rob53

Shane0527 said:

FaceID is awful! I have to type in my passcode the majority of the time to access my phone. Need directions while you’re driving? Better pull over because you have to fully interact with the phone to unlock it to get directions. This is the iPhone I strongly dislike!

tmay said:

cloudguy said:

tmay said:

I don't imagine that Apple has concerns one way or the other. Apple is likely at a point where they have in house capability and have licensed necessary IP to create their own proprietary ISA, while also large enough to create the design and validation tools needed to fab at TMSC, or whomever.

I would prefer that ARM reside in Japan or the UK, and not Taiwan, simply for National Security reasons.

You can't create any ARM designs without licensing from ARM Holdings. Even if it were possible somehow, Apple's existing line of processors - A, T, S, U, W, H - are all based on designs that they currently licensed from ARM. Creating 6 new lines of processors in a way that doesn't infringe on the MANY RISC-based CPU patents - and there are tons as RISC has been around since the early 1980s - would take years, and one would have no idea about such real world issues as performance, heat and scalability. Speaking of real world issues, Apple would be responsible for things like creating a new instruction set, architecture, microcode etc. as well as publishing all that stuff and securing patents for it. They also would need to build an entire application stack on top of the new architecture AND migrate their existing applications for their hardware to it, while still supporting the 2 billion iOS devices on the previous architecture for the 5-6 years that all those devices last. 

Another thing: basic R&D like this isn't Apple's deal. It is amazing that so many people are convinced that it is. In fact, Apple doesn't do originality. Instead they take existing technology - stuff that has been around for awhile and has been proven - and incorporate them into their existing design language. At most, one could say that they excel at taking parts innovated or improved by others and using them to make new great products. But the truth is that nothing in Apple's present existence or their previous history indicates that they are capable of coming up with a "new" CPU design, or even a major advance on an existing design. Even their own CPUs, in addition to being based on the existing ARM design, were the result of acqui-hiring PA Semiconductor. Even something MUCH SIMPLER such as a fingerprint scanner, they had to buy a company that already had the tech, where Qualcomm and Samsung created their own using their own R&D departments (which is why they were able to make under-the-screen fingerprint scanners so quickly). 

You do realize that Apple created the first 64 bit ARM implementation before ARM actually provided its own ARM 64 bit implementation.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/12/02/a7-how-apples-custom-64-bit-silicon-embarrassed-the-industry

Apple has never been challenged in SOC's since.

"Apple doesn't do originality" is a bullshit meme.

Fidonet127 said:

viclauyyc said:

sflocal said:

viclauyyc said:

Well, it looks good on number in the presentation. But let’s not forget the Ultra is comparing with a 2 year old Xeon. 2 years is a lot in computer technology. Not to mention, arguably AMD’s Epyc is the fastest CPU in the PC world. 

Let’s hope the future Mac Pro will be even faster with 4/8 sets of CPU. But it might cost $8000 on the entry model.

Intel's offerings until just recently have remained stagnant on the Xeon side.  It's only right to compare it with Apple's current Mac Pro offerings, even though it's 2 years old.  It's still incredible how Apple has pushed the performance envelope in those two years where Intel was nowhere to be seen.

While AMD's offerings is also impressive, when compared in terms of performance-per-watt, ASi outperforms them both.

Honestly, I don’t understand why Apple is so emphasis on performance/watt. Sure save energy is good and less noise from fan. But no one really care if their $100000 sports car use much less gas than the next car. People care about how fast it can go and how it handle the corner, not gas/miles.

Many reasons to be energy efficient. Apple is pushing and being pushed to be environmentally friendly. More efficient computers is less power, fan usage, and cooling needed. One computer isn’t significant, millions of computers are. More efficient computers allow longer run time on UPSs during a power outage. Solar is still expensive, so. Using less power, means less solar is needed. Think about racks of these computers. I’m warmed up behind a half rack of servers in a cold room. Power efficiency is a huge deal when dealing with a rack or more of computers. 

cloudguy said:

rob53 said:

Is Apple required to push their Apple developed ARM designs back to the main ARM design architecture? It appears v9 will include many of the ideas Apple has developed. 

As for Nvidia buying Arm Ltd there better be a whole lot more investigation into how Nvidia will be allowed to control the architecture and its users before they’re allowed to buy them. 

You are wrong on both counts.