Apple's 64-bit A7 already powering advanced new audio, video features in apps and games

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 98
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by winstein2010 View Post

     

    I think many critics of A7 were jaded by Microsoft's slow and awkward transition from 32 to 64 bit, as well Intel's insistence of a separate product architecture for the 64-bit processor initially.  Many people also don't understand the difference between 64-bit address space (memory) and 64-bit instruction set (code).

     

    Because Apple controls the processor architecture as well the OS and the App Store ecosystem, only Apple can pull this off and establish it in what seems like a short time frame.


     

    The A7 instructions are still 32-bits wide.

  • Reply 42 of 98

    Not sure I buy all the Note 3 battery 2x times IP5s  etc etc. Pretty much everyone knows that the display is the biggest drain on battery any you can be pretty sure that the note 3's 5.7in screen is a major juice sucker.

  • Reply 43 of 98
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

     

    Not sure I buy all the Note 3 battery 2x times IP5s  etc etc. Pretty much everyone knows that the display is the biggest drain on battery any you can be pretty sure that the note 3's 5.7in screen is a major juice sucker.


     

    Bigger screen means a much bigger battery. Despite the screen requiring more power, the increase on battery capacity is higher, much higher.

  • Reply 44 of 98
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

     

     

    The A7 instructions are still 32-bits wide.


     

    But "in theory" you execute 2 32-bit instructions during each 64-bit "cycle"

  • Reply 45 of 98
    Bigger screen means a much bigger battery. Despite the screen requiring more power, the increase on battery capacity is higher, much higher.
    I was referring specifically to the portion of the article that implied that the A7 was super efficient because they lasted the same time, but the note had double the battery capacity. This is a useless statement without out factoring in the massive display on the note 3. On a larger device you have more room for a bigger capacity battery, the end result is the same to the user, they both last the same time.
  • Reply 46 of 98
    But "in theory" you execute 2 32-bit instructions during each 64-bit "cycle"
    .
    No.
  • Reply 47 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    First let me put in writing this thought - I'm shocked at the quality of this piece. It is the first DED article I've been able to read all the way through and not roll my eyes once. This is a fine example of what written articles should be on AI!
    apple ][ wrote: »
    A damn iPhone is far more powerful than some laptops that people owned not that long ago. The amount of computing power that people now carry around in their pockets is insane! Mobile devices are only getting more powerful, and we're going to start seeing more and more desktop class apps being released. Just imagine how ridiculously powerful an iPhone or iPad is going to be in a few years time, not that they're too shabby now, mind you.
    Sadly, well not really sad for the current times, but my iPhone 4 is probably more powerful than 75% of all the computers I've ever owned. That was a lot of money spent over the years that can't hold a candle to an iPhone 4 much less a modern Apple device.
    Apple is definitely looking towards the future with their 64 bit chips, and as usual, the monkey see, monkey do crowd is going to follow suit.
    I don't really think that is fair to say. Everybody knows that 64 bit ARM is coming, the mobile suppliers have been working on it for some time. Apple just beat everybody to it by a significant margin.
    Tim Cook had barely stepped off of the stage, and in what seemed like five minutes later, Scamsung was quick to announce that they too were going 64 bit, but they admitted that it was not coming any time soon in any of their phones. I can also safely predict that their transition will be a total mess, since this is Android that we're talking about after all. Nobody can do super smooth transitions like Apple can. And nobody's user base and developer base is as quick to adopt as Apple's user base is. Hell, I'm sure that you already know this, but iOS 7 was just recently released and the adoption rate is already crazy.
    It might be good entertainment in the future to watch 64 bit unfold on other platforms. You are absolutely right though, Apple has mastered transitions like this. I haven't heard of one 64 bit related glitch yet.
    I will most likely be getting an iPad 5 in 3-4 weeks, if all goes according to plan, and while the A7 chip is no doubt great, I would like to see something even slightly better in the iPad, an A7x chip, like they have done in the past for previous iPads. We'll see.
    I'm actually skipping iPhone for now as I'm far more interested in iPad. Like you I'm very interested in what A7 will look like in the iPad. Will they just use the current A7, or perhaps an up clocked model. Or maybe they do have an A7X in development with significantly better performance. Obviously I don't know but I have to imagine that an A7X is in the works to better support graphics and enhance performance a bit. This especially the case if a 12-13" iPad is in the works.

    However experience with my iPad 3 highlights that something more important than the processor needs to be upgraded. That would be the RAM installed, 1GB just isn't enough in a tablet and at the very least needs to be updated to 2GB or better yet 4GB. For one Safari would work much better if we didn't have those constant tab reloads, that is a memory issue. Of course I'm not going to knock better processor performance but I do think Apple needs to look at where iPad comes up short in common usage. So give us an A7X coupled to at least 2GB of RAM.

    In any event it think this new machine will be a huge overhaul! The iPad 5 leaks, the few that have happened, seem to indicate that nothing is left untouched in the new machine.
  • Reply 48 of 98
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    jonbirge wrote: »
    There is no evidence that any of these gains are coming from 64 bit versus 32 bit.

    Whether that's true or not, it's irrelevant.

    Apple created a chip with incredible performance. It has 64 bits, more registers, etc. Why would the user care about exactly how much was contributed to performance by each feature?
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Are you thinking they could maybe include a detachable keyboard and some way to support the display when used on the desktop? Perhaps tweak the OS to better run familiar Mac apps optimized for the "pro" iPad?

    I don't know. My guess is that it would not have a detachable keyboard and would look a lot like the current MBA, but who knows?
  • Reply 49 of 98
    Apple has done it again. It redefined the word, "Gimmick", and made it magical!
  • Reply 50 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    mausz wrote: »
    64 bit is a bit of a gimmick, what really matters is the ARMv8 support.... But try selling that to customers....
    Isn't ARMv8 closely tied to 64 bit? In any event it isn't so much a gimmick as it is marketing with something people can grasp on to. The enhanced architecture of the chip is part of what leads to this wonderful performance on the iPhone 5s. 64 bit plays a crucial role in delivering that performance.
    Only problem I see here is fragmentation...If the difference is this large, won't we get 5s only apps ?

    That has already happened, but honestly I don't see why you see it as a problem. Most apps I run today wouldn't have a chance in hell of running well on my iPhone 3G and I'm still using an iPhone 4. Further some of my iPad apps can't run on my iPhone, it is the nature of the beast really technology moves forward and eventually old stuff can't keep up.

    To address your concern in another way, I would expect Apple to have an all 64 bit lineup by this time next year. That includes iPod Touch. It would be good for marketing and good for developers. Actually good for users too. The sooner they do this the sooner they can cut off all 32 bit support in iOS. Cutting 32 bit support will just result in a leaner OS, better usage of RAM, and gives Apple the ability to drop 32 bit support in future processors. I could see A10 refactored into a 64 bit only processor with no legacy support at all.
  • Reply 51 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    First let me put in writing this thought - I'm shocked at the quality of this piece. It is the first DED article I've been able to read all the way through and not roll my eyes once. This is a fine example of what written articles should be on AI!

    I rolled my eyes at this portion..

     

    "As a result, Apple's iPhone 5s delivers performance equal or better performance to Samsung's latest large phablet, despite the Note 3 being equipped with twice the system RAM, a system clock running twice as fast and a battery over twice as large (3,200 mAh vs 1570 mAh in the iPhone 5s). It's not only faster (above), but vastly more efficient, allowing iPhone 5s to beat the Note 3 in battery life when browsing the web over LTE (below). "

     

    Without taking the massive screen difference into consideration, this is just pure fanboy speak. As an example the IP5s has a 5wh battery, the iPad 4 has a 42wh battery. They both (on LTE) last about the same time on web browsing test. Does this mean that the IP5 is vastly more efficient than the iPad 4? It does but you're comparing apples to oranges. The screen is a huge differentiator.

     

    This "vastly more efficient" device gets an extra 20 minutes after 8 hrs of use.

  • Reply 52 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    This chip is so badass, there's so much potential!
    Potential is the key here. Interestingly the software writers are leveraging that potential very quickly.
    I'm not even thinking about the a8, I'm just waiting for a a7x. What will that beast do graphic's wise?
    And that's when I cry.
    Cry? I laugh and giggle a little bit about the thought of such a machine. The idea is very pleasurable to say the least.
    They can't take advantage of it now, because it would destroy older iPads. Oh well, future proof at least, even with 1gb ram.
    Destroy older iPads? You state that like it is a bad thing, this is exactly what you want Apple to do, that is keep the iPad well out in front of the competition.

    By the way iPad 5 could really use 2GB of RAM at the least. Doubling RAM should help a lot of apps with performance.

    Who here is, in secret, hoping for Apple to release an a7 or a7x (oh boy oh boy!) on the iPad mini?

    Secret? Not a chance, I will state for everyone to hear that I want to see Apple 64 bit chips in all of its iOS devices as soon as possible. An A7 in the iPad Mini would really be something though, I'm not even sure that machine needs an X variant. It might if the Mini goes retina but in the current form an A7 would be awesome, especially if the clock gets bumped a bit.
  • Reply 53 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Apple has smashed them.
    Literally hit one out of the ball park.
    Intriguing that Apple wants the iOS and Mac OS X 64 bit binaries/code lines up. But is it?

    It's 'X' afterall. iOS is just 'X' when it comes down to it.
    Actually it makes good sense for Apple. It helps with development tools production for one. I do hope that people don't read to much into that blurb. IOS was designed to be Mac OS/X on an cell phone from day one so it would be foolish to diverge from that idea for a 64 bit chip.
    Some of the apps so far are just incredible. Desktop class performance.

    With the iPad 5 with A7 X chip ....
    Don't - I say don't get me started with day dreaming here. The idea of an iPad with that sort of chip, more RAM and hopefully more storage just overwhelms me and results in day dreaming about the possibilities.
    ...this is just the beginning. (With Intel's 5-10% gains on cpus every 12-18 months...and Apple's double iOS cpu gains and with an app store with software in a more efficient blue print...the performance gap is going to narrow markedly in the next two years.)

    Lemon Bon Bon.

    What performance gap? With things that actually sell well Apple is way out in front. There are already predictions of a very dismal Christmas season for the i86 world. If Apples performance gap is against a market that is collapsing as we speak, then is that a bad thing?
  • Reply 54 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    PDRPRTScom wrote: »
    inspiring. great article.

    and the ultimate estimate may be

    ios x / os xi

    will definitely sooner than later be combined.

    crossing fingers for 2015

    I really don't see this ever happening. Mac OS, especially in the professional arena can't be bound up like iOS.
  • Reply 55 of 98
    Apple TV a7 = next gen console
  • Reply 56 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    … just stupid.
    That about covers it! ????????????????????
  • Reply 57 of 98
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

     

     

    This is a really good article DED overall, but that part is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. Clearly powering a screen almost 6in at a higher resolution is going to require more energy than one using 4in for something like browsing. The end experience shows both devices getting somewhere 8+ hours, so that doesn't prove much of anything from the end perspective. You would have to dig deeper into a PPW metric to expose efficiency. (Maybe they should start doing that)

    Think of it this way, no one will be surprised a Camry will cover a few more miles on a complete tank of gas than a Camero despite have a smaller tank. We don't look at it that way, we use MPG to level the field. 


     

    ......  "Clearly powering a screen almost 6in at a higher resolution is going to require more energy than one using 4in for something like browsing". ....  You "missed" (unintentionally, I'm sure) a very important point, 'tho ... a 6in screen device is certainly going to have a larger battery and other components (4 core x 2 core, maybe) than a 4in device .... but the Apple 5s still outperforms them. Now that's impressive.

     

  • Reply 58 of 98
    alfiejralfiejr Posts: 1,524member

    the next even bigger step is the A7 iPad coming very soon ... certainly the full size iPad. and will we see a Mini-S too?

  • Reply 59 of 98
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Perhaps you are just gullible. If not that considering this is your second post maybe you are on Samsungs payroll. Either way nothing you say is completely valid below.
    jonbirge wrote: »
    There is no evidence that any of these gains are coming from 64 bit versus 32 bit.
    Actually there is evidence, Anandtech did some benchmarking that highlighted a few tests where the advantage of 64 bit support was measured. 64 bit results in a not insignificant speed up for many apps and as such contributes to that enhanced performance.
    They are coming from other changes made simultaneous to the jump to 64 bit.
    Doesn't that generally happen with any new generation of processor? In any event those changes are only part of the reason A7 is doing so well in new apps.
    The reason 32 bit apps run slower is that they are running in the old instruction set on the chip's compatibility mode.
    Except that it runs faster than Apples last generation chip which was no slouch at all compared to the rest of the industry. Oh and by the way, why would you even expect that a compatibility mode would be a high performance mode.
    ARM probably could've made the core 32 bit and left in everything else and gotten the same gains.
    Nope, not a chance. Apple is already leveraging the 64 bit features in this hardware to allow for performance gains not possible in a device that is a 32 bit machine. The 64 bit nature of this chip, or any 64 bit chip for that matter, lends itself to optimizations that can't be carried out on 32 bit hardware.
    So, it wasn't really apples choice to go to 64, but ARM's.
    How can you even make that statement? You have no idea which vendors where pushing hard or hardest to get ARM to make a 64 bit platform. It wasn't just Apple desiring a 64 bit ARM architecture.
    On the other hand, apple did choose to market 64 bit as a advantage, and Qualcom's chief is right to call BS.
    Qualcom got caught with its pants down, the chiefs response was at best childish and ill conceived especially when the software industry is leveraging the chip within weeks of release. There is no BS in results and developers are getting very good results from A7.
    Perhaps he knows a bit more than those of you commenting here.
    He is a marketing drone, the only thing they know how to work with is whiskey and cheap woman. He obviously doesn't understand the technology here. Further he is choosing to ignore the rapid gains in A7 optimized software. So honestly who do you believe a marketing drone trying to protect his company or a whole series of developers demonstrating superior performance from their apps?
  • Reply 60 of 98
    @mausz if you still think 64-bit in iOS 7 is a gimmick, I'd suggest you read about the way pointers are laid out in iOS and how the obcj runtime has been been updated, particularly with respect to the use of the extra bits in the isa field to store inline reference counts. Very cool stuff, with a very real impact on software performance that's possible not because of the V8 instruction set but because the width of pointers has doubled.
Sign In or Register to comment.