Rumor: TSMC already finalizing 10nm 'A11' processor design for Apple's 'iPhone 7s'
Apple processor supplier TSMC is starting to tape out the design for an "A11" chip that could go into small-scale production as soon the second quarter of 2017, in preparation for that year's iPhones, a report said on Friday.
The chip design is based on the 10-nanometer FinFET process TSMC is still working on, sources claimed to DigiTimes. Certification for that process is only expected in the fourth quarter of 2016, and product samples would only be delivered to Apple in the following quarter.
The sources suggested that TSMC would likely control two-thirds of total "A11" orders, with the chips going into new iPhones shipping in the second half of 2017.
Although the report didn't specify which company would claim the remaining third, that would presumably be Samsung, which produces a portion of the A9 chips used in the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus. For many years the Korean company was the exclusive manufacturer of Apple's A-series processors.
Rumors have suggested that TSMC could be the sole producer of "A10" chips for iPhones shipping later this year. If so, it's not clear why Apple would already be planning to revert back to a two-supplier system, though price competition and/or capacity could be some reasons.
Current iPhones use 14- or 16-nanometer chip designs, depending on whether they're built by Samsung or TSMC. Shrinking die size further would allow not just for more compact designs, but better power efficiency. 7-nanometer chips could be a possibility for a 2018 "iPhone 8," although Apple might be forced to use 10-nanometer chips depending on supplier progress.
The chip design is based on the 10-nanometer FinFET process TSMC is still working on, sources claimed to DigiTimes. Certification for that process is only expected in the fourth quarter of 2016, and product samples would only be delivered to Apple in the following quarter.
The sources suggested that TSMC would likely control two-thirds of total "A11" orders, with the chips going into new iPhones shipping in the second half of 2017.
Although the report didn't specify which company would claim the remaining third, that would presumably be Samsung, which produces a portion of the A9 chips used in the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus. For many years the Korean company was the exclusive manufacturer of Apple's A-series processors.
Rumors have suggested that TSMC could be the sole producer of "A10" chips for iPhones shipping later this year. If so, it's not clear why Apple would already be planning to revert back to a two-supplier system, though price competition and/or capacity could be some reasons.
Current iPhones use 14- or 16-nanometer chip designs, depending on whether they're built by Samsung or TSMC. Shrinking die size further would allow not just for more compact designs, but better power efficiency. 7-nanometer chips could be a possibility for a 2018 "iPhone 8," although Apple might be forced to use 10-nanometer chips depending on supplier progress.
Comments
PS - a bit funny AI has made no mention of Tim Cooks forthcoming trip to China to talk to officials about 'stuff'. http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/6/11606412/apple-china-books-movies-tim-cook-visit
The A9x is already handle 4k content in the iPad Pro+!
Wonder if it will go into any Macs...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Thats what you and all the other trolls keep HOPING AND PRAYING for, but it still hasn't happened. Starting way back when Apple sued Samsung and people (idiots) were wondering how come Samsung doesn't cut off parts to Apple.
They would happily take the billions in revenue as they are businesspeople, not children.
I am not hoping or praying any such thing. However, you and all the other DED invective infected, ceaselessly bleat about your childish wish Apple would cease doing any business with Samsung and yet Apple themselves continue to do so, year after year, because they aren't so stupid and are actually the businesspeople you mentioned.
As for switchers, if Apple makes it possible to run adapted IOS Apps on OSX, then Windows will have what advantage on OSX?
Windows App development has slowed down A LOT in last few years; it's pretty stale really.
The world of now is not the world of 2006; there are 3.5B+ mobile devices out there, 1B of those being Apples!
Apple's not replacing all its range soon anyway. But, they're likely going to introduce a OSX Mac within 1-2 years.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Absolutely. Order of magnitude. The world computing landscape has changed. And in Apple's favour.
We're already seeing keyboards on 'iOS' computers. iPad Pro laptop? And on the regular iPad Pro too. Apple will be selling tens of millions of iPads. Now with keyboard. Many with a 'pencil.'
iPad apps. How many of them? They dwarf the Mac and rival Windows now.
I wonder what the computing landscape will look like with iOS11 and an A11 chip?
Pretty powerful. Apple are already casting a shadow over the chips in the Macbook. The glacial rate of 'Skylake' and predecessors are staring down the barrel of A chips that are closing the gap alarmingly!
Lemon Bon Bon.
It will be done differently going forward, different than Rosetta.... We already have seen the first baby steps, and I expect we might see another step at WWDC.
What were the first steps.
- Introduction of Clang compiler using LLVM as an intermediary.... LLVM takes the sudo assembly language code and generates either ARM based (iOS) binary or Intel based (OS X) binaries from it. Basically the intermediate form is what is I think known as "bitcode".
- Last year the change to upload application binaries along with bitcode which would allow future optimizations to be generated into binaries with performance improvements. What this really means is that the app store could be changed to generate application binaries for both ARM and Intel based Macs.
I expect a few more moves this WWDC, hopefully a way of packaging applications in bitcode that are generated into binaries during installation -- which would allow applications not sold through the app store to also be transportable.
Once all that is in place - it would allow Apple to introduce different processor architected Macs (Intel, ARM) -- while mostly hiding the difference from the customer.... They would be able to buy a Macbook with an ARM processor, and download and install the apps that they used on the Intel versioned Macs without really having to understand the difference between the two.
The only thing that would be limited would be VMWare Fusion and Parallels would not be able to function in the same manner and may not be available (unless of course they built a processor emulator layer running at maybe 40% to 50% the native speed). I actually do use VMWare Fusion - for Linux / Oracle Database... but most people don't really need that ability and most don't install Windows.
This would allow their laptops (starting with a Macbook) to run on Ax processors, while still having much more powerful Intel Macs in the same lineup with a minimum of confusion.
Though whether it matters for Apple to try something similar for a 10nm process?
With 1 billion 'Mac' devices out there (I count iPhone and iPads as basically 'Macs'. They are. It's not a phone in your pocket. It's a Mac for the rest of us...) Apple have an ecosphere that now eclipses Windows and is going to run it over going forwards.
selling 4-5 million Macs per quarter. Ten million iPads. 50 million plus iPhones. 65 million 'macs' per quarter. That's some steamroller.
They're all 'X' at heart.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Apple isn't going to stop selling x86 as long as there is demand for Windows. At the same time, Windows is dying by a thousand paper cuts to mobile; the future for Apple is iOS, et al, not OS X.
Please find a single comment by me where I ever stated Apple should drop Samsung. You won't because I've always maintained the position that Apple should purchase from whoever can supply the necessary parts in the quantities they need (including Samsung).
BTW, Samsung and TSMC would both produce small quantities for someone like Apple. What do you think "sampling" is? Here's a hint: It's when a fab produces smaller batches of a component so a company (Apple, Nvidia, AMD) can try them out and see if they meet their requirements. Here's another hint: the fab has to perform the same amount of work (taping out, getting lines ready) to produce samples as they would to produce in quantity. There's no shortcut to making samples.
And Apple WOULD ask them to do so, and it's not childish. It's called competition. Samsung and TSMC could both be asked to produce samples for Apple, and they would both know that whoever produced the better chips would get the orders (perhaps the entire order or maybe just a larger percentage of the order).