or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple 'gets serious' about moving chip production away from Samsung - report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple 'gets serious' about moving chip production away from Samsung - report

post #1 of 88
Thread Starter 
The relationship between Apple and Samsung has moved from "love-hate" to simply "hate-hate," according to a new report, which indicates that Apple is doing all it can to cut ties with its fierce rival.

Though Apple still relies on Samsung for production of its mobile processors, the iPhone maker has apparently made it clear it will no longer use Samsung's technology, an unnamed senior official at the Korean electronics company said to The Korea Times. The report indicated that the relationship between Samsung and Apple is "now about to become one-dimensional."

"There are three types of chip clients," the Samsung source reportedly said. "Some want us to handle everything from chip design, architecture and manufacturing. Some want us to just design and manufacture. Some wants us to just make the chips. Apple is now the third type."

Samsung did reportedly earn more money for manufacturing the A6 processor for Apple's iPhone 5 than the company did from building earlier custom chips. But at the moment, Samsung is said to be the only semiconductor manufacturer in the world that can meet Apple's needs for high volume of chip production in a short period of time.

Apple did not collaborate with Samsung in the development of the A6 processor found in the iPhone 5. While Apple collaborated with Samsung in designing its earlier processors, the new A6 chip marks the first time Apple designed its own ARMv7 core.

A6


The details come soon after Apple was revealed to have hired away former Samsung chip designer Jim Mergard. Prior to his brief stint at Samsung, Mergard designed and developed chips for Advanced Micro Devices for 16 years.

Another report last week also reiterated claims that Apple plans to have future chips built by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., taking away a key component from Samsung. It was said that TSMC could build quad-core 20-nanometer chips for Apple by as early as next year.
post #2 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The relationship between Apple and Samsung has moved from "love-hate" to simply "hate-hate," according to a new report, which indicates that Apple is doing all it can to cut ties with its fierce rival.

So Samsung's blatant copying of Apple's designs cost them $1 B in fines and $10 B in lost business.

While they are picking up lots of cell phone business, much of it is at relatively low margins. More importantly, they could have picked up most of that business by coming up with their own designs that were merely inspired by the iPhone rather than a blatant copy.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #3 of 88
I am curious ... is it possible for the design to be reverse engineered by Samsung with the third type of client?
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #4 of 88
Apple have a huge problem. They are to big.
Apple needs about 30K wafers starts per month. This is rapidly growing to about 55K wafers starts in 2014-15.

Apple needs a whole foundry by themselves. The best way is to buy an idle plant from Intel or that Apple pays TSMC a bunch of money for a whole line to them selves.

Having an own high quality foundry would be a huge advantage for Apple. Especially since they will move everything to their own A class SoC.

Todays A6 is as fast as the fastest intel per mhz. (and I know... Intel have 6 cores are clocked 3-4 times higher, so Intel is faster. But nothing stops Apple from designing quad or octo core A6 feed more power to make it 2.5ghz. Nvidia will introduce a 8 core ARM late this year/q1 next year)
post #5 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I am curious ... is it possible for the design to be reverse engineered by Samsung with the third type of client?

 

I'll bet that any Samsung division responsible for fabricating chips for Apple would rather side with their client than with their parent.

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #6 of 88
This cannot come soon enough. Given what I've observed with Samsung, I believe there is a 30% or greater chance the Samsung fabrication side of the business has shared confidential Apple CPU design info with their mobile team

@ $10 billion/year, Apple business is the equivalent to 20 million smartphone sales ($10B / $500 per phone). It's a major hit to their overall business

And wait until Apple enters the TV market. TVs are 25% of Samsung's business. The hurt for Samsung is just getting going

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply
post #7 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I am curious ... is it possible for the design to be reverse engineered by Samsung with the third type of client?

 

I don't think so. If Apple provides a netlist Samsung can copy it but has no (VHDL) design.

Such a low level description has almost no design information, like the binary code from a C program after compilation.

So Samsung can make an exact copy of the information (and that's a must if Samsung is to produce the chip) but it cannot make variations or use parts of the design the netlist originates from.

 

J.

post #8 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Apple have a huge problem. They are to big.
Apple needs about 30K wafers starts per month. This is rapidly growing to about 55K wafers starts in 2014-15.
Apple needs a whole foundry by themselves. The best way is to buy an idle plant from Intel or that Apple pays TSMC a bunch of money for a whole line to them selves.
...

 

This is not the best way and it is not how Apple does business. When Apple needs its own manufacturing capacity, it uses its cash reserves to build the factory capacity for its contractor.

post #9 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

This cannot come soon enough. Given what I've observed with Samsung, I believe there is a 30% or greater chance the Samsung fabrication side of the business has shared confidential Apple CPU design info with their mobile team
@ $10 billion/year, Apple business is the equivalent to 20 million smartphone sales ($10B / $500 per phone). It's a major hit to their overall business
And wait until Apple enters the TV market. TVs are 25% of Samsung's business. The hurt for Samsung is just getting going
 

 

But Samsung isn't really making a lot of profit with TV sets. Most of the profit in the consumer electronics division stems from smart phone displays:

 

"Earnings at the consumer-electronics division that makes TVs jumped 66 percent to 760 billion won, exceeding the 542.5 billion-won median of the analysts’ estimates compiled by Bloomberg. The display business had a profit of 750 billion won, also higher than the 600 billion-won estimate.

While flat-screen TV sales aren’t picking up, the company is benefiting from demand for displays used in mobile devices. Operating profit at the unit making panels for smartphones, including the Galaxy models, more than tripled in the second quarter, accounting for 86 percent of earnings at the display business, according to IBK Securities Co. estimates." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-26/samsung-profit-misses-estimates-on-handset-output-chip-prices.html

post #10 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

This cannot come soon enough. Given what I've observed with Samsung, I believe there is a 30% or greater chance the Samsung fabrication side of the business has shared confidential Apple CPU design info with their mobile team
@ $10 billion/year, Apple business is the equivalent to 20 million smartphone sales ($10B / $500 per phone). It's a major hit to their overall business
And wait until Apple enters the TV market. TVs are 25% of Samsung's business. The hurt for Samsung is just getting going
 

 

So you're freely admitting you want Apple to become a monopoly in every industry possible?

 

Why do you think that Samsung would want to steal CPU design from Apple?  It is a proprietary design specialized for Apple hardware and software, which makes the incentive to duplicate it pretty much non-existent.  Sort of ironic though how Apple has poached a Samsung engineer.  Why is that necessary if they are so brilliantly awesome at superior design?

post #11 of 88
I think this article is a tad misleading, in that it implies Apple's move to designing its own chips and using Samsung just for manufacturing is evidence of the "rift." In fact, this is the sort of thing Apple would have done anyway. The real evidence of the rift is the alleged move to TSMC.
post #12 of 88
Hate-hate? That's not some new category.

"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 #13 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


So Samsung's blatant copying of Apple's designs cost them $1 B in fines and $10 B in lost business.
While they are picking up lots of cell phone business, much of it is at relatively low margins. More importantly, they could have picked up most of that business by coming up with their own designs that were merely inspired by the iPhone rather than a blatant copy.

 

Nope. Samsung mobile's profit is now greater than all other divisions profit combined.  Samsung's semi profit margin was never all that great - Samsung is certainly making a killing in mobile business. Also remember Apple is a bargain hunter - Samsung is much better off without Apple.

post #14 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I am curious ... is it possible for the design to be reverse engineered by Samsung with the third type of client?

 

Why would Samsung want to reverse engineer anything technology from Apple? 1wink.gif

post #15 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

 

So you're freely admitting you want Apple to become a monopoly in every industry possible?

 

Why do you think that Samsung would want to steal CPU design from Apple?  It is a proprietary design specialized for Apple hardware and software, which makes the incentive to duplicate it pretty much non-existent.  Sort of ironic though how Apple has poached a Samsung engineer.  Why is that necessary if they are so brilliantly awesome at superior design?

 

Apple is one of the original ARM shares holders and one of the most knowledgable of the ARM architecture. Apple got many edge over Samsung on their chips design with help of P.A Semi and Intrinsity acquisions. It worth noting Intrinsity was responsible for Samsung's Hummingbirds design.

post #16 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

So you're freely admitting you want Apple to become a monopoly in every industry possible?

Why do you think that Samsung would want to steal CPU design from Apple?  It is a proprietary design specialized for Apple hardware and software, which makes the incentive to duplicate it pretty much non-existent.  Sort of ironic though how Apple has poached a Samsung engineer.  Why is that necessary if they are so brilliantly awesome at superior design?

If Samsung was so brilliantly awesome at chip design why was it necessary for them to poach that same engineer from AMD?

How does Apple making its own chips make them a "monopoly" in that industry? I do not think the word means what you think it means.

"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 #17 of 88

"Some want us to handle everything from chip design, architecture and manufacturing. Some want us to just design and manufacture."

 

GIven the architecture is ARM-based, what exactly does Samsung "archictecture"? In other words, what is the diff between type 1 and 2?

post #18 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

 

Why would Samsung want to reverse engineer anything technology from Apple? 1wink.gif

For coping Apple gears and profits:

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/102317767/Samsung-Relative-Evaluation-Report-on-S1-iPhone

post #19 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

 

So you're freely admitting you want Apple to become a monopoly in every industry possible?

 

Why do you think that Samsung would want to steal CPU design from Apple?  It is a proprietary design specialized for Apple hardware and software, which makes the incentive to duplicate it pretty much non-existent.  Sort of ironic though how Apple has poached a Samsung engineer.  Why is that necessary if they are so brilliantly awesome at superior design?

What you are saying doesn't make sense.  If you think Apple entering the TV market makes them a monopoly in that market, seeing that Samsung outsells Apple on smartphones and currently has a bigger share of the TV market than Apple, does it mean you are OK with Samsung being a monopoly in every industry possible?

That's just screwed up.

 

And the CPU guy used to be the VP of design at AMD for 16 years.  What's wrong with poaching him?  Who do you think designs stuff at Apple?  It's brilliant people - so why shouldn't they hire brilliant people?

post #20 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

 

Why would Samsung want to reverse engineer anything technology from Apple? 1wink.gif

I dunno.  That 250 page document that showed up in court seems to indicate they do.

post #21 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

If Samsung was so brilliantly awesome at chip design why was it necessary for them to poach that same engineer from AMD?
How does Apple making its own chips make them a "monopoly" in that industry? I do not think the word means what you think it means.
Inconceivable!
post #22 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

 

Apple is one of the original ARM shares holders and one of the most knowledgable of the ARM architecture. Apple got many edge over Samsung on their chips design with help of P.A Semi and Intrinsity acquisions. It worth noting Intrinsity was responsible for Samsung's Hummingbirds design.

 

That must have been why Apple had to rely on Samsung designed / manufactured Hummingbird (tweaked for Apple) for earlier iPhones and iPod..  all because Apple knew too much.. LOL!!

post #23 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

Nope. Samsung mobile's profit is now greater than all other divisions profit combined.  Samsung's semi profit margin was never all that great - Samsung is certainly making a killing in mobile business. Also remember Apple is a bargain hunter - Samsung is much better off without Apple.
Way to try and spin off the loss of billions in sales as a non-issue.

Part of the reason Samsung is out front in semiconductors is because of Apple. Samsung wouldn't have money to expand their production and build new lines without someone to buy all their chips. It also reduces their economy of scale which means either higher prices for their other customers or reduced margins on their other sales.

Don't kid yourself, this is bigger than just the loss of a few sales.
post #24 of 88
If Amazon buys Texas Instruments this gets very interesting indeed!
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #25 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

 

That must have been why Apple had to rely on Samsung designed / manufactured Hummingbird (tweaked for Apple) for earlier iPhones and iPod..  all because Apple knew too much.. LOL!!

 

Yep, and Apple ended up snatching all Samsung ARM ressources and bring every aspect of cpu design in-house, leading ARM cpu market ever since. 

post #26 of 88

I understand why this has happened, and I don't think the fault lies at Apple's feet to any great degree, but nevertheless it doesn't seem like a good development for the company to have a hateful relationship with anyone.  I hope Apple aren't going to take this down the road they did with Microsoft and IBM in the past, rivals are fine to have, but enemies just lead to destructive behaviour that distract from making good products.

 

Maybe I'm wrong and Apple can tap into this productively and make iPhones and iPads that blow Samsung even further out of the water.  But if they cut off their nose to spite their face then we all lose.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #27 of 88
How is that Samsung firewall coming along?
post #28 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

How is that Samsung firewall coming along?

Some Samsung's execs should be fire.

post #29 of 88
Agree with blastdoor; but even the move to TSMC is normal supply chain management.It is normal that with these kind of volumes, and this critical kind of dependency on the supply chain performance Apple needs to differentiate.
post #30 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

This cannot come soon enough. Given what I've observed with Samsung, I believe there is a 30% or greater chance the Samsung fabrication side of the business has shared confidential Apple CPU design info with their mobile team
@ $10 billion/year, Apple business is the equivalent to 20 million smartphone sales ($10B / $500 per phone). It's a major hit to their overall business

That underestimates things. Their contribution margin (roughly, the gross margin) on chips is almost certainly considerably higher than the gross margin on cell phones. So they need to sell more than $10 B of cell phones to make the same margin as they do on Apple's semiconductor business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

And wait until Apple enters the TV market. TVs are 25% of Samsung's business. The hurt for Samsung is just getting going

I don't expect Apple to enter the TV market. Could be wrong, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

So you're freely admitting you want Apple to become a monopoly in every industry possible?

No one ever said any such thing. What is being suggested is that Apple should not rely on direct competitors to manufacture their components. There's nothing in that statement that even remotely suggests that Apple should be a monopoly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

Why do you think that Samsung would want to steal CPU design from Apple?  It is a proprietary design specialized for Apple hardware and software, which makes the incentive to duplicate it pretty much non-existent.  Sort of ironic though how Apple has poached a Samsung engineer.  Why is that necessary if they are so brilliantly awesome at superior design?

Well, for starters, Apple seems to be getting incredible performance out of their chips - even when Samsung is using "faster" chips in their designs. Some of that is the OS, but some also involves hardware tweaks. Furthermore, there's a history of Samsung copying Apple - even their semiconductor unit was shown in the court case to be doing so.

And it's not unusual for someone to hire a specialist in one area - even if they're the market leader. There's absolutely nothing to be read into the fact that Apple hired a Samsung engineer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

Nope. Samsung mobile's profit is now greater than all other divisions profit combined.  Samsung's semi profit margin was never all that great - Samsung is certainly making a killing in mobile business. Also remember Apple is a bargain hunter - Samsung is much better off without Apple.

That's an overly simplistic evaluation. The amount Samsung gained by stealing Apple's technology can not be determined by looking at their current profits. Rather, you really need to evaluate 3 figures:

1. Their current profits.
2. Their profits if they had done nothing different than what they did before the iPhone came out.
3. Their profits if they had taken guidance and inspiration from the iPhone but without making slavish copies.

I would suggest that the difference between #1 and #3 is the benefit that Samsung gained by their slavish copies - and is undoubtedly much smaller than their entire current profit (which is the number you want to use).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #31 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

 

That must have been why Apple had to rely on Samsung designed / manufactured Hummingbird (tweaked for Apple) for earlier iPhones and iPod..  all because Apple knew too much.. LOL!!

 

Still the usual troll.

 

Funny how Samsung can design their own chips but they can't even design an icon to avoid infringing Apple's designs.

 

Also funny how the A6 (a 100% original design by Apple) can outperform all these monster quad-core overclocked SoC's. Yeah, they really know how to design chips all right. They're making the same mistakes Intel made years ago thinking more cores or more GHz is going to be the route to increased performance.

post #32 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


That underestimates things. Their contribution margin (roughly, the gross margin) on chips is almost certainly considerably higher than the gross margin on cell phones. So they need to sell more than $10 B of cell phones to make the same margin as they do on Apple's semiconductor business.

I don't think the margin on the phones is that different than the margin on contract manufacture of processors, is it?
post #33 of 88

Although the loss of Apple as a foundary client will hurt them, it wont hurt them as much as some proponents here like to boast.

 

Apple is notorious for squeezing their suppliers' profit margins to be hair thin.

 

Samsung is getting most of their profits from the mobile phone division, not from their semiconductor business like they used to.

 

Also, like Samsung said, the loss of Apple will help alleviate space for other companies to to take up Samsung's time, namely other Qualcomm and NVIDIA as TSMC seems to alot most of their resources to serve one customer, namely Apple.

 

Most of this shuffle wont really affect Samsung in the long run.

 

It will only hurt Apple as switching costs are fairly high not to mention the yields from TSMC manufacturing base. TSMC has been notorious previously for quality control issues from their chip manufacturing business, namely the NVIDIA GEFORCE chip fiasco. Look it up.

 

Plus, TSMC doesnt even have enough capacity to produce NVIDIA chips today. How in the heck are they going to produce the A7 ( in sufficient yields and reliability) two years from now? Throwing billions wont cut it as this is a fab we are talking about not some assembly plant.
 

Samsung is the only manufacturer on the market right now that can deliver guaranteed yields as well as quality. They have proven track record of both. Apple is just butthurt and perhaps in a panic after realizing their lawsuit isnt going quite as planned. Their recent "win" in the California courts? Yeah, that will most likely get a retrial or even thrown out all together. The appeals court will be using the abuse of discretion from Judge Koh's judgement and use it for the appeals case.

 

Also, last point, if Apple keeps switching suppliers due to personal reasons, their relations with them wont be a good one. Who wants to work with a client who is fickle?

 

I hope their severing ties with Samsung has a better outcome than the last one they had: Google. lol.gif


Edited by Galbi - 10/15/12 at 9:02am

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #34 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

I don't think the margin on the phones is that different than the margin on contract manufacture of processors, is it?

The industry average for semiconductor gross margins is around 65%. Samsung was reported to have margins close to the industry average.

The industry average for mobile phones is quite low - certainly nowhere near 65%. And even that overestimates how much Samsung got by stealing Apple's technology. Arguably, they would have sold a lot of the high end phones, anyway. People who are paying $750 to buy a Galaxy SIII instead of $750 to buy an iPhone probably had some other reason for buying the SIII - so the IP theft may not have helped all that much. OTOH, the "looks just like an iPhone, but hundreds of dollars less" depends directly on their slavish imitation of Apple's products - and helps them to sell mostly low margin phones.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #35 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

 

Yep, and Apple ended up snatching all Samsung ARM ressources and bring every aspect of cpu design in-house, leading ARM cpu market ever since. 

 

LOL!!  Oh, you mean Intrinsity?  Of course, Samsung couldn't have possibly produce its own ARM based chips without it. LOL!!   So much for Apple's superior knowledge of the ARM arch.. 

post #36 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

I understand why this has happened, and I don't think the fault lies at Apple's feet to any great degree, but nevertheless it doesn't seem like a good development for the company to have a hateful relationship with anyone.  I hope Apple aren't going to take this down the road they did with Microsoft and IBM in the past, rivals are fine to have, but enemies just lead to destructive behaviour that distract from making good products.

 

Maybe I'm wrong and Apple can tap into this productively and make iPhones and iPads that blow Samsung even further out of the water.  But if they cut off their nose to spite their face then we all lose.

 

You are wrong, but not about what you think you're wrong about.

 

Are you aware that the terms "love-hate" and "hate-hate" is a purely "food coloring" added by the press? In this case, it's in the English title of the original Korea Times article. AppleInsider for no clear reason distilled the facts by blending that characterization into the body of their re-reported article, perhaps to obfuscate its source, or perhaps for no reason at all. No one from either company uses the terms "love" or "hate" to characterize their business relationship. In fact, both companies declined to comment on the original article. The only fact the article reported was that Apple did not collaborate with Samsung on the development of the A6, using Samsung's manufacturing capability only. And that's followed by "analysts" who start painting their opinion to the facts--BUT STILL NONE OF THEM characterized Apple-Samsung partnership as "hate-hate." Ask yourself this: WHO SAID "HATE"? If you dig hard enough, you'll see that this is a fabrication by whoever came up with the title of the original article.

 

In other words, facts are boring. Let's dramatize everything, let's use war metaphors, so people will care, they'll hang on every word, they'll post comments and this will cause others to post replies, and this will drive up site engagement! Money from ads! AppleInsider didn't even write the original content! So it's virtually free money!

"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 #37 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Apple have a huge problem. They are to big.
Apple needs about 30K wafers starts per month. This is rapidly growing to about 55K wafers starts in 2014-15.
That is a lot of chips.
Quote:
Apple needs a whole foundry by themselves. The best way is to buy an idle plant from Intel or that Apple pays TSMC a bunch of money for a whole line to them selves.
Having an own high quality foundry would be a huge advantage for Apple. Especially since they will move everything to their own A class SoC.
Yep Apple needs a foundry but apparently they don't realize that yet. However buying a used foundry won't do, they would need the newest technology possible. It is a huge investment, probably on the order of 5-7 billion dollars.
Quote:
Todays A6 is as fast as the fastest intel per mhz. (and I know... Intel have 6 cores are clocked 3-4 times higher, so Intel is faster. But nothing stops Apple from designing quad or octo core A6 feed more power to make it 2.5ghz.
We have no idea about how fast A6 can actually operate but everything tells me it is a lot faster than the relatively slow clock rates in iPhone. It is also hard to tell how much provision has been left for more CPU cores in the current design. There are smart people at work at Apple so I see no problem at all for them to deliver a quad core chip, an A6X for iPad 4.
Quote:
Nvidia will introduce a 8 core ARM late this year/q1 next year)
Yes but what hardware and software architecture will support those cores? The real trick in this industry is leveraging the hardware you have to the best possible efficiency. Having 8 cores in a phone or tablet would be a waste in my mind. 64 bit hardware would be needed before 8 cores makes sense.

In general though you are right Apple needs to wake up and smell the coffee. They need their own production plants.
post #38 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

That must have been why Apple had to rely on Samsung designed / manufactured Hummingbird (tweaked for Apple) for earlier iPhones and iPod..  all because Apple knew too much.. LOL!!
You really should do some more research on this subject because you don't know what you are talking about.
post #39 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

 

LOL!!  Oh, you mean Intrinsity?  Of course, Samsung couldn't have possibly produce its own ARM based chips without it. LOL!!   So much for Apple's superior knowledge of the ARM arch.. 

 

Samsung is not a R&D shop, they are OEM manufacturer,  Samsung have not create their ARM design in-house, Intrinsity engineers was the real brains behind Samsung's CPU. 

post #40 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


Way to try and spin off the loss of billions in sales as a non-issue.
Part of the reason Samsung is out front in semiconductors is because of Apple. Samsung wouldn't have money to expand their production and build new lines without someone to buy all their chips. It also reduces their economy of scale which means either higher prices for their other customers or reduced margins on their other sales.
Don't kid yourself, this is bigger than just the loss of a few sales.

 

 

ROFL!!  Firstly, Apple' share of Samsung Electronic's overall Sales is still less than 8% - and Apple wasn't even Samsung's largest customer until last year (Sony #1).  Even if you combine all the sales from Apple last several years, it couldn't still pay for Samsung's capital expenditure for 2012 or $41B.  Samsung and other South Korean component makers like Hynix and LG have been well "out in front" in semiconductor/display business since the 90's and it has very little or nothing to do with Apple, which back in the late 90's was on the brink of collapse.  Samsung semi's revenue has been flat for years now and could possibly face a few disappointing quarters - after all, nobody, other than Samsung and Toshiba, is really making money in the DRAM/NAND business now; almost everyone in the display business is losing money.  But that's the nature of their business; it has little to do with Apple. Samsung mobile can easily make up for the loss in the growing mobile (smartphone) and mobile components business.

 

 Apple #1!!   LOL!!

 


Edited by tooltalk - 10/15/12 at 10:03am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple 'gets serious' about moving chip production away from Samsung - report