[Tzul]

I've heard rumors that the quad-core CPU of the Actions ATM7029 might not be an ARM Cortex A9 as claimed.
It could be an ARM Cortex A5, perhaps modified and improved...

What does this mean?
Well, the A5 is more energy efficient, but also older and slower per core and per clock (A9: 2.50 DMIPS, A5: 1.57 DMIPS).
Therefore, applications that don't take full advantage of all CPU cores might actually run faster on a real A9 dual core.

How can we find out if it is an A5 or A9?
Benchmarks should be able to tell. Also, if you have an ATM7029 based tablet, take a good file manager (doesn't even require root) and open the file /proc/cpuinfo.
Or from a terminal, you can run the command "cat /proc/cpuinfo" to display the contents of the file.

Here's what it looks like on an Amlogic AML8726-MX (dual-core Cortex A9):

Processor       : ARMv7 Processor rev 0 (v7l)<br />
processor       : 0<br />
BogoMIPS        : 2627.08<br />
<br />
processor       : 1<br />
BogoMIPS        : 2627.08<br />
<br />
Features        : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3<br />
CPU implementer : 0x41<br />
CPU architecture: 7<br />
CPU variant     : 0x3<br />
CPU part        : 0xc09<br />
CPU revision    : 0<br />
<br />
Hardware        : Amlogic Meson6 g06 customer platform<br />
Revision        : 0020<br />
Serial          : 000000000000000c<br />

The "CPU part" number identifies the CPU type. The ARM Cortex CPUs should have 0xC0? with "?" being the type number, e.g. 9 for an A9 or f (hexadecimal) for an A15.
The ATM7029 supposedly reports 0xc05, thus an A5.

Can anyone here with a Hero II confirm or deny this?

 

[janesh]

From my hero ii that i almost sold.

Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l)
processor : 0
BogoMIPS : 1114.46

processor : 1
BogoMIPS : 1114.46

processor : 2
BogoMIPS : 1114.46

processor : 3
BogoMIPS : 1114.46

Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4
CPU implementer : 0x41
CPU architecture: 7
CPU variant : 0x0
CPU part : 0xc05
CPU revision : 1

Hardware : gs702a
Revision : 0000
Serial : 0000000000000000

Now my Onda V812

Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 3 (v7l)
processor : 0
BogoMIPS : 1725.93

processor : 1
BogoMIPS : 1725.93

Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp thumbee neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt
CPU implementer : 0x41
CPU architecture: 7
CPU variant : 0x0
CPU part : 0xc07
CPU revision : 3

Hardware : sun6i
Revision : 0000
Serial : 00000000000000000000000000000000

And now my Ployer Momo8 IPS

Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 0 (v7l)
processor : 0
BogoMIPS : 3214.95

processor : 1
BogoMIPS : 3214.95

Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3
CPU implementer : 0x41
CPU architecture: 7
CPU variant : 0x3
CPU part : 0xc09
CPU revision : 0

Hardware : RK30board
Revision : 0000
Serial : 0000000000000000

 

[Tzul]

Thanks!

So it's true, the ATM7029 has the 0xc05 ID as used for ARM Cortex A5 CPUs.
Yet another case of false advertising. The ID could be a mistake, but I doubt it.

By the way: don't read too much into the BogoMips values, they vary greatly depending on the current CPU clock speed.

 

[janesh]

I allready sold my hero ii, because the device is not fast enough for me, but now i must think about it.

http://detail.tmall.com/item.htm?spm=a1z10.1.3-17888004767.1.py8qA7&id=16768981007

Below a quote on a ainol TMALL website where they are listing 'cortex A9'.

NOVO10英雄四核搭载SMP对称高性能四核ARM cortex A9 family架构芯片ATM7029，最高频率达1.5GHz，整体性能较双核处理器提升了200%。四核3D GPU与一颗专有的独立2D GPU分离技术，展现领先同级的图形渲染实力，四核3D GPU帮助运行大型3D游戏，2D GPU更好地提升3D GPU在像素填充上的品质，让你穿梭于各类大型3D游戏或者办公、绘图软件之间游刃有余。

 

[Nickos-V]

Janesh ran Antutu 3 on Hero II & Onda V812. Hero II showed very strong performance for integer, float & RAM.
http://www.slatedroid.com/topic/42580-onda-v812-quadcore-8-ips-tablet/page__view__findpost__p__476881

ATM7029 still comes out with higher results for those even if you scale up V812's # by 20%. ie. V812 quad Cortex A7 @ 1 GHz vs ATM7029 quad Cortex A5 or A9 @ 1.2 GHz. = 20% clock speed difference.

The A5 is a weaker ARM chip and CPU performance would be lower. Only 2 explanations. #1. Cortex A5 & not A9 or #2. Actions screwed up the part value and put in A5 instead of A9.

CPU benchmarks will prove which of these for sure. Right now, Antutu 3 results by Janesh are pointing to #2.

 

[Tzul]

The A5 is a weaker ARM chip and CPU performance would be lower. Only 2 explanations. #1. Cortex A5 & not A9 or #2. Actions screwed up the part value and put in A5 instead of A9.

CPU benchmarks will prove which of these for sure. Right now, Antutu 3 results by Janesh are pointing to #2.

As I said, it's entirely possible that the CPU ID is an error. However, I think it doesn't bode well for Action's chips if they can't even get the ID register right.

It's also possible that they took a vanilla A5 and tweaked their implementation to make it better and faster. Maybe the GPU is a GC1000 "plus" for the same reason.

Here's one more thing to consider:
In the cpuinfo dumps above you can see that janesh's and my Cortex A9 models (Rockchip and Amlogic) support VFP v3 but not VFP v4 (that's the vector floating point architecture).
The Cortex A5 (and Cortex A7) do support VFP v4. And so does the ATM7029.

What the official ARM manuals say:
Cortex A5 FPU
Cortex A9 FPU

 

[robertnl]

After Janesh posted this on a Dutch treatd i did put my Baidu skills to the work (they are bad

).

Found this:

Propaganda written A9Family (Manufacturer marketing is going far)

[sub]Note, fleely translated partly with translate partly by my interpertaion after translating in 3 languaes[/sub]

So what is inpliced here is that ATM has lyed and as Ainol stated A9 famaly you could call A7, A8, A15 famaly to as they do use the same instruction set.
So after some more research this could be true, Ainol should skip the Hero or give a explination fast as this will couse lots and lost of dmg to there brand.

In Benchmarks the difference between the to (A5 VS A9) is not so far away (less then a 100 points as you can see).

And the ATM score on 1.5GHZ? (not completely sure as translate screws up some things

!)

Sources for the above:: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2084867680 and http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2084867680

Then i went to the Ainol forums and found a link to the Imp3 forums (will do some more research there later):
http://bbs.imp3.net/thread-10880138-1-1.html

In short, certainly not A9.
If it is really A9, killed does not add a damn ambiguous family! - Chinese people is inexcusable traditional personality!

Gun God I just get a small waterway messages in the group, and true and false do not know
this atm7029 fact, is not arm architecture a5
but former mips by underlying convert analog into an arm like the actual performance close to a5.
That the bottom of the Actions chip false

So when i read this tread it gives me more or less the following options:
- MIPS structure with a conversion layer (highly doubt it)
- Cortex A5
- Modifyed cortex A5 (Like qualcomm did with Krait) So this way it could be part A9, part A5 but its highly doubtfull as it would take lots of effort and research to make something like this.
- it is A9 (doubt it)

 

[Nickos-V]

OK. Good points Tzul.

vfp v4 is not supported on Cortex A9 with ARM's spec. Actions may have decided to make a "modified" Cortex A9 chip which includes vfp v4. ie. Cortex A9 + vfpv4. In order for software to make use of vfp v4 instructions, Actions would have to change the chip ID to A5 (or A7) because A9 does not support vfp v4. Or Actions made a 2nd error by including vfp v4 in the description. Or Actions has done a really amazing job tweaking the performance out of Cortex A5 architecture. Or Actions made Cortex A5 chip and found a way to "fool" Antutu benchmark to achieve better CPU results.

Whether Cortex A9 or A5 is really kinda irrelevant. What really matters is the CPU performance in the benchmarks. Presently, ATM7029 has a very strong showing in Antutu RAM, INT & FLOAT. Though we "should" test with other CPU benchmarks to confirm those to be true and accurate.

My N80 (RK3066) 2 x 1.6 GHz A9s w/Antutu 3
RAM: 1886
INT: 2520
FLOAT: 1825

Total CPU clock difference between Hero II & N80 = 50% (4.8 GHz VS 3.2 GHz)
We can see that ATM7029 scores very well against my N80. ie. does 43% better RAM score, 43% INT, 56% FLOAT. Notice that if you scale up my N80 results by 50% they would be very similar to ATM7029?

Take into account that Antutu is not super accurate either and chip design between RK3066 & ATM7029 are different too. ie. the results still seem "fairly" linear and are within acceptable differences

You missed my point before. Antutu "should" scale CPU results linearly for the same chip (ie. A31). A 1.2 GHz A31 should scale up linearly for CPU performance compared to A31 @ 1.0 GHz. I was scaling up the results for V812 (Cortex A7) & comparing those "scaled" V812 CPU results to ATM7029 Antutu results. The results "should" scale up linear based on clock speed when using the "same" ARM chip (ie. A31) because #1. the architecture is the same, #2. the chip design is exactly the same and #3 the same tests are being run. Imagine two Intel Core i3s (1st gen) chips. 1 @ 1.0 GHz & the other at 2.0 GHz. The only difference being their clock speeds. In theory, the CPU results would scale up linearly between the 1.0 & 2.0 GHz chips running the same tests. The 2 GHz chip should get 2X the CPU performance. ie. that would only make sense.

V812......V812 (@ 1.2 GHz)....Hero II
1 GHz.....1.2 GHz (scaled)....1.2 GHz
1547......1856.......................2690
2876......3451.......................3615
1830......2196.......................2845
*Notice how Hero II beats V812 (scaled). If ATM7029 is Cortex A5, then it should be scoring less and not more than scaled A31 (Cortex A7) chip.

My guess is that Actions created a Cortex A9 w/vfp v4 and changed the chip ID to Cortex A5 so software uses vfp v4 instructions. But, this all assumes and relies heavily on Antutu results being correct and not manipulated in anyway! More CPU testing will prove whether I am right or not with this "guess" or if Antutu was somehow fooled.

PS, the biggest problem I have seen with ATM7029 is 3D performance because they went with GC1000. ATM7029 chip would have been a winner if it had Mali400MP4 GPU. I would strongly advise people to avoid this chip just because of the very weak 3D performance.

 

[Tzul]

PS, the biggest problem I have seen with ATM7029 is 3D performance because they went with GC1000. ATM7029 chip would have been a winner if it had Mali400MP4 GPU. I would strongly advise people to avoid this chip just because of the very weak 3D performance.

I'd second that, but only if you want to play many 3D games (not everybody does). The ATM7029's CPU performance looks good, A5 or not, and it apparently has a nice video decoder onboard (there's a demo of a Hero II playing several videos simultaneously).

 

[Nickos-V]

You need synthetic benchmarks otherwise you will never be able to measure and compare performance. =) For instance, gaming benchmarks are the best and most accurate but they test out CPU, RAM & GPU together. To get individual values for those requires running synthetic tests. Whether it be computing PI or testing with Antutu or CF-Bench, etc. Though relying on just a single benchmark is never good. Better to run and compare against a couple of different ones.

I still believe modified Cortex A9. So, they would not be lying then. =)
Though could be modified Cortex A5 but I doubt that because the performance in Antutu CPU tests looks really great. Finding Antutu 3 values for Cortex A5 chip and scaling them would help prove this.

Let's forget about A31 for now and just compare to RK3066 & 8726-MX instead.

INT & FLOAT scale up linearly with CPU frequency (in Antutu) as you have also proven. RAM not 1:1 but it does benefit from higher clock speed too. ie. 100% frequency increase = 100% increase to INT, 100% increase to FLOAT & 83-90% increase, when working with dual cores, to RAM.

Notice how ATM7029 scores similar to 729 * 2.87 for INT but much higher for FLOAT (792 * 3.23). ie. Action really improved the FPU performance on their chip probably by going with vfpv4. That is why their chip appears to be Cortex A9 w/vfpv4 to me. For ATM7029: INT compares to dual A9 @ 2.27 GHz and FLOAT compares to dual A9 @ 2.56 GHz.

<br />
      | 792MHz  |  1320MHz ||  792MHz * 1.67 || 792MHz * 2.02 || 792 * 2.87          || ATM7029<br />
                                             (Dual A9 @ 1.6 GHz) (Dual A9 @ 2.27 GHz)   quad 1.2 GHz<br />
------+---------+----------++----------------++--------------------------------------------------<br />
RAM   |   1023  |     1590 ||  1708          || 2066          ||  <br />
INT   |   1258  |     2089 ||  2101          || 2541          ||  3610               || 3615<br />
FLOAT |    881  |     1480 ||  1471          || 1780          ||  2528               || 2845<br />

You have proven, in your previous post, that INT & FLOAT scale linearly per frequency & per core in Antutu tests. In that case, for INT, we can do, 2 x 2.27 = 4.54 GHz Cortex A9 and 2 x 2.56 = 5.12 GHz for FLOAT. ie. INT comes very close to 4.8 GHz A9 and FLOAT results are similar to 5.1 GHz A9.

True, that creating a more unique chip design than the standard Cortex A9 one from ARM could change performance but only to a point. ie. 5-10% CPU performance difference is possible between different Cortex A9 chips @ same clock frequency. Only so much extra performance you can squeeze out of a certain chip architecture with extra tweaks.

By the way, seeing "4.8 GHz VS 3.2 GHz" makes me cringe.

I have been working with SMP machines since 2003 so I know that is not true. ie. app first has to be multi-threaded otherwise only 1 core gets used. 2nd, even then, the app may only achieve maximum of 70-85% performance increase per additional core because of the app's code and/or OS. 2 cores does not mean 2X the performance. =) Though some OSes, like BeOS/Haiku, will get 95% efficiency (or higher).

 

[Nickos-V]

PS, Antutu maybe wrong with the #s too. Vellamo Metal gives ATM7029 score of 251. My N80 gets 500 which is double in score. The Metal tests appear to be CPU & memory tests & maybe disk access too.
http://www.quicinc.com/vellamo/

It makes no sense why ATM7029 scores very well in Antutu CPU & RAM tests and poorly in Metal benchmark. That is why other CPU benches are needed to know what is really going on here. ie. two benchmarks and both saying different things. Believe Antutu, then looks like Cortex A9. Believe Metal, then Cortex A5. Who should we believe?

I still tell people to avoid ATM7029 because should always buy a balanced computer/tablet. ie. RK3066 has way better balance than ATM7029 between CPU & GPU power.

Edit: I probably would believe Vellamo over Antutu benchmark because made by Qualcomm. Also, many newer devices benched in Metal get 450-700 score. Like Note II with score of 619.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.quicinc.vellamo&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImNvbS5xdWljaW5jLnZlbGxhbW8iXQ..

So, very likely that ATM7029 is really quad Cortex A5 like you said. More CPU tests have to be run to know for certain though.

 

[Ali DSD]

PS, Antutu maybe wrong with the #s too. Vellamo Metal gives ATM7029 score of 251. My N80 gets 500 which is double in score. The Metal tests appear to be CPU & memory tests & maybe disk access too.
http://www.quicinc.com/vellamo/

It makes no sense why ATM7029 scores very well in Antutu CPU & RAM tests and poorly in Metal benchmark. That is why other CPU benches are needed to know what is really going on here. ie. two benchmarks and both saying different things. Believe Antutu, then looks like Cortex A9. Believe Metal, then Cortex A5. Who should we believe?

I still tell people to avoid ATM7029 because should always buy a balanced computer/tablet. ie. RK3066 has way better balance than ATM7029 between CPU & GPU power.

Edit: I probably would believe Vellamo over Antutu benchmark because made by Qualcomm. Also, many newer devices benched in Metal get 450-700 score. Like Note II with score of 619.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.quicinc.vellamo&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImNvbS5xdWljaW5jLnZlbGxhbW8iXQ..

So, very likely that ATM7029 is really quad Cortex A5 like you said. More CPU tests have to be run to know for certain though.

I just saw the add of Novo 7 Venus on caveat emptor.com, its showing :
CPU ATM7029 (Cortex-A9)
Graphic Hardware Mali-400, 1080p decoding,Supporting OpenGL ES2.0, ES1.0, OpenVG1.1

So Is this ATM7029 the different from Hero II , because it have Mali-400. I am confused, Nikos and Tzul, please give your opinion.

Thanks

 

[AC Slater]

@ Ali: there has been very poor marketing, with lack of precise descriptions and only vague fingerpointing what's inside.

First it looked as if they would use ARM Mali-400 of even Mali-450. Then it was supposed to be the Vivante GC1000, but it had 4 cores and dedicated core for 2D, so the 'GC1000 Plus' was born, whatever that really is.
Since there was no clear answers, they could even have gone for somekind of PowerVR-solution.

Now people are actually getting their tablets in, it sure seems to lack graphic processing in the 3D department. It's being outperformed by the RK3066 SoC which uses Mali-400MP quadcore.
So using the power of deduction, you would have to agree it is in fact not a Mali, nobody ever claimed something about PowerVR, so lets skip that one and assume it is in fact a Vivante GC1000 Plus variant.
Though even that is not guaranteed, because on the tablet self, it says it contains a 'S5 Multicore Engine' build/sold by 'Advanced Graphics Corporation'.

What I can tell you in short is so much:

- Never go to a reseller/webstore if you want 100% correct information. A great deal of the time they have no clue what they're actually selling and just copying information from 'somewhere' without checking.
- The Ainol Tmall-stores advertised the Hero II with 'Mail400MP4' processor

Notice the misspelling too, not really to be trusted
- Ainol.com has a quadcore-page: http://www.ainol.com/zzl/ainolquad/page.htm , it says 'GC1000 plus'
- The tablet itself shows the GPU as 'S5 Multicore Engine' by 'Advanced Graphics Corporation'

So basicly, I don't think anybody can give you a 100% guaranteed correct answer.

 

[Nickos-V]

So Is this ATM7029 the different from Hero II , because it have Mali-400.

ATM7029 is one chip with certain specs. You cannot have ATM7029 with Mali400 and another with GC1000. Some sellers are lying or do not know the chip specs. Chinese sellers only care about selling goods. Some tablet makers are to blame too because I have seen Ainol & Ramos say Mali400 GPU which is not true.

Action very likely re-branded Vivante's GC1000 GPU. Half or more of the sites say GC1000 for GPU. If you look here you will see the GPU comes up as:
Advanced Graphics Corporation
S5 Multicore
http://www.glbenchmark.com/phonedetails.jsp?benchmark=glpro25&D=Ainol+Novo+10+Hero+QuadCore&testgroup=gl

I have never heard of Advanced Graphics Corp. before ATM7029. That leads me to believe a re-brand of another GPU.

Here is GlBenchmark compare of Novo10 Quad VS Cube U30GT-H:
http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare.jsp?benchmark=glpro25&showhide=true&data-source=1&D1=Ainol%20Novo%2010%20Hero%20QuadCore&D2=Cube%20Technology%20U30GT-H

Many tests fail with newer GLbenchmark but can at least see:

<br />
                          Novo10 Quad     U30GT-H<br />
2.1 Egypt Classic            <br />
Offscreen (1080P)            2529          6642<br />
<br />
2.1 Egypt Classic            3456          6797<br />
  Onscreen<br />

ie.
in offscreen mode, at 1920x1080, U30GT is 2.63X (163%) more powerful at HD resolution
in onscreen mode, 1280x800, U30GT is 1.97X (97%) more powerful

I wish there were more GLBenchmark "game" type benches to look at but that one will just have to do.

PS, and now it looks like the CPU could very likely be Cortex A5 too which is way weaker than Cortex A9. This will add another very good reason to avoid ATM7029 chip. ie. weak GPU & CPU.

 

[Nickos-V]

If you want strong ARM chip today go with one of:
RK3066, Exynos Quad or A31

In few months time, you can add RK3188 to that list.

Tablets with those ARM chips are the ones worth buying. Forget about ATM7029 & 8726-MX chips. The ARM chip is the most important part. It determines performance. 2nd is the tablet brand.

 

[Ali DSD]

Thank you Nickos and AC Slater, the information about GPU is very vague on different web sites.
Currently I have bought RK3066, and its really very powerfull then the Amlogic 8726. I would wait for RK3188..
Thanks

 

[janesh]

If you want strong ARM chip today go with one of:
RK3066, Exynos Quad or A31

Right Nickos, my thoughts, but with my experience with RK3066 and now with A31, i will never buy a device with this chips and a retina screen.

I just did the vellamo benchmark with three devices, here the results.

Onda V812, Metal 372, HTML5 1120
Hero ii, Metal 254, HTML5. 942
Ployer momo8,Metal 514, HTML5 1563

Also disappointing for me since i own the hero ii is the small amount of Ram, listed as 1 Gb, and only 718 Mb available, while the ployer momo8 and teclast P88 both have 876 Mb.

For me it was clear after one day of use, i am going to sell this device.

 

[Nickos-V]

I just did the vellamo benchmark with three devices, here the results.

Onda V812, Metal 372, HTML5 1120
Hero ii, Metal 254, HTML5. 942
Ployer momo8,Metal 514, HTML5 1563

Hi Janesh. Thanks for your benches.

You can see that ATM7029 is the worst of all 3 of those chips. RK3066 is the best. It also shows how ATM7029 does poorly in both CPU & GPU sides. Add to that, losing 166 MB of RAM over RK3066.

I believe Metal runs single threaded tests but cannot say for sure. If metal is single (or dual) threaded, that would explain why momo8 does so well compared to the other two tablets. But, even if multi-threaded, Cortex A5 & A7 would still lose because slower architectures, slower CPU speeds and because of efficiency.

HTML5 tests out GPU, CPU & Network stack. Metal is CPU, RAM & disk. Good seeing those tablet comparisons.

Many apps are dual or single threaded so a fast dual core Cortex A9 (or better, A15) will run better than a lower clocked quad CPU tablet! That is why RK3066 will give better CPU performance over A31 most of the time.

 

[janesh]

http://tabletrepublic.com/forum/latest-tablet-news/ainols-quad-core-line-up-3024-2.html

Interesting page and topic on tabletrepublic, where some predict month agoo what is the matter with ATM7029.

 

[Nickos-V]

http://tabletrepublic.com/forum/latest-tablet-news/ainols-quad-core-line-up-3024-2.html

Interesting page and topic on tabletrepublic, where some predict month agoo what is the matter with ATM7029.

Actually a chip designer told Frank the ATM7029 was using Cortex A7. Though it really turned out to be Cortex A5. A7 would still have been good but A5 is not. A5 is very weak.
http://tabletrepublic.com/forum/latest-tablet-news/ainols-quad-core-line-up-3024-2.html#post30151

Though I am very disappointed how Antutu gives this chip a very high score for INT & FLOAT tests with an A5 architecture. Antutu really surprised me because it outputs a really high total score for the Hero II even though it has weaker CPU & GPU. Go figure! That is why I have never been a big fan of Antutu benchmark.