or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ksec

 Samsung 14nm is doing well, at least it is ahead of TSMC. Samsung skipped mass production of 20nm and concentrated on 14nm ( which is basically 20nm + FinFET ) Samsung's 14nm also performed better then TSMC 16nm, that is why TSMC came out with 16nm+, hoping to win back some market shares. However it is likely Apple will be using both TSMC and Samsung as foundry, as they are more iPhones then ever, unlike 20nm which has its time to matured quite a bit before mass producing...
Yes I forgot about their Atom Line Lol. And you can tell from history software/drivers for GPU matter much much more then the hardware. Intel never paid IMG for its driver support. Hence why earlier Atom GPU performance sucks.
No, Intel hasn't used the PowerVR IP in their iGPU for 3 generation now. As for the article. This isn't something new. As i have stated before it is much more likely Apple make their own GPU rather then switching OSX to ARM. The reason is simply because making a GPU with PowerVR IP is easy ( relatively ), coding its drivers is freaking hard work and takes long time. Since Apple handles its own drivers, it may be of Apple's best interest to only code/optimize for one...
As far as I am concern, Fab, or SoC has never been iPhone's production problem. It is actually TSMC 16nm that Apple will be using. Samsung will likely be the source of A9X, or even A8X.
I got my new MBA today, and as far as i can tell it was manufactured in week 43, two week passed the lunch of Yosemite. Yet it still had Maverick on it, why is that?  
Is that really the case? Or US just trying to destroy the Ruble via the Oil price? Shipping cost per unit in the whole BOM is the lowest of all. Not only does it not make a slight difference in the Apple's margin ( compared to the drop of exchange rate ). Apple dont paid for Oil price, and like someone said it is those transportation company who are benefiting. ( Which is unlikely either because these company sigh long term contract on oil prices ) Share price is never...
I think it would be short sighted for Apple to release a Mac Pro based on Intel X86 and then decide to dump x86 on the MBA , MBP , iMac Range.  Yes, it is much more likely for Apple move to AMD then jumping to its own SoC. At least in the next few years as stop gap.You cant just scale the A8X SoC, rank up clock speed and call it a day thinking giving it a 25W TDP everything will immediately work fine. No.That is like saying Intel Atom is great why dont you just overclock...
And yet the latest news ( rumors ) is that Samsung 14nm has been delayed and yield wasn't as good as planned, and TSMC 16nm+ has moved forward by a quarter. You need a reliable partner to Fab SoC, and GF surely isn't in the reliable category, not now, not in 10nm. Samsung 14nm will bring ~1x% die shrink compared to TSMC 20nm. While TSMC 16nm+ is all about performance and power consumption.
Even though the performance of A8X comes with a bit of surprise, it is still quite far off compared to Intel Broadwell.   Next year 2015 will be 10 years since Apple announced to switch to Intel. ( If you think about it and the state of Apple were then, compared to what they are now.... ), and 2016 they started to ship Mac with Intel CPU.   I guess a better IPC, Quad Core with 16 cluster of PowerVR7 A9X should work out fine next year. 
Well the iPhone is packed with Far more design, tech and software. It is also arguably best in class on many catagories. Beats' Headphone? Apart form the brand, it doesnt produce sound that is any where near the $300 price tag. 
New Posts  All Forums: