iPhone 3GS CPU underclocked to 600MHz

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by Jon-Luke, Jun 20, 2009.

  1. macrumors 6502

    Jon-Luke

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    Cape Town
    #1
    So if you look at this link: http://alturl.com/rxdg

    You will see that the iPhone 3GS actually has a CPU that can run at 833MHz with 720p video :eek:

    The article goes on to say that the reason they think Apple is underclocking the CPU is to save on battery power. How important is that to you? Would you prefer your phone to be faster and have less battery power?

    Do you think with the continual improvements on battery technology there may be a upgrade on the 3GS as soon as they develop a battery that can handle the 833MHz processor (A 3GS.2 if you will or Maybe 3GSr - the pimped sport version).

    Is there any other reason not to use the chips full 833MHz processing power?

    And then what about the 720p video capability, surely this would make the iPhone a viable Apple TV alternative with the right adapters (iPhone to HDMI)

    Let me know your thoughts

    :rolleyes::apple:
     
  2. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #2
    The 3G's CPU was also underclocked, and I bet the 2G's was as well.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jon-Luke

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    Cape Town
    #3
    Anyone have the clock speed of the 3G CPU? (Actual and downclocked)
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    #4
    Yeah 2G and 3G were underclocked. Not just battery life, but heat may be a concern too.
     
  5. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Location:
    St. Augustine, FL
    #5
    Well, I'm really happy that the 3gS is as fast as it is.. it's made the iPhone a real productive device that can keep up with your thoughts and so far doesn't have me tapping my feet waiting for it to load simple tasks like text messaging, e-mails, etc.. everything is just there the moment you need it.

    I've done a side by side comparison - 3GS with Wifi, 3g, BT, max brightness on, idling on the home screen against the same items with a 3g and the 3gS didn't beat the 3g in battery life. Kind of a disappointing turn out to be honest.. so no, I wouldn't trade more battery life over speed at this moment until Apple learns how to stay ahead of the game and get involved in Silver Zinc batteries (which should have been used this year along with a OLED screen to get a jump on the competition but they are too cheap and know they can still move devices based on brand loyalty).

    Next year I can see the mild upgrades being OLED and new battery technology and a software bump.. And maybe then you'll see your 800+mhz Cortex A8 set at default.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    nfl46

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    #6
    It was prob 600MHz...

    833 > 600 -- 3G S
    600 > 412 -- 3G
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    #7
    412 MHz, IIRC was the running CPU.
     
  8. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Location:
    St. Augustine, FL
    #8
    I believe 2g and 3g CPUs were downclocked to 400mhz from a max default speed of 600mhz.

    And keep in mind the 2g and 3g share the same exact CPU, they aren't different as some people tend to think.
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    itommyboy

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Location:
    Titletown USA
    #9
    You kind of already answered yourself. The reasons they currently don't run at full power (and never have in fact all iphones cpu's were underclocked) is because of 1) battery life 2) possible overheating issues. As for outputting 720p with HDMI adapters not going to happen. Apple is very cautious of self cannibalization.
     
  10. macrumors 603

    nfl46

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    #10
    There's really not much difference between the 1st Gen and 2nd Gen (internally). The only thing the 2nd Gen got was 3G, GPS, and a new casing. It was a MINOR upgrade, for sure!
     
  11. macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 24+.
    #11
    Not a direct comparison, but there are other phones running Snapdragon processors at 1 GHz now, with 1.5 GHz on the horizon.

    I would stop worrying about clock speed. All that matters is that the phone runs well and quickly. If that only takes 200MHz, then fine. If it takes 600MHz, fine too.

    Designers limit total wattage used (and thus, the speed) because of battery and heat limitations.
     
  12. thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jon-Luke

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    Cape Town
    #12
    You make an interesting point - I have noticed that my Girlfriend's Blackberry is really zippy on some tasks and quite slow on others. does RIM use a fast or slow chip? I'm guessing that the less complex graphics help make the Blackberry faster - would this be correct?
     
  13. macrumors 68040

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #13
    I dont think we will see anything hdmi from apple; mini dv or dvi but more likely component out.
    Underclocking probably stems from buying a more cost effective mainstream processor instead of a custom processor. Unclocking solely for the purpose of battery life, which most laptops do but the diffeence is the iphone processor is locked to 1 speed where laptops shift clock speeds depending on the battery charge.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Location:
    St. Augustine, FL
    #14
    I have a Blackberry and 3GS.. I don't know the mechanics but I would imaging the reason I can load up almost every basic app on the Blackberry (email, messenger, browser) is because it's probably already loaded into memory and it's just accessing ram space and not having to reload the entire app (like an iPhone does).

    iPhone only keeps E-mail, Phone, and sometimes Browser pre-loaded into memory.. there was 1 or 2 programs i've seen the iPhone keep in memory but I can't remember which ones..
     
  15. thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jon-Luke

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    Cape Town
    #15
    Does anyone think there may be a change of the 720p video being activated in the future, perhaps with a remote control function - it could become Apple's answer to the Mvix system

    [​IMG]

    This would definitely be on top of the list for me for a 2010 iPhone upgrade
     
  16. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    #16
    I'd rather have the longer battery life.
     
  17. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #17
    The 3GS is plenty fast right now because I just got it. I'm sure once I have it a while I'll want it to be faster. The same was true for my 2G.
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #18
    battery life is definitely worth more than speed for me.
     
  19. macrumors 6502a

    doubleatheman

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    #19
    I think if it was any faster the thing would fry itself,

    When charging, and browsing the web at the same time it gets pretty warm. Think of acomputer from 1999 with a 600 MHz CPU, the CPU in it has a large Cooler on it, yes I know the iPhone CPU is a smaller nm, but still think how far we have gotten.

    I do whish somehow the CPU could speedstep, and give bursts of speed only when needed.
     
  20. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Location:
    Kansas City
    #20
    Speed vs Battery life.... I'll take the balance they have. It's so much faster than the 3g I'm very happy with it's performance. Other phones may have faster processors and higher megapixel camera's, but they have to... BECAUSE THEIR SOFTWARE SUCKS.

    Apple has never sold product based on "tech specs" if you think this matters and that the spec's are the most important reason you buy a product, you simply do not understand anything about Apple.
     
  21. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #21
    It's not underclocked. It's appropriately clocked for its needs, power usage and heat management.

    Just because the Cortex-A8 can run at 833Mhz doesn't mean that anything below that = under clocked.

    Would you say that MacBooks have underclocked Core 2 Duos because you can get 3Ghz+ Core 2 Duos?
     
  22. Eso
    macrumors 68000

    Eso

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    #22
    Anytime a processor is running at anything less than what it is rated for, yes, it is under-clocked. This one is apparently rated at 667 Mhz. Processors are rated based on the loads which they can handle with continuous operation. Technically, you can run this processor at 2 GHz - for a couple milliseconds - until it fries. Chips produced from the same silicon wafer can be rated at different speeds. This is why you will see the same processor sold as different models with different speed ratings.

    If you are running an E7600 at 2.8 GHz, you are underclocking that processor because it is rated at 3.06 GHz. Same thing when you are running the cortex A8 at 600 MHz when it is rated for 667 MHz.
     
  23. macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 24+.
    #23
    Which is why it's bogus when people claim the first CPU was rated at 600MHz+, or that the new one is rated at 833MHz+... because we have no idea what speed rating Apple actually paid for.

    Non-engineers read manufacturer advertisements and take the highest speeds as gospel. That's not how it's done in real life.

    The higher the speed, the higher the cost. When buying parts, you try to only pay for what you think you'll need. An extra five dollars times 20 million units would not be a small savings.
     
  24. macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #24
    Actually, it isn't underclocked.

    It is running within the Thermal Design Power of the System-On-a-Chip (SoC).

    It is the licensee which decides the thermal characteristics and thermal envelope, not Samsung.
     

Share This Page