HN Explorer

6 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 16.5 ms ] thread
0x0
I thought the 64bit ARMs were usually "ARMv8", not "ARM 7"? In fact, doesn't "ARM 7" mean a series of ARMv3 and ARMv4 CPUs? (The pi1 and pi2 had ARMv6 and ARMv7 cores I believe)

There's a huge difference between "ARM 7" and "ARMv7". Even if it's a typo (missing "v"), it's odd it's not v8?

kaoD
Indeed a typo, it's ARMv7 and it's indeed 64 bits according to Farnell: http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/2020826.pdf
jrapdx3
Strangely enough, this PDF appears to be a completely empty document. All I get is a blank, 1/1 page. Have to regard it as, well, not informative...

(Let's hope whatever the error, it gets fixed.)

ewmailing
You are correct. The naming scheme is confusing as heck. When Android device manufactures transitioned to armv7, a dev tools company I worked with at the time made the decision to drop armv5/armv6 support. But users were absolutely confused by this, because device manufacturers continued pushing the marketing names. The worst for us was ARM11, which was like a dual armv6, because cheap device manufactures continued pushing new devices based on this instead of moving to armv7.