Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/core-size-info-from-cpu-cores-from-intel-amd-apple-mtk-qcom.24199/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2030770
            [XFI] => 1060170
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Core Size Info from CPU Cores from Intel/AMD/Apple/MTK/QCOM

siliconbruh999

Well-known member
A sheet with core sizes of CPU Cores
1765648730557.png

 
Outstanding work! But just to nit-pick a little, it's really hard to compare apple to apple with these numbers if some include the L2 while others don't.
 
Outstanding work! But just to nit-pick a little, it's really hard to compare apple to apple with these numbers if some include the L2 while others don't.
well this is a real problem and is part of how the cores are designed in the first place like how do you want your memory hierarchy you want private L2 with a bigger L3 or you want Shared L2.
I think you can simply take the Core+shared size and divide by the number of cores to get effective area as well for a single core from cluster
 
The simplest comparison would to exclude all L2s but I understand there might not be such measurement available for all the cores. I am no cpu expert but I believe the shared L2 vs L2+L3 has something to do with what the cpus intended end market. For mobile client, the shared arrangement is probably more efficient where as you probably can't use this for the server market. So we will never have a truely apple to apple comparison.
 
Back
Top