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

  • lucian303 - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    I'd hardly say browser benchmarks are indicative of actual CPU or overall performance considering the huge differences in browser implementations. It tests the speed of the browser on the hardware, not the hardware itself.
  • Whitereflection - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    Normally when people write cellphone reviews, They write things that most people can understand and comparing specs that are practical and features that people actually use and care about. Keep in mind most people have one or more smartphone nowadays, You don't need to be a rocket scientist to read a review. Sadly 50% of review is written in Mars language.
  • tech01x - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    You are free to read a lightweight review from any number of less competent reviewers. There are plenty on the net. Matter of fact, plenty of other reviewers are going to incorporate Anandtech's review as a fundamental part of their review.
  • tredstone - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    that's very true. in fact there are lots of reviews that incorporate parts or Anandtech's review. if people cannot make sense of the technical info they can always go and find a review that places more emphasis on the pretty colours
  • MikefromSA - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    I'm interested in how it performs as a phone. Did I miss that section, or was it not a consideration?
  • tecsi - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    What are the implications of non-world Qualcomm chip for China Mobile?
  • BSMonitor - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    I want to know if your OG iPhone is in Mint condition! Some day that'll sell on eBay for $2M!
  • hydreds - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    Great review Thanks. Wish you had a video review. Not that I love to see you. I am lazy to read.
  • webdev511 - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    And of course as far as handsets go this is an iOS Android only party. While I'm sure Windows Phone 8 devices would probably score lower, they certainly don't feel that way when you're using one.
  • apertotes - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link

    "Now going back and holding an iPhone 4S, it feels like the very opposite is true - the 4S was too heavy"

    And that is why Apple can't loose. No matter what they did, the last thing they settle for its going to always be perfect. At least for most reviewers.

    Of course, this does not mean that the nimble Galaxy S2 was right. No, at the time, it was wrong. Lightness is only good starting on iphone 5.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now