Inside iPhone 8: Apple's A11 Bionic introduces 5 new custom silicon engines

1356

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 119
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,563member
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.


    More like when will Google stop pushing their own inferior standards down everyone's throat and use the industry accepted HEVC (h.265) instead?
    AFAIK, HEVC is entirely free to the viewer, so I'm not seeing that this is any issue for Google other than additional control of it's YouTube media ecosystem on the creation/upload side, and a relatively small license fee for HEVC content delivery.

    I'm sure that Gatorguy will provide the details at some point.

    Still, lots of YouTube content loses nothing at 480P, so me being forced to watch anything at 1080P quality in lieu of 4k isn't going to cause me any grief.
    StrangeDayscali
  • Reply 42 of 119
    jbm3 said:
    I am curious if Apple has removed hardware support for 32-bit instructions from the A11 chip, now that iOS11 doesn't support 32 bit apps.  It would be a way to save chip space.  If so, perhaps the same will happen to x86 CPUs in Macs in a few years (if Intel or AMD agree). 
    Somebody else posted here that it was the libraries in iOS that support 32-bit code that got removed.

    I don't believe that desktop processors will ever shut out 32-bit instructions.  I believe that there is FAR too much legacy 32-bit software that nobody wants to try and modify.  Saving chip space and power is less of a concern in that hardware.
    netmage
  • Reply 43 of 119
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,563member
    ph382 said:
    jbm3 said:
    I am curious if Apple has removed hardware support for 32-bit instructions from the A11 chip, now that iOS11 doesn't support 32 bit apps.  It would be a way to save chip space.  If so, perhaps the same will happen to x86 CPUs in Macs in a few years (if Intel or AMD agree). 
    Somebody else posted here that it was the libraries in iOS that support 32-bit code that got removed.

    I don't believe that desktop processors will ever shut out 32-bit instructions.  I believe that there is FAR too much legacy 32-bit software that nobody wants to try and modify.  Saving chip space and power is less of a concern in that hardware.
    It is happening to MacOS as well, High Sierra being the last version to fully support 32 bit "without compromise", but any current Intel powered Mac should be able to run Windows 32bit either through boot or through Parallels.

    I'm guessing that lots of legacy code is "cruft" that is better off dead.

    edited September 2017
  • Reply 44 of 119
    So if I record video using HEVC, does that mean friends without an iPhone 8 (or above) may not be able to view it? When I post the video to Facebook, does it remain in HEVC or does it convert to a more commonly available format?
  • Reply 45 of 119
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,563member
    So if I record video using HEVC, does that mean friends without an iPhone 8 (or above) may not be able to view it? When I post the video to Facebook, does it remain in HEVC or does it convert to a more commonly available format?

    The following is from June, but it's likely still accurate;

    https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/08/ios-11s-new-heifhevc-camera-formats-will-save-you-50-on-storage/


    "If you’re currently running iOS 11 beta 1, you can verify this by switching between the High Efficiencyand Most Compatible formats under iOS Settings → Camera → Formats. Under the High Efficiency format, images will be saved as HEIC and movies as an HEVC .mov file. Under Most Compatible, images will be saved as JPGs and movies as an h.264 .mov file.

    In testing I went out at night and took a photo and video of the New York City skyline. The outputted JPG image weighed in at 2 MB, while the HEIC image came in at 1.2 MB. Similarly, the h.264 encoded video was 61.2 MB, while the h.265 (HEVC) video was 33 MB."

    Essentially, it you want to share widely, then use h,264. If you want to shoot in H.265 and later transcode to H.264, there may be iOS apps for that, but otherwise, it could be easily done on a desktop. I personally wouldn't want to spend much time transcoding on a mobile device, other than for short clips.

  • Reply 46 of 119
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.

    They don't want the battery life hit or the extra resources (and compromises in other areas) it takes to avoid that hit with hardware acceleration.  Apple is big enough that their requirement of the industry standard H.265 will ensure content is available in that format.
    edited September 2017 tmaymizhouargonaut
  • Reply 47 of 119
    HEIF video can be transcoded to H.264
    HEIF is only for still images, and is the "successor" to JPEG in iOS. For video it's HEVC.
    The quoted sentence should therefore be "HEVC video can be transcoded to H.264" or
    "
    HEIF image can be transcoded to jpeg"
  • Reply 48 of 119
    palegolas said:
    Today I've been recording in the new High Efficiency mode on my iPad Pro 10.5", and then played back the files on the Mac (Mac OS 10.12.6). First of all, QuickTime Player plays the files fine. It looks good. But QuickTime Player says it's h.264. Is this just wrong, or is Apple's "High Efficiency" something else than HEVC (which i was under the impression was h.265). Has HEVC moved into the h.264 standard?
    Also, these High Efficiency recordings do not play back very well on my iPhone 6 plus. They play, but very choppy. Even the 1080 ones. Either iOS 11 optimisations for older phones is needed, or it's just the nature of the new algorithms.. Too heavy for iPhone 6.
    If I understand the technology correctly, it won’t work on your Mac until the High Sierra Update. Otherwise it changes to H.264 which it’ll default to on any incompatible device/system. At least, that’s my understanding of how it works. So, check again after updating to High Sierra tomorrow.
    palegolas
  • Reply 49 of 119
    crosslad said:
    "Google  - aimed at hitting an average selling price of less than $300—Android One phones have an aggressive price target of $100." 

    Not entirely true nowadays; the Pixel phones were priced the same as the iPhones and the new MotoX4, running Android One is around $400. This has got to be good for Apple. I would not pay the same price for an android phone as an iPhone. Now that Apple has phones at every price point  I can only see Apple sales increasing.

    Average selling price of Androids, including Pixel, is actually below $200. Even Samsung’s ASP, which includes its premium-priced Galaxy phones that sell in the 10s of millions, is now at $227. 

    http://www.androidauthority.com/price-gap-samsung-apple-smartphones-769772/

    This isn’t a new development. iPhone ASP has been pretty constant at or above $650 while Androids have have been below $300 since 2013. 

    Having a vanity model that sells in tiny quantities has little impact on an average, whether Pixel or Virtu. 



    tmayStrangeDayspscooter63loquiturcalibrucemcargonaut
  • Reply 50 of 119
    wizard69 said:
    I'd like to know how they lowered power while increasing performance in the GPU for one.
    Avieshek said:
    From TSMC's higher Fabrication Processes.

    Avieshek has a valid point there, and also the article mentioned that Apple earlier used graphics hardware from other (Imagination Tech) that had support for decoding WMV and other formats. Even if Apple didn't use these features in earlier hardware, I guess there were a lot of transistors on those chips that consumed some power, even though they weren't in use.

    If Apple just builds a chip with exactly what is needed, then they can also make that chip more power efficient.

  • Reply 51 of 119
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,119member
    AMD and now Nvidia also licence out their patents, and they both manage tile based rendering without Imagination, so I wonder if one of them got a royalty deal from Apple to use TBR. 
  • Reply 52 of 119
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,563member
    crosslad said:
    "Google  - aimed at hitting an average selling price of less than $300—Android One phones have an aggressive price target of $100." 

    Not entirely true nowadays; the Pixel phones were priced the same as the iPhones and the new MotoX4, running Android One is around $400. This has got to be good for Apple. I would not pay the same price for an android phone as an iPhone. Now that Apple has phones at every price point  I can only see Apple sales increasing.

    Average selling price of Androids, including Pixel, is actually below $200. Even Samsung’s ASP, which includes its premium-priced Galaxy phones that sell in the 10s of millions, is now at $227. 

    http://www.androidauthority.com/price-gap-samsung-apple-smartphones-769772/

    This isn’t a new development. iPhone ASP has been pretty constant at or above $650 while Androids have have been below $300 since 2013. 

    Having a vanity model that sells in tiny quantities has little impact on an average, whether Pixel or Virtu. 



    The few members of the Church of Marketshare on AI will not acknowledge those facts.
    ericthehalfbeeStrangeDays
  • Reply 53 of 119
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,119member
    Speaking of the custom SSD controller, has anyone seen benchmarks of its storage yet? The 7 mostly stayed where the 6S was, which was still ahead of the industry, curious if it advanced again now. 
  • Reply 54 of 119
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.
    Why would Apple support Google codecs? Does Apple support Flash? No, but we can still use Flash thanks to the Flash plug-in on macOS. We use Microsoft's Silverlight plug-in to watch Netflix. Google must just provide its own plug-in for its codec. If it provides its own codec for tvOS and Apple refuses that then we may question that. But since Google doesn't provide a plug-in for macOS, it is most probably that it doesn't provide a codec for tvOS either. They might well implement it in their YouTube tvOS app. So the truth is not Apple does not support Google's codecs, the truth is Google's YouTube app does not support Google's own 4K codec on tvOS. If I'm wrong and it supports then correct me.
    You are wrong. Siverlight and flash are not "codecs" and I'm not going to explain the difference here. Netflix delivers H.264 / H.265 to all it's devices, same for youtube - except youtube 4k. Google is using VP9 instead hvec h.265 for 4k content delivery, so it's a different codec and would require different hardware decoder than H.265. Most GPUs support both VP9 and H265 hardware decoding- the question here is does Apple's A10 support hardware VP9 decoding ? I don't know, but can the CPU/GPU handle real-time software VP9 decoding? Only apple knows, and that's the point. 
    It's not on google to support the AppleTV 4k, it's on apple to support the VP9 codec... 
    edited September 2017 avon b7
  • Reply 55 of 119
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,563member
    apple_evo said:
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.
    Why would Apple support Google codecs? Does Apple support Flash? No, but we can still use Flash thanks to the Flash plug-in on macOS. We use Microsoft's Silverlight plug-in to watch Netflix. Google must just provide its own plug-in for its codec. If it provides its own codec for tvOS and Apple refuses that then we may question that. But since Google doesn't provide a plug-in for macOS, it is most probably that it doesn't provide a codec for tvOS either. They might well implement it in their YouTube tvOS app. So the truth is not Apple does not support Google's codecs, the truth is Google's YouTube app does not support Google's own 4K codec on tvOS. If I'm wrong and it supports then correct me.
    You are wrong. Siverlight and flash are not "codecs" and I'm not going to explain the difference here. Netflix delivers H.264 / H.265 to all it's devices, same for youtube - except youtube 4k. Google is using VP9 instead hvec h.265 for 4k content delivery, so it's a different codec and would require different hardware decoder than H.265. Most GPUs support both VP9 and H265 hardware decoding- the question here is does Apple's A10 support hardware VP9 decoding ? I don't know, but can the CPU/GPU handle real-time software VP9 decoding? Only apple knows, and that's the point. 
    It's not on google to support the AppleTV 4k, it's on apple to support the VP9 codec... 
    Actually, since the industry standard is h.265, I'm not seeing that its Apple's problem to offer what was at one time, and still may be, a less efficient codec in VP9.
    edited September 2017 ericthehalfbeeronnStrangeDayspscooter63argonaut
  • Reply 56 of 119
    apple_evo said:
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.
    Why would Apple support Google codecs? Does Apple support Flash? No, but we can still use Flash thanks to the Flash plug-in on macOS. We use Microsoft's Silverlight plug-in to watch Netflix. Google must just provide its own plug-in for its codec. If it provides its own codec for tvOS and Apple refuses that then we may question that. But since Google doesn't provide a plug-in for macOS, it is most probably that it doesn't provide a codec for tvOS either. They might well implement it in their YouTube tvOS app. So the truth is not Apple does not support Google's codecs, the truth is Google's YouTube app does not support Google's own 4K codec on tvOS. If I'm wrong and it supports then correct me.
    You are wrong. Siverlight and flash are not "codecs" and I'm not going to explain the difference here. Netflix delivers H.264 / H.265 to all it's devices, same for youtube - except youtube 4k. Google is using VP9 instead hvec h.265 for 4k content delivery, so it's a different codec and would require different hardware decoder than H.265. Most GPUs support both VP9 and H265 hardware decoding- the question here is does Apple's A10 support hardware VP9 decoding ? I don't know, but can the CPU/GPU handle real-time software VP9 decoding? Only apple knows, and that's the point. 
    It's not on google to support the AppleTV 4k, it's on apple to support the VP9 codec... 
    Stop posting general information. Everyone using Flash and Silverlight know that they are not codecs, but codecs may be implemented in them. Flash plug-in supports a lot of codecs. Codecs can be implemented as Safari plugins as well, as Flash is an example. Here is where you're wrong/uninformed: you think that VP9 does not run on A10 because A10 can't run such a code. This is dumb wrong, if VP9 is implemented in software A10 can of course run it. Give an appropriately compiled code to a CPU it can run everything. The hardware support you mention is just a "benevolence" of chip producers, Intel, Apple or others may implement H.264, H.265, VP9, VP1000... or none of these, this is at their discretion. If they don't implement any of these codecs their products don't lose CPU/GPU character. Of course A10 can handle real-time software VP9 decoding, why wouldn't it? There is a lot of codecs not implemented in the CPU yet we can run almost all of them in Macs and iOS thanks to appropriate plug-ins or apps since many years. The H.265 standard doesn't require to be implemented in hardware, Apple could implement it as software as well and it still would run on A10. If writing that software VP9 codec is extremely difficult for Google for reasons such as device capabilities, security model and alike, then this is their content's problem. Content must match the device, the device is not obligated to match the content. "I have a GreenRay movie at 40K why don't you produce GreenRay players that would run my movie?". That's stupid, don't say that anywhere else...
    tmayronnpscooter63
  • Reply 57 of 119
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.
    Maybe on a Mac or AppleTV, but decoding 4K video is rather computational intensive, and therefore Apple has implemented h.265 decoding in hardware on the iPhone. While it may be free of licensing costs to use VP9, implementing a hardware decoder for it is not.
    Therefore Apple can implement it in software, but that means the video might lag, because its too computational intensive to decode in software, or even if it's fast enough it will have a negative impact on the power consumption and battery life.

    I think it's better if every streaming service could agree on one standard like HEVC.
    tmayronn
  • Reply 58 of 119
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,032member
    mizhou said:
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.
    Maybe on a Mac or AppleTV, but decoding 4K video is rather computational intensive, and therefore Apple has implemented h.265 decoding in hardware on the iPhone. While it may be free of licensing costs to use VP9, implementing a hardware decoder for it is not.
    Therefore Apple can implement it in software, but that means the video might lag, because its too computational intensive to decode in software, or even if it's fast enough it will have a negative impact on the power consumption and battery life.

    I think it's better if every streaming service could agree on one standard like HEVC.
    Yeah, I don't see Apple supporting VP9 in SW. We should also get rid of this notion of "free" when it comes to codecs. Even if Alphabet said that they would cover any and all lawsuits that cropped up from using their "free" codec there's still a cost and complexity involved with being strong armed by YouTube's dominance to use a lesser video codec so they can increase their monopoly through their "free" today but we'll bleed you dry tomorrow model.
    mizhoutmayronnpscooter63argonaut
  • Reply 59 of 119
    apple_evo said:
    melgross said:
    It will be interesting to see whether Apple decides to support Google’s codecs. It’s up to Apple to do that. Since it’s free to support, I can’t see why they wouldn’t, unless it just corporate rivalry on their part.

    remember that Apple never supported FLAC for music either, but now they do. So that’s a change.
    Why would Apple support Google codecs? Does Apple support Flash? No, but we can still use Flash thanks to the Flash plug-in on macOS. We use Microsoft's Silverlight plug-in to watch Netflix. Google must just provide its own plug-in for its codec. If it provides its own codec for tvOS and Apple refuses that then we may question that. But since Google doesn't provide a plug-in for macOS, it is most probably that it doesn't provide a codec for tvOS either. They might well implement it in their YouTube tvOS app. So the truth is not Apple does not support Google's codecs, the truth is Google's YouTube app does not support Google's own 4K codec on tvOS. If I'm wrong and it supports then correct me.

    It's not on google to support the AppleTV 4k, it's on apple to support the VP9 codec... 

    Sorry, but this is all Google. HEVC is the dominant standard and superior to VP9. Google is trying to use the popularity of YouTube to try and force the industry to use VP9. Apple was smart and picked HEVC. Apple is big enough that going with HEVC pretty much guarantees HEVC wins the codec wars and VP9 loses.

    Awhile ago Google tried to use YouTube to get people to sign up for Google+, requiring you to sign up in order to post comments. It failed spectacularly and they later dropped it.

    Google is trying the same with VP9. It will also fail.
    tmayronnmizhouStrangeDayspscooter63caliargonaut
  • Reply 60 of 119
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,057member
    Folio said:

    Funny how the depth and breadth of 10th anniversary rollout— phenomenal to most of us partisans— so far eludes general appreciation. But that’s just a momentary hiccup, so I hope.

    Appreciate the insight on the processors. Look forward to a series: AI on AI. Perhaps also consider initiating a quarterly comparison: Sets of questions and answers to Siri, Alexa, Google Asst, Cortana, Bixby.

    I recently did 2400 mile road trip in California and Arizona. My travel buddy used Galaxy/Verizon/Google and I had iPhone5s/12.9iPadPro on T-Mobile. Verizon coverage noticeably superior outside of cities. Siri did fine, except for glaring misdirection to Sequoia National Park, taking us up by Edison Lake instead, so we missed seeing the gargantuan trees this trip, but at least hiked great lake with mountain air.

    Another time I asked Siri driving distance from Tucson to Phoenix. Instead of a simple quick answer, it demanded I turn on location services. Grrrr. In my dream, Siri would have traits like a concierge in a world class hotel and not talk back, let alone be impertinent. Note: I’ve not yet used new Siri.

    A recent brokerage report (BAML 31AUG2017 on Google Traffic Acquisition Costs) estimates Google pays Apple $4billion plus each year in TAC fees. That’s US$4,000,000,000 plus to tap each of us in Apple’s ecosystem. Google’s iOS recent assistant app, while it may help Apple retain any users who would otherwise defect to Android for the assistant, likely is a foot in the door to reduce annual TAC payments from Google to Apple.

    If Apple makes more Siri experiences superior or near frictionless, with consent tailored to its individual users, then it can not only protect TAC fees but gain more lucrative share in e-commerce from Google, Amazon, etc. Recent internal moves, though late in coming, are encouraging, and HomePod visibility means Siri development can’t languish anymore. Game on.

    Bionic chip processing power for AR/VR could be a differentiator for Apple mobile for next few years in buying fitted clothes, shower curtains, sofas, views from/of hotel rooms, maybe even head room in cars or leg room on airline seats. Question is how fast sellers ramp up.

    Is there a "new" SIRI that comes with the iPhone 8/8Plus or iPhoneX?    I use a iPhoneSE and 5SI.     SIRI has always worked like crap for me.    It's so frustrating that
    after all these years it still seems to be in beta.  Its because of SIRI that I'm not interested in CARPLAY , the apple watch, or AirPods.   I'm very curious and hopeful about the HomePod.   Hopefully there will be a SIRI in it that works as good as my Alexa (Amazon is beating Google on the hardware front-The Pixel 2 rumors make it sound like a pathetic Sophomore edition).

    Is there anything new (hardware or software wise) in the iPhone 8/8Plus/X that makes SIRI really work better.   Apple has added a notchful of sensors to the X for FaceID? Is there a new sensor to help SIRI work better.

    I've long thought that Apple aims for an A+ on display quality, A+ on core iOS Software, A+ on build quality, A- on Design,  B+ on audio, but a C on SIRI.   
    Looking forward to when SIRI has been improved by those aquisitions that DED has often pointed out.
    williamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.