- Last Active
Consumer Reports is a garbage magazine. Nothing they say can be trusted.
They lost me as a reader a long time one ago when they went on record stating in emphatic fashion that dental amalgams, made up of 50% mercury, are completely safe.
The EPA classifies amalgam as hazardous waste and OSHA requires special precautions to protect the staff from mercury vapor in dental offices. Yet the stuff is safe to put into people’s mouths, fully supported by consumer reports.
The evidence is pretty overwhelming these days regarding the harm that mercury amalgam is capable of:
Or the following video:
Consumer reports has absolutely no credibility in my book.
I truly don’t mean to go off on a tangent. But their OPINIONS are in many cases, completely WRONG. They certainly don’t base their opinions on facts, so why should they regarding the iPhone X? Never mind that the performance of the A10 bionic CPU in the iPhone accomplishes far more with less power than the Snapdragon 835 in the Galaxy S8. Or the fact that iOS is far more secure and offers much better privacy than any Android device. Or the fact that the potential for state of the art AR apps is far greater on the iPhone X than for any Android based device.
Consumer Reports is a pathetic publication. Their opinions mean nothing these days.
Especially to the real consumers who will be purchasing the iPhone X in droves and greatly outselling the Galaxy S8. The publication has lost touch with the real public and what’s truly important.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line
seems far fetched.
TSMC may actually lose Apple as a client.
Intel might actually do what Otellini originally turned down, fabricate Apple’s mobile CPUs.
Perhaps Intel might regain its lead in fab technology again partnered up with Apple.
It’s going to be a devastating loss for TSMC. But Intel offers Apple the opportunity to integrate a modem into the SOC.
This was coming all along. Qualcomm’s Snapdragon is going to fall further and further behind also. They are already getting killed in single core performance.
The problem is that LG is far behind Samsung in small panel OLED display manufacturing.
Samsung panels originally had a host of problems which the company eventually became to solve. In some ways, the early Samsung panels back in 2011 were still superior to the LG ones being manufactured today.
The small model Pixel 2 has a Samsung display. That display is quite nice. The larger model has the much poorer LG built display.
The real issue concerns Apple’s planned use of LG as a high volume OLED display supplier next year. I can guarantee that LG will be nowhere near the quality of Samsung built displays in another year. It’s taken Samsung 6 years to get to this stage. No amount of money is going to enable LG to catch Samsung in only a year. It’s ridiculous to think that LG can. Google is finding it out the hard way right now. Apple is going to in 2018 if Cook continues his insane plans.
Cook made a critical mistake. He should have approached LG about building OLED panels for phones at least three years ago when Samsung was rapidly improving and expanding their manufacturing expertise in such panels.
It is now too late. Samsung is going to utterly dominate high quality small panel OLED display manufacturing.
With that dominance, Samsung is going to take full control of the non iOS portion of the smart device market. Apple will be forced to continue to source OLED panels primarily from Samsung.
Think about it. How will the market react if the flagship iPhone X2 or whatever Apple decides to name it, comes with an inferior panel to the iPhone X. Apple is tied at the hip to Samsung. There’s very little that can be done about it now
EngDev said:AppleInsider said:
Benchmarking an ARM processor in a phone and comparing the numbers to an x86 processor, like in the MacBook Pro, is perilous because of architectural differences and the optimizations between processor families. The more linear comparison is mobile to mobile -- and ideally on the same operating system.
It should also be noted that Geekbench will actually pause the benchmark to stop thermal throttling, so everything seen is mostly peak performance and may not be sustained in long term.Geekbench inserts a pause (or gap) between each workload to minimize the effect thermal issues have on workload performance. Without this gap, workload that appear later in the benchmark would have lower scores than workload that appear earlier in the benchmark.
My iPhone and iPad never heat up unless being charged. Unlike my MacBook which heats up under load all the time. Especially when playing video.
GPU performance of the iPad Pro trounces all integrated Intel units also.
My iPad Pro is actually far more useful than any MacBook (pro). Superior battery life, integrated baseband radio, and the real productivity enhancement has been the pencil.
For server workloads, Intel is quite good although AMD is now building some awfully compelling products. For mobile/portable computing, Apple is far better than Intel. It isn't even close. Core i5 level performance in a handheld device is actually pretty spectacular. Especially when the SOC essentially never throttles and has superior graphics capabilities.