on January 24, 2017 3:07 pm wrote:
> Anon (no.delete@this.email.com) on January 24, 2017 1:54 pm wrote:
> > Aaron Spink (aaronspink.delete@this.notearthlink.net) on January 24, 2017 6:44 am wrote:
> > > vvid (no.delete@this.hans.com) on January 24, 2017 1:55 am wrote:
> > > > Aaron Spink (aaronspink.delete@this.notearthlink.net) on January 23, 2017 7:02 pm wrote:
> > > > > dmcq (dmcq.delete@this.fano.co.uk) on January 22, 2017 1:03 pm wrote:
> > > > > > I'm not sure what "Problem with the phone/tablet SoCs is you are going to have to run at least
> > > > > > twice." means. Every ARM designed core has ECC support as an option as far as I'm aware, even
> > > > > > the A73 which is specifically for phones rather than mission critical or server applications.
> > > > > >
> > > > > That's great, what about the TB+ of main memory?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Isn't it strange to ask of TB+ DRAM from smartphone SoC?
> > > > So far we have 8GB max here. Not that bad for a node.
> > > > Anyway CoreLink CMN-600 supports 8chn DDR4. So it should handle 1TB(?)
> > > >
> > > In the thread I'm replying to, we are talking about phone SoCs, the question about the TB+ of
> > > memory is related to main memory ECC for a super computer composed of phone/tablet socs.
> > >
> > > As far as X-Gene 3, that isn't a phone/tablet SoC. And it matters
> > > not what cores support, but what the processor/SoC supports.
> > >
> >
> > Why would anyone build a TB+ single memory image supercomputer from phone SOCs, other than as
> > a strawman? There would be so many other things wrong with it anyway... memory addressing would
> > almost be the least of your problems.
>
> Nobody would use the same SoC for both of course, that's insane. The original quote was:
> "And the huge market for phone/tablet ARM-based SoCs with low power and integrated GPU's
> means that a good deal of the relevant hardware design is already off-the-shelf ..."

Which as we know is not true. Reusing a core barely helps. It's about volume of the SoC. And server SoCs have little in common with phone chips.

> That's correct given mobile SoCs contain many of the components needed for a server.

Actually it's wrong.

>As stated several times
> mobile-focussed cores like Cortex-A73, their fabric, caches and memory controllers support ECC as well as a large
> address space. So you can use the same off-the-shelf components and build both mobile and server >parts.

The A73 doesn't support AMBA5 and server fabric, etc. The A72 does.

David