After Swift Comes Cyclone Oscar

I was fortunate enough to receive a tip last time that pointed me at some LLVM documentation calling out Apple’s Swift core by name. Scrubbing through those same docs, it seems like my leak has been plugged. Fortunately I came across a unique string looking at the iPhone 5s while it booted:

I can’t find any other references to Oscar online, in LLVM documentation or anywhere else of value. I also didn’t see Oscar references on prior iPhones, only on the 5s. I’d heard that this new core wasn’t called Swift, referencing just how different it was. Obviously Apple isn’t going to tell me what it’s called, so I’m going with Oscar unless someone tells me otherwise.

Oscar is a CPU core inside M7, Cyclone is the name of the Swift replacement.

Cyclone likely resembles a beefier Swift core (or at least Swift inspired) than a new design from the ground up. That means we’re likely talking about a 3-wide front end, and somewhere in the 5 - 7 range of execution ports. The design is likely also capable of out-of-order execution, given the performance levels we’ve been seeing.

Cyclone is a 64-bit ARMv8 core and not some Apple designed ISA. Cyclone manages to not only beat all other smartphone makers to ARMv8 but also key ARM server partners. I’ll talk about the whole 64-bit aspect of this next, but needless to say, this is a big deal.

The move to ARMv8 comes with some of its own performance enhancements. More registers, a cleaner ISA, improved SIMD extensions/performance as well as cryptographic acceleration are all on the menu for the new core.

Pipeline depth likely remains similar (maybe slightly longer) as frequencies haven’t gone up at all (1.3GHz). The A7 doesn’t feature support for any thermal driven CPU (or GPU) frequency boost.

The most visible change to Apple’s first ARMv8 core is a doubling of the L1 cache size: from 32KB/32KB (instruction/data) to 64KB/64KB. Along with this larger L1 cache comes an increase in access latency (from 2 clocks to 3 clocks from what I can tell), but the increase in hit rate likely makes up for the added latency. Such large L1 caches are quite common with AMD architectures, but unheard of in ultra mobile cores. A larger L1 cache will do a good job keeping the machine fed, implying a larger/more capable core.

The L2 cache remains unchanged in size at 1MB shared between both CPU cores. L2 access latency is improved tremendously with the new architecture. In some cases I measured L2 latency 1/2 that of what I saw with Swift.

The A7’s memory controller sees big improvements as well. I measured 20% lower main memory latency on the A7 compared to the A6. Branch prediction and memory prefetchers are both significantly better on the A7.

I noticed large increases in peak memory bandwidth on top of all of this. I used a combination of custom tools as well as publicly available benchmarks to confirm all of this. A quick look at Geekbench 3 (prior to the ARMv8 patch) gives a conservative estimate of memory bandwidth improvements:

Geekbench 3.0.0 Memory Bandwidth Comparison (1 thread)
  Stream Copy Stream Scale Stream Add Stream Triad
Apple A7 1.3GHz 5.24 GB/s 5.21 GB/s 5.74 GB/s 5.71 GB/s
Apple A6 1.3GHz 4.93 GB/s 3.77 GB/s 3.63 GB/s 3.62 GB/s
A7 Advantage 6% 38% 58% 57%

We see anywhere from a 6% improvement in memory bandwidth to nearly 60% running the same Stream code. I’m not entirely sure how Geekbench implemented Stream and whether or not we’re actually testing other execution paths in addition to (or instead of) memory bandwidth. One custom piece of code I used to measure memory bandwidth showed nearly a 2x increase in peak bandwidth. That may be overstating things a bit, but needless to say this new architecture has a vastly improved cache and memory interface.

Looking at low level Geekbench 3 results (again, prior to the ARMv8 patch), we get a good feel for just how much the CPU cores have improved.

Geekbench 3.0.0 Compute Performance
  Integer (ST) Integer (MT) FP (ST) FP (MT)
Apple A7 1.3GHz 1065 2095 983 1955
Apple A6 1.3GHz 750 1472 588 1165
A7 Advantage 42% 42% 67% 67%

Integer performance is up 44% on average, while floating point performance is up by 67%. Again this is without 64-bit or any other enhancements that go along with ARMv8. Memory bandwidth improves by 35% across all Geekbench tests. I confirmed with Apple that the A7 has a 64-bit wide memory interface, and we're likely talking about LPDDR3 memory this time around so there's probably some frequency uplift there as well.

The result is something Apple refers to as desktop-class CPU performance. I’ll get to evaluating those claims in a moment, but first, let’s talk about the other big part of the A7 story: the move to a 64-bit ISA.

A7 SoC Explained The Move to 64-bit
Comments Locked

464 Comments

View All Comments

  • solipsism - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    There is definitely additional space required for both 2x images and iPad 1x and 2x images when making an app Universal.
  • akdj - Wednesday, October 9, 2013 - link

    I think Apple is NOW mandating retina assets only, isn't that something that came up with the iOS7/XCode 5 updates? (Essentially ensuring an iPad mini 'retina' and the gradual phasing out of the first two iPads....or, is it possible they can 'halve' the resolution just as they do the 2x for iPhone apps on iPads?)
  • tipoo - Tuesday, September 17, 2013 - link

    When you say mobile Core 2 class performance, does that mean Core 2 ULVs like in the Macbook Air a few generations back, or Core 2 proper? I can't find any comparisons directly from Bay Trail to Core 2.
  • Krysto - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    Since he said MBA, then ULV.
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    Core 2 ULVs
  • tipoo - Tuesday, September 17, 2013 - link

    Is there supposed to be a 5S in the Basemark X off screen?

    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7335/58164...
  • dylan522p - Tuesday, September 17, 2013 - link

    He mentioned he ran into a bug.
  • tipoo - Tuesday, September 17, 2013 - link

    is the RAM use of these 64 bit apps higher than the 32 bit ones running on the 5? On x86 at least, moving to 64 bit pointers usually bloats your program about 25%
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, September 17, 2013 - link

    Yes, RAM usage will be higher to some degree. Apple's own 64-bit guide makes brief mention of it, noting that it needs to be suitably managed to avoid a performance regression.

    https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios...
  • Eug - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    I knew this 5S wasn't "just" another S iteration. I figured this machine was going to be a beast in terms of performance, and the improved camera, as well as the fingerprint scanner make this purchase a no-brainer for me.

    Except for one thing...

    Given the potentially somewhat increased memory usage going to 64-bit, I was disappointed that this machine didn't get 2 GB RAM. 64-bit future-proofs the iPhone 5S such that it is IMHO likely to last one generation longer for iOS updates vs. the iPhone 5/5C. The problem though is by that time (2016?) the 1 GB RAM would likely be pretty limiting.

    But then I wonder if even in 2013-2014 it could be somewhat limiting too, even just compared to the 5/5C which would have apps with smaller memory footprints using that same 1 GB amount of RAM.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now