StarFive Dubhe 64-bit RISC-V core to be found in 12nm, 2 GHz processors

StarFive has just announced customers’ delivery of the 64-bit RISC-V Dubhe core based on RV64GC ISA plus bit manipulation, user-level interrupts, as well as the latest Vector 1.0 (V) and Hypervisor (H) instructions.

StarFive Dubhe can be clocked up to 2 GHz on a 12nm TSMC process node, and the company also released performance numbers with a SPECint2006 score of 8.9/GHz, a Dhrystone score of 6.6 DMIPS/MHz, and a CoreMark score of 7.6/MHz. A third-party source told CNX Software it should be equivalent to the SiFive Performance P550 RISC-V core announced last summer, itself comparable to Cortex-A75.

StarFive Dubhe RISC-V Core

StarFive Dubhe highlights:

  • Typical frequency – 2.0 GHz @ TSMC 12nm
  • “Industry-leading” Power and Area Efficiency (TSMC 12nm)
  • RISC-V Vector Extension
    • Data types: floating point, fixed point and integer
    • VLEN=128-1024bits
    • ALU & data path width=128 or 256 bits
    • Full vector register grouping (LMUL) support
  • RISC-V Virtualization Extension
  • Pre-integrated Multi-Core with Memory Coherency Support

That’s not super detailed, but the company also lists some target applications with edge & cloud data centers (e.g. BMC, enterprise & computational storage), 5G infrastructure and base station, wireless access points, V2X communication, as well as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) for autonomous vehicles, robots, computer vision, and more.

StarFive has licensing agreements with SiFive, while being free to license its own RISC-V cores like the Dubhe, and that’s why you’ll find Dubhe together with SiFive U-Series, S-Series, etc.. on StarFive CPU cores page. Besides CPU IP, StarFive also provides its own full SoCs like the SiFive U74 based StarFive JH7100 processor found in the VisionFive V1 board that has just launched. So I would not be surprised if we see a Dubhe single board computer by the end of 2022 or sometime in 2023.

Via LinuxGizmos

Share this:

Support CNX Software! Donate via PayPal or cryptocurrencies, become a Patron on Patreon, or buy review samples

ROCK Pi 4C Plus
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
The comment form collects your name, email and content to allow us keep track of the comments placed on the website. Please read and accept our website Terms and Privacy Policy to post a comment.
14 Comments
oldest
newest
FreekieDeCakie
FreekieDeCakie
9 months ago

> Dhrystone score of 6.6 DMIPS/MHz

Isn’t that nigh-identical to a Cortex A73?

ClownWorld
ClownWorld
9 months ago

A73 is 4.8 DMIPS/MHz, 6.6 would sit between an A75 and A77 so if true its quite impressive performance

However the comment about it being equivalent to a P550 contradict that because the P550 is < 4 DMIPS/MHz

Nd D
Nd D
9 months ago

Wonder what’s the score for A76. Since it also sit between A75 and A77.

ClownWorld
ClownWorld
9 months ago

There are no published scores for the A75, A76 or A77. ARM stopped publishing from the A75 onwards. Ive never tested an A76 core but I have benched A75 and A77 which came out at approx 6.1 and 7.3 DMIPS/MHz

tkaiser
tkaiser
9 months ago

> I have benched A75 and A77

Using which methodology? Dhrystone 2?

ClownWorld
ClownWorld
9 months ago

Yeah its not just compilers and libs either, Im not convinced that a lot of cheap SoC’s report their operating clocks accurately either, especially MTK based devices Im not too concerned about absolute accuracy, I just wanted a relative comparison between the A35, 53, 57, 72, 73, 75 & 77 devices I had available. I tested using the same binary on the same OS image (except 4 different kernels, 2 mainline 5.10, 2 oem BSP 5.4) and the results I got were within a few % mostly of what Arm publishes for the earlier cores. Not hugely meaningful and split… Read more »

tkaiser
tkaiser
9 months ago

> I tested using the same binary on the same OS image

Oh, then these scores are really something one can rely on to order different CPU cores 🙂

Wrt sysfs numbers that pretend to represent clockspeeds: no need to trust, simply measure next time…

ClownWorld
ClownWorld
9 months ago

Awesome thanks, I hadnt seen that project before. I was thinking of writing something similar then I didnt have the motivation once Id done the testing lol

tkaiser
tkaiser
9 months ago

Better thank Willy next time you encounter him here in the comments. BTW: I keep a collection of such clockspeed measurements here (but neither MTK nor Qualcomm included).

Willy
Willy
9 months ago

Hehe I don’t need to be thanked. Many of us used to be victims of some vendor scams (with amlogic and rockchip commonly leading the movement), and at least we can say that thanks to our collective efforts we all managed to put an end to this practice that’s just old memories by now. That was the exact reason why I originally created this tool, and I wanted to create a standard hardware assessment tool that I didn’t have to make since Thomas did it 🙂 And with Jean-Luc using it with each and every board under review there’s very… Read more »

Tim
Tim
9 months ago

History definitely has a way of repeating.

Marcin Dąbrowski
9 months ago

Whatever you do, just don’t make a repeat of ARM China.

Kaustubh
Kaustubh
9 months ago

I think its performance should be around cortex a76

Advertisement