SemiAccurate, for whatever their reputation is worth (so...Mound of salt, here), is staking their reputation on a 50% increase per core. Now that would be a mighty impressive feat, given that they're already up there with Intel size execution windows, but given the density, power, and clock speed improvements of the 7nm fab, maybe, if all those things were used towards peak power...
SemiAccurate is saying +50% per Hz or +50% per core from A11 to A12 cores?
The former is basically impossible for generic integer/FP code or on average across a variety of loads, especially when it’s limited to a 5W environments. It could be done for narrow cases by adding more and SIMD units or an extra FP unit, etc, with only a few loads that can take advantage of it, but if on average, a lot of people will think it is tantamount to magic.
The latter is doable if TSMC gets a 30% uplift from their 10nm to 7nm process and Apple gets a 15% improvement in perf per clock. So, a clock increase from 2.4 GHz to 3.2 GHz and a per clock improvement of 1.15x gets you to 50% improvement. 15% is achievable through the usual methods like better caches, buffers and whatnot. But this hinges TSMC 7nm being really good.
Hoping the iPads go the A12X route, finally being in line with the iPhone processor core launches, while still being higher power/higher bandwidth/more cores. The rumored 3+5 core sounds scary for the Intel U series.
Me too! Love my iPad Pro 10.5. I’m already seriously jealous of an iPad with 12.9” display with a smaller footprint than the current, not to mention the 11” being about the same footprint. Still wish for a 5:4 aspect ratio display and improved OS and app. Have to wait it out at least another year. Might have to seriously consider a selling my 1 year old iPad.
From the recent link regarding the ARM Roadmap;
"More importantly the vanilla ARM cores are designed for a wide frequency range so they leave some performance on the table to gain that flexibility. If you take an ARM core and design it for a small number of workloads and frequency ranges, you can get a lot more performance out of the SoC, and we mean a lot. The classic example of this is the Apple A11 which currently trounces the best Intel has at performance per Watt and in many cases raw performance. The numbers SemiAccurate has seen for the A12 show it gains about 50% more single threaded performance without changing energy use. Some of this is process related but most of it is architectural. You will see in a few weeks and you will be impressed."
It looks to me like Apple has good data on what workloads are important to its customers, and have used that knowledge to maximize performance.
So, the latter, comparing A11 single threaded performance to A12 single threaded performance. We will see how much is architectural in a few weeks.
Keep in mind what this means, and why you should be skeptical. If the 50% is a generalized improvement over a wide set of PC workloads, it’ll mean the A12 can score 6300 on GB4. The A11 currently scores 4200 on GB4, and multiply that by 1.5, you get 6300. The current highest official score is a 6190 from a Core i7-8086K, which is an unlocked 95W Intel processor with a turbo of 5 GHz. It seems basically impossible for Apple to achieve such a performance uplift. Maybe a 3.6 GHz turbo with the A12 core? And after a few minutes, it’ll drop down to 2.7 GHz or so?
I think I would be pleasantly surprised if the A12 hit 5000 single threaded GB4 points. 20% is pretty awesome these days.
I don't agree that we'll see a 50% increase in Geekbench 4, the few "leaked" benchmarks are unreliable and don't show that at all, but I do agree that most of the performance is coming from architectural advancements, rather than the move to the 7nm node.
Note though, that semiaccurate stated that more performance could be gained from optimizing the design to a "small number of workloads and frequency ranges". That's what I'm looking at, real world rather than synthetic benchmarks.
Ditching plus branding only works well if both phones offer all the same features. If they do it’s a no brainier plus branding is likely gone. As for the 6.1” iPhone, making it 6.1” as opposed to 5.8” is confusing. And it is sensible to assume it will be named iPhone 9, and will feature a single lens camera and LCD screen.
I wonder if they keep the 7 and 8 around.
They’ll allow their propensity for profit over product lineup clarity, simplicity and elegance to inform their direction on that one. Sigh.
Bullshit. Apples profits result from making superior products and selling them in ridiculous quantities, not because they put profit over everything else.
They make good products, but profit is a significantly important dimension for Apple. Don’t fool yourself. You need look no further than how they price everything they sell and their standard 40% markup. Margins are huge and important for this company. There’s no bullshit about it. It’s a fact.
You’re confusing markup and margin. You don’t know their markup because you don’t know their costs. And standard margin is not 40%.
Apple prioritizes excellent design first, high build quality, etc. The profits follow. It’s why all of their designs are copied.
If they prioritized profits first we’d see stupid products like netbooks. They won’t do it because they said they sucked and wouldn’t be proud of them. EOS
Sorry, but the 6.1” LCD “value proposition” iPhone X does not make any sense. There is NO reason for Apple to make a cheaper version of something, when the expensive version is already selling extremely well.
I’m betting that the 6.1” LCD display is for iPhone 9 Plus.
They will release 2 new models and 4, maybe 5, new phones...
iPhone X.2 iPhone X.2 Plus
iPhone 9 iPhone 9 Plus iPhone 9 mini
All new models will have True Depth cameras, meaning no more Home Button. The iPhone 9 display will not have a notch, but rather smaller top and bottom bezels.
I purposely avoided buying an iPhone last year because of the $1k top model and the $800 price for a model that looked just like the 6S+ I already have(which was $750 at that time). I am one of those that might go for that “low end” 6.1” model.
... Oh, and external monitor support too. Would be interesting if I could use the iPad as the input device, including software keyboard, trackpad, and stylus.
I like this idea. (I gather you mean something like a second monitor, acting as an "extended desktop", not just mirroring the iPad screen).
Would be extra cool if the second output could be via airplay to Apple TV (or other wireless conference room collaboration devices that support airplay) for connection to a projector.
Ditching plus branding only works well if both phones offer all the same features. If they do it’s a no brainier plus branding is likely gone. As for the 6.1” iPhone, making it 6.1” as opposed to 5.8” is confusing. And it is sensible to assume it will be named iPhone 9, and will feature a single lens camera and LCD screen.
I wonder if they keep the 7 and 8 around.
They’ll allow their propensity for profit over product lineup clarity, simplicity and elegance to inform their direction on that one. Sigh.
Bullshit. Apples profits result from making superior products and selling them in ridiculous quantities, not because they put profit over everything else.
And selling them at high prices. I do wish their strategy for the low end was something other than keeping older models around and reducing the price. I wish they had an iPhone strategy of good, better best and each model was updated every year. Then even the low end would feel like a new phone rather than a 3 year old phone price reduced.
They tried that with the 5C -- it was bust. It was a compromise between Apple quality and a cheap product.
Selling the older products makes a ton of sense: They can sell them cheaper because they have already covered the overhead of R&D and design that it took to develop them as well as the tooling and infrastructure updates it took to manufacture them. So, Apple only has to cover the actual cost of manufacture -- which means they can put out a high quality piece of equipment at a low cost. And that is particularly true because runs all the latest OS.
I think it's extremely likely the iPad Pro will have an A12X. I doubt Apple will make an A11X a full year after the A11. They skipped announcing the iPad Pro at WWDC, so it's almost a given it'll be announced along with the iPhone, or in October.
Plus, Apple is now designing both their own CPU and GPU. It makes sense that since they're now in complete control of everything that they could design the A12/A12X side-by-side and launch them around the same time. The A11 was their first try at a custom GPU, so I can see them not wanting to rush out a first-gen A11X without seeing how their GPU worked in the A11 (for example, how well it scales or thermal issues). Now we're a year later and Apple will be coming out with their second generation GPU, which would be a great time to show off how powerful it is with a new A12X.
Also remember that Adobe talked about Photoshop on the iPad Pro. What better way to show off your most powerful processor by having an iPad run full-blown Photoshop?
To me, the biggest improvement for iPad Pros, would be 8 GB RAM, turning on virtual memory (swap files etc), and other OS and app optimizations, with upgrade options to 16 GB. It would make Photoshop style apps, other apps, much more amenable on iPads.
Oh, and external monitor support too. Would be interesting if I could use the iPad as the input device, including software keyboard, trackpad, and stylus.
All but the trackpad is already here -- and I'm sure that that's coming. Otherwise Apple would fail in its pledge to make the iPad a laptop killer.
... Oh, and external monitor support too. Would be interesting if I could use the iPad as the input device, including software keyboard, trackpad, and stylus.
I like this idea. (I gather you mean something like a second monitor, acting as an "extended desktop", not just mirroring the iPad screen).
Would be extra cool if the second output could be via airplay to Apple TV (or other wireless conference room collaboration devices that support airplay) for connection to a projector.
Yes, extended desktop plus windowed apps. Software keyboard, software trackpad, and stylus input on the iPad. I’d prefer wired for reduced latency. The iPad’s trajectory to full PC features have been too lumbering and half hearted. If they say it can be a PC replacement, they really should implement PC features and apps. Buyers and users can be on-boarded with a the current simplistic interface, but they should have it’s capabilities as the user want it, like a window mode settings switch, terminal, etc.
And, oh, do I want to move the emoji and microphone keys in the keyboard so much.
Ditching plus branding only works well if both phones offer all the same features. If they do it’s a no brainier plus branding is likely gone. As for the 6.1” iPhone, making it 6.1” as opposed to 5.8” is confusing. And it is sensible to assume it will be named iPhone 9, and will feature a single lens camera and LCD screen.
I wonder if they keep the 7 and 8 around.
They’ll allow their propensity for profit over product lineup clarity, simplicity and elegance to inform their direction on that one. Sigh.
Bullshit. Apples profits result from making superior products and selling them in ridiculous quantities, not because they put profit over everything else.
And selling them at high prices. I do wish their strategy for the low end was something other than keeping older models around and reducing the price. I wish they had an iPhone strategy of good, better best and each model was updated every year. Then even the low end would feel like a new phone rather than a 3 year old phone price reduced.
They tried that with the 5C -- it was bust. It was a compromise between Apple quality and a cheap product.
Selling the older products makes a ton of sense: They can sell them cheaper because they have already covered the overhead of R&D and design that it took to develop them as well as the tooling and infrastructure updates it took to manufacture them. So, Apple only has to cover the actual cost of manufacture -- which means they can put out a high quality piece of equipment at a low cost. And that is particularly true because runs all the latest OS.
There was nothing cheap about the 5C. It almost felt more like ceramic than plastic. But the colors weren’t appealing, and there was not black offering. And it was more expensive than people expected. The $329 iPad shows Apple can make a low end product that isn’t “cheap”. They could do the same with iPhone. They could have a low end model similar to iPod Touch. I just think the iPhone line would be cleaner if they went good > better > best. And they wouldn’t have to redesign them every year. Just update the colors and internals. Then they could get rid of the numbering schemes and just have iPhone (year) and iPhone Plus (year). Maybe the higher end model(s) would have bigger changes year over year but the low end would be a spec bump and new colors. And they’d all run the latest OS.
Perhaps they'll just switch the naming convention to something closer to the Mac, MacBook and iPad...year number + screen size. They could also use the 'Pro' naming if they add Apple Pencil support.
Surely they have to now, releasing 8 & 10 at the same time just threw the system all to f*ck. If they release a 9 this year, it'll be newer than the 10
Who cares? It’s just the name. Remember 10 is actually written X. X before 9 is not a big deal!
Perhaps they'll just switch the naming convention to something closer to the Mac, MacBook and iPad...year number + screen size. They could also use the 'Pro' naming if they add Apple Pencil support.
Surely they have to now, releasing 8 & 10 at the same time just threw the system all to f*ck. If they release a 9 this year, it'll be newer than the 10
Who cares? It’s just the name. Remember 10 is actually written X. X before 9 is not a big deal!
If the rumors are true, and all new models will be based off of iPhone 'X', why assume that any new phone will have a '9' moniker?
Ditching plus branding only works well if both phones offer all the same features. If they do it’s a no brainier plus branding is likely gone. As for the 6.1” iPhone, making it 6.1” as opposed to 5.8” is confusing. And it is sensible to assume it will be named iPhone 9, and will feature a single lens camera and LCD screen.
I wonder if they keep the 7 and 8 around.
They’ll allow their propensity for profit over product lineup clarity, simplicity and elegance to inform their direction on that one. Sigh.
Bullshit. Apples profits result from making superior products and selling them in ridiculous quantities, not because they put profit over everything else.
And selling them at high prices. I do wish their strategy for the low end was something other than keeping older models around and reducing the price. I wish they had an iPhone strategy of good, better best and each model was updated every year. Then even the low end would feel like a new phone rather than a 3 year old phone price reduced.
They tried that with the 5C -- it was bust. It was a compromise between Apple quality and a cheap product.
Selling the older products makes a ton of sense: They can sell them cheaper because they have already covered the overhead of R&D and design that it took to develop them as well as the tooling and infrastructure updates it took to manufacture them. So, Apple only has to cover the actual cost of manufacture -- which means they can put out a high quality piece of equipment at a low cost. And that is particularly true because runs all the latest OS.
There was nothing cheap about the 5C. It almost felt more like ceramic than plastic. But the colors weren’t appealing, and there was not black offering. And it was more expensive than people expected. The $329 iPad shows Apple can make a low end product that isn’t “cheap”. They could do the same with iPhone. They could have a low end model similar to iPod Touch. I just think the iPhone line would be cleaner if they went good > better > best. And they wouldn’t have to redesign them every year. Just update the colors and internals. Then they could get rid of the numbering schemes and just have iPhone (year) and iPhone Plus (year). Maybe the higher end model(s) would have bigger changes year over year but the low end would be a spec bump and new colors. And they’d all run the latest OS.
Well, no... The 5C was known as the 5Cheap for a reason -- and there was only one reason for Apple to market it: Provide a cheap phone to the market. But, as you point out, it wasn't cheap enough.
The trouble is: Apple has (to oversimplify a bit) a three tiered cost structure:
-- R&D + Manufacturing tooling and infrastructure
-- Direct Manufacturing costs
-- Apple infrastructure/ecosystem costs -- iCloud, Yearly OS updates, automatic backups, cloud sharing, Apple support, etc., etc., etc.,....
Other manufacturers have (mostly) only the first 2 of those to worry about. But, it's the third that sets Apple products apart. So, Apple is simply more limited in how much they can lower their prices and still produce an actual margin.
For the iPad:
I think Apple probably scraped the bottom of their barrel cutting costs and, in fact, the 2018 iPad probably does not provide adequate margins to Apple. But, it was a marketing attempt to sacrifice profit and margin in order to (re)enter a valued market. I think the same is going on with the Apple Watch: I can't believe that a $300 Apple Watch provides the same margin as a $1,000 iPhone. But, Apple is working hard to expand that market and is willing to take the hit.
The iPhone9 looks like the one for me right now! I like the idea of having adding to my 4” screen size! But that may change if there is a red color X! Cannot afford both the X and iPhone9 for 2018 however.
Sorry, but the 6.1” LCD “value proposition” iPhone X does not make any sense. There is NO reason for Apple to make a cheaper version of something, when the expensive version is already selling extremely well.
I’m betting that the 6.1” LCD display is for iPhone 9 Plus.
They will release 2 new models and 4, maybe 5, new phones...
iPhone X.2 iPhone X.2 Plus
iPhone 9 iPhone 9 Plus iPhone 9 mini
All new models will have True Depth cameras, meaning no more Home Button. The iPhone 9 display will not have a notch, but rather smaller top and bottom bezels.
Why are there 3 iPhone 9 models? What the heck is the iPhone 9 mini?
The iPhone 9 Mini size still accounts for 22% of U.S. iPhone sales and 18% of worldwide sales! It the best size iPhone if you have a iPad too.
Comments
Note though, that semiaccurate stated that more performance could be gained from optimizing the design to a "small number of workloads and frequency ranges". That's what I'm looking at, real world rather than synthetic benchmarks.
Apple prioritizes excellent design first, high build quality, etc. The profits follow. It’s why all of their designs are copied.
If they prioritized profits first we’d see stupid products like netbooks. They won’t do it because they said they sucked and wouldn’t be proud of them. EOS
Would be extra cool if the second output could be via airplay to Apple TV (or other wireless conference room collaboration devices that support airplay) for connection to a projector.
And, oh, do I want to move the emoji and microphone keys in the keyboard so much.