Motorola was a lousy partner for Apple. IBM wasn't much better. Their interests simply did not coincide with Apple's, and in Motorola's case, Apple was dealing with general corporate cluelessness that made Apple's leadership at the time look positively enlightened.
You may know that since 2004 Motorola had nothing to do anymore with semiconductors. It was spin-off Freescale to run design and manufacture CPU parts for Apple.
It is well known fact that Apple volumes were not big enough to justify highly-optimized PowerPC CPU designs successfully competing against Intel in terms of price-performance.
You may know that since 2004 Motorola had nothing to do anymore with semiconductors. It was spin-off Freescale to run design and manufacture CPU parts for Apple.
It is well known fact that Apple volumes were not big enough to justify highly-optimized PowerPC CPU designs successfully competing against Intel in terms of price-performance.
Right, but you cut off the part of my post which dealt with the time period long before 2004, when Motorola was not only a partner in AIM but also a Mac clone licensee from Apple. One of the reasons why they spun off their semiconductor business was because they'd fumbled it so badly. A company that doesn't use its own products either lacks vision or intelligence or both.
The Apple A4 processor does look good, but no better than say, Tegra 2 or Snapdragon 2. I'd have to agree with the post saying that Apple's real reason for a custom chip instead of one of the available options is content protection and jailbreak-protection.
For those interested, here is a great readup on Tegra 2, which at least for the processor component is similar. The graphics components will be different though, the a4 is likely using an updated version of the SGX graphics chip from the iPhone 3GS
The Apple A4 processor does look good, but no better than say, Tegra 2 or Snapdragon 2. I'd have to agree with the post saying that Apple's real reason for a custom chip instead of one of the available options is content protection and jailbreak-protection.
For those interested, here is a great readup on Tegra 2, which at least for the processor component is similar. The graphics components will be different though, the a4 is likely using an updated version of the SGX graphics chip from the iPhone 3GS
Tegra2 and Snapdragon are nice chips but at this point no one knows what special conconction the A4 chip is for Apple.
The A4 will likely only vary by other designs by say 20% but there could be some significant features embodied within the small percentage. I'd say the power management is clearly an area that the PA Semi guys/gals worked heavily on.
The one billion properly includes the increase shares of Imagination Technologies ( Owner of PowerVR )and Purchase of PASemi. Because 1B is A LOT. You could buy a third of ARM.
And its nearly certain that the processor component is based on the Cortex A9 reference design.
Speaking of which, I'm a bit confused as to how taking reference designs from ARM and the SGX graphics component, and putting them together and sending them off to be made by someone else is a 1 billion dollar investment. Apple isn't forming their own foundries here or anything.
Only a cortex A8? Thats dissapointing. Still faster than the iPhone due to clockspeed alone, but the A9 would be so much faster.
It's looking that way. There was some speculation of it not being A9 or dual-core because Apple didn't promote that aspect of it.
Personally I don't care about an individual chip being used but the overall package. It'll be interesting to see how this competes with other devices in it's class and out of class devices using A8 and A9s at those frequencies.
I think the A4 in the next iPhone is likely. Perhaps we'll get some major power savings there as the article states.
As Ars so eloquently put it, "its the software, stupid!". But still, I cant help but feel dissapointed. The A9's provide an enormous benefit, they are out-of-order processors for one, which is a huge benefit in itself, and for two they are either dual or quad cores. I cant remember who's specific test it was, but the A9 kept toe-to-toe with Intel's Atom (pinetrail) while consuming so much less power. Two Cortex A9 cores would be a screamer for a device like this, the A8 seems merely adequate.
As Ars so eloquently put it, "its the software, stupid!". But still, I cant help but feel dissapointed. The A9's provide an enormous benefit, they are out-of-order processors for one, which is a huge benefit in itself, and for two they are either dual or quad cores. I cant remember who's specific test it was, but the A9 kept toe-to-toe with Intel's Atom (pinetrail) while consuming so much less power. Two Cortex A9 cores would be a screamer for a device like this, the A8 seems merely adequate.
The A9 is certainly a more advanced chip, not just a newer title. but I have to wonder if this new avenue of chip design for Apple pretty much required they use the A8 for the first go around because they have had more time to optimize it. Maybe in a couple iterations they can be on the cutting edge with the most advanced chip tailored to their specific needs, but I'm happy to finally see this being tackled.
Of course, this article is not canon and it could very well be an A9 inside.
The A9 catching up with Atom while using less power isn't good for Intel. It was thought that in a few year Atom would start catching up to ARM for comparable power to performance but that simply isn' the case. And now with Apple paving the way for a tailored OS on a tablet (and likely netbooks) we're not going to see many desktop OSes shoehorned into these devices like we have for the last decade. Android for sure, and possibly WebOS and Win7. This market is going to be big and I don't think Intel will be a major part of it.
Comments
Motorola was a lousy partner for Apple. IBM wasn't much better. Their interests simply did not coincide with Apple's, and in Motorola's case, Apple was dealing with general corporate cluelessness that made Apple's leadership at the time look positively enlightened.
You may know that since 2004 Motorola had nothing to do anymore with semiconductors. It was spin-off Freescale to run design and manufacture CPU parts for Apple.
It is well known fact that Apple volumes were not big enough to justify highly-optimized PowerPC CPU designs successfully competing against Intel in terms of price-performance.
You may know that since 2004 Motorola had nothing to do anymore with semiconductors. It was spin-off Freescale to run design and manufacture CPU parts for Apple.
It is well known fact that Apple volumes were not big enough to justify highly-optimized PowerPC CPU designs successfully competing against Intel in terms of price-performance.
Right, but you cut off the part of my post which dealt with the time period long before 2004, when Motorola was not only a partner in AIM but also a Mac clone licensee from Apple. One of the reasons why they spun off their semiconductor business was because they'd fumbled it so badly. A company that doesn't use its own products either lacks vision or intelligence or both.
For those interested, here is a great readup on Tegra 2, which at least for the processor component is similar. The graphics components will be different though, the a4 is likely using an updated version of the SGX graphics chip from the iPhone 3GS
http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3714
Skip to page 3 to learn more about the Cortex A9 the Apple chip is using, and the last page for Cortex A9 VS Intel Atom.
The Apple A4 processor does look good, but no better than say, Tegra 2 or Snapdragon 2. I'd have to agree with the post saying that Apple's real reason for a custom chip instead of one of the available options is content protection and jailbreak-protection.
For those interested, here is a great readup on Tegra 2, which at least for the processor component is similar. The graphics components will be different though, the a4 is likely using an updated version of the SGX graphics chip from the iPhone 3GS
http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3714
Skip to page 3 to learn more about the Cortex A9 the Apple chip is using, and the last page for Cortex A9 VS Intel Atom.
Huh? How the hell can you say that it "looks good" but "no better than Tegra 2 or Snapdragon 2"? Do you know FOR SURE anything at all about the A4?
"a4 is likely using an updated version of the SGX graphics chip from the iPhone 3GS"
likely based on what?
The A4 will likely only vary by other designs by say 20% but there could be some significant features embodied within the small percentage. I'd say the power management is clearly an area that the PA Semi guys/gals worked heavily on.
The one billion properly includes the increase shares of Imagination Technologies ( Owner of PowerVR )and Purchase of PASemi. Because 1B is A LOT. You could buy a third of ARM.
Indeed. An ARM and a leg!
Huh? How the hell can you say that it "looks good" but "no better than Tegra 2 or Snapdragon 2"? Do you know FOR SURE anything at all about the A4?
"a4 is likely using an updated version of the SGX graphics chip from the iPhone 3GS"
likely based on what?
On the PowerVR SGX graphics -
http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/i...-sgx-graphics/
And its nearly certain that the processor component is based on the Cortex A9 reference design.
Speaking of which, I'm a bit confused as to how taking reference designs from ARM and the SGX graphics component, and putting them together and sending them off to be made by someone else is a 1 billion dollar investment. Apple isn't forming their own foundries here or anything.
Do I sense the real purpose behind custom processors is content protection?
How come you are not sensing that they want to spy on you and take control of everything you have connected to network?
G4, A4, will history repeat itself? ;-)
As it always does. In four years we'll have another communist revolution, and later Germany will invade Poland.
Some juicy A4 info over at Arstechnia...
Only a cortex A8? Thats dissapointing. Still faster than the iPhone due to clockspeed alone, but the A9 would be so much faster.
Only a cortex A8? Thats dissapointing. Still faster than the iPhone due to clockspeed alone, but the A9 would be so much faster.
It's looking that way. There was some speculation of it not being A9 or dual-core because Apple didn't promote that aspect of it.
Personally I don't care about an individual chip being used but the overall package. It'll be interesting to see how this competes with other devices in it's class and out of class devices using A8 and A9s at those frequencies.
I think the A4 in the next iPhone is likely. Perhaps we'll get some major power savings there as the article states.
As Ars so eloquently put it, "its the software, stupid!". But still, I cant help but feel dissapointed. The A9's provide an enormous benefit, they are out-of-order processors for one, which is a huge benefit in itself, and for two they are either dual or quad cores. I cant remember who's specific test it was, but the A9 kept toe-to-toe with Intel's Atom (pinetrail) while consuming so much less power. Two Cortex A9 cores would be a screamer for a device like this, the A8 seems merely adequate.
The A9 is certainly a more advanced chip, not just a newer title. but I have to wonder if this new avenue of chip design for Apple pretty much required they use the A8 for the first go around because they have had more time to optimize it. Maybe in a couple iterations they can be on the cutting edge with the most advanced chip tailored to their specific needs, but I'm happy to finally see this being tackled.
Of course, this article is not canon and it could very well be an A9 inside.
The A9 catching up with Atom while using less power isn't good for Intel. It was thought that in a few year Atom would start catching up to ARM for comparable power to performance but that simply isn' the case. And now with Apple paving the way for a tailored OS on a tablet (and likely netbooks) we're not going to see many desktop OSes shoehorned into these devices like we have for the last decade. Android for sure, and possibly WebOS and Win7. This market is going to be big and I don't think Intel will be a major part of it.