or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple begins trial production of A6 processor set to launch in 2012
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple begins trial production of A6 processor set to launch in 2012

post #1 of 45
Thread Starter 
Apple's next-generation A6 processor, expected to arrive in future versions of the iPad and iPhone, is said to have gone into trial production ahead of a launch expected in the first half of 2012.

Citing industry sources, Taiwan Economic News reported Friday that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. has started trial production of the A6 in cooperation with Apple. Production design is scheduled to be finalized in the first quarter of 2012, while the chip will be publicly unveiled, likely in a third-generation iPad, no earlier than the second quarter of 2012.

If accurate, the report could quash persistent speculation that Apple plans to launch a third-generation iPad later this year, assuming such a device would run the next-generation A6 processor.

The ARM-based A6 is said to incorporate TSMC's 28-nanometer process and 3D stacking technology. The chipmaker's "silicon interposer" and "bump on trace" methods are also said to be utilized in the next-generation chip.

Trial manufacturing of the A6 processor was originally claimed by Reuters to have begun in July, when it was also indicated the chips would make their way into devices in 2012. Both reports have pegged TSMC as the manufacturer, lending credence to rumors that Apple is looking to move away from Samsung, which has built its A4 and A5 processors.



Samsung and Apple are currently engaged in a fierce legal battle that recently led sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 to be banned in both Europe and Australia. Apple has accused Samsung of copying the look and feel of its popular iPhone and iPad products, while Samsung has responded in kind with its own patent infringement lawsuit.

Friday's report said sources indicated TSMC has been capable of producing processors for Apple, but the manufacturer was held back by limited production lines. TSMC is also a customer of Nvidia and Qualcomm.
post #2 of 45
Gee thanks, AI. Now we will all be disappointed with our A5 iPhone 5's.

I'm kidding, of course! Technology does change fast, though.
post #3 of 45
My bet is that iPad 3 will come out next fall. Component upgrades seem to necessitate it, and it's not like other tablets are giving Apple much competition. Also would put it in a better sales position being the holiday upgrade, like iPods.
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
post #4 of 45
What's that? The iPad 3 won't be able to be released this year?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. REALLY.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #5 of 45
Did that huge image of an A5 add anything to the story? It's square and grey and has an Apple logo. Wow.

It seems odd that Apple would be "going into production" for a chip that won't go into anything for 6+ months.
post #6 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Did that huge image of an A5 add anything to the story? It's square and grey and has an Apple logo. Wow.

It seems odd that Apple would be "going into production" for a chip that won't go into anything for 6+ months.

Everyone likes a picture, and I think you missed out on the word "trial" right before the word "production."
post #7 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Did that huge image of an A5 add anything to the story? It's square and grey and has an Apple logo. Wow.

It seems odd that Apple would be "going into production" for a chip that won't go into anything for 6+ months.

"trial production"

Oops... Prof. Peabody beat me to it.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #8 of 45
If Samsung think Apple forcing blocks on the Tab is going to cost them, it's nothing compared to what they will lose if Apple do shift to TSMC for the A6.

Samsung have built entire fabs pretty much solely for the purpose of producing logic for Apple. At around $5bn for a fab, it's a lot of money to be sitting idle.
post #9 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

If Samsung think Apple forcing blocks on the Tab is going to cost them, it's nothing compared to what they will lose if Apple do shift to TSMC for the A6.

Samsung have built entire fabs pretty much solely for the purpose of producing logic for Apple. At around $5bn for a fab, it's a lot of money to be sitting idle.

Samsung will need them when they start copying the A6.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #10 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Did that huge image of an A5 add anything to the story? It's square and grey and has an Apple logo. Wow.

It seems odd that Apple would be "going into production" for a chip that won't go into anything for 6+ months.

Forgive me of my lack of knowledge of silicon production, but I believe trial production is vastly different from full production. I'd assume trial production means this company is testing how fast they can make chips within a reasonable error rate. They may find an error that may cause them to have to retool the entire factory and set them back months or force Apple to find another supplier.
When a company stops chasing profit and start chasing the betterment of their products, services, workforce, and customers, that will be the most valuable company in the world.
Reply
When a company stops chasing profit and start chasing the betterment of their products, services, workforce, and customers, that will be the most valuable company in the world.
Reply
post #11 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

What's that? The iPad 3 won't be able to be released this year?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. REALLY.

I never believed those rumors anyway. Sheesh. There is such a thing as a product cycle.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #12 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

If Samsung think Apple forcing blocks on the Tab is going to cost them, it's nothing compared to what they will lose if Apple do shift to TSMC for the A6.

Samsung have built entire fabs pretty much solely for the purpose of producing logic for Apple. At around $5bn for a fab, it's a lot of money to be sitting idle.

The lines Apple is currently using for A5 & A4 would never have been used to build the A6 anyway as they are 45nm lines and not 28nm. By the time the A6 is in production the output of those lines would always have been switched to some other lower cost device, likely from some other OEM.

The overall contract foundry market is huge and while Samsung may have to drop their margins a little to attract new custom it's very unlikely that their new 28nm lines will be sat empty - even if Apple goes 100% TSMC. From Apple's perspective, two suppliers are a lot better than one, so it's quite likely they'll continue to use Samsung, even if they send the bulk of their business to Taiwan instead of Korea.
post #13 of 45
TSMC is also a customer of Nvidia and Qualcomm.

Or did you ment supplier?
post #14 of 45
I'm just waiting for Audi to sue ...
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #15 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulfoaf View Post

Gee thanks, AI. Now we will all be disappointed with our A5 iPhone 5's.

I'm kidding, of course! Technology does change fast, though.

By tweaked I'm thinking a process shrink possibly to 32nm. Currently the A5 is a little warm for a phone so a shrink would take care of that. I was actually surprised to find out, via the teardown sites, that the A5 is apparently built on the same process technology as the A4.

I forget what the power delta is with Samsung but if they save 20% that would be very significant for the iPhone. Experience with my iPhone 4 tells me that it can get very warm at times. I've heard that the processor can max out at two watts which is actually pretty hot for a mobile device. So I can see them trying to push tech along for iPhone 5.

On top of all of that we have had rumors in the past that Apple now has two development teams working on SoCs. One apparently targeting handheld devices and the other going after tablets. Frankly I don't know if this is true but it would make sense to me. Mainly it makes sense because of different performance expectations.

Exciting times!
post #16 of 45
By that I mean Samsung has more or less gone into partnership here with Apple. We don't know the nature of that partnership nor who owns what.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

The lines Apple is currently using for A5 & A4 would never have been used to build the A6 anyway as they are 45nm lines and not 28nm. By the time the A6 is in production the output of those lines would always have been switched to some other lower cost device, likely from some other OEM.

While this is true in the sense of process shrinks, Apple might take the attitude that the line should be scraped.
Quote:
The overall contract foundry market is huge and while Samsung may have to drop their margins a little to attract new custom it's very unlikely that their new 28nm lines will be sat empty - even if Apple goes 100% TSMC.

Currently it is my understanding that Apple is greater than 80% of Samsungs foundry business. That is a very serious loss.
Quote:
From Apple's perspective, two suppliers are a lot better than one, so it's quite likely they'll continue to use Samsung, even if they send the bulk of their business to Taiwan instead of Korea.

This is an important point. Some of the recent sad events in Asia highlight the need to manage risks. Beyond that there is a big issue simply with capacity, if they are using close to 100% of Samsungs capacity they really have no choice but to spread out a bit.

Sometimes I think people read to much into these moves. Apple has been ramping production as fast as they can remove the various bottle necks. I really don't think they want a processor bottleneck, so this is really just being prudent.
post #17 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I never believed those rumors anyway. Sheesh. There is such a thing as a product cycle.

Good, someone else sane.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #18 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Samsung will need them when they start copying the A6.

The A4 was a slightly modified copy of the Samsung Hummingbird. Samsung got Intrinsity to help with the design of it before there was ever an A4 version of it. Apple liked it so much they later bought Intrinsity.

Hummingbird announced by Samsung July 27, 2009

A4 announced by Steve on January 27, 2010
post #19 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

The A4 was a slightly modified copy of the Samsung Hummingbird. Samsung got Intrinsity to help with the design of it before there was ever an A4 version of it. Apple liked it so much they later bought Intrinsity.

Hummingbird announced by Samsung July 27, 2009

A4 announced by Steve on January 27, 2010

Oh... and manufactured by who, or did you mention that?

... and Intrinsity designed the Hummingbird chip and collaborated with Samsung for the manufacturing.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #20 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

While this is true in the sense of process shrinks, Apple might take the attitude that the line should be scraped.

Can't imagine why. While Apple may front suppliers money to build new capacity they don't afaik own the capacity, just have exclusive use for a while. Besides, from Apple's perspective it's now a line that makes chips that don't really compete with it - the 45nm lines will go to making things like chips for PMPs, eBook readers, bluetooth peripherals etc. etc. In a year's time Apple will take the view that anybody using a 45nm SoC in a premium smartphone is hopelessly quaint.

Quote:
Currently it is my understanding that Apple is greater than 80% of Samsungs foundry business. That is a very serious loss.

Definitely! But on the flipside, whenever one client is 80% of your business you've already screwed up. From Samsung's perspective the diversification may be almost as beneficial as it is from Apple's. There are only 3 foundries even playing at 32nm or 28nm so I doubt that Samsung will lack business.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/d...s_Company.html

Quote:
This is an important point. Some of the recent sad events in Asia highlight the need to manage risks. Beyond that there is a big issue simply with capacity, if they are using close to 100% of Samsungs capacity they really have no choice but to spread out a bit.

Exactly, and even without a natural disaster it's very easy for a single supplier to have issues due to contamination. We could even see one of the big foundries fumble a process transition, so relying entirely on one just doesn't seem smart.
post #21 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulfoaf View Post

Gee thanks, AI. Now we will all be disappointed with our A5 iPhone 5's.

I'm kidding, of course! Technology does change fast, though.

I still don't know what capabilities even the A5 will bring to an iPhone -- above faster, better graphics for gaming.

I have an iP4 and it does everything I need a phone to do, as well as can be done (within current cell limitations).

Now, the iPad with the larger form factor is a different story altogether.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker."
-auxio-
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker."
-auxio-
Reply
post #22 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I still don't know what capabilities even the A5 will bring to an iPhone -- above faster, better graphics for gaming.

I have an iP4 and it does everything I need a phone to do, as well as can be done (within current cell limitations).

Now, the iPad with the larger form factor is a different story altogether.

Like on the iPad 2, the idea of screen mirroring is the killer feature I'm hoping for. Not even for gaming, but presentations, photo sharing, etc. If I could walk into a room, plug my Apple TV into a projector, and hold a presentation with my phone, that would be awesome.
post #23 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

Like on the iPad 2, the idea of screen mirroring is the killer feature I'm hoping for. Not even for gaming, but presentations, photo sharing, etc. If I could walk into a room, plug my Apple TV into a projector, and hold a presentation with my phone, that would be awesome.

Ahh, yes... I agree.

I could use that for soccer team parties film highlights at the local pizza palace.

Though, given that I have an iPad 2, I'd much rather use that.

What would be kinda neat, is have multiple iDevices PIP mirrored to a single ATV -- I am think that the kids could each apply PhotoBooth-like effects (bumps, swirls, etc.) to their pics on the screen. (Kind' like after they take the real team pic, they take a few more where everyone gets to act up and make faces).
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker."
-auxio-
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker."
-auxio-
Reply
post #24 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

The lines Apple is currently using for A5 & A4 would never have been used to build the A6 anyway as they are 45nm lines and not 28nm. By the time the A6 is in production the output of those lines would always have been switched to some other lower cost device, likely from some other OEM.

The overall contract foundry market is huge and while Samsung may have to drop their margins a little to attract new custom it's very unlikely that their new 28nm lines will be sat empty - even if Apple goes 100% TSMC. From Apple's perspective, two suppliers are a lot better than one, so it's quite likely they'll continue to use Samsung, even if they send the bulk of their business to Taiwan instead of Korea.

While I'm sure you're right, it will not be very high margin business when compared to the Apple devices. I'd even question how successful they would be in winning much business to replace it. I put a lot of equipment into their first foundry line, and until they won the Apple contract, there was very little silicon going through there (what there was was typically devices from Samsung memory lines being used for the odd process due to down equipment in the memory lines).

They did have plans to re-tool for 28nm in their existing lines - I wonder how aggressive they will be at that now.
post #25 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Oh... and manufactured by who, or did you mention that?

... and Intrinsity designed the Hummingbird chip and collaborated with Samsung for the manufacturing.

Samsung did not steal or copy the design or concept for the Hummingbird from Apple. Samsung and Intrinsity collaborated on the design of the Hummingbird. It was only much later that Apple bought Intrinsity. The A4 and Hummingbird were both manufactured by Samsung, what was the point of your question?
post #26 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

While I'm sure you're right, it will not be very high margin business when compared to the Apple devices. I'd even question how successful they would be in winning much business to replace it. I put a lot of equipment into their first foundry line, and until they won the Apple contract, there was very little silicon going through there (what there was was typically devices from Samsung memory lines being used for the odd process due to down equipment in the memory lines).

They did have plans to re-tool for 28nm in their existing lines - I wonder how aggressive they will be at that now.

Was the plan to re-tool or to set up completely new lines? I thought the norm in the industry was to keep old processes around for quite some time because once the plant was fully paid off the profits even on low-margin work are substantial.

They're definitely still committed to having 28 and 32nm lines, and I'd imagine that having succeeded in supplying Apple they've won significant reputation in the industry.
post #27 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Samsung did not steal or copy the design or concept for the Hummingbird from Apple. Samsung and Intrinsity collaborated on the design of the Hummingbird. It was only much later that Apple bought Intrinsity. The A4 and Hummingbird were both manufactured by Samsung, what was the point of your question?

Your point was that Apple copied Samsung... which is bullshit. Intrinsity "designed" both chips and both chips were manufactured by Samsung; Hummingbird for Samsung's phones and A4 for Apple's phone. Samsung was a collaborator in the design of the Hummingbird in the sense that they built their fab around the chip and the chip was redesigned in areas where it would make it easier to manufacture.

So in buying Intrinsity, Apple was not copying Samsung with the A4... they were buying the Hummingbird design and redesigning it for Apple's purpose. If Snapdragon had been owned by a private company and not Qualcomm (by way of AMD) then maybe Apple would have bought that company but Intrinsity was there for the taking.

The A6 on the other hand is Apple's and Intrinsity's design... anything that resembles it from Samsung at this point would then truly be a copy being that Apple now owns Intrinsity.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #28 of 45
A little light reading; an excerpt from an AnandTech article(emphasis mine):

"In September 2008, Samsung went against ARM's suggestion that any semi-custom implementation of the Cortex-A8 wouldn't be faster than TI's OMAP3 version. They inked a deal with Intrinsity to develop a FastCore version of the Cortex-A8 called as the Hummingbird. In the meanwhile, Apple was also looking for a way to speed up the Cortex-A8 for their iPad. It is believed in industry circles that Samsung asked Intrinsity develop a FastCore version of the Cortex-A8 at the behest of Apple for A4, and also ended up using it for the S5PC110 / S5PV210 after splitting the cost (according to rumors). The hardening was completed in July 2009, just in time for the rest of the A4 SoC to be taped out for the iPad and the S5PC110 for the Samsung Galaxy S."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3665/a...ers-and-losers
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #29 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Was the plan to re-tool or to set up completely new lines? I thought the norm in the industry was to keep old processes around for quite some time because once the plant was fully paid off the profits even on low-margin work are substantial.

They're definitely still committed to having 28 and 32nm lines, and I'd imagine that having succeeded in supplying Apple they've won significant reputation in the industry.

They were going to do both. There are a couple of new fabs going up, but you can actually re-tool an older fab to do tighter geometry reasonably cheaply (in fab cost terms). Basically in most process flows, there are a limited number of pieces of equipment that will be the critical parts for going down a step, so if you replace or upgrade just those, you are good to go. For example, generally moving to tighter geometries would need a new stepper, but an implanter would either need to be upgraded a little or not at all, but not replaced.

What's difficult is changing devices. Basically if you've built a DRAM fab, it's a DRAM fab. Converting to NAND would entail such a huge replacement of equipment that it wouldn't be cost effective. Similarly, you wouldn't change a logic fab to be a memory fab.

In practice, running older fabs is not as profitable as you might think (although it's better now than it was a few years ago). There tends to be a sweet spot of a few years for a fab where they make truly incredible amounts of money, but then when the price for those devices falls, the fixed costs for a fab remain high (spares, chemicals, facilities etc. are still very expensive, even for an older fab), and profit is often hard to find.

What helped the older fab market was the credit crunch. There had been far too much capacity, especially at 200mm wafer sizes, but a lot of those fabs were killed off, and those that are left are doing OK at the moment. They have limited time though, since the push for 450mm wafers is finally getting traction, and as soon as the big boys goto 450mm, all the older devices that are currently on 200mm will start being run in the 300mm fabs, and that will all but kill 200mm.
post #30 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

The A4 was a slightly modified copy of the Samsung Hummingbird. Samsung got Intrinsity to help with the design of it before there was ever an A4 version of it. Apple liked it so much they later bought Intrinsity.

While that is true, the 'Samsung' Hummingbird itself was just a slightly modified copy of the standard ARM Cortex A8 design. The only ARM SoC's I know of that are significantly different from the reference design are Tegra and OMAP.
post #31 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

They were going to do both. There are a couple of new fabs going up, but you can actually re-tool an older fab to do tighter geometry reasonably cheaply (in fab cost terms). Basically in most process flows, there are a limited number of pieces of equipment that will be the critical parts for going down a step, so if you replace or upgrade just those, you are good to go. For example, generally moving to tighter geometries would need a new stepper, but an implanter would either need to be upgraded a little or not at all, but not replaced.

Interesting, thanks - I guess at any rate they wouldn't be able to start upgrading those lines until Apple have stopped needing A4s, which might happen any week now. Maybe we'll hear some rumours then.
post #32 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Interesting, thanks - I guess at any rate they wouldn't be able to start upgrading those lines until Apple have stopped needing A4s, which might happen any week now. Maybe we'll hear some rumours then.

That's true, transitioning into a new device while still producing an older one is tricky, and often involves a new fab, but not always. Generally if you add a new piece of equipment to do the tighter geometry, it will be able to run the older technology too (although you'll have to fully process qual it), so it's not impossible to gradually transition over, but it's really dependent on whether you have any fab floor space to throw in some new equipment.

Obviously the equipment that you can retrofit to make it capable of running newer devices (like the example I gave above of an implanter) is a piece of cake, since you do it in place on the existing machine. Again, you have to re-qual the existing process, but that can be achieved in about a month, and is something Samsung are probably better at than anyone else.
post #33 of 45
If the A6 is the quad core version of the A5, it will be the same chip as will power the soon to be released Playstation Vita. A powerful little thing, roughly half the power of an Xbox 360 or PS3.
post #34 of 45
April 19 it was reported that TSMC had got test tape out of A5 class processor.

June 27 it was reported that Apple got back test wafers. The speculation was that it was an A5s chip.

One thing we can be sure of.
If it is A6 trials, it is probably 28nm. TSMC will have less then 1% wafer revenue from 28nm q4. So nothing will be introduced this year using a 28nm SoC.

If it is A5s trials, they should be able to ramp up for a release in 1-2 month.
post #35 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

If the A6 is the quad core version of the A5, it will be the same chip as will power the soon to be released Playstation Vita. A powerful little thing, roughly half the power of an Xbox 360 or PS3.

It is all about clock speeds.
We have today no idea how fast a quod core ARM would be.

My point being: PS Vita will use a 40nm quod core ARM SoC.

Apple will use a 28nm quod core ARM SoC. The shrink should make it easier for Apple to clock it higher.
post #36 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

That's true, transitioning into a new device while still producing an older one is tricky, and often involves a new fab, but not always. Generally if you add a new piece of equipment to do the tighter geometry, it will be able to run the older technology too (although you'll have to fully process qual it), so it's not impossible to gradually transition over, but it's really dependent on whether you have any fab floor space to throw in some new equipment.

Obviously the equipment that you can retrofit to make it capable of running newer devices (like the example I gave above of an implanter) is a piece of cake, since you do it in place on the existing machine. Again, you have to re-qual the existing process, but that can be achieved in about a month, and is something Samsung are probably better at than anyone else.

A5 is produced by Samsung.
A5s would be proceeded by TSMC.
No problem with 2 production lines.
post #37 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

Like on the iPad 2, the idea of screen mirroring is the killer feature I'm hoping for. Not even for gaming, but presentations, photo sharing, etc. If I could walk into a room, plug my Apple TV into a projector, and hold a presentation with my phone, that would be awesome.

Add a bluetooth keyboard and you have the future of computing.

Soon ARM devices will be fast enough. Just plug in you smartphone in your display and start to work.
post #38 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Can't imagine why. While Apple may front suppliers money to build new capacity they don't afaik own the capacity, just have exclusive use for a while. Besides, from Apple's perspective it's now a line that makes chips that don't really compete with it - the 45nm lines will go to making things like chips for PMPs, eBook readers, bluetooth peripherals etc. etc. In a year's time Apple will take the view that anybody using a 45nm SoC in a premium smartphone is hopelessly quaint.

Well as far as possible Apple ownnership of tooling it was described in some reporting that Samsung had partners in their fab. The partner was not named. Now a partnership can mean many things but Apple could potentially own part of the plant.

Even if we are not talking partnership it isn't unusual in business for one company to own the capital used by another. I've seen this done by a company that wasn't happy with one supplier and decided to make it real easy for a competitor to get in the business. Of course the big difference here is we are talking a few $100,000 as opposed to billions.
Quote:

Definitely! But on the flipside, whenever one client is 80% of your business you've already screwed up. From Samsung's perspective the diversification may be almost as beneficial as it is from Apple's. There are only 3 foundries even playing at 32nm or 28nm so I doubt that Samsung will lack business.

Well they will lack the business for awhile until they can get a customers product onto the production lime. It would likely be serious pain for six months. You would likely loose your technicians and engineers in that time frame.
Quote:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/d...s_Company.html



Exactly, and even without a natural disaster it's very easy for a single supplier to have issues due to contamination. We could even see one of the big foundries fumble a process transition, so relying entirely on one just doesn't seem smart.

I suspect that diversification has to play a part in this move. Apples "I" devices continue a rather stiff ramp up in production as such Samaung simply might run out of capacity.

In any event it must be really exciting to be working at Apple these days. They are literally on the bleeding edge working with some of the best technology on the planet. IPad 3 ought to be a barn burner if these chips come to pass.
post #39 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

April 19 it was reported that TSMC had got test tape out of A5 class processor.

June 27 it was reported that Apple got back test wafers. The speculation was that it was an A5s chip.

One thing we can be sure of.
If it is A6 trials, it is probably 28nm. TSMC will have less then 1% wafer revenue from 28nm q4. So nothing will be introduced this year using a 28nm SoC.

If it is A5s trials, they should be able to ramp up for a release in 1-2 month.

The production run was referred to as trial production which to me implies chips that are complete engineering wise. If it was called a tape out or prototype it would be easy to see that shipping product is six months out.

In this case though it appears that shippable product could be had anytime. The question then becomes is this an A5 shrink or the A6? I would like to think it is an A6 but I believe that they really needed an A5 shrink to get the power down for the handheld devices. Maybe both are coming.
post #40 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Your point was that Apple copied Samsung... which is bullshit. Intrinsity "designed" both chips and both chips were manufactured by Samsung; Hummingbird for Samsung's phones and A4 for Apple's phone. Samsung was a collaborator in the design of the Hummingbird in the sense that they built their fab around the chip and the chip was redesigned in areas where it would make it easier to manufacture.

So in buying Intrinsity, Apple was not copying Samsung with the A4... they were buying the Hummingbird design and redesigning it for Apple's purpose. If Snapdragon had been owned by a private company and not Qualcomm (by way of AMD) then maybe Apple would have bought that company but Intrinsity was there for the taking.

The A6 on the other hand is Apple's and Intrinsity's design... anything that resembles it from Samsung at this point would then truly be a copy being that Apple now owns Intrinsity.

Unlike you, I never implied or stated that Apple copied anything from Samsung. You are the one spouting bullshit.

As for the Anandtech propaganda, that is guess work and Apple centric supposition on their part. If the development of the Hummingbird had really been at the 'behest' of Apple, Samsung would have been obliged to secrecy and not been able to announce and market it a full six months before the A4 was ever mentioned.

It is far more likely Samsung contracted Intrinsity to help them design the Hummingbird for use in their own phones like the Wave and Galaxy and then Apple became aware of it and then asked Samsung/Intrinsity for a slightly altered variation for their own use.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple begins trial production of A6 processor set to launch in 2012
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple begins trial production of A6 processor set to launch in 2012