Tegra 3 missed performance goals by wide margins  Late,
problematic, and far too costly  Nvidia world icon 63x27 Tegra 3
missed performance goals by wide margins Nvidia’s ‘quad-ish’
core Tegra 3/Kal-el is bad idea with a worse implementation, and
that is before the financials. Once you get in to that arena,
things get positively ugly.  The short story is this; the CPU is
under-performing badly, missed internal clock targets, and costs
too much to be financially viable.  Lets start out with what
Tegra 3 is, it is a quad-core A9 built on a TSMC 40nm process.
We went over it a while ago, some of the details are here. The
biggest thing we missed is the so called fifth core, and that is
where many of the problems lie, not to mention the costs. ARM
supplies the A9 core in two main versions, low power or high
performance, both relatively speaking. Companies with an ARM
core license can choose one or the other, but not modify the
core itself.  To save power, one of the biggest problems with
the current Tegra 2, there