ration al

macplusplus said:

ration al said:

Thunderbolt 3 is implemented using a separate controller chip (DSL6540) which requires processor/system support for PCI express Generation 3.

http://ark.intel.com/products/87402/Intel-DSL6540-Thunderbolt-3-Controller

This chip wasn't available before early 2015 when Apple launched the MacBook with a diminutive PCB to maximize space for battery. Its lack of support for it is probably a design trade-off between battery life and the power-user perception of a 40 Gbps transfer speed.

Only 6th Gen. i.e. Skylake Core M (m3/m5/m7) supports PCIe 3.0 and can benefit from that TB 3 controller. Intel's documentation is obscure in whether some TB 3 features require additional cooling or not, as seen in display resolutions of 5th Gen. Core M for example. For reasons only an OEM would know, Apple may have omitted TB 3 support in the rMB. The low-power variant of that controller for example is shown as suitable for MBA in wikipedia, and the MBA is not a fanless laptop.

macplusplus said:

SnRa said:

Apollo Lake with Goldmont cores is still coming (replacing Braswell), so that shouldn't be a problem. Only SoFIA and Broxton (smartphones/tablets) have been cancelled.

Thank you for the tips. Now can you comment please on a much discussed issue such as the lack of Thunderbolt 3 in the new Retina Macbook? Does Core M support TB 3, or if not what is Intel's solution?

Reasonable907 said:

rogifan_new said:

Jesus if you need more ports get a frigging MacBook Pro. Not difficult.

What if he needs something lighter than a Pro, Rog?

cnocbui said:

ration al said:

Since the Galaxy S7 was released a full month (and a fiscal quarter) earlier than the S6 (March 11 / Q1 2016 vs April /Q2 2015) a mere 10% profit increase for Q1 2016 isn't at all impressive. You're comparing it to a time when the S5 was in it's last quarter as their flagship and customers were anticipating the imminent release of the next model.

Having stated that they tripled first month sales versus 2015's S6 launch, one can only deduce that the S7 profit margins must be relatively slim.

Not at all.  Samsung make a lot of phones at a whole range of price levels.  They sell a lot more phones than Apple 319.7 M in 2015 vs Apple's 231.5 M.  It's unlikely that Samsung's flagship phones make up more than a quarter of their total, so a large increase in S7 sales isn't going to shift  the needle as much, as 75% of their sales and profit might be static.  So an increase of 10% actually indicates they make a very good margin on the S7, which stands to reason as they are much more vertically integrated than Apple.  In an S7, Samsung will have made the Exynos processor, the display panel, the memory, the battery the modem and probably a good fraction of the other components.  The only component I can think of in an S7 Samsung didn't make is the Gorilla glass.  Even the S7 models with the Qualcom processor - Samsung made those too.  The S7 are sold at iPhone prices, so Samsung have possibly even larger margins than Apple, as they are making just about everything in it so get all the component profit as well as the overall device profit.