• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

News ARM Server CPUs

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Doug S

Senior member
Feb 8, 2020
468
675
96
Maybe, maybe not.
For one thing we have no idea what the transition plan for v9 is.
They COULD have a temporary period during which devices can decode both v8 (hopefully 64-bit only!) and v9 instructions. How feasible this is depends on how ambitious they are in redesigning v9.
Why would they do that, when what they did with ARMv7/ARMv8 was perfect: treat them as separate ISAs, and allow for cores that either run both or run ARMv8 only. Why would they need to define a "transition period", rather than letting the customers decide what's best for them and their market?

Since there's essentially zero commercial (closed source) ARMv8 binaries, an ARM server vendor could quite reasonably go ARMv9 only from day one. Why should they pay the price of a transition period? Why should Android OEMs that serve a market that goes as low as sub $50 phones be forced into a transition before it makes sense for them?

I'm still skeptical there IS an ARMv9, since AFAIK the only evidence was a job posting mentioning that. That might be something they are targeting for 2025, and we'll see several more ARMv8 iterations.
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
400
296
136
Why would they do that, when what they did with ARMv7/ARMv8 was perfect: treat them as separate ISAs, and allow for cores that either run both or run ARMv8 only. Why would they need to define a "transition period", rather than letting the customers decide what's best for them and their market?

Since there's essentially zero commercial (closed source) ARMv8 binaries, an ARM server vendor could quite reasonably go ARMv9 only from day one. Why should they pay the price of a transition period? Why should Android OEMs that serve a market that goes as low as sub $50 phones be forced into a transition before it makes sense for them?

I'm still skeptical there IS an ARMv9, since AFAIK the only evidence was a job posting mentioning that. That might be something they are targeting for 2025, and we'll see several more ARMv8 iterations.
You're AGREEING with me!
My point was that
- continuing to advance v8
- does not mean those advances TAKE THE PLACE OF v9
which was the comment to which I was replying.

v8 and v9 could serve different roles and different markets going forward for a few years, even in v9 appears next year.

Andrei has been adamant that v9 is imminent (ie way before 2025) but of course he may have have misinterpreted whatever it was that gave him this confidence.
 

soresu

Golden Member
Dec 19, 2014
1,571
784
136
Not got a subscription, so I don't know who it is. My guess would be Marvell?
Yes, the problem is that Neoverse seems to be killing it.

Given this fact just as with Qualcomm and now Samsung on the client side (and nVidia on the Tegra side as of Oren) there is probably a growing thought that custom server core development is simply more trouble/expense than it is worth.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
8,721
1,570
126
When it comes to ARM Servers, Amazon is going to be tough to beat. If you can use ARM at this point, you are running Linux, and are most likely okay with the cloud...
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
400
296
136
Yes, the problem is that Neoverse seems to be killing it.

Given this fact just as with Qualcomm and now Samsung on the client side (and nVidia on the Tegra side as of Oren) there is probably a growing thought that custom server core development is simply more trouble/expense than it is worth.
Or to put it differently, common sense has finally taken over!
It was always the case that these separate ARM companies (and so many of them) made zero economic sense. ARM in servers ala Neoverse, yes, that makes a huge amount of sense; but not other companies doing the exact same thing, it's just wasted resources.

Amazon is basically a more sensible model (or, alternatively, think Apple A4 and A5) -- ARM does one part of the job with the CPU and bus designs, TSMC/SS does fabbing, AMZ (or Apple back then) puts together the exact package of functionality they need.

Honestly I'm not optimistic for Nuvia. Having the ambition to be faster than ARM is great, but you need customers who are willing to pay more for that extra speed, you need to manage relationships, you need to be able to provide any extra weirdness that might be desired from NPUs to accelerators to security features. I can't see how Nuvia is big enough to both design a kickass CPU+SoC AND do the sort of handholding and customer management that's required when a Google or a Facebook come by considering buying the chips but asking for one extra thing that will really help us out.

Well, we'll see. I'm sure whatever happens they will land on their feet, acquired by Apple, Google, or nV.
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
400
296
136
Or to put it differently, common sense has finally taken over!
It was always the case that these separate ARM companies (and so many of them) made zero economic sense. ARM in servers ala Neoverse, yes, that makes a huge amount of sense; but not other companies doing the exact same thing, it's just wasted resources.

Amazon is basically a more sensible model (or, alternatively, think Apple A4 and A5) -- ARM does one part of the job with the CPU and bus designs, TSMC/SS does fabbing, AMZ (or Apple back then) puts together the exact package of functionality they need.

Honestly I'm not optimistic for Nuvia. Having the ambition to be faster than ARM is great, but you need customers who are willing to pay more for that extra speed, you need to manage relationships, you need to be able to provide any extra weirdness that might be desired from NPUs to accelerators to security features. I can't see how Nuvia is big enough to both design a kickass CPU+SoC AND do the sort of handholding and customer management that's required when a Google or a Facebook come by considering buying the chips but asking for one extra thing that will really help us out.

Well, we'll see. I'm sure whatever happens they will land on their feet, acquired by Apple, Google, or nV.
There's an interesting question here that, as far as I know, remains unanswered: what was the ARM server timeline?
We know ARM has been pushing a particular timeline for its presence in servers since at least 2015. There were earlier timelines that could be mocked, but starting around 2015 they began to be, IMHO, realistic, hoping for a substantial v8 based presence beginning in 2020, which is about what we saw, with Neoverse announced in 2018, and AMZ really taking advantage of this in 2019.

OK, so against that background, consider Centriq. That was announced as an idea in 2014, SoC demoed late 2016, shipped late 2017, then soon cancelled. Cancelling was probably a good idea, given what we know of Neoverse, but the interesting political question is who knew what when...
Was ARM planning Neoverse quietly for years, since 2014 or so?, and just not informing the partners?
Did the partners think (and to be fair, this was not an unreasonable thought at the time, until Apple kicked ARM's butt) that ARM had a history of cores that were great at area+power, not so much at performance, so they had an opening?
Or was ARM willing to leave servers in partner hands until some late point (2016?) by which time they were so disappointed at everything they'd been shown that they concluded "to hell with these people and their companies, they all deserve to fail! If you want something done right do it yourself."
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,780
5,759
136
@name99

Honestly I think ARM expected people to do what Amazon did: license the design diretly from ARM (in this case, NeoVerse), maybe tweak it a little, and sell that to the public. I don't think ARM ever intended for players to just drop out of the race.
 

Thala

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2014
1,135
446
136
There is an opportunity to develop you own cores but license other IP like the mesh-interconnect used in NeoVerse. You can license lots of the building blocks separately. Thats the direction NUVIA is going.
 

scannall

Golden Member
Jan 1, 2012
1,751
1,177
136
There is an opportunity to develop you own cores but license other IP like the mesh-interconnect used in NeoVerse. You can license lots of the building blocks separately. Thats the direction NUVIA is going.
Just my own opinion/speculation but it looks to me like Nuvia is building IP and making noise for a high dollar buyout. As an actual business model it's pretty weak. Look at how resistant the market is just switching vendors using the same ISA, let alone going to ARM or whatever requiring rebuilds of most of your software and licenses.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,780
5,759
136
So how many ARM server offerings are left outside of Graviton2 (cloud only) and A64FX (extremely niche)? Including ones that are supposed to be coming up real soon now.
 

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
9,077
2,279
136
Well yes, it does. I'm just wondering who is still left? Ampere and . . . ?
Nuvia are still in it. And don't be surprised if the other hyperscalers are building their own Graviton-style chip, with ARM IP and a few custom tweaks.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,780
5,759
136
Nuvia are still in it. And don't be surprised if the other hyperscalers are building their own Graviton-style chip, with ARM IP and a few custom tweaks.
Such as Google? They won't market anything like that, though. It'll be in-house only. Just like Amazon.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY