4 ms·

"It remains to be seen if other SoC manufacturers will catch up in their CPU architecture at one point or another" This is surprisingly ignorant from Anandtech

by personZ 12y ago

"It remains to be seen if other SoC manufacturers will catch up in their CPU architecture at one point or another" This is surprisingly ignorant from Anandtech. Surely they know better. While Apple raced to win the spec war (I say that tongue in cheek, but the truth is that Apple tries really hard to give you bragging rights, buying the biggest PowerVR designs, jumping on incomplete ARM specs, etc), going to ARMv8 far before her peers by creating a derivative of early A57 designs (much like Qualcomm did with Krait, getting in early on the new A15 design), every other vendor has been soberly pursuing ARM A57 at their own pace: It isn't like there is some great lack of performance in competing devices, and this simply isn't a critical thing, so there seems to be no great rush. The Tegra K1 Denver will be the first salvo from alternatives, and early indications are that it will provide pretty extraordinary performance, and presumably we'll search for ways of using that power productively. Looks like I've stepped into the distortion field, where Apple is both uncatchably ahead of everyone, and simultaneously not even trying.

pinaceae 12y ago
Apple tries really hard to give you bragging rights through their processor!? are you posting this from bizarro world? apple is the one tech company that does not advertise tech specs. they mention them in the keynotes and move on. as if you ignored thousands of articles about this very fact. amazing.
- personZ 12y ago
  I see comments like yours fairly frequently, and it really is bizarro world. It's buying into an obviously untrue narrative that hasn't been true...well..ever. Apple makes a really big deal about their cores and GPU, as they have every right to (they're pretty great). Quite aside from their keynotes that focus extensively on this, on the product page you learn, right near the top, about the A8 64-bit processor and M8 coprocessor, as if these facts have any relevance to an end user. They're bragging points. Apple talks about their 64-bit advantage ad nauseam. They absolutely brag about their chip. They boast specs (as they boast "retina" displays and thinness and grams and materials).
  - at-fates-hands 12y ago
    >>> They absolutely brag about their chip. They boast specs (as they boast "retina" displays and thinness and grams and materials). Completely agree. As far back as I can remember (Apple iMac G3) they've been touting their processors and architecture as being superior to other manufacturers, and one of the key reasons you should be using their hardware. So your comments are right on point, and something that's easily lost when most people only see is their advanced design chops.
  - bonestamp2 12y ago
    Do any other mobiles use a 64-bit processor?
    - Bud 12y ago
      No. Android doesn't even support 64-bit yet.
    - szatkus 12y ago
      Few different companies announced 64-bit models this month. All of them includes A53 cores. Also Nexus 9 (two Denver cores) will be released soon, but it's a tablet.
  - josefresco 12y ago
    Agreed, and I'm old enough to remember their (cherry-picked) performance claims in the desktop/cpu world when they had to compete with Wintel machines. What Apple doesn't do, is release products that compete solely based on these hardware specs. Their approach is "yeah it's fast enough, but it's also beautful etc."
    - laichzeit0 12y ago
      Believe it or not, there is a large group of consumers that purchase technology not just based on technical merit, but aesthetics (myself included). I'm more likely to buy something that looks/feels better designed and trade off functionality just for aesthetic reasons. Much like I'd rather buy a hardcover copy of a book instead of the paperback, if the quality is sufficiently higher. Life's too short to use ugly crap.
rsynnott 12y ago
> but the truth is that Apple tries really hard to give you bragging rights, buying the biggest PowerVR designs, jumping on incomplete ARM specs Wait, you think ARMv8 was incomplete when the 5S came out? What on earth makes you think that? Also, it's clear that they DON'T try all that hard; they could have used the six-core variant of the PowerVR used here, at the cost of battery life. > going to ARMv8 far before her peers by creating a derivative of early A57 designs Hrm? Cyclone isn't particularly similar to A57. Also, if they'd wanted A57, they could have just implemented it; it was available in the right timeframe.
- personZ 12y ago
  Also, if they'd wanted A57, they could have just implemented it; it was available in the right timeframe. No it wasn't. A57 wasn't actually done when Apple outed Cyclone. Apple clearly ran with early aspects of A57 (your disingenuous misreading about ARMv8 being ignored). At exactly the same timeframe, nvidia, Qualcomm, and others had as many details of A57 and ARMv8, and none of them ran with it. Indeed, nvidia and Qualcomm are just getting to 64-bit parts, doing a pretty good job with their existing architectures. Apple wanted to be first, and they pounded every bit out of 64-bits in their marketing. But here, again, we have to pretend that reality isn't as it actually is. Also, it's clear that they DON'T try all that hard; they could have used the six-core variant of the PowerVR used here, at the cost of battery life This is absurdity theater. Apple has chosen higher bin/tier PowerVR parts than her peers for virtually every single generation. But because they didn't choose even higher we are to believe that they don't try hard? Do you actually look at the benchmarks, or just continue on with a ridiculous narrative based upon preconceived notions?
  - rsynnott 12y ago
    > No it wasn't. A57 wasn't actually done when Apple outed Cyclone. Apple clearly ran with early aspects of A57 (your disingenuous misreading about ARMv8 being ignored) In April 2013, ARM announced that the first production A57 chip had been fabbed and tested at an unspecified prior date: http://www.arm.com/about/newsroom/arm-and-cadence-partner-to-implement-industrys-first-cortex-a57-64-bit-processor-on-tsmc-16nm.php http://www.arm.com/about/newsroom/arm-and-cadence-partner-to... > At exactly the same timeframe, nvidia, Qualcomm, and others had as many details of A57 and ARMv8, and none of them ran with it. Google is showing me lots of documents published by ARM on ARMv8 from 2011. By Oct. 2012, Samsung had licensed the A53 and A57 core designs: http://www.techhive.com/article/2013298/arm-introduces-64bit-processors-for-phones-tablets-and-servers.html http://www.techhive.com/article/2013298/arm-introduces-64bit... . They didn't have 'many details'; they had the design itself. > Apple clearly ran with early aspects of A57 Which ones? I mean, Cyclone was wider than A9, but that's hardly a shock. My impression is that A57 isn't, in any case, really suitable for phones except in a BIG.little configuration.

by personZ 12y ago

pinaceae 12y ago

Apple tries really hard to give you bragging rights through their processor!? are you posting this from bizarro world? apple is the one tech company that does not advertise tech specs. they mention them in the keynotes and move on. as if you ignored thousands of articles about this very fact. amazing.

personZ 12y ago
I see comments like yours fairly frequently, and it really is bizarro world. It's buying into an obviously untrue narrative that hasn't been true...well..ever. Apple makes a really big deal about their cores and GPU, as they have every right to (they're pretty great). Quite aside from their keynotes that focus extensively on this, on the product page you learn, right near the top, about the A8 64-bit processor and M8 coprocessor, as if these facts have any relevance to an end user. They're bragging points. Apple talks about their 64-bit advantage ad nauseam. They absolutely brag about their chip. They boast specs (as they boast "retina" displays and thinness and grams and materials).
- at-fates-hands 12y ago
  >>> They absolutely brag about their chip. They boast specs (as they boast "retina" displays and thinness and grams and materials). Completely agree. As far back as I can remember (Apple iMac G3) they've been touting their processors and architecture as being superior to other manufacturers, and one of the key reasons you should be using their hardware. So your comments are right on point, and something that's easily lost when most people only see is their advanced design chops.
- bonestamp2 12y ago
  Do any other mobiles use a 64-bit processor?
  - Bud 12y ago
    No. Android doesn't even support 64-bit yet.
  - szatkus 12y ago
    Few different companies announced 64-bit models this month. All of them includes A53 cores. Also Nexus 9 (two Denver cores) will be released soon, but it's a tablet.
- josefresco 12y ago
  Agreed, and I'm old enough to remember their (cherry-picked) performance claims in the desktop/cpu world when they had to compete with Wintel machines. What Apple doesn't do, is release products that compete solely based on these hardware specs. Their approach is "yeah it's fast enough, but it's also beautful etc."
  - laichzeit0 12y ago
    Believe it or not, there is a large group of consumers that purchase technology not just based on technical merit, but aesthetics (myself included). I'm more likely to buy something that looks/feels better designed and trade off functionality just for aesthetic reasons. Much like I'd rather buy a hardcover copy of a book instead of the paperback, if the quality is sufficiently higher. Life's too short to use ugly crap.

rsynnott 12y ago

> but the truth is that Apple tries really hard to give you bragging rights, buying the biggest PowerVR designs, jumping on incomplete ARM specs Wait, you think ARMv8 was incomplete when the 5S came out? What on earth makes you think that? Also, it's clear that they DON'T try all that hard; they could have used the six-core variant of the PowerVR used here, at the cost of battery life. > going to ARMv8 far before her peers by creating a derivative of early A57 designs Hrm? Cyclone isn't particularly similar to A57. Also, if they'd wanted A57, they could have just implemented it; it was available in the right timeframe.

personZ 12y ago
Also, if they'd wanted A57, they could have just implemented it; it was available in the right timeframe. No it wasn't. A57 wasn't actually done when Apple outed Cyclone. Apple clearly ran with early aspects of A57 (your disingenuous misreading about ARMv8 being ignored). At exactly the same timeframe, nvidia, Qualcomm, and others had as many details of A57 and ARMv8, and none of them ran with it. Indeed, nvidia and Qualcomm are just getting to 64-bit parts, doing a pretty good job with their existing architectures. Apple wanted to be first, and they pounded every bit out of 64-bits in their marketing. But here, again, we have to pretend that reality isn't as it actually is. Also, it's clear that they DON'T try all that hard; they could have used the six-core variant of the PowerVR used here, at the cost of battery life This is absurdity theater. Apple has chosen higher bin/tier PowerVR parts than her peers for virtually every single generation. But because they didn't choose even higher we are to believe that they don't try hard? Do you actually look at the benchmarks, or just continue on with a ridiculous narrative based upon preconceived notions?
- rsynnott 12y ago
  > No it wasn't. A57 wasn't actually done when Apple outed Cyclone. Apple clearly ran with early aspects of A57 (your disingenuous misreading about ARMv8 being ignored) In April 2013, ARM announced that the first production A57 chip had been fabbed and tested at an unspecified prior date: http://www.arm.com/about/newsroom/arm-and-cadence-partner-to-implement-industrys-first-cortex-a57-64-bit-processor-on-tsmc-16nm.php http://www.arm.com/about/newsroom/arm-and-cadence-partner-to... > At exactly the same timeframe, nvidia, Qualcomm, and others had as many details of A57 and ARMv8, and none of them ran with it. Google is showing me lots of documents published by ARM on ARMv8 from 2011. By Oct. 2012, Samsung had licensed the A53 and A57 core designs: http://www.techhive.com/article/2013298/arm-introduces-64bit-processors-for-phones-tablets-and-servers.html http://www.techhive.com/article/2013298/arm-introduces-64bit... . They didn't have 'many details'; they had the design itself. > Apple clearly ran with early aspects of A57 Which ones? I mean, Cyclone was wider than A9, but that's hardly a shock. My impression is that A57 isn't, in any case, really suitable for phones except in a BIG.little configuration.