or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Doubts cast on likelihood of quad-core A6 CPU in third-gen iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Doubts cast on likelihood of quad-core A6 CPU in third-gen iPad - Page 2

post #41 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Here we go again.
As long as we got +50% in CPU performance I'm happy quad or not.

Well, a faster-clocked/ better architecture dualcore CPU is perfectly fine. Boosting GPU for Retina, gaming, etc. is more important, I feel.

I just finished "Bastion" last night on my Xbox360. Superb indie game... Mixture of "dungeon crawling" (except in the air, with a great Miyazaki "Laputa Castle In The Cloud" feel, intriguing storyline, hack-and-slash that's not too brainless, RPG elements, a few interesting sidequests, and *insanely good* artwork. Mainly 2D, with a few elements in 3D.

1280x720 resolution. Should be *smoothly* adapted for the iPad 3, can't wait for them to do it... if they do it. Hook it up to your HDTV and have the iPad as the "controller". Boom! One step closer to iPad4 DX10-quality graphics Unreal Engine 4 full-spec.

BRING IT ON
post #42 of 64
Netflix will be a lot better with mkre bandwidth especially on a retina display. Dropbox downloads, Dropbox uploads, iTunes downloads, etc...

Since I have the unlimited plan iPad 1 caps don't bother me...
post #43 of 64
iPad 3 will have LTE

Quad Core depends on TDP

Will a QC running at x MHz be as fast or faster and run as cool as a DC running at a higher y MHz ?

We are going to find out
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #44 of 64
See, what you have to remember: NONE OF THESE PEOPLE KNOW what Apple will ship. I'm sure Apple will test all kinds of engineering prototypes, and some of it is just fanboys wet dreaming up specs, but The Verge, BGR, Engadget, Bloomberg, Ashton Kutcher, Ashtok Kumar, and some "A Korean newspaper" DO NOT KNOW what Apple is planning to ship. They claim to know, they claim to have the inside scoop. They read their tea leaves or their chicken guts and say, "look at the size of that chicken's gallbladder! This portends to a quad-core A6 shipping in 2012!!!" Right.

"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 #45 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShAdOwXPR View Post

Well besides battery impact I don't see what will prevent them to do it. And ipad 3 should have plenty on battery capacity for LTE antenna IMHO...

Battery impact alone could be a major reason why Apple wouldn't support LTE. Apple deals with actual real world technological facts, your opinion or my opinion won't make Apple change things.
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Reply
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools."
Reply
post #46 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Will a QC running at x MHz be as fast or faster and run as cool as a DC running at a higher y MHz ?

Hmm.. Depends on the GPU. ...Pretty please Apple... When can I ditch my wonderful Xbox360???
post #47 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Here we go again...

It is entirely the rumor mill's responsibility to crank up the expectations, so pressure can be put on AAPL stock if the expectations are not met.

These guys still run the risk that Apple meets or exceeds the expectations, so it may have been more prudent to predict a hex or octal core iPad3.
post #48 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanFruniken View Post

It is entirely the rumor mill's responsibility to crank up the expectations, so pressure can be put on AAPL stock if the expectations are not met.

These guys still run the risk that Apple meets or exceeds the expectations, so it may have been more prudent to predict a hex or octal core iPad3.

Screw the cores. I want raw, unprecedented GPU power.
post #49 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hmm...

The place that said the "iPhone 5" was CERTAIN to happen in October and CERTAIN to have a tapered design says that there won't be a quad-core chip... despite Apple's own OS showing otherwise.

Yeah, I believe them.

And he also wrote breaking news about there will be no web apps (Mail, Contact, Calendar) for iCloud because ONE Apple employee told him.
post #50 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Screw the cores. I want raw, unprecedented GPU power.

That's right. On a computer, 2 cores is a bit stuttery sometimes, but 4 cores is mostly smooth as butter. Any more parallelism than that, farm it off to the GPU.
post #51 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifail View Post

If Apple sticks to what i assume they will, they will just be introducing a better processor, which would most likely be a quad core A9, i SEVERELY doubt we'll see a Cortex A15 dual core, which would put it on the very bleeding edge.

Seeing as how Apple likes to refresh GPUs every 2 years so far, i think we'll be seeing the same GPU even if it the iPad 2 gets a Retina Display, just like they reused the SGX535 for the iPhone 4 when it has a retina display.

It could well be a similar situation to the 3GS -> iPhone 4 jump where it got the retina display, smaller motherboard and bigger battery. Then they bring the A6 chip next year for the iPad 3S.

This doesn't offer much for the next iPhone though. Usually Apple goes:

iPad -> A4
iPhone 4 -> A4, retina
iPad 2 -> A5
iPhone 4S -> A5
...
iPad 3 -> A5, retina
iPhone ??

I think people would prefer longer battery life at this stage than much faster performance but I hope they don't just include a bigger battery meaning longer charging time. It would be nice to see charging time reduced considerably.
post #52 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It could well be a similar situation to the 3GS -> iPhone 4 jump where it got the retina display, smaller motherboard and bigger battery. Then they bring the A6 chip next year for the iPad 3S.

This doesn't offer much for the next iPhone though. Usually Apple goes:

iPad -> A4
iPhone 4 -> A4, retina
iPad 2 -> A5
iPhone 4S -> A5
...
iPad 3 -> A5, retina
iPhone ??
...

iPhone5 - >LTE

I think it is mostly the Verizon folks hoping for LTE. In my market, AT&T has good 3G coverage and decent speeds. When I got my iPhone 3GS, I was lucky to get better than 1 mbps even next to towers, now with the iPhone 4, I routinely get better than 4 mbps, no LTE in my area so it would no help now on speed anyway, although it might in a year or two. People with Verizon I know are barely getting over 1 mbps, so they could use the jump to LTE and Verizon LTE is much more wide spread than AT&T.
post #53 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2oh1 View Post

I'm hoping for quad-core...

Why? Is your check list really that important to you?
post #54 of 64
If A6 is manufactured on 28nm manufacturing, it will be a quad core CPU. No one single dual core ARM is manufactured at 28nm.

I would be very surpassed if ARM15 is not used, and that is a quad core part paired with PowerVR6. That is the only way you can drive 4 times more pixels without speed penalty.
post #55 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

If A6 is manufactured on 28nm manufacturing, it will be a quad core CPU. No one single dual core ARM is manufactured at 28nm.

I would be very surpassed if ARM15 is not used, and that is a quad core part paired with PowerVR6. That is the only way you can drive 4 times more pixels without speed penalty.

I'll be surprised if it's not a Quad Core as well. A Dual Core could mean a significant jump in clock speeds to get a solid gain in performance. Probably akin to 1.5Ghz. It really becomes a matter of if DC 1.5Ghz is superior overall than QC 1.2Ghz or so.

The Cortex A15 sounds like something coming late 2012 with the Apple version slated for Q2 2013 at best. We'll see.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #56 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

If A6 is manufactured on 28nm manufacturing, it will be a quad core CPU. No one single dual core ARM is manufactured at 28nm.

I would be very surpassed if ARM15 is not used, and that is a quad core part paired with PowerVR6. That is the only way you can drive 4 times more pixels without speed penalty.

Intel is shipping dual-core CPUs with Ivy Bridge at 22nm - they are putting the emphasis on the GPU and I suspect this will be the case with Apple.

They need 4x more power in the GPU to stand still with a high-res display. PowerVR 6 won't be here until 2013. Right now, they use PowerVR 5 SGX543MP2. They just need to use 543MP8, which is double the performance of the PS Vita.

The iPad 3S can have a quad-core and PowerVR 6 in 2013.

If they can put a quad-core CPU in this time, great but I don't see a need for it just now.
post #57 of 64
If you're talking true quad-core CPU, forget about it--mostly for power consumption reasons.

But a "almost" quad-core CPU with two Cortex A15 and two Cortex M4 cores, that might be possible.
post #58 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

If A6 is manufactured on 28nm manufacturing, it will be a quad core CPU. No one single dual core ARM is manufactured at 28nm.

I would be very surpassed if ARM15 is not used, and that is a quad core part paired with PowerVR6. That is the only way you can drive 4 times more pixels without speed penalty.

I read a good article on ARM's big.LITTLE strategy. I think ARM15 dual or quad consumes too much power, and would only come into play late this year or sometime next year(?) as big.Little (ie. most likely ARM15 dualcore with ARM7 dualcore).

iPad 3 will probably have dual or quad ARM9, paired with (hopefully) some really beefy PowerVR stuff. It could have a slightly higher-clocked dual ARM9 instead of quad, Retina is going to depend heavily on the GPU. The iOS render engine is very heavily GPU oriented even for 2D stuff. And again the 2D composite/render engine is absolutely superb compared to Flash because it is GPU optimised. [That being Flash's sad, immense failure, 2D compositing simply depended on more CPU thrown at it until you have a decent Intel Core 2 Duo pegged 100% CPU for seemingly trivial Flash stuff).

However in any case Apple's Quartz 2D means driving Retina resolutions would require CPU optimisation but certainly a lot of GPU improvements and GPU memory as well. Retina iPad 2D games will require some decent GPU horsepower to throw at it, not to mention 3D stuff (which I reiterate I feel will be capped at 1680 by x pixels).

BTW I came across this:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/780481

Poor b*st*rds trying to cross-compile for iOS. Best to go Xcode from the start, IMHO.

[My last post of the day, not very coherent I know]
post #59 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Intel is shipping dual-core CPUs with Ivy Bridge at 22nm - they are putting the emphasis on the GPU and I suspect this will be the case with Apple.

They need 4x more power in the GPU to stand still with a high-res display. PowerVR 6 won't be here until 2013. Right now, they use PowerVR 5 SGX543MP2. They just need to use 543MP8, which is double the performance of the PS Vita.

The iPad 3S can have a quad-core and PowerVR 6 in 2013.

If they can put a quad-core CPU in this time, great but I don't see a need for it just now.

Yeah, a slightly faster-clocked dualcore A9 with that PowerVR 543MP8 would be sweet.

I hope Apple goes to at least 28nm with the A6, ATI's Radeon 7970 at 28nm is the fastest single-core GPU out there right now. The benefits of 28nm and below compared to 45nm is clearly significant: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5261/a...hd-7970-review

Interestingly TSMC has cancelled their 32nm process, FWIW. Not sure only in regards to GPU for AMD and Nvidia or all other thingies.

<rant>
Again, I'm infuriated by the power and beauty of AMD's 7-series and Nvidia's 560/580. Amazing GPUs that are let down in whole by drivers (endless updates and issues), being beholden to Windows 7, and last but not least subject to the whims and fancies of PC game development, the lowest rung on the ladder nowadays (case in point: LA Noire for PC).

*Sigh*. In 2008 PC gaming and GPUs were stunning, with so much promise, hence my username.

Since then though... *Sigh*. I definitely wouldn't trust something like Mass Effect 3 to anything other than Xbox360 or PS3. No way I'm risking that experience with PC gaming/ patching/ updating/ network issues/ Steam/ DRM/ whatever. It's Xbox360 or bust. Pop open the disc box, put it in, "installs" in several minutes (aka copying to internal hard drive) and Boom! I should be in business. If all goes well no Internet connectivity required at all. Because that has become a ridiculous crutch for PC game developers, Microsoft, and PC component manufacturers ~ "everything will be alright... as long as you constantly patch everything" Not even going to think what tweaks are needed for a good PC experience. How dare they say quad core CPUs and DX11million required for best experience when these are just console ports of stuff that runs on ancient console hardware. I mean, Unreal Engine 3 ran on 2008 (and older!!!) PC hardware FFS and looked great. Mass Effect 3 is still pretty much Unreal Engine 3... which if the PC world knew what they were doing, would still run fine on 2008 hardware!!! ARGHHGHGH
</rant>
post #60 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

I definitely wouldn't trust something like Mass Effect 3 to anything other than Xbox360 or PS3

On the subject of Mass Effect, it seems EA is throwing Apple a bone:

http://kotaku.com/5883602/mass-effec...ipad/gallery/1
http://www.destructoid.com/preview-m...r-221469.phtml

It's good to see the iOS devices being treated like a proper console and what better way to show off iOS getting such a cool game way before Android than to demo it on a new iPad. That game should arrive around about the same time as ME3 (March 6th). Hmm, wonder when that new iPad is due.
post #61 of 64
The only reason anyone expected a quad-core is because of marketing. Android Tablet X has quad-core so the iPad needs it! Ridiculous. If Apple sticks to it's typical design philosophy, it will balance performance with battery life. Consider the power requirements the iPad will have with double the pixels, a faster graphics core, and 4G LTE. Why add two more cores and reduce battery life even more just to check off a box on a marketing spec. sheet?

It's the same thing we see with Apple continuing to use 512MB of RAM even though most Android phones and tablets have 1 GB. The focus on the numbers is a throw-back to a specs based design philosophy Apple abandoned long ago much to its benefit. It's all about the total package and user experience. It's a lesson that no Android tablet or phone maker has learned except for maybe Amazon.
post #62 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by divisionbyzero View Post

The only reason anyone expected a quad-core is because of marketing. Android Tablet X has quad-core so the iPad needs it! Ridiculous. If Apple sticks to it's typical design philosophy, it will balance performance with battery life. Consider the power requirements the iPad will have with double the pixels, a faster graphics core, and 4G LTE. Why add two more cores and reduce battery life even more just to check off a box on a marketing spec. sheet?

It's the same thing we see with Apple continuing to use 512MB of RAM even though most Android phones and tablets have 1 GB. The focus on the numbers is a throw-back to a specs based design philosophy Apple abandoned long ago much to its benefit. It's all about the total package and user experience. It's a lesson that no Android tablet or phone maker has learned except for maybe Amazon.

A couple things... Quad-core Cortex-A9 are the standard now for this implementation just as dual-core Cortex-A15 will be at the end of the year. Going with quad-core isn't about getting faster it's about getting better performance for the energy used so being able to complete a process and then ramping down power usage is a good thing. I expect quad-core but I don't expect Apple going past 1.2GHz and wouldn't be surprised if they stayed at 1GHz.

As for the RAM that will have to be 1GB to support 4x as many pixels as the current iPad. Remember the GPU is integrated so it uses the system RAM.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #63 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

A couple things... Quad-core Cortex-A9 are the standard now for this implementation just as dual-core Cortex-A15 will be at the end of the year. Going with quad-core isn't about getting faster it's about getting better performance for the energy used so being able to complete a process and then ramping down power usage is a good thing. I expect quad-core but I don't expect Apple going past 1.2GHz and wouldn't be surprised if they stayed at 1GHz.

As for the RAM that will have to be 1GB to support 4x as many pixels as the current iPad. Remember the GPU is integrated so it uses the system RAM.


good reply. I think it's easy to assume that processor design choices are made for marketing reasons but often the trends are more based on the packaging of the product. Apple could clock the dual cores higher but the absence of two physical cores means that the die size would be small (at 28nm) and might create hot spots.


Whatever happens whether Apple goes to Quad or stays Dual depends on how they best plan to manage the max TDP of the SoC. My gut says Quad because die size really isn't an issue (the A5 is pretty large) and Quad cores means you get to lower the frequency of each core safely.

1GB of RAM seems ideal because of the higher display resolution and perhaps there will be more threads running in the background (multitasking)
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #64 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by divisionbyzero View Post

The only reason anyone expected a quad-core is because of marketing. Android Tablet X has quad-core so the iPad needs it! Ridiculous. If Apple sticks to it's typical design philosophy, it will balance performance with battery life. Consider the power requirements the iPad will have with double the pixels, a faster graphics core, and 4G LTE. Why add two more cores and reduce battery life even more just to check off a box on a marketing spec. sheet?

I agree. I think the overhead of quad CPU compared to what they need to invest in making the GPU real good means dual A9 CPU... Possibly clocked the same but with custom tweaks.

However, 1GB of RAM, that, I have to say, is quite likely, given the GPU RAM requirements.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Doubts cast on likelihood of quad-core A6 CPU in third-gen iPad