A Watch’s CPU

[BenGoren]

I keep seeing people complaining that Apple isn’t doing enough to upgrade the CPU in new versions of the Apple Watch.

And I’m utterly flabbergasted.

I see zero evidence that the Ultra (and, presumably, any of its recent predecessors) is even remotely computationally limited. I wouldn’t want the opening animation of apps to be any faster, and there isn’t any stutter or lag or anything like that when doing anything at all on the watch. Everything is seamless and fluid. There’s nothing like the “spinning beach ball cursor” effect as I’m waiting for the watch to do something.

Nor can I realistically imagine anything new that would be introduced to the watch that would require more computational “oomph.” What, I’m going to start editing videos on my wrist!?

And, to add insult to injury … the watch would have been the most powerful supercomputer on the planet in the mid-90s, and would completely mop the floor with any desktop tower a mere mortal could afford to buy retail up through the late aughts. It still spanks plenty of smartphones and tablets and even laptops being manufactured for sale new at a store near you.

But this somehow isn’t enough computational power for a wristwatch!?

Can anybody explain to me what, exactly, a more powerful CPU in a watch is supposed to do that the current one can’t?

I mean, is there some sort of underground jailbreak community out there I don’t know about where people are mining bitcoin as they swim laps? Are you doing nuclear weapons design on the subway and don’t want to draw attention to yourself so you do it on the watch? Is there some ultimate game that’s lagging badly enough that you keep getting fragged?

What am I missing?

Cheers,

b&

 

[bricktop_at]

At the moment I‘d rather have more efficiency than computing power, the AW seems to be fine in terms of being capable enough for any task that it‘s doing right now.

 

[BigMcGuire]

To me Battery Life is #1 - this is why I got the Ultra. To get 3 days on a charge is amazing.

While faster is always better and more is always better, nothing seems to overwhelm the AW. Everything is really smooth and it seems almost overpowered for what is asked of it at the moment. I don't see that changing.

To me if I had a choice for faster CPU or more battery life, I'd slide the slider towards more battery life.


I'd love to get to a point where I only have to charge my watch once a week and have the option for "low power mode" that would give me 2 weeks, lol.

 

[Howard2k]

At the moment I‘d rather have more efficiency than computing power, the AW seems to be fine in terms of being capable enough for any task that it‘s doing right now.

Seconded. A new CPU would be beneficial even if it had the same processing power but with efficiency gains.

 

[chabig]

I see zero evidence that the Ultra (and, presumably, any of its recent predecessors) is even remotely computationally limited.

There are some who won't be satisfied until it can simultaneously process 4 channels of 8K ProRes Raw video.

 

[BenGoren]

There are some who won't be satisfied until it can simultaneously process 4 channels of 8K can ProRes Raw video.

Well, clearly that’s where the problem lies.

You see, all my Ks go to 11. Which is like, two more than 8. And that’s why my Ultra has no trouble processing twice as many of my Ks as theirs.

The problem isn’t the CPU; it’s their wimpy small Ks. They have nowhere to go, no way to go over the top of the cliff when their Ks only go to 8.

Mine goes to 11.

b&

 

[MBAir2010]

maybe a better guide
what does the wind button do?
why can I only add one album to the download?
there are other things an functions I dont undestand
which is why im here

 

[BenGoren]

maybe a better guide
what does the wind button do?
why can I only add one album to the download?
there are other things an functions I dont undestand
which is why im here

The wind button really blows, man. Like a hurricane! And, if you’re getting the album on the down-low, you can only get the one because otherwise they think you might be the fuzz, especially if you ask too many questions.

If there’s more you don’t understand, I’ll try to guide you better. Just ask! But not too many questions, if you know what I mean.

b&

 

[MBAir2010]

The wind button really blows, man. Like a hurricane! And, if you’re getting the album on the down-low, you can only get the one because otherwise they think you might be the fuzz, especially if you ask too many questions.

If there’s more you don’t understand, I’ll try to guide you better. Just ask! But not too many questions, if you know what I mean.

b&

thanks
I just bent over an' purchased the watch just 2 weeks ago
so far so good
I like the simplicity and I can walk about for an hour and listen to an album via  airpods
the watch does everything I need and can spit water out after a swim.

 

[rafark]

I keep seeing people complaining that Apple isn’t doing enough to upgrade the CPU in new versions of the Apple Watch.

And I’m utterly flabbergasted.

I see zero evidence that the Ultra (and, presumably, any of its recent predecessors) is even remotely computationally limited. I wouldn’t want the opening animation of apps to be any faster, and there isn’t any stutter or lag or anything like that when doing anything at all on the watch. Everything is seamless and fluid. There’s nothing like the “spinning beach ball cursor” effect as I’m waiting for the watch to do something.

Nor can I realistically imagine anything new that would be introduced to the watch that would require more computational “oomph.” What, I’m going to start editing videos on my wrist!?

And, to add insult to injury … the watch would have been the most powerful supercomputer on the planet in the mid-90s, and would completely mop the floor with any desktop tower a mere mortal could afford to buy retail up through the late aughts. It still spanks plenty of smartphones and tablets and even laptops being manufactured for sale new at a store near you.

But this somehow isn’t enough computational power for a wristwatch!?

Can anybody explain to me what, exactly, a more powerful CPU in a watch is supposed to do that the current one can’t?

I mean, is there some sort of underground jailbreak community out there I don’t know about where people are mining bitcoin as they swim laps? Are you doing nuclear weapons design on the subway and don’t want to draw attention to yourself so you do it on the watch? Is there some ultimate game that’s lagging badly enough that you keep getting fragged?

What am I missing?

Cheers,

b&

There's ALWAYS room for improvement

 

[fwmireault]

Having a newer CPU doesn't necessarily mean more computing power, it could also mean that the same computing power can be reached with a lower power consumption. Given how poor the battery life is on Apple Watch compared to competition, I think that the critics again a 3+ years old SiP are fair. If we can get the same smoothness across the OS, but for 22-24 hours of battery life rather than 18 (not talking about the Ultra but the logic is the same), it's a win for everyone.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

Sensors and battery life are top priority. Apple Watch is quick and snappy, it’s not the kind of device that needs CPU and GPU benchmarks every year. It’s not exporting videos. Of course, speed and power increases will be needed over time. My series 6 is quick, and the 7, 8, SE, and Ultra are as well. New functionality will come along that requires more, but the original question of
“Is more needed” is not necessarily true. They function well, and that functionality will continue to expand and grow, and CPU needs with it.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

There are some who won't be satisfied until it can simultaneously process 4 channels of 8K ProRes Raw video.

No, those people will never be satisfied — because even if it did process 8K video, as absurd as that would be, they would complain that it couldn't process 10K video! Some people choose to be miserable no matter what.

 

[chabig]

No, those people will never be satisfied — because even if it did process 8k video, as absurd as that would be, they would complain that it couldn't process 10K video! Some people choose to be miserable no matter what.

Haha. You're right. I almost typed 4K video, then thought better of myself and made it 8K.

 

[PsykX]

Apple Watch Series 8 has the same processor as Series 7, which has the same processor as Series 6, except a few minor differences.

As long as there's a spinner in some places in watchOS, I say yes, there is room for a more powerful processor.
That being said, the performance has absolutely nothing to do with Series 0. This one was ridiculously slow. Today's lineup is quite honorable, performance-wise.

Overall I can't say I wait after my watch that often, but a small boost in performance and a big boost in battery would be the way to go for the next gen.

 

[bodonnell202]

Apple has been using the same CPU in the Apple Watch for 3 generations now, and that CPU uses the efficiency cores from the A13 which was launched in 2019. While I agree that more processing power isn’t really needed at the moment, echoing what others have said they could’ve focused on efficiency and improved battery life. The S6/S7/S8 is built on a N7P process - imagine how much more efficient it could be if they built it on a N5P process (which is what the A15 is built on), and prioritized efficiency while maintaining performance.

 

[CalebEdenburn]

My watch SE1 with an S5 processor has significant lag doing day to day operations. The thought that the $800 ultra only has a processor one year newer is a travesty.

 

[Mikeske]

I really do not understand it all on needing more power and the fact that this watch if you really want to call is really an adjutant to the iPhone. It is nice it can do some amazing things in helping it owner as it is now. I mean to say it is doing far more than most folks will ever use. It has multiple pricing tiers from the most basic to high end for a watch. It can assist monitoring someones heart health and when a woman is expecting her monthly cycle. I replace my original Apple Watch with a dead battery with a series 8 and I was absolutely amazed the progress that has been made with this device. I decided against the higher end versions and went basic with the series 8 in space black. People on this forum will always want MORRRE POWWWWWER but really what for so the price is even more expensive.

 

[GSWForever8]

I don’t care about cpu, my series 5 is doing just fine. I care about better battery life though.

 

[Danfango]

I think anyone asking for more performance here needs to actually rationalise how fast the CPUs are in these things.

We basically have a mid level Cray T3E strapped to our wrists.

 

[MayaUser]

Since it will be 3 years old, the next watch needs a new SiP,while watchOS is improving little by little every year

 

[CraigJDuffy]

At the moment I‘d rather have more efficiency than computing power, the AW seems to be fine in terms of being capable enough for any task that it‘s doing right now.

Greater power can = lower power use as you can run the processor at higher clock speeds for a lower amount of time.

 

[Alex Cai]

Apple has been using the same CPU in the Apple Watch for 3 generations now, and that CPU uses the efficiency cores from the A13 which was launched in 2019. While I agree that more processing power isn’t really needed at the moment, echoing what others have said they could’ve focused on efficiency and improved battery life. The S6/S7/S8 is built on a N7P process - imagine how much more efficient it could be if they built it on a N5P process (which is what the A15 is built on), and prioritized efficiency while maintaining performance.

Well Apple said that the always on display is brighter(on series 5 and 6 event) to keep the battery life at 18 hours. But the battery will always be dead in the afternoon if I turn LTE on

 

[cheesygrin]

The number one thing you’re missing is longevity. The Apple Watch 3 was fine when it came out, but became almost unusable through its lifetime due to limited storage space and cpu power. Software updates get bigger and more complex every year and require more power to run the latest software. For the watch (or any device for that matter) to STAY snappy over time, it needs to be a little bit overkill when it first comes out.

 

[curnalpanic]

Yes, and 32 GB of RAM too.