or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's 64-bit A7 SoC 'set off panic' for chipmakers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's 64-bit A7 SoC 'set off panic' for chipmakers - Page 2

post #41 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


When you ask a company to fan a chip do they know what the chip does? I'd think it would be Apple's engineers that do most of the setup and testing with Samsung just making and stamping the wafers to Apple's specifications.

 

Remember when Chipworks "examined" the A7 die to get an idea how it works? I guarantee you Samsung would know a lot more than Chipworks would since they make the processor. They might not know how it would perform or how many instructions it can do per clock (6, BTW), but they'd definitely know it was 64 bit along with how much cache it had and many other details.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jm6032 View Post
 


I disagree a bit with the notion Samsung did not know. I mean, "Build me 1000 samples of this" is way different than, "Build me 10,000,000" of these...

 

That's not what I said. I said they could be sampling the processors and then asked Samsung to ramp up to production. This would take a few months, so Samsung would know Apple is going to be using this processor in an upcoming device very soon. But they could have been sampling parts 6, 9 or 12 months earlier, making it very difficult for Samsung to tell when the processor might make the switch from sample to production.

post #42 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by st88 View Post
 

My point? Intel is about to dominate tablet hardware SoCs in the 7 inch and up segment.

 

Merrifield (22nm Silvermont + PowerVR 6 GPU) and Moorefield (14nm Airmont + Broadwell GPU) are coming for smartphones in 2014 (Q1 and Q3).

 

I will not hold my breath on this one....  Historically, the pentium architecture as been notoriously big and power hungry, over time Intel as working hard to lower its CPU power consumption by stripping features out, lower the clock frequency and lower the fab process.  In another hand, the ARM processor has been created with the absolute opposite in mind, a small CPU built for power efficiency at first and been augmented overtime.  So ARM SoC still have a lot of headroom for further enhancement, the A7 is still an 28nm SoC and can gain the same advantage from going to 22nm or 14nm has Intel is planning for their future anemic CPUs.

post #43 of 131
Excuse my ignorance but what real world benefits will consumers see in the future when the iPhone and iPad start really taking advantage of these chips? I'm glad Apple decided to make the move. I assume they'll have a smoother transition while the competition scrambles to catch up.
post #44 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post

Ok.... What is you point?  No intel CPU can reach smartphone TDP levels offer by ARM SoC


Intel can compete in both tablet and phone category.

59073.png

http://www.yugatech.com/mobile/lenovo-k900-review/
post #45 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 

 

Remember when Chipworks "examined" the A7 die to get an idea how it works? I guarantee you Samsung would know a lot more than Chipworks would since they make the processor. They might not know how it would perform or how many instructions it can do per clock (6, BTW), but they'd definitely know it was 64 bit along with how much cache it had and many other details.

 

I'll take you on that bet. I'll bet that Samsung basically knew no more than Chipworks did. They didn't know it was 64-bit, and they didn't know any details of the CPU. They only thing they could really know was the generic type things Chipworks could identify. Things like "this looks like the GPU, this is where the CPU is, this looks like L1 cache, this looks like the memory bus" yes, but zilch on any architecture details.

 

We only know scant architecture details from Anandtech running software on it. Odds that Apple let Samsung run software on their new SoC? I bet it is pretty close to zero.

post #46 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supreme View Post

Excuse my ignorance but what real world benefits will consumers see in the future when the iPhone and iPad start really taking advantage of these chips? I'm glad Apple decided to make the move. I assume they'll have a smoother transition while the competition scrambles to catch up.

 

The real world benefit of the A7 is for Apple been able to offer a faster and better CPU than the last year one with more or less the same thermal design power of the last years design.  There is no way any other competitor can achieve this without a better ARM core than current ARMv7 design,  multiplicating cores leads to greater power consumption with smaller performance boost than having bigger enhanced cores.

post #47 of 131

Intel is indeed a dangerous competitor, and could come up with quite a few wins for Merrifield in 1H 14. But what you list isn't proof. These are all tablets with 4 to 8 W TDP. Smartphones will be in 2 to 4 W TDP levels. Wait and see on whether Merrifield can compete with Snapdragon 805 next year.

post #48 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post


Intel can compete in both tablet and phone category.

59073.png

http://www.yugatech.com/mobile/lenovo-k900-review/

 

It need a battery twice has big than the iPhone 5S to achieve 8.5 hours on a looping video with full hardware acceleration, no sound and 50% brightness, which you can't compare with a web browsing test.

post #49 of 131

Not only that this crashing issue is more related to (the new) iOS 7 than the new A7, which brings back to my point that transitioning 64 bit is not a mere hardware design race, but also the 64-bit builds of the iOS still seem to run into stability issues more frequently than their 32-bit counterparts. The bottom line is that the OS needs to run smoothly with whatever 64-bit CPU, which is not really the case for iOS 7 + A7.

 

My iOS 7 on my old iPad has far lesser crashes than my new iPad Air. In case if you haven't got what I'm say, what I mean by crash is that the iOS 7 on my new iPad Air crashes and REBOOTS itself AT LEAST every other day. I'm not the only one who has this issue out there and good for you if you haven't had this experience. It's not just some third party app crashing, which I could care less. 

 

If a third party app could bring down the whole iOS 7, which I don't think should happen at normal circumstances, I'm not sure if Apple could just sit back and point finger to third party app developer.

 

I've been using iPhone / iOS since the original iPhone in case if you are wondering and I can't remember when was the last time my iOS 6 crashed.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

This is a pretty unspecific issue more related to iOS 7 than the new A7, I've been using iOS since the iPhone 3G, I've always seen some apps crashing, most of those apps got updated or disappear after time, I have now a iPhone 5S and a iPad Air, I can't say there is a really issue here, I still got some apps crashing some times, but most of the time it affect older pre-iOS 7 third party apps that needed to be updated.   I haven't found any instability yet using built-in apps. 

 

 

post #50 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by THT View Post
 

Intel is indeed a dangerous competitor, and could come up with quite a few wins for Merrifield in 1H 14. But what you list isn't proof. These are all tablets with 4 to 8 W TDP. Smartphones will be in 2 to 4 W TDP levels. Wait and see on whether Merrifield can compete with Snapdragon 805 next year.

 

Apple SoC TDP is working around half of that, around 1W for smartphone and 2W for tablet.

post #51 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supreme View Post

Excuse my ignorance but what real world benefits will consumers see in the future when the iPhone and iPad start really taking advantage of these chips? I'm glad Apple decided to make the move. I assume they'll have a smoother transition while the competition scrambles to catch up.

 

My take on benefits of 64-bit is that it's a holistic one for the consumer. The big benefit will be for developers (Apple software included) and customers get a downstream effect of better software.

 

Virtual address space goes to whatever terabyte or exabyte levels it will be, instead of the 4 GB it is today. This will make it easier for them to make more complex software. So, for obvious things like video, 3D, big computation applications, developers can get going designing their software now. It'll allow for desktop level implementations of web browsers, which is likely the largest user-facing, highest usage application on computers today.

 

Then, for hardware, it opens the door for Apple to using their ARM SoC in "bigger" hardware, like the supposed 13" iPad or a new 12" laptop. If Apple keeps going at the pace of SoC development where CPU and GPU performance is doubling year over year, they can used it for Macintoshes in a year or so. iMacs have a curvy bulge in the back about 1.5" thick or more. With an 5 Watt TDP SoC, an iMac could be 0.5" thin. With 5 Watt TDP, instead of the 7.7" x 7.7" Mac mini, it'll be like the Apple TV or Airport Express, just 4" x 4" and 0.75" high. Lastly, the laptops can get thinner and lighter. Instead of a 3 lb 0.68" thick 13" MBA, it'll be 2 lb and 0.5" thick instead.

post #52 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgwychu View Post
 

My iOS 7 on my old iPad has far lesser crashes than my new iPad Air. In case if you haven't got what I'm say, what I mean by crash is that the iOS 7 on my new iPad Air crashes and REBOOTS itself AT LEAST every other day. I'm not the only one who has this issue out there and good for you if you haven't had this experience. It's not just some third party app crashing, which I could care less. 

 

You should check and keep an eye on what you have installed and use on your iPad, because Apple has currently sold more iOS7 + A7 devices than any other iOS devices in the past.  If there was a really issue here, be assured the media, fandroids and every competitor would knock on every nails against Apple they can found.

post #53 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

Apple SoC TDP is working around half of that, around 1W for smartphone and 2W for tablet.

 

Maybe. I use 2 to 4 Watt to be safer, and it just feels more than 1 or 2 Watt based on the battery tests I've seen. I'm relatively certain you can burn down an iPad Air battery in 6 to 7 hours by turning the screen brightness down to the lowest setting (probably 1 to 2 Watts) and running a complex game or application. So, the SoC is probably hitting somewhere between 2 to 4 Watts.

 

Lastly, 4 Watt TDP for the tablet is likely the limit due to skin temperatures, and it's doubtful to me that Apple won't try to use every bit of that. And I feel 2 Watt TDP is likely the limit for smartphones and skin temperatures.

post #54 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by aelegg View Post

I suppose this is sort of a reply to the "iSheep buy iCrap" comment, but it's a meaningful summary of the apple experience.





We bought the $99 airport express last night. 


The little thing is like JEWELRY.  It's like a physical app-icon you can hold in your hand.  It's glossy plastic around the rim (with peel plastic to 'reveal' it as-such).  The top is matte, with an apple logo.  The bottom is slightly beige, with another logo, "swollen out" a smidge (circular), so it sits "up" a bit when you set it down.



 






Where the REAL problem lies is people's failure to see the Apple is the best of both worlds.  High end AND a good value.



 



I don't have any illusions about my $8 wine, but people have reverse-illusions about Apple.



 



So be it.


 



I agree that the AirPort Express is a great device, but I preferred the old design, where you could plug the box directly into the power strip with no wire and it was just as thick as the plug. It sits on the strip right next to the Power Supply for the MacBook Pro, which is also that same thickness. While I appreciate that the new one has Ethernet out, I think the old form factor was better.

While I haven't tried the new one, there is an issue with the old one and that's when you setup more than one to extend WiFi range, it consumes bandwidth which reduces speed. I was having problems watching streaming movies because they would constantly cache. I would go back to the Mac and check speed and everything would seem to be okay. I disconnected the living room AirPort Express which was the one being used with the home theatre and had those systems pick up WiFi from the dining room Express and the speed came back.
post #55 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aelegg View Post
 

I suppose this is sort of a reply to the "iSheep buy iCrap" comment, but it's a meaningful summary of the apple experience.

 



We bought the $99 airport express last night. 

 

The little thing is like JEWELRY.  It's like a physical app-icon you can hold in your hand.  It's glossy plastic around the rim (with peel plastic to 'reveal' it as-such).  The top is matte, with an apple logo.  The bottom is slightly beige, with another logo, "swollen out" a smidge (circular), so it sits "up" a bit when you set it down.

 

 





 

Where the REAL problem lies is people's failure to see the Apple is the best of both worlds.  High end AND a good value.

 

 

 

I don't have any illusions about my $8 wine, but people have reverse-illusions about Apple.

 

 

 

So be it.

 


While I haven't tried the new one, there is an issue with the old one and that's when you setup more than one to extend WiFi range, it consumes bandwidth which reduces speed. I was having problems watching streaming movies because they would constantly cache. I would go back to the Mac and check speed and everything would seem to be okay. I disconnected the living room AirPort Express which was the one being used with the home theatre and had those systems pick up WiFi from the dining room Express and the speed came back.

 

If you've got the 5Ghz model for you base station and extender, you can split into 2 networks and manage better your bandwidth by splitting your devices between the 2.4ghz and the 5Ghz network.

post #56 of 131

Thanks for keep assuming that it is my own personal fault and disregard anything that AnandTech and other users on Apple discussion forum have to say. Yeah... if a third party app brings down iOS 7, which you believe is the case and I don't, all Apple needs to do is blame the user and the third party app developer.

 

Selling more iOS7 + A7 than any other iOS device is not a measure of quality at all unless you believe Windows has always been a better product than Mac OS X.

 

By the way, the fact that competitors and haters are not pinpointing your issues does not mean the issues do not exist. Not many Apple haters point out the design issues that caused the white Macbook case to crack easily back years ago. Oh well, you are probably going to blame the users any way just because Apple sold a lot of that Macbook plastic junk.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

You should check and keep an eye on what you have installed and use on your iPad, because Apple has currently sold more iOS7 + A7 devices than any other iOS devices in the past.  If there was a really issue here, be assured the media, fandroids and every competitor would knock on every nails against Apple they can found.

post #57 of 131

Quote:

Originally Posted by THT View Post
 

 

Maybe. I use 2 to 4 Watt to be safer, and it just feels more than 1 or 2 Watt based on the battery tests I've seen. I'm relatively certain you can burn down an iPad Air battery in 6 to 7 hours by turning the screen brightness down to the lowest setting (probably 1 to 2 Watts) and running a complex game or application. So, the SoC is probably hitting somewhere between 2 to 4 Watts.

 

Lastly, 4 Watt TDP for the tablet is likely the limit due to skin temperatures, and it's doubtful to me that Apple won't try to use every bit of that. And I feel 2 Watt TDP is likely the limit for smartphones and skin temperatures.

 

I agree, we don't know for sure and Apple has never disclose specs about this, but the original iPhone off the shelve CPU has been dissected by third party on every level and found to work around 1W.  Ever since all iphone got pretty much the same battery capacity and retain the same battery autonomy. 

 

I applause Apple for not adding bigger battery to compensate for any improvement that can be power hungry and instead working for keeping pretty much the same power usage while keep offering greater performance at every generation.


Edited by BigMac2 - 12/17/13 at 9:42am
post #58 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by st88 View Post

Meanwhile, Intel's x86-64 Bay Trail (22nm Silvermont + Ivy Bridge GPU) is already on the market. In 2014 Intel is planning their tick-tock with Cherry Trail (14nm Airmont + Broadwell GPU) and Willow Trail (14nm Goldmont + Skylake GPU).  Intel will also be launching a successor to their current LTE chip with LTE-Advanced in 2014.

That's the standard retort from camp Wintel: wait until (insert laundry list of Intel code names hyped on Anandtech). Then you'll see! Microsoft Windows 8 will own the future!

"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 #59 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

It need a battery twice has big than the iPhone 5S to achieve 8.5 hours on a looping video with full hardware acceleration, no sound and 50% brightness, which you can't compare with a web browsing test.

 

The Intel phone has twice the screen area with more density.  Look at what drains the battery the most and its always the screen. 

 

The iphone battery performance dropped going from 5 to 5s.

post #60 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
the A7 is still an 28nm SoC and can gain the same advantage from going to 22nm or 14nm has Intel is planning for their future anemic CPUs.

 

You mean anemic like the Xeons in the Mac Pro or the Core i7s in the iMac?

 

Intel's problem isn't that they aren't powerful but that they suck down too much power.  Something they've been working on the last few generations.

post #61 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgwychu View Post

 

Thanks for keep assuming that it is my own personal fault and disregard anything that AnandTech and other users on Apple discussion forum have to say. Yeah... if a third party app brings down iOS 7, which you believe is the case and I don't, all Apple needs to do is blame the user and the third party app developer.

 

Selling more iOS7 + A7 than any other iOS device is not a measure of quality at all unless you believe Windows has always been a better product than Mac OS X.

 

By the way, the fact that competitors and haters are not pinpointing your issues does not mean the issues do not exist. Not many Apple haters point out the design issues that caused the white Macbook case to crack easily back years ago. Oh well, you are probably going to blame the users any way just because Apple sold a lot of that Macbook plastic junk.

 

Agree It is always easier to blame some else for their own mistake. Also I do agree the volume of sales do not represent the quality of a product, but it make much more easy to identify a major design flaw if every device is affected with.  Apple has never got a free pass before, every new product Apple comes with is scrutinize by so many groups so happy to get something bad to say about Apple and their product.

 

I totally disagree with you about calling those MacBook being plastic junk just because of a esthetic problems, have you got one of those MacBook? I've got many at my office, I still do have one in perfect shape, for the price and the time (2007), it was one of the best small laptop on the market, the cracking case issues was purely esthetic and never tempered the laptop functionnallity.

post #62 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by THT View Post
 

Intel is indeed a dangerous competitor, and could come up with quite a few wins for Merrifield in 1H 14. But what you list isn't proof. These are all tablets with 4 to 8 W TDP. Smartphones will be in 2 to 4 W TDP levels. Wait and see on whether Merrifield can compete with Snapdragon 805 next year.

 

The Medfield Xolos were middle of the Android pack for battery life.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5770/lava-xolo-x900-review-the-first-intel-medfield-phone/6

post #63 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

You mean anemic like the Xeons in the Mac Pro or the Core i7s in the iMac?

 

Intel's problem isn't that they aren't powerful but that they suck down too much power.  Something they've been working on the last few generations.

 

Ugh? I wasn't talking about Desktop CPU.....   Intel problem is they need to slowdowns and remove to much feature from their CPU to make it work on mobile devices.

post #64 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai1999 View Post

What pisses me off though, is how Apple haven't got a 5" screen iPhone yet...
- personally, I am loath to upgrade my aging iPhone 3GS to a 5s with the 4" screen
- my aging eyes really need a bigger screen...
 

While it doesn't "piss me off", I do agree that a 4.7" screen is a good thing and will happen next year.  The naysayers will be proven wrong in 2014.

post #65 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgwychu View Post
 

"Although things seem to have improved with iOS 7.0.3, the 64-bit builds of the OS still seem to run into stability issues more frequently than their 32-bit counterparts. I still see low memory errors associated with any crashes. It could just be that the move to 64-bit applications (and associated memory pressure) is putting more stress on iOS’ memory management routines, which in turn exposes some weaknesses. The iPad Air crashed a couple of times on me (3 times total during the past week), but no where near as much as earlier devices running iOS 7.0.1."

 

If you bothered to read the link I provided, you would know what I'm talking about. Above is the quote from the link I posted. Many others on Apple's forum and I have similar issues with iOS 7. If it is an issue caused by third party app, then I would have this same issue with iOS 6 installed on my old iPad, which is not the case. Unfortunately, my new iPad Air crashes at least every other day.

 

 

your experience and the various forum comments are all ad hoc reports. my ad hoc report is that none of my three iOS 7 devices have had a system crash yet, including a new iPad Mini. so the first question is if some app that is in background state but checking occasionally for activity is the problem for those of you with crash reports. the issue is clearly not so widespread as to be affecting everyone, we would have heard about that by now.

 

without much more real world user info and technical analysis (including Anandtech), you are jumping to conclusions.

post #66 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post
 

 

The Intel phone has twice the screen area with more density.  Look at what drains the battery the most and its always the screen. 

 

The iphone battery performance dropped going from 5 to 5s.

 

No true, Radios and backlight is what is mostly draining the battery, 2 things limited on your K900 review article and not in your other benchmark. 

post #67 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by aelegg View Post
 

I suppose this is sort of a reply to the "iSheep buy iCrap" comment, but it's a meaningful summary of the apple experience.


We bought the $99 airport express last night.  Our old-timer Linksys WRT54G (missing a letter in there I think), has just about had it.

 

The little airport express is in a tiny box of course, with a great little cardboard thing providing a little "Voila!" experience (remember W. Mossberg saying that Steve showed him early-release products sometimes and even when it was just-him there was a little cloth over the product, so Steve could "Voila" him?).

 

The little thing is like JEWELRY.  It's like a physical app-icon you can hold in your hand.  It's glossy plastic around the rim (with peel plastic to 'reveal' it as-such).  The top is matte, with an apple logo.  The bottom is slightly beige, with another logo, "swollen out" a smidge (circular), so it sits "up" a bit when you set it down.

 

The power cord is great.  Perfectly coiled in the box.  Quality materials in your hand.  For the Cord!  The plug is tiny.  No big-ass power brick like some crap from HP.

 

It's impossibly small for what it does (wireless printing, audio-out).  And of course it just works, is easy to set up, provides better signal, etc etc.

 

It's COMPLETELY SOLID.  It's like the little thing was poured like the plastic in the iPhone 5C commercials.

 

It's "just" a little router,  yet fully and completely encapsulates the Apple experience.

 

My buddy with me in the Apple store said, "$100!?!?!" in protest.


We say here that people don't "get" the Apple experience, but deep down everyone does.  We all have our high end temptations, and we all have our low-cost-temptations.


I buy Apple products due to the high end experience, but can't resist cheap wine ("hey this is $8!").

 

Where the REAL problem lies is people's failure to see the Apple is the best of both worlds.  High end AND a good value.

 

I don't have any illusions about my $8 wine, but people have reverse-illusions about Apple.

 

So be it.

I just bought the new Airport extreme yesterday and while functionally this is a great product there are 2 major design flaws. 

1. The freaking box is weird. There's no way of knowing you have to unpack it vertically. I unpacked it sideways and the router fell out onto the ground and the black apple logo on the top fell off.

2. The extra ethernet ports on the rear are arranged vertically very close together. It is near impossible to unplug one of the ethernet cables in any but the topmost port because you cannot depress the plastic locking tab. I had to remove all my cables just to replace the one on the bottom.

 

I expected better industrial design from Apple. 

post #68 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by st88 View Post
 

Silvermont (and on) is not a product of Intel stripping features.  They're building it from the ground up.  Intel was a little late to the party on the mobile focus, but even upon entry they're already a step ahead of the competition.  Bay Trail and its (real world) capabilities is proof of their efforts.

 

Until the Silvermont, every previous Intel attempt was base of Atom architecture without Out of order capability, Silvermont will change this but still base of Atom and Celeron architecture.  As I said, Intel can't win against ARM on effiency with all x86 legacy their CPU needs.

post #69 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by st88 View Post
 

The K900 was using CloverTrail+, which is based on an outdated architecture (Saltwell).  The jump from Saltwell to Silvermont was substantial.


Too bad it's currently the prime and sole example of a Intel Soc in a smartphone.  2 years ago Clovertrail got the same level of praise of the forthcoming Silvermont and under deliver on actual product, like the nVidia Tegra, they got a lot of hype and praised by the bloggosphere, but got deceiving product at the end.

post #70 of 131
LOL. Anandtech readers waving a fistful of code names and nanometer specs have infected this thread. What's the meme now? That the A7 is not "real 64-bit" because Safari crashes on my iPad Air? Bugs in iOS 7 don't magically un-64-bit the A7, folks. Those are separate issues.

"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 #71 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


That's the standard retort from camp Wintel: wait until (insert laundry list of Intel code names hyped on Anandtech). Then you'll see! Microsoft Windows 8 will own the future!

 

Win 8 is a bit like Vista.  On the other hand Win7 was pretty decent.  I prefer OSX but Win7 was a vast improvement over XP while Vista was one of those two steps sideways, one step forward and one step back things.  Win8 same deal.  Whether Win9 will be a good OS is still TBD but given their pattern it probably won't suck as much as Win8.

post #72 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by st88 View Post
 

We already have at least 6 Bay Trail tablets on the market.  Silvermont's performance and capabilities are exceptional.  There is nothing "deceiving" about them.

 

Why are you avoiding the conversation? have you any Intel smartphone you can compared with?  On tablet they all need to compensate with bigger battery.  The iPad Air is currently one of the tablets with the best battery life with the smallest battery capacity, same apply for the iPhone 5S.

post #73 of 131
I'm utterly unsurprised iOS went 64-bit. It makes keeping OS X uniform across platforms just that much easier.
post #74 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

Ugh? I wasn't talking about Desktop CPU.....   Intel problem is they need to slowdowns and remove to much feature from their CPU to make it work on mobile devices.

 

Atoms, until this generation, has been oddly backburnered in terms of process and development.  I guess not that oddly given the pricing.  They simply haven't been all that agressive given they could have moved Atom forward to 32nm earlier.

 

Silvermont goes from in order to out of order at 22nm with a 50% gain in IPC and moved the ISA to Westmere level.  They should make for good tablet SoCs and decent smartphone SoCs.  Airmont is following quickly the year after.  And 64 bit is a non-issue for Intel.

 

post #75 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

The iPad Air is currently one of the tablets with the best battery life with the smallest battery capacity, same apply for the iPhone 5S.

 

That has as much to do with iOS as the chip.  Probably more.

post #76 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai1999 View Post

Definitely, the big news with the iPhone 5s was Apple begin first to have a product with a 64-bit ARM in it
- especially when you consider how long nVidia has been working on their Project Denver
- a really impressive achievement

What pisses me off though, is how Apple haven't got a 5" screen iPhone yet...
- personally, I am loath to upgrade my aging iPhone 3GS to a 5s with the 4" screen
- my aging eyes really need a bigger screen...

Anyway, that's a different argument, but, yes, I agree that the announcement of the 64-bit ARM was the big news for me at the iPhone 5s launch
- almost makes we want to get the 5s!

 

Theres this thing called Glasses.  They help with vision.  You may want to research it and come back to us in a week.  While you are at it buy a Nexus7 and report back to us.

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #77 of 131
Quote:

Originally Posted by st88 View Post

 

The ASUS T100 is running x86 Windows 8.1 with a 31Whr battery and offers 10:40 of use (Engadget).

 

Not bad given Windows.  It simply isn't as thrifty as OSX or iOS.

post #78 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post

When I read this story earlier and MacRumors it made me smile as I remembered all the analysts and tech bloggers claiming that Apple could not innovate. ...

I wouldn't call it "innovate".  It's certainly the next step.  Apple just took the lead and came out with the 64bit faster than others.  Good work.

post #79 of 131
Hmm...So Samsung is building the A7....and how much of it will they copy since they will have have access to the chip? How much of Xynos will be copied from the A7? this will make a great patent war...
post #80 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post
 

 

Atoms, until this generation, has been oddly backburnered in terms of process and development.  I guess not that oddly given the pricing.  They simply haven't been all that agressive given they could have moved Atom forward to 32nm earlier.

 

Silvermont goes from in order to out of order at 22nm with a 50% gain in IPC and moved the ISA to Westmere level.  They should make for good tablet SoCs and decent smartphone SoCs.  Airmont is following quickly the year after.  And 64 bit is a non-issue for Intel.

 

 

My hunch is that Intel's been suffering through some strategy tax or product segmentation tax for awhile. Obviously, Atom was created for Netbooks, so it naturally had to perform not as good as Core processors and relied on n-1 nodes to make them cheap. Then for 3 straight years, they tried to shoehorn the in-order core into a smartphone SoC. They got a couple of very minor wins (Razr i, Yolo), but I view those as more concept phones (read: concept car) then a serious win. When they finally fab their smartphone SoC with their state-of-the-art fab node, we'll know they've finally accepted the model of selling CPUs for hundreds of dollars as not the way to move forward. That they are serious and view it as vital to the company.

 

The problem with Silvermont is that it's still trying to fit inside a box of not competing with Core while arriving a little bit late. They are essentially a new entrant in the mobile world and have to push out the incumbent. Silvermont is at parity with ARM SoCs. To push out the incumbent, they have to be better, both in performance and perf/watt.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's 64-bit A7 SoC 'set off panic' for chipmakers