Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
A7 Processor to Be 31% Faster and 64-Bit, iPhone 5S to Support Motion Tracking?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
iOS is OS X; which is already 64-Bit underlying. The Kernel may just run at present in 32-Bit mode.
My thoughts, it's amazing the performance increase. The rate they're going we'll see 20%+ increase on each generation.
It's interesting seeing the improvement of these processors and methinks it raises the question for the distant future with power/performance/battery if we might see a Macbook Air with a A(whatever number they are up to) in it.
Why would a current 32 bit ARM processor which has 64 bit double precision floating point and 128 bit vector registers have its memory bus restricted to 32 bit? Documentation is hard to find, but the 64 bit Haswell processor has a 256 bit memory bus.
----------
What innovations? Name _one_ thing that competitors have done that you would call innovation if Apple had done it. (Or that you called innovation when Apple actually did it, because there are plenty of Android fans with bad memory around).
Err, Apple knows how to use more ram than a CPU can support. They had bankswitching in the Apple IIs if anyone here is that old...
Mavericks includes some new memory compression technology that manages to improve memory usage significantly. There's no reason why that technology wouldn't be used in iOS 7. And more RAM uses more power therefore battery life goes down.
Normally I would agree with this point but times are changing......apple has very stiff competition now so maybe they step their game up a bit on this version of the phone.
Then throw in the fact you really have to cost justify the difference between the iPhone 5c and the 5S. If Apple doesn't give the 5S more horsepower there really wouldn't be a big enough drive to pay the extra money for it.
I have a question.
Is it 31% faster or 'roughly' 31% faster. And if it is 'roughly', what does that mean? If you said roughly 30% (rounding it to the nearest 10%) I would understand what you mean. Or if you round it up to a third faster, that would be roughly a third faster. But you instead added "accuracy" by saying that the originally stated 31% was actually something else like "31.17%".
The French report apparently just said "is 31% faster" and so did MacRumors until you changed it in the next line.
I would love to get the new iphone but the note 2 has ruined me on tiny screens. I could probably drop to 4.5" but I had an iphone 5 before I got the note 2 and 4" didn't really thrill me. Also without zephyr since there will be no jailbreak that really hurts too. Zephyr is great. I also wish I could mount the iphone directly as a mass storage device without needing to use iTunes
It's solved. Has been solved for years. I have regularly compiled apps for PowerPC 32 bit, x86 32-bit and x86-64, and compiled the same code for ARM as well. And it's actually supported in iOS. There are different versions of the ARM processor (ARM v7 and ARM v7s) used in different iOS devices, and the ARM v7s has for example much better vector processing. So if your own code benefits from it, you can produce code for both processors.
Perhaps a MacBook Air with a slimmed down version of OSX maybe. I don't see them using their AX for iOS chips in their Macs any time soon.
I'm curious what else Apple will have under their sleeve. I don't see a problem with the current speed of the 4S nor do I hear people really complaining about it. Don't get me wrong, a processor upgrade is more than welcome but there also isn't anything wrong with the 4S. Where will we see these changes aside from game load time? Average consumers don't care about technical specifications but look at value instead. The 4S still has a very good camera so is it going to be worth the upgrade price + buying all new accessories (cases, chargers, lightning adapters, etc?).
Personally, my friends and family have no interest in updating unless Apple introduces something new that their phone can't do. Will others? Of course.
Personally, my friends and family have no interest in updating unless Apple introduces something new that their phone can't do. Will others? Of course.
I think I can speak for a lot of people when I say the fingerprint scanner won't be a hit. The possibility that an intruder can steal my fingerprint is too risky. You can change a password, but not your fingerprint.
p.s. I think a slight screen bump would be great.
There is absolutely nothing a hacker could do with a digital copy of your fingerprint. What exactly is the concern? As a form of identification, fingerprints actually require your physical presence in order to be used. No institution would ever accept a digital copy of your fingerprint as proof of ID. you would never be able to email a bank someone's fingerprint and expect to have access to their account.
I'm not! Lol. It just didn't sound high to me. I'm sure Apple knows what they're doing. I just hope the next iPhone is a true speed demon.
And people keep confusing 64-bit support:
- It doesn't bring speed if implemented alone;
- It allows for more RAM (which is good: iOS needs more RAM, since it doesn't do swap files);
- 64-bit processors MAY NOT be able to run 32-bit code. It just so happens that the transition from G4 to G5 and x86-32 to x86-64 were thought out so that the processors still supported the OLD 32-bit instructions. But it's not a requirement. Intel even tried building a 64-bit processor that didn't support the old instructions and it tanked: the Itanium with its mighty IA-64 arch. This is a tough choice to make as ARM's philosophy is to be light, but keeping backwards compatibility is a big advantage in consumer due to not needing recompiles;
- Quad core will only be faster if devs use the cores which a lot don't.
Looking forward to hearing what it'll be. iOS doesn't need 64-bit right now, IMO. But will in a year or two.
- It doesn't bring speed if implemented alone;
- It allows for more RAM (which is good: iOS needs more RAM, since it doesn't do swap files);
- 64-bit processors MAY NOT be able to run 32-bit code. It just so happens that the transition from G4 to G5 and x86-32 to x86-64 were thought out so that the processors still supported the OLD 32-bit instructions. But it's not a requirement. Intel even tried building a 64-bit processor that didn't support the old instructions and it tanked: the Itanium with its mighty IA-64 arch. This is a tough choice to make as ARM's philosophy is to be light, but keeping backwards compatibility is a big advantage in consumer due to not needing recompiles;
- Quad core will only be faster if devs use the cores which a lot don't.
Looking forward to hearing what it'll be. iOS doesn't need 64-bit right now, IMO. But will in a year or two.
I like how you have no faith in Apple, the most original and successful smartphone manufacturer, but you a positive about unnamed 'others' to do what Apple cannot. Of course.
So essentially its going to get stomped by the existing snapdragon 600 devices and get absolutely murdered by the upcoming snapdragon 800 devices.
I'm not! Lol. It just didn't sound high to me. I'm sure Apple knows what they're doing. I just hope the next iPhone is a true speed demon.
Or at least the one after that
The good thing is apple's own dev tools do much of the work for you. Grand Central Dispatch technologies, if not there already, should do most (emphasis added) of the groundwork when rolled into iOS.
----------
Not so fast.
Android, given the massive amount of hardware it has to run on, is not even close to as optimized as iOS is. A bigger engine doesn't mean diddly if the transmission can't deliver the power. That's why many of the flagship Android devices have 2+ gigs of RAM and don't have the night and day performance difference someone would expect from just looking at specs. So far I'd say most are very comparable to the iP5.
Specs are meaningless if not implemented correctly.
I was thinking 5+ years when the processors mature so agreed not soon for the consumer portables, for the moment I feel it's purely speculation. Though there was a point where Intel processors in a Mac was a "looney" idea as well....
I think I can speak for a lot of people when I say the fingerprint scanner won't be a hit. The possibility that an intruder can steal my fingerprint is too risky. You can change a password, but not your fingerprint.
p.s. I think a slight screen bump would be great.
Please look at 9to5Macs article on the fingerprint scanner Apple would be using. They said that the fingerprint scanner could not read stolen finger prints because it needs the heat of the finger and some other things.
I'm admitting that petty first world advertising has spoiled me into want 2x as fast.
I won't base anything on the new processor, I doubt I'll upgrade because it makes me feel too frivolous since I have a functioning iPhone.
----------
It's not a standard, just a feature I was expecting. And I doubt I'll upgrade because I have a working phone and it makes me feel unappreciative.
I like it! I am quite moved indeed.