Prediction: Atom based iPad by 2016
There's been a lot of talk of the Macs going ARM but I'm going argue the opposite: the iPad moves to x86. With 22nm Atom next year and 14nm Atoms by 2014 I can see Intel winning the performance per watt battle over time between process node advantages and overall improvement in their designs.
If that happens...and Intel gets into the Tick/Tock pattern for mobile then ARM might end up on the wrong end of the power performance curve by 2016.
Apple can move in either direction (Mac to ARM or iPad to X86). It's just an XCode target and recompile for most app devs.
Intel can certainly provide volume Apple needs and it would once again love to have Apple as a premiere partner. I don't think that ARM can scale up performance wise as fast as Intel has been scaling down power requirements.
Comments
No, they're not gonna put X86 chips in the iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, they're not gonna put X86 chips in the iPad.
It's more likely than putting ARM in Macs.
Originally Posted by nht
It's more likely than putting ARM in Macs.
One's going backward. The other is going forward. There's overlap now because of what ARM can't provide* that X86 can.
*Yet.
why would Apple invest hundreds of millions of dollars in chip design for ARM chips, just to give it up to Intel in four years. Not going to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davion3052
why would Apple invest hundreds of millions of dollars in chip design for ARM chips, just to give it up to Intel in four years. Not going to happen.
Apple invested millions into the AIM alliance and the PowerPC as well.
Want to bet that there isn't a Medfield reference design phone running iOS somewhere in Cupertino?
The A6/A6X is pretty cool and if Apple goes the IDM route then moving to Intel is far less likely. If they don't then it's not such a big deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Apple invested millions into the AIM alliance and the PowerPC as well.
Want to bet that there isn't a Medfield reference design phone running iOS somewhere in Cupertino?
The A6/A6X is pretty cool and if Apple goes the IDM route then moving to Intel is far less likely. If they don't then it's not such a big deal.
Three things:
The AIM Alliance and the PowerPC were nearly 20 years ago.
Apple has many experimental projects in Cupertino. The vast majority of these projects never see the light of day.
Apple processors including the A6/A6X are systems on a chip rather than discrete processors. Is it possible that Apple will revert to discrete components? Certainly. It is likely? Certainly not.
Is is where IP goes these days to make unique products.
Frankly I could argue that Intel will have no choice but to support customers with custom chips. It is the way of the future for these small devices. Doesn't matter. Seriously Apples move to Soc technology with ARM cores is all about where engineering is done these days. Thatis certainly true.
It isn't a simple matter of measuring processor core performance. In fact the processor core is just a small part of today's chips. You really need to think of that wafer of silicon as a replacement for the fiberglass printed circuit boards of the past. Instead of piecing together a system with a bunch of discrete chips and clever engineering to realize a machine it is rather an effort of merging IP and synthesized logic and application blocks to realize a device.
Honestly I think Intel has missed the boat here. Unless they open up ATOMs cores to custom implementations they will get no where in mobile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
One's going backward. The other is going forward. There's overlap now because of what ARM can't provide* that X86 can.
*Yet.
I don't see it as so clear cut. I would suggest that if Apple was going to implement Atom, it would have happened a long time ago. They aren't so likely to change a successful strategy today. With PowerPC -> Intel, they were floundering. Notebooks were the largest potential growth market in the Mac lineup and they were stuck with the G4 process. They don't really have that kind of problem today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Me
Apple processors including the A6/A6X are systems on a chip rather than discrete processors. Is it possible that Apple will revert to discrete components? Certainly. It is likely? Certainly not.
The Intel Medfield is a SoC with the CPU/GPU/other stuff on die and DRAM stacked on the package. Intel's Core chips a pseudo-SOCs these days with the GPU and Northbridge on die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Not a chance. It really has nothing to do with performance, it is more about being the captain of your own ship. The reality is that unless Intel has a change of heart with respect to custom SoC they will have little success in mobile. Why? Pretty simple today's SoC is equivalent to the printed circuit boards back in the day when Wozniak and other engineers made leaps and bounds in clever circuit design. In effect mobile devices are built on SoC technologies, that is where IP goes these days to make unique products.
Frankly I could argue that Intel will have no choice but to support customers with custom chips. It is the way of the future for these small devices.
Then a reporter asked if Intel customizes parts for its largest customers. “Yes,” Bryant said. “We want to give them a way of differentiating their machines.”
Bryant didn’t say much more, but those few words shine a light on another part of the big-time chip business that’s rarely discussed. There are cases where a large chipmaker such as Intel and AMD will provide certain customers with chips that others may not have access to. Sometimes, this merely means that when the chipmaker cranks out a big batch of processors, one customer gets the chips that happen to have the best speed or power ratings. But in other cases, the chipmaker will actually modify processors at the request of a particular customer.
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/09/intel-amd-custom-chips/all/
Intel produced a custom Merom for the first MBA. If Apple wants some secret sauce in its SoC then Intel probably would do it. The only exception is that Intel probably really really wants to push it's Gen7 GPU (Ivy Bridge HD Graphics with 4 cores) in their 22nm SOCs over the SGX.
That's faster than today's top end SGX554MP4 but we're also looking a year or two from now.
Quote:
Doesn't matter. Seriously Apples move to Soc technology with ARM cores is all about where engineering is done these days.
There's just as much engineering being done to the Intel Silvermont and Airmont cores and if Apple wants something special it probably has the mojo to get it given the volumes it needs AND the cachet of its branding. An Apple mobile design win for Intel means a lot more than the desktop/laptop design win did. That was a nice to have. This would be a major change in the mobile processor playing field.
Quote:
It isn't a simple matter of measuring processor core performance. In fact the processor core is just a small part of today's chips. You really need to think of that wafer of silicon as a replacement for the fiberglass printed circuit boards of the past. Instead of piecing together a system with a bunch of discrete chips and clever engineering to realize a machine it is rather an effort of merging IP and synthesized logic and application blocks to realize a device.
Honestly I think Intel has missed the boat here. Unless they open up ATOMs cores to custom implementations they will get no where in mobile.
You guys don't seem to realize that Medfield and all the follow on smartphone/tablet Atoms are SOCs. In this generation with SGX544MP2 GPUs on the tablets and SGX 545 on netbooks and SGX540 on phones. If Apple had said "we'll use the Saltwell processor for the iPad 4 but we need SGX554MP4 instead and these three things removed from the die and these two added you really don't think that Intel would have said "Hell yeah!".
Frankly Saltwell isn't fast enough for it to be a compelling move for Apple. I do see 14nm Airmont in 2014 being compelling. If the cost is moving to Gen8/9 Intel GPUs (the Haswell ones on 14nm) that's probably okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
I don't see it as so clear cut. I would suggest that if Apple was going to implement Atom, it would have happened a long time ago. They aren't so likely to change a successful strategy today. With PowerPC -> Intel, they were floundering. Notebooks were the largest potential growth market in the Mac lineup and they were stuck with the G4 process. They don't really have that kind of problem today.
Intel Atom has sucked until Medfield. It simply was never a viable option for Apple.
With 2012 Medfield they have parity with A9s so they are a half step behind. (Why do that?)
With 2013 22nm (Valleyview, etc) I expect parity with A15s. (Okay, but the A6 is already here since Apple is slightly ahead of the pack so they are still a half step behind Apple)
with 2014 14nm I expect them to be ahead of ARM on both power and performance in 2014. (Now you have a reason to think about switching horses)
Which is why I hedged and said 2016 iPads.
Regardless of whether you think I'm a crackpot to suggest an Atom powered iPad by 2016, I hope I've shown that it's hugely unlikely for Macs to move to ARM in the same timeframe.
There's no convincing power story to move the MBA to ARM. Not with Haswell having 10W parts and Atom showing up with either parity or exceeding ARM performance per watt AND x86 compatibility in the next couple years. The ARM in the Chromebook is a ~4-5W TDP part.
Intel can say whatever it wants too but the reality is they aren't setup to do custom SoC the way ARM is. could they get that way, possibly but it would take a major mindset change at Intel. As to future Intel cores of course there is lots of engineering going into them, that is because their current solutions are crap. However you missed the most important point or glossed over it, Apple can't engineer the chip to suit their needs with Intels current approach to this market. Further it is in Apples strategic interest to engineer their own solutions.
AS to ATOM being a SoC, it might be that if you become very liberal with the term but current implementations lack the integration to really compete with anything that can be done with ARM hardware in this sector. As for Intel say hell yeah apparently they already turned down the possibility of becoming a foundry for Apple. That pretty much says it all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Not a chance. It really has nothing to do with performance, it is more about being the captain of your own ship. The reality is that unless Intel has a change of heart with respect to custom SoC they will have little success in mobile. Why? Pretty simple today's SoC is equivalent to the printed circuit boards back in the day when Wozniak and other engineers made leaps and bounds in clever circuit design. In effect mobile devices are built on SoC technologies, that is where IP goes these days to make unique products.
Frankly I could argue that Intel will have no choice but to support customers with custom chips. It is the way of the future for these small devices.
Then a reporter asked if Intel customizes parts for its largest customers. “Yes,” Bryant said. “We want to give them a way of differentiating their machines.”
Bryant didn’t say much more, but those few words shine a light on another part of the big-time chip business that’s rarely discussed. There are cases where a large chipmaker such as Intel and AMD will provide certain customers with chips that others may not have access to. Sometimes, this merely means that when the chipmaker cranks out a big batch of processors, one customer gets the chips that happen to have the best speed or power ratings. But in other cases, the chipmaker will actually modify processors at the request of a particular customer.
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/09/intel-amd-custom-chips/all/
Intel produced a custom Merom for the first MBA. If Apple wants some secret sauce in its SoC then Intel probably would do it. The only exception is that Intel probably really really wants to push it's Gen7 GPU (Ivy Bridge HD Graphics with 4 cores) in their 22nm SOCs over the SGX.
That's faster than today's top end SGX554MP4 but we're also looking a year or two from now.
Quote:
Doesn't matter. Seriously Apples move to Soc technology with ARM cores is all about where engineering is done these days.
There's just as much engineering being done to the Intel Silvermont and Airmont cores and if Apple wants something special it probably has the mojo to get it given the volumes it needs AND the cachet of its branding. An Apple mobile design win for Intel means a lot more than the desktop/laptop design win did. That was a nice to have. This would be a major change in the mobile processor playing field.
Quote:
It isn't a simple matter of measuring processor core performance. In fact the processor core is just a small part of today's chips. You really need to think of that wafer of silicon as a replacement for the fiberglass printed circuit boards of the past. Instead of piecing together a system with a bunch of discrete chips and clever engineering to realize a machine it is rather an effort of merging IP and synthesized logic and application blocks to realize a device.
Honestly I think Intel has missed the boat here. Unless they open up ATOMs cores to custom implementations they will get no where in mobile.
You guys don't seem to realize that Medfield and all the follow on smartphone/tablet Atoms are SOCs. In this generation with SGX544MP2 GPUs on the tablets and SGX 545 on netbooks and SGX540 on phones. If Apple had said "we'll use the Saltwell processor for the iPad 4 but we need SGX554MP4 instead and these three things removed from the die and these two added you really don't think that Intel would have said "Hell yeah!".
Frankly Saltwell isn't fast enough for it to be a compelling move for Apple. I do see 14nm Airmont in 2014 being compelling. If the cost is moving to Gen8/9 Intel GPUs (the Haswell ones on 14nm) that's probably okay.
ARM benefits from process shrinks just like Intel does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
I don't see it as so clear cut. I would suggest that if Apple was going to implement Atom, it would have happened a long time ago. They aren't so likely to change a successful strategy today. With PowerPC -> Intel, they were floundering. Notebooks were the largest potential growth market in the Mac lineup and they were stuck with the G4 process. They don't really have that kind of problem today.
Intel Atom has sucked until Medfield. It simply was never a viable option for Apple.
With 2012 Medfield they have parity with A9s so they are a half step behind. (Why do that?)
With 2013 22nm (Valleyview, etc) I expect parity with A15s. (Okay, but the A6 is already here since Apple is slightly ahead of the pack so they are still a half step behind Apple)
with 2014 14nm I expect them to be ahead of ARM on both power and performance in 2014. (Now you have a reason to think about switching horses)
Which is why I hedged and said 2016 iPads.
Crackpot, not really. I just think you are missing the point with Apple going to custom ARM SoCs.
As to "Mac" with ARM processors I can't see any good reason for that to happen my self. It would just confuse the family of devices. However I could see Apple offering a different product with ARM as the processor of choice; it would be marketed as a separate product, probably iOS derived, to prevent product confusion. An iPad with keyboard if you will.
The reason they would do an ARM based laptop is the same reason they will stay with ARM in iPads. It allows them to command their own ship. That is they could tailor a SoC for the exact functionality they would want to put into the device. It is no different than Apple TV where the A series chip was tailored for that machine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Regardless of whether you think I'm a crackpot to suggest an Atom powered iPad by 2016, I hope I've shown that it's hugely unlikely for Macs to move to ARM in the same timeframe.
There's no convincing power story to move the MBA to ARM. Not with Haswell having 10W parts and Atom showing up with either parity or exceeding ARM performance per watt AND x86 compatibility in the next couple years. The ARM in the Chromebook is a ~4-5W TDP part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
ARM benefits from process shrinks just like Intel does.
Yes, but Intel is getting to 14nm mobile before anyone else. Instead of competing a process node behind (32nm vs 28nm in 2012) they'll be a process node ahead with Atom and that's a big difference.
Quote:
AS to ATOM being a SoC, it might be that if you become very liberal with the term but current implementations lack the integration to really compete with anything that can be done with ARM hardware in this sector.
The Medfield SoC used in the K800 and Xolo are SoCs just like the A6. In what way is it any less "integrated" and not a SoC.
Given that the Xolo outperformed the Galaxy Nexus (Dual Core OMAP Cortex A9) and on par with the HTX One X (Quad Core Tegra 3 Cortex-A9) and has decent real world battery life despite the small battery in the Xolo (5.4 Whr vs 6.85 Whr in the Nexus) is a clear indicator that it IS competitive with ARM A9 designs.
Since the Xolo X900 is an early-2012 phone that's not that shabby for Intel. Intel is not trying for "not shabby" but industry leading performance. It might get there next year at 22nm but I suspect it won't be until 2014 where it beats ARM performance in all respects for what AnandTech calls a "Conroe moment".
Taking honor bets. Loser agrees pays charity of winner's choice, no verification...just do it or not on your own honor. This is just for fun and bragging rights.
My charity choice is Dean Kaman's First http://www.usfirst.org/
I'm going to say the odds are only 10-1 against Intel iPad design win by end of 2016 but if I like your charity I'll do 1-1.
This isn't even worth gambling on.
Besides that I thought your position was to support the idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
This isn't even worth gambling on.
Besides that I thought your position was to support the idea.
I do. I figure 1-10 odds are pretty good for something most folks this has a one in a million chance (or even zero chance) of happening.
/shrug
Folks are pretty adamant about their positions around here so why not put up or shut up?