Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

ARM Announces Cortex-A50 64-Bit Processors

By - Source: ARM | B 18 comments

Scheduled for arrival in actual commercial SoC designs in 2014, ARM formally announced the first two processors based on it 64-bit ARMv8 architecture.

The Cortex-A50 series will initially debut as A53 and A57 with the latter moving closer to Intel territory and a claimed performance that is similar to a "legacy PC".

Leading up until 2014, Intel will not be standing still either; but if ARM can deliver on its promise that especially the flagship model A57 can triple the performance of the Cortex-A15 processor, the company is setting a lofty goal that expands the horizon what future smartphone and tablet will be able to do.

The big news is the arrival of 64-bit support in ARM's designs which is necessary to provide it with an opportunity to break into new markets of desktop computing as well as server computing. While the company is not aiming to challenge Intel's high-performing x86 Xeon processors, ARM vendors believe they have an opportunity to use lower power processors to offer an efficient alternative for all those tasks where a Xeon processor's processing capability is not granular enough and effectively wasted.

In ultradense microservers, which aim for application areas such as networking, storage and bulk processing tasks in cloud environments, ARM vendors believe they can make a compelling business case. Intel will be standing against ARM vendors with its Atom S processor series.

Initial licensees of ARMv8 include AMD, Broadcom, Calxeda, HiSilicon, Samsung and STMicroelectronics. AMD recently announced that it will be designing ARM processors in the future as well.

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 18 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 8 Hide
    azraa , October 31, 2012 7:18 PM
    What do they mean with 'Legacy PC' ? :S
    I mean, this development is great, but Legacy PC could be what?
    Something along the line of the first core 2 duo? similar to a 1st gen athlon64?

    Anyway, props to ARM c:
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , October 31, 2012 7:41 PM
    First core 2 duo is going to be challenged by the higher clocked versions of Cortex A15, which is already entering the market. Can't wait to see what they'll do with those shiny new toys :D 
  • 8 Hide
    chewy1963 , October 31, 2012 7:57 PM
    Quote:
    What do they mean with 'Legacy PC' ? :S
    I mean, this development is great, but Legacy PC could be what?
    Something along the line of the first core 2 duo? similar to a 1st gen athlon64?

    Anyway, props to ARM c:


    Or they could mean an 8088 running at 4.77 MHz, that's about as "legacy" as it gets! :lol: 
  • 3 Hide
    esrever , October 31, 2012 8:24 PM
    azraaWhat do they mean with 'Legacy PC' ? :SI mean, this development is great, but Legacy PC could be what?Something along the line of the first core 2 duo? similar to a 1st gen athlon64? Anyway, props to ARM c:

    legacy means instructions that are no longer used but are still supported for backward compatibility. Mostly in the x86 world it means the old x87 instructions and some of the intel instructions used in the first pentiums and such. The core 2 duo is positively modern compared to some of these instructions.
  • 7 Hide
    Anonymous , October 31, 2012 8:41 PM
    Good on AMD for moving away from x86. You can't possibly beat Intel at x86 because they control the licensing and IP, and if you do manage to beat them at anything, they'll just bribe the entire industry into shunning your advancements and refusing to sell your products, whilst simultaneously having the tech media slander your good name...

    By contrast, ARM is a level playing field that anybody can join, x86 is going to whither away into nothing, good riddance...
  • -4 Hide
    southernshark , October 31, 2012 9:21 PM
    Given the hype I suspect that the actual product will impress me just as much as AMD's Bulldozer did.
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , October 31, 2012 10:35 PM
    Well if ARM 64 can get the job done, I am sure it will cost less than Intel$ high cost silicon! I hope ARM continues to produce products the users can and do use for their computing needs, and AMD continues to build alternatives, or we will all be at Intel$ mercy!
  • 1 Hide
    bloc97 , October 31, 2012 11:25 PM
    Very nice, we should be expecting performance increases. :) 
  • 5 Hide
    sykozis , October 31, 2012 11:44 PM
    otacon72AMD lost because it's R&D department sucks and couldn't keep up. They were neck and neck with intel for a while until Core 2 blew AMD out of the water and they just went downhill from there. How you beat any company is come up with a better product and AMD couldn't.

    AMD's R&D department couldn't keep up because Intel used it's position to bride OEMs into refusing to use AMD products....and in Dell's case, offered rebates, brides and altered payment schedules. In cases where OEMs refused to drop AMD base products, Intel made threats. In Compaq's case....Intel decided to intentionally ship an order of Xeon processors late because Compaq refused to drop their AMD based product lines.

    Do a little research. This has all been proven.
  • -6 Hide
    shqtth , November 1, 2012 12:42 AM
    AMD got a billion, they could of caught up, but they spend all that money for beer for investors.
  • 2 Hide
    fedelm , November 1, 2012 12:53 AM
    arm_wrestlerGood on AMD for moving away from x86. You can't possibly beat Intel at x86 because they control the licensing and IP, and if you do manage to beat them at anything, they'll just bribe the entire industry into shunning your advancements and refusing to sell your products, whilst simultaneously having the tech media slander your good name...By contrast, ARM is a level playing field that anybody can join, x86 is going to whither away into nothing, good riddance...


    I think I read somewhere a few years ago that Intel's R&D budget was AMDs ENTIRE budget as a company.

    No source, just from memory.
  • 1 Hide
    azraa , November 1, 2012 3:49 AM
    fedelmI think I read somewhere a few years ago that Intel's R&D budget was AMDs ENTIRE budget as a company.No source, just from memory.


    Yeah, so what?

    Is Intel better than AMD because of that? Nah, I dont think so.
    Im just saying that your statement is irrelevant if you consider the total sizes and ratios of budgets. Sure it makes a lot of sense Intel's R&D matches the entire AMD value, but you have to remember that Intel is valued at what? Dozens if not hundreds of time AMDs value?

    Besides, I dont know about you, but if AMD with its minuscule research budget managed to pull out Piledriver FX8350 and match or surpass the 2500k/3570k on many aspects (about 80% of the measurements here at Tom's) then well, I think that for their budget, Intel is wasting assloads of money and giving little to no advances recently. That is one serious feat from the red team, with everything against them and a 100 times smaller budget.

    (Darn I sound like an AMD fanboy. I hate when it happens, but there is so many people throwing crap at a legit company that I feel the need to defend them)

    @topic: thanks for the info about the 'legacy' meaning. I recognize myself ignorant about the former standards prior to what we know from Y2K
  • 0 Hide
    mad tech , November 1, 2012 6:31 AM
    azraaYeah, so what?Is Intel better than AMD because of that? Nah, I dont think so.Im just saying that your statement is irrelevant if you consider the total sizes and ratios of budgets. Sure it makes a lot of sense Intel's R&D matches the entire AMD value, but you have to remember that Intel is valued at what? Dozens if not hundreds of time AMDs value? Besides, I dont know about you, but if AMD with its minuscule research budget managed to pull out Piledriver FX8350 and match or surpass the 2500k/3570k on many aspects (about 80% of the measurements here at Tom's) then well, I think that for their budget, Intel is wasting assloads of money and giving little to no advances recently. That is one serious feat from the red team, with everything against them and a 100 times smaller budget. (Darn I sound like an AMD fanboy. I hate when it happens, but there is so many people throwing crap at a legit company that I feel the need to defend them)@topic: thanks for the info about the 'legacy' meaning. I recognize myself ignorant about the former standards prior to what we know from Y2K


    Bigger is not Always Better ;) 
  • 2 Hide
    technoholic , November 1, 2012 8:39 AM
    azraa... if AMD with its minuscule research budget managed to pull out Piledriver FX8350 and match or surpass the 2500k/3570k on many aspects (about 80% of the measurements here at Tom's) then well, I think that for their budget, Intel is wasting assloads of money and giving little to no advances recently. That is one serious feat from the red team, with everything against them and a 100 times smaller budget.
    I totally agree this. Budget is not always the sole factor in innovation
  • 4 Hide
    digiex , November 1, 2012 9:40 AM
    Quote:
    You can't possibly beat Intel at x86 because they control the licensing and IP,
    ...

    Don't forget that AMD is the Holder of x64 architecture IP and most of Intel Processors are made off it, except Itanium of course.
  • 1 Hide
    tmk221 , November 1, 2012 12:01 PM
    slacker3461First core 2 duo is going to be challenged by the higher clocked versions of Cortex A15, which is already entering the market. Can't wait to see what they'll do with those shiny new toys


    you are joking right ?
  • 0 Hide
    djscribbles , November 1, 2012 12:55 PM
    Back when AMD was leading intel in price and performance (forgive me if my memory is somehow slanted) in the Athlon XP era, Intel still dominated the OEM market...

    To me, AMD has always lost, even when they were winning; and that, in my opinion, is why they are struggling to compete on performance now.

  • 0 Hide
    youcanDUit , June 1, 2013 5:41 PM
    PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD ARM PURCHASE AMD AND MAKE A DESKTOP PROCESSOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!