Anandtech: Apple's Cyclone Microarchitecture Detailed (A7)

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by chrmjenkins, Mar 31, 2014.

  1. chrmjenkins, Mar 31, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2014

    chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #1
  2. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #2
    I'd like to say THANK YOU.

    This is one of the few thread where the topic is not a silly question about an Apple product or a mere excuse to start a flame with a complaint , where the usual Note 3 owner (it seems that almost every note 3 user has a subscription on MacRumors forum) would try to convince all of us that Apple is doomed and his purchase is sooooo superior :rolleyes:

    I'm going to read that article because I love the way anandtech analyze every architecture and every product without any bias (on GsmArena if you have a quad core and 2 Ghz you HAVE TO BE BETTER than a dual core with 1.4 Ghz, no matter if the benchmarks show another story :rolleyes:).

    Thank you
     
  3. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #3

    Really?

    First reply and this this is already heading toward the alternative section.

    Let's try to keep on topic I think this would be an interesting thread.
     
  4. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #4
    I beg your pardon .... but I'm so tired of those flame in this section (or I should say in this forum :rolleyes:)
    I learned more about android devices here than in the android forum where I'm signed up ....
     
  5. jamesjingyi macrumors 6502a

    jamesjingyi

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    I always wondered why the A7 was so fast compared to the A6 or even the SGN3, this looks like a good read.
     
  6. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #6
    Anand made some assumptions during iPhone 5S first review .... And he probably was right.
     
  7. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #7

    Its because someone randomly antagonizes competing product owners and then those people go on the defense. ;)

    That is a very good article though. Excellent reference material.
     
  8. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #8
    The most challenging part of last year's iPhone 5s review was piecing together details about Apple's A7 without any internal Apple assistance. I had less than a week to turn the review around and limited access to tools (much less time to develop them on my own) to figure out what Apple had done to double CPU performance without scaling frequency. The end result was an (incorrect) assumption that Apple had simply evolved its first ARMv7 architecture (codename: Swift).

    This is why I really love that website. People not looking at marketing biased specs ....
     
  9. T5BRICK macrumors 604

    T5BRICK

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon
    #9
    Good read. I had forgotten how in depth Anandtech goes.
     
  10. easy-peasy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2014
    #10
    Anandtech is simply the best. He goes so in depth that I have to digest his reviews in pieces (and that's a good thing).

    Wish I could have a lunch with him sometime to chat about technology and learn just how inferior my knowledge is ;)
     
  11. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #11
    I like the conclusions:

    Looking at Cyclone makes one thing very clear: the rest of the players in the ultra mobile CPU space didn't aim high enough. I wonder what happens next round.

    Typical user only looks at screen dimensions, but with A7 Apple just took everyone off-guard ...
     
  12. T5BRICK macrumors 604

    T5BRICK

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon
    #12
    Although, he did mention that the chip in the current platform may be handicapped with only 1GB of RAM.
     
  13. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #13
    I really hope Apple bumps up the RAM in the 6. The baseline model being 32 GB of storage would also be nice with 128 GB being at the top.

    As for the A7, it really is an impressive feat of engineering. I'm eager to see what Apple delivers next time around.
     
  14. chrmjenkins thread starter macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #14
    Apple tends to upgrade the RAM every other phone iteration, like the hardware design. Increased RAM usage from 64-bit pointers will get some relief with 2GB.

    At this point, the amount of NAND they use is more of a market decision than technical one. It's technically possible with NAND densities now.
     
  15. easy-peasy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2014
    #15
    And stop customers from handing them an extra $100? No way! Gotta maximize dem' profits :cool:
     
  16. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #16
    Yes and it's really about time for an upgrade. I don't have high hopes, though.

    We used to have 4 GB iPhones. It has nothing to do with profits. Storage increase is a natural evolution of technology. High storage is expensive at first and then comes down in price. I'm sure they will implement it when it financially makes sense. The size of apps (and everything else) is increasing. I had to get the 32 GB model because by the time I was done installing all my apps I was already using 18 GB of space. There are apps I use that are at least 1 GB and bigger games these days can take up several. 16 GB is becoming obsolete fast. Having to delete apps to install others is certainly not convenient.
     
  17. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #17

    Hmm? Nothing to do with profit but when it financially makes sense?

    I happen to think its to do with profit also. Other manufactures are using 32gb of storage as the base.

    iOS is still small enough to keep selling 16gb. And as long as there are people that aren't using it all they'll keep selling it.

    [​IMG]

    I pretty much only use my phone for business and social media. Everything else is cloud based.
     
  18. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #18
    It's not handicapped, just not exploited to its full power ....
    I'm looking forward for a 2 Gb iPhone 6

    ----------

    Baseline model still is 16 Gb for many products, so I don't think Apple will change it in the next upgrade.
    Btw in my case 16 Gb is enough for the smartphone but not for the tablet ....
     
  19. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #19
    I guess that did sound rather contradictory. :p


    That's great and all, but you can't store apps in the cloud. And having to pay for extra cloud storage due to a lack of internal storage is rather dumb, but I suppose Apple likes it that way. I don't personally like having all my photos in the cloud.
     
  20. T5BRICK macrumors 604

    T5BRICK

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon
    #20
    Definition of handicap: a disadvantage that makes achievement unusually difficult

    By equipping the current hardware using the A7 with only 1GB of RAM, they gave it a disadvantage when it comes to future software requirements.
     
  21. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #21

    With Apples cloud the information has to be on the device. So it's not an alternative to save space. If it's on Apples cloud it's on a device. Nor is it readily accessible great for backups though.

    [​IMG]

    I meant cloud like Dropbox. I have 3-4 gb of photos and documents stored there. It's a really good solution to wanting to have access to things occasionally with chewing up my storage.

    Meanwhile I off load useless stuff (but stuff I don't want to necessarily delete) to my Mac.

    My point being though was as long as it's possible to get iOS and a few apps on the iDevice Apple will continue to sell 16 gb and sell 32 gb for an incredible 100 dollars (I know Apple isn't the only company that charges that much but there are some that charge 50 for that upgrade). Too me that is a cash cow I don't see Apple letting go of.
     
  22. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #22
    It will eventually be a standard... it has to. That's the way of things. But you're probably right that it will be a while. I'll just continue getting the more expensive models. >_> This kind of thing makes Android devices with storage slots very enticing. $100 for an extra 16 GB is absurd.
     
  23. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #23

    Totally agree. Eventually 32 gb will need to be the standard. I just don't think so for the next or even next couple of iPhones.

    -------------

    More on topic this article makes the A7 seem like an amazing piece of tech that's well ahead of its time. And it really is, no native or 3rd party apps are close to maxing out its capabilities.

    So, what will the next iPhone have?

    Generally tech is spoon fed. The A7 seems like a wheel barrel full.
     
  24. Max(IT) Suspended

    Max(IT)

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Italy
    #24
    I think A8 will be just a refined A7 at higher frequencies .... And a more powerful GPU (according with Apple tradition they always use fast GPU in their SoC).
     
  25. Xenomorph macrumors 65816

    Xenomorph

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Location:
    St. Louis
    #25
    Yes 4GB back in 2007. And here we are, in 2014, where you can still get a new iPhone with 8GB of storage.

    NAND is cheap. It costs them pennies for it. They could make the base device have 32GB storage and still make a big profit. 64GB doesn't cost that much any more.

    You can hold 1TB of flash with one finger. The technology is already here to pack as much storage as possible in each device.

    It's not an issue of size.

    It's not an issue of evolution or technology.

    It's a money issue. Either they want to earn a bunch more profit, or they want to push you to their subscription service. $$$ is the only reason.
     

Share This Page