Talk:ARM Cortex-A9

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Actions ATM7029

The CPU of the ATM7029 is most likely not a Cortex-A9. It's always marketed as "Cortex-A9 family", which is suspicious in its own right. It has the VFPv4 floating point extension which no other Cortex-A9 has. An A9 always has VFPv3. Furthermore, the ATM7029 reports a value of 0xC05 as CPU part ID - at least it did before firmware updates hid this fact. That's the ID of a Cortex-A5. An A9 would have 0xC09. Actions also specify on their ATM7029 page that the CPU has an in-order execution pipeline whereas an A9 would have a better out-of-order pipeline. Finally, benchmarks that measure the performance of a single CPU core, such as Vellamo Metal, indicate that the ATM7029 can't be a Cortex-A9 as its performance lower than expected. It's on par with the performance of an A5. A detailed discussion about all this can be found on SlateDroid. Fimio (talk) 16:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dual-core processing

The article lists in chapter Features Dual-Core Processing. What does that mean? If it means having more than one processor it should be called multi-core processing. It also would not be a special feature of one processing core. Maybe it should be clarified if here processing core and ARM core is different. On the other hand it might be some core cooperation feature, but that should be better named respectively described. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 10:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apple A5? Really?

Now, I know that Apple tends to be pretty tight-lipped about their hardware, but at this point I don't think it's proper to list the Apple A5 as incorporating ARM Cortex-A9. Recent tests have cast doubt on this in terms of underwhelming power compared to what is to be expected. At best, the article cited is speculation. I'm going to go ahead and note it as such. 173.27.39.170 (talk) 01:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Implementations +Sony Playstation Vita

PSP successor Vita -to be released end 2011/start 2012- is to be using a 4 core A9, at least according to the respective article on here Playstation_Vita.

84.73.98.97 (talk) 23:44, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read up on the ARM architecture and understand that ARM only licenses cores; it does not make processors. Chip manufacturers make the actual chip with the core(s) and a whole bunch of other things on it, called a system-on-a-chip (SoC). This article is about a particular core that ARM has designed and the 'implementations' section lists SoC's that contain this core. The Vita will use a SoC — it is not itself a SoC. When people find out which SoC the Vita is using, a link can be added to the appropriate article. It might even be a custom Sony part, in which case a new article could be created for it and a link added to this article!

Summary: the Vita is not a SoC, so please stop adding it to the 'implementations' list. --Imroy (talk) 17:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting input

The popularity of the Cortex M0 and M4 are starting to take off, thus it would be easier to pick some direction before having a bunch of tiny articles. Should there be unique articles for each of the ARM Cortex families? Should there be only 3 major ARM Cortex articles instead, and redirect all sub-flavors to these 3 new articles? Requesting input at Talk:List of ARM microprocessor cores#Discusion for ARM Cortex article overhaul for comments! • Sbmeirow • Talk • 17:14, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trim-Slice

I don't think it's correct to list the Trim-Slice as a "development platform". It's a complete, Tegra 2 based nettop PC, marketed towards consumers and businesses - not some kind of geek/engineer-oriented intermediate product like BeagleBoard. - 78.8.101.21 (talk) 13:10, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Max clock speed?

Where's the source for "Max. CPU clock rate: 0.8 GHz to 2 GHz"? Also, what does it mean for the maximum to be a range? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yifan lu (talk • contribs) 22:34, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on ARM Cortex-A9. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on ARM Cortex-A9. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]