What would the world and his dog think if P2 used an x86 SOC? (but not mini SD) ;)

[ShleeDragon]

Well, the datasheets for the SoC are already available to the public (so NO NDA as with most other manufacturers).


Official distributors are AvNet and Mouser.


I've got a good contact to AvNet and sent a mail about the availability of the SoC.


If Intel sells it without NDA, permissions, etc., simply through normal distributor channels, then it's way easier to get than any other ARM SoC... which would be a huge advantage for us.


Let's see what we'll get.

wait.. for what soc?

 

[EssoAir]

Well, the datasheets for the SoC are already available to the public (so NO NDA as with most other manufacturers).


Official distributors are AvNet and Mouser.


I've got a good contact to AvNet and sent a mail about the availability of the SoC.


If Intel sells it without NDA, permissions, etc., simply through normal distributor channels, then it's way easier to get than any other ARM SoC... which would be a huge advantage for us.


Let's see what we'll get.

wait.. for what soc?

as I understand it....
For any ARM soc he has to really work to get into the supply chain, but these x86 ones being discussed are readily available and sold

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

When I think of an x86 Pandora I'm always reminded of this thing:http://www.umpcportal.com/products/Ocosmos/OCS1/


Now, this product never even came to fruition, and probably for good reason since Oak Trail would have been pretty lousy for this. But it does show maybe there's some prospect for a lowish volume Intel SoC device. For what it's worth, this company is Korean.

The country in which I will be living from summer of 2014 till summer of 2015. Id love to talk face to face with people to establish relationships

Aren't you the same person that said that last time? Why do you think I want to get payed?

But you won't get paid though.  It's a service to the community OK?  :lol:

I'm just busting your chops because you said the same thing the last time so I used same quote here

 

[Grench]

Thank you for giving it consideration and a fair assessment. I look forward to what results from it.

 

[Mr_Loon]

...


The country in which I will be living from summer of 2014 till summer of 2015. Id love to talk face to face with people to establish relationships

What would be the purpose of establishing a relationship with these people? In what capacity would you propose to do this?


____________________________

...


If Intel sells it without NDA, permissions, etc., simply through normal distributor channels, then it's way easier to get than any other ARM SoC... which would be a huge advantage for us.


Let's see what we'll get.

wait.. for what soc?

An Intel one I presume.


I'm still pretty confused by your initial reaction to this thread, care to elaborate on this post? No offence taken here but I'd love to know how the OP could ruffle anyone's feathers.

____________________________

And in a probably vain attempt to get this back on topic :

@ Exophase : What you your personal feeling be if P2 was x86 based, would you still develop software for it? Would you consider it a real shame that things like DraStic would not be usable on it? Have you given any consideration to a potential future P2 when developing stuff for P1?

 

[pmprog]

Wow, this is one crazy thread, I think I only saw about 6 posts related.

Personally it wouldn't bother me whether it was x86 or ARM. I don't do any low level coding any more, and I'm getting frustrated setting simple things up like libraries these days too.

If I could get Mono (or even something like QtCreator), I'll be happy

 

[Klumpen]

To me, you are all wizards.

 

[EssoAir]

What would be the purpose of establishing a relationship with these people? In what capacity would you propose to do this?

Lol, I have no idea I just want to be helpful if I can

 

[fusion_power]

Well, the datasheets for the SoC are already available to the public (so NO NDA as with most other manufacturers).


Official distributors are AvNet and Mouser.


I've got a good contact to AvNet and sent a mail about the availability of the SoC.


If Intel sells it without NDA, permissions, etc., simply through normal distributor channels, then it's way easier to get than any other ARM SoC... which would be a huge advantage for us.


Let's see what we'll get.

Nice. Whatever is the most available solution should be used. At the end it's ED and mybe MWeston who decides that. OK, maybe also some Devs. But if X86 is easier to get and maintain than an ARM Chipset, then I guess it's OK to use the X86 as long as it fits in the desired specs (mainly Battery time I guess). Not sure about emulation like ARM systems, they were closer to ther Pandora ARM SoE I guess. But at the other hand, it will be closer to get nice PC games ported.

Would that custom SoC supports Mini SD?

Oh, no. Not again, you are evil!

Exo you are ever so serious.

Yes, I often imagine Exo as Bert from Ernie & Bert.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

Not sure how accurate this is.  I know nothing about x86 vs ARM.  Just want to link it here to keep this beast growing...

http://www.notebookcheck.net/SoC-Shootout-x86-vs-ARM.99496.0.html

 

[Grench]

Not sure how accurate this is.  I know nothing about x86 vs ARM.  Just want to link it here to keep this beast growing...

http://www.notebookcheck.net/SoC-Shootout-x86-vs-ARM.99496.0.html

Good article - but please note.  The X86 used in that article and related charts was the previous generation Z2760.  The SoC under discussion/consideration is the newly released Z3770 - which has characteristics that make it more worthy of consideration.

 

[Grench]

Looking at:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvermont

I found a link to:

Datasheet for Z36xxx and Z37xxx SoC

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/atom/atom-z36xxx-z37xxx-datasheet-vol-1.html

On page 112 - how to interpret the storage options?

If I understand it right - that would give us two SD slots - with SDIO on one and an interface to an internal storage block?  I.e. the number of storage devices is the same as the existing Pandora (3) with two being SD interface (SDXC or microSD agnostic).  Looking up what eMMC is - it appears that eMMC modules range from 4GB to 128GB.

http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/product/flash-emmc/overview

So it isn't too much of a stretch to imagine this future device as having 32GB or even 64GB of internal on-motherboard storage for OS & swap?  Future iterations (Pandora 3?) after 17nm version of the architecture comes out could see 128GB+?

That part (SD interface count and storage cappcity) was important to me so I looked it up - you're all welcome to look up what is important to you.

 

[Grench]

Page 67 of http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/atom/atom-z36xxx-z37xxx-datasheet-vol-1.html

Intel's marketing says there is a 2GB per channel 4GB total RAM limit using lpddr3.  I wonder if that is a physical limitation or a practical one.  Did they take into account the Samsung 3GB lpddr3 chip?

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Samsung-3GB-LPDDR3-20nm-class-4Gb-LPDDR3-memory-module,23662.html

If we could get the parts - would that mean a possibility of 6GB RAM?  Not that it's practical or we should - but is it possible?

The potential fully loaded machine specs on this beast are wild.

quad core 64bit CPU

4 (or 6?) GB RAM

up to 128GB on-MB storage

up to 256GB per SD slot x2 - 512GB total

The only thing that I see to keep this out of normal notebooks is the lack of a SATA interface - which I don't think we care about.

 

[EvilDragon]

Yep, and the more RAM you have, the more power you need, so we really shouldn't exaggerate here.

2GB should be MORE than enough.

 

[Binky]

Sata could be interesting - especially if we could get one of those eSATA+USB thingies - Although I wouldn't say it was important.

 

[Exophase]

Intel's marketing says there is a 2GB per channel 4GB total RAM limit using lpddr3. I wonder if that is a physical limitation or a practical one. Did they take into account the Samsung 3GB lpddr3 chip?

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Samsung-3GB-LPDDR3-20nm-class-4Gb-LPDDR3-memory-module,23662.html

These limits are almost always dictated by the actual physical number of address lines coming out of the chip. Which is not negotiable regardless of what Samsung comes up with. Unless you want to do registered RAM....

2GB is sufficient, but I think 4GB would be "nice." Some analysis should be done with respects to power consumption to see what's more worth it. But LPDDR3 won't use very much power when it's just in retention (not actually accessed), and there could even be modes where it's shut off entirely until there's a lot of pressure to use it. Not sure if there's any OS support for anything like that. At the very least the user could probably configure it this way.

I certainly wouldn't entertain going past 4GB. Availability vs packaging plays a role (PoP could limit capacity. Avoiding PoP may make for a cheaper design anyway, if the cost in board area is acceptable)

 

[Grench]

Yep, and the more RAM you have, the more power you need, so we really shouldn't exaggerate here.

2GB should be MORE than enough.

Intel's marketing says there is a 2GB per channel 4GB total RAM limit using lpddr3. I wonder if that is a physical limitation or a practical one. Did they take into account the Samsung 3GB lpddr3 chip?

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Samsung-3GB-LPDDR3-20nm-class-4Gb-LPDDR3-memory-module,23662.html

These limits are almost always dictated by the actual physical number of address lines coming out of the chip. Which is not negotiable regardless of what Samsung comes up with. Unless you want to do registered RAM....


2GB is sufficient, but I think 4GB would be "nice." Some analysis should be done with respects to power consumption to see what's more worth it. But LPDDR3 won't use very much power when it's just in retention (not actually accessed), and there could even be modes where it's shut off entirely until there's a lot of pressure to use it. Not sure if there's any OS support for anything like that. At the very least the user could probably configure it this way.


I certainly wouldn't entertain going past 4GB. Availability vs packaging plays a role (PoP could limit capacity. Avoiding PoP may make for a cheaper design anyway, if the cost in board area is acceptable)

All of this would need to be weighed out regardless of the SoC.  If I'm interpreting it right, it looks like the Z3770 gets it's best performance when going dual channel - accessing two RAM modules?  So there may be a performance edge to be gained as well?

Speed - does splitting the RAM over 2 units to take advantage of dual channel RAM yield a significant performance increase?

Size in GB - Clearly there are 1GB, 2GB and maybe even 3GB units - what other sizes exist?

Availability - which ones can we get to fit?

Physical size on MB - If not PoP then how big are they?

Cost - how much do 2GB LPDDR3 modules cost?

Capabilities - what would 4GB allow that 2GB would not?

Does 2+2GB = 4GB use twice the power as 1+1=2GB or is it more like 1.2 times as much?

Somewhere in the mix of those is a solution.

Still - those data sheets are cool.  I'm probably more of a hindrance than a help in reading them though.  Fun to sort through though.

 

[EssoAir]

4GB would allow for better performance with video playback. If they screen is 720p, then you need enough ram to load video files that size

 

[Exophase]

4GB would allow for better performance with video playback. If they screen is 720p, then you need enough ram to load video files that size

You don't load the entire video into RAM, you stream in frames as you need them. The only thing having more RAM helps with is that you can rewind faster if you keep the played frames in RAM.

 

[Binky]

Is SDIO read speed likely to be an issue when playing video - or other such activities?