More of the exact same RAM requires more power. This cannot be debated This is a fact! This is physics!
I don't think anyone here said that the only reason the iPhone 5S didn't get 2GB was due to it eating up too much power. Apple has a long and impressive history of balancing power with performance. The bottom line is that adding more RAM wouldn't have increased the user experience to make it worthwhile for them.
Nor would it have reduced the battery life by any noticeable margin.
64-bit is more ideal for the Objective-C runtime. It also means they can use the same runtime between OS X and iOS. Specifically, 64-bits allows for a technique called tagged pointers that can speed up dynamic programming languages that use boxed types. Objective-C is a hybrid language, so the impact will not but huge. Many people have speculated that Apple will release a new language someday that will sit on top of Objective-C. Most likely a smalltalk inspired language. 64-bit could be a big deal for this theoretical language and there is no way Apple will release a new programming language if it doesn't run well on iOS. Javascript can also benefit from tagged pointers and should be accelerated by a move to 64-bit.
That's all true, but your argument doesn't really address the issue, either.
So Apple's use of 1 GB does save energy compared to 2 GB of the same RAM type.
Of course it does. I have yet to see how doubling the same of any component will use less power....... I'm not arguing that, I'm saying that doubling memory can be done in a power efficient manner when moving to new architecture/process.
Again I'm responding to (debunking) the post that blanket states that more RAM kills battery life.
A5 (on 4S) was 45nm with 512MB DDR2, A6 (on 5) was 32nm with 1GB DDR2. Ram was doubled (same type) but no appreciable change in battery life for same capacity of battery.
A7 went to 28nm and DDR3 ram, there was probably room to improve, even double DRAM size to 2GB without any major impact on battery life, but Apple chose not to for a variety of reasons.
Note the 5S battery is 1570mah vs 1440mah on 5, so there was plenty of room to grow SDRAM size if Apple had of wanted to.
Of course it does. I have yet to see how doubling the same of any component will use less power....... I'm not arguing that, I'm saying that doubling memory can be done in a power efficient manner when moving to new architecture/process.
Again I'm responding to (debunking) the post that blanket states that more RAM kills battery life.
A5 (on 4S) was 45nm with 512MB DDR2, A6 (on 5) was 32nm with 1GB DDR2. Ram was doubled (same type) but no appreciable change in battery life for same capacity of battery.
A7 went to 28nm and DDR3 ram, there was probably room to improve, even double DRAM size to 2GB without any major impact on battery life, but Apple chose not to for a variety of reasons.
Note the 5S battery is 1570mah vs 1440mah on 5, so there was plenty of room to grow SDRAM size if Apple had of wanted to.
Everything you wrote is complete rubbish. Your logic that Apple increased the battery size means they should have doubled the RAM is absolutely ridiculous. It's clear you have no concept of any of the tech they used.
Everything you wrote is complete rubbish. Your logic that Apple increased the battery size means they should have doubled the RAM is absolutely ridiculous. It's clear you have no concept of any of the tech they used.
Man you really seem to have a hard time comprehending english.
I said Apple "COULD" have doubled the ram if they had of "WANTED" to without "SERIOUSLY" affecting battery life.
Man you really seem to have a hard time comprehending english.
I said Apple "COULD" have doubled the ram if the had of "WANTED" to without "SERIOUSLY" affecting battery life.
It is clear that you are horribly confused.
What you said was that they could have doubled the RAM and it would would use less power. It was pointed out by me and others that it's impossible in this Universe to do that with everything else being the same.
What you said was that they could have doubled the RAM and it would would use less power. It was pointed out by me and others that it's impossible in this Universe to do that with everything else being the same.
You're being just stupid now. I said that a process change can allow a doubling of memory capacity and result in less power being used. I even gave a practical example where Samsung reduced the power consumption (by 67%) of 1GB SDRAM modules by going from DDR2 50nm to DDR3 20nm.
I further pointed out the process change in A7 from 32 to 28nm along with the DDR2 to DDR3 dram change, along with increased battery capacity in 5S, which COULD have allowed apple to double the SDRAM size with NO APPRECIABLE change in battery life, IF they had wanted to.
To be fair, with only 1GB or RAM there is a limit as to how much of an advantage a 64 bit OS really is at this point....
However, it does sound like sour grapes at this point....
Sure, if you assume the only benefit of 64-bit is that you get to address more RAM, but it's not. Double-width general purpose registers is a huge boon. It mean's less data need be accessed from the CPU's cache or from RAM which means increased throughput.
Doesn't anyone recall when Apple installed an A-Series processor into a MacBook Air and achieved outstanding results...I believe that was an A5 or maybe an A6...don't recall...
Moving to a 64-bit processor could allow them to do so in the foreseeable future...move the manufacturing to TSMC and ditch Samsung and Intel in one fell-swoop...HOLY MOLY Batman!!!
It's a marketing gimmick right up to the second that Qualcomm can ship a 64-bit CPU for smartphones, then it will magically become a "must have feature that makes everything faster and better"
Doesn't anyone recall when Apple installed an A-Series processor into a MacBook Air and achieved outstanding results...I believe that was an A5 or maybe an A6...don't recall...
They’ve done no such thing, ever.
…ditch… …Intel…
Sounds like the GPU they commissioned was a waste of money, then.
You're being just stupid now. I said that a process change can allow a doubling of memory capacity and result in less power being used. I even gave a practical example where Samsung reduced the power consumption (by 67%) of 1GB SDRAM modules by going from DDR2 50nm to DDR3 20nm.
I further pointed out the process change in A7 from 32 to 28nm along with the DDR2 to DDR3 dram change, along with increased battery capacity in 5S, which COULD have allowed apple to double the SDRAM size with NO APPRECIABLE change in battery life, IF they had wanted to.
What part of that do you not understand?
You mentioned all these other things, including moving from 50nm to 20nm as PROOF that doubling their current RAM choice would lead to lower power use. You're either trolling or you didn't understand what you were writing and are now backtracking. Keep it up!
Doesn't anyone recall when Apple installed an A-Series processor into a MacBook Air and achieved outstanding results...I believe that was an A5 or maybe an A6...don't recall...
Moving to a 64-bit processor could allow them to do so in the foreseeable future...move the manufacturing to TSMC and ditch Samsung and Intel in one fell-swoop...HOLY MOLY Batman!!!
I don't recall there ever being an Apple A chip in any MBA. It's been Intel Core from the start.
Unlikely. See how Apple is still buying from Samsung. Apple will still need Qualcomm for the foreseeable future.
Qualcomm isn't just a fab plant the way Samsung is, they hold their chip patents and design the chips that are used. I don't think Apple has any intention of getting into that business.
It's a marketing gimmick right up to the second that Qualcomm can ship a 64-bit CPU for smartphones, then it will magically become a "must have feature that makes everything faster and better"
LOL I will be very surprised if Android is fully 64-bit when it finally launches.
Apple tends to stay clear of hybrid technology, it's their refrigerator/toaster theory.
Sorry I wasn't very clear, I didn't mean hybrid in that sence, more hybrid like the way they have the A7 AND the new M chip. As in off loading tasks to an A chip while keeping the Intel for things the A chip can't do, such as run a VM with Windows as just one example.
So Qualcomm's chief marketing officer goes to the press and talks smack about Qualcomm's biggest customer Apple and their new flagship product? Wow. If Qualcomm has a CEO worth his salt this dimwitted chief marketing officer will be looking for a new job come Monday. At the latest!
Doesn't anyone recall when Apple installed an A-Series processor into a MacBook Air and achieved outstanding results...I believe that was an A5 or maybe an A6...don't recall...
There's no official evidence of that. There are rumors that they've done that, but "outstanding results" is undoubtedly an exaggeration. Even the fastest A7 is dog slow compared to the MBA.
Maybe some day they'll be able to us an ARM chip that's fast enough to be competitive, but that's a long way in the future.
OTOH, I would not be the least bit surprised to see an iPad Pro which is a format like the MBA, but is essentially an iPad with a keyboard. But that would be in addition to the MBA - not a replacement.
You mentioned all these other things, including moving from 50nm to 20nm as PROOF that doubling their current RAM choice would lead to lower power use. You're either trolling or you didn't understand what you were writing and are now backtracking. Keep it up!
Again your english comprehension fails you. Move along, this conversation is way out of your grade level.
I'm tired of this 64-Bit is not useful unless you have 4GB of memory. This is not windows people, It's Unix. Less times needed to access the chip, lower heat, less battery being used. And using iMovie to compile the same trailer as an example between the iPhone 5 and iPhone 5s was done in half the time. I know this, because I did it. And why, oh why if it's not useful is Qualcomm and everyone else now planning on making a 64-Bit processor also??? Oh, that's not good, but we will also make one of those no good processors???? What????? I'm done.
Comments
More of the exact same RAM requires more power. This cannot be debated This is a fact! This is physics!
I don't think anyone here said that the only reason the iPhone 5S didn't get 2GB was due to it eating up too much power. Apple has a long and impressive history of balancing power with performance. The bottom line is that adding more RAM wouldn't have increased the user experience to make it worthwhile for them.
Nor would it have reduced the battery life by any noticeable margin.
Apple you better start looking for a new partner.
That's all true, but your argument doesn't really address the issue, either.
So Apple's use of 1 GB does save energy compared to 2 GB of the same RAM type.
Of course it does. I have yet to see how doubling the same of any component will use less power....... I'm not arguing that, I'm saying that doubling memory can be done in a power efficient manner when moving to new architecture/process.
Again I'm responding to (debunking) the post that blanket states that more RAM kills battery life.
A5 (on 4S) was 45nm with 512MB DDR2, A6 (on 5) was 32nm with 1GB DDR2. Ram was doubled (same type) but no appreciable change in battery life for same capacity of battery.
A7 went to 28nm and DDR3 ram, there was probably room to improve, even double DRAM size to 2GB without any major impact on battery life, but Apple chose not to for a variety of reasons.
Note the 5S battery is 1570mah vs 1440mah on 5, so there was plenty of room to grow SDRAM size if Apple had of wanted to.
Everything you wrote is complete rubbish. Your logic that Apple increased the battery size means they should have doubled the RAM is absolutely ridiculous. It's clear you have no concept of any of the tech they used.
Everything you wrote is complete rubbish. Your logic that Apple increased the battery size means they should have doubled the RAM is absolutely ridiculous. It's clear you have no concept of any of the tech they used.
Man you really seem to have a hard time comprehending english.
I said Apple "COULD" have doubled the ram if they had of "WANTED" to without "SERIOUSLY" affecting battery life.
It is clear that you are horribly confused.
What you said was that they could have doubled the RAM and it would would use less power. It was pointed out by me and others that it's impossible in this Universe to do that with everything else being the same.
What you said was that they could have doubled the RAM and it would would use less power. It was pointed out by me and others that it's impossible in this Universe to do that with everything else being the same.
You're being just stupid now. I said that a process change can allow a doubling of memory capacity and result in less power being used. I even gave a practical example where Samsung reduced the power consumption (by 67%) of 1GB SDRAM modules by going from DDR2 50nm to DDR3 20nm.
I further pointed out the process change in A7 from 32 to 28nm along with the DDR2 to DDR3 dram change, along with increased battery capacity in 5S, which COULD have allowed apple to double the SDRAM size with NO APPRECIABLE change in battery life, IF they had wanted to.
What part of that do you not understand?
To be fair, with only 1GB or RAM there is a limit as to how much of an advantage a 64 bit OS really is at this point....
However, it does sound like sour grapes at this point....
Sure, if you assume the only benefit of 64-bit is that you get to address more RAM, but it's not. Double-width general purpose registers is a huge boon. It mean's less data need be accessed from the CPU's cache or from RAM which means increased throughput.
Moving to a 64-bit processor could allow them to do so in the foreseeable future...move the manufacturing to TSMC and ditch Samsung and Intel in one fell-swoop...HOLY MOLY Batman!!!
He's lucky Steve isn't still around to hear him say that. With him, it'd be personal. Either he would lose his job or Apple would have a new supplier.
...
Unlikely. See how Apple is still buying from Samsung. Apple will still need Qualcomm for the foreseeable future.
They’ve done no such thing, ever.
Sounds like the GPU they commissioned was a waste of money, then.
You mentioned all these other things, including moving from 50nm to 20nm as PROOF that doubling their current RAM choice would lead to lower power use. You're either trolling or you didn't understand what you were writing and are now backtracking. Keep it up!
I don't recall there ever being an Apple A chip in any MBA. It's been Intel Core from the start.
Qualcomm isn't just a fab plant the way Samsung is, they hold their chip patents and design the chips that are used. I don't think Apple has any intention of getting into that business.
LOL I will be very surprised if Android is fully 64-bit when it finally launches.
Sorry I wasn't very clear, I didn't mean hybrid in that sence, more hybrid like the way they have the A7 AND the new M chip. As in off loading tasks to an A chip while keeping the Intel for things the A chip can't do, such as run a VM with Windows as just one example.
If Qualcomm has a CEO worth his salt this dimwitted chief marketing officer will be looking for a new job come Monday. At the latest!
There's no official evidence of that. There are rumors that they've done that, but "outstanding results" is undoubtedly an exaggeration. Even the fastest A7 is dog slow compared to the MBA.
Maybe some day they'll be able to us an ARM chip that's fast enough to be competitive, but that's a long way in the future.
OTOH, I would not be the least bit surprised to see an iPad Pro which is a format like the MBA, but is essentially an iPad with a keyboard. But that would be in addition to the MBA - not a replacement.
You mentioned all these other things, including moving from 50nm to 20nm as PROOF that doubling their current RAM choice would lead to lower power use. You're either trolling or you didn't understand what you were writing and are now backtracking. Keep it up!
Again your english comprehension fails you. Move along, this conversation is way out of your grade level.
First you backtrack and now you're throwing personal attacks. How's that working out for you?
And why, oh why if it's not useful is Qualcomm and everyone else now planning on making a 64-Bit processor also??? Oh, that's not good, but we will also make one of those no good processors????
What?????
I'm done.