Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Reportedly Signs Deal with Samsung for 14-nm A9 Chips Starting in 2015

Technarchy said:
Apple has way too much interest and dealings with chip manufacturers lately. Something's amiss. It Seems like they are loading up on capacity. But for what? What is it they think will drive demand to such an extent that they need all these firms cranking out chips.
Click to expand...

Not really. Remember they also had a lot of interest in chip manufacturing, even before iOS devices, with their Mac when they switched from IBM to Intel and there was even RUMOURS of AMD as well as creating their own.

IMO it seems they're sticking with Samsung because they have a 14 nm chip and they have the track record of success when it comes to quality and quantity. The others, I feel, are being groomed to either replace Samsung one day or pick up any slack if there are any supply issues in the future. Also as someone noted they could be used to manufacture chips for other devices. As always business is business.
 
Seems Apple likes playing "Hop Scotch"

They turn the other way when Samsung and Apple go against each other in court, and Apple looses, but Samsung sweetens the deal with offering Apple something they are looking for ....
 
Thoughts

This is not necessarily bad. While I am no engineer, I had the following thoughts:

1) Competition is good. A win to produce chips at 14nm only means Samsung has obtained a contract for that process node. Samsung is on notice that more companies are vying to produce chips for Apple and they will have to compete for (rather than assume) Apple's business. Their chokehold on Apple is not as tight as they thought.

2) Perhaps there is a year (2014?) for which Samsung is not producing chips for Apple. This would prevent them from having access to Apple's technology for that year and if so, when Samsung resumes production the following year, it would put them a year behind in (knowledge about Apple's) engineering.

3) Apple is loading up on (and investing in?) chip suppliers due to different needs for current and future products (iPods, iPhones (premium and base models), AppleTV, iTV, iWatch, etc.). Perhaps Samsung will develop the chips which require cutting edge node technology, while TSMC and GF will continue to produce older chips on proven technologies. The exception might be next year if TSMC (and GF?) have already proven the ability to produce chips at 20nm.

Thoughts?
 
Technarchy said:
Apple has way too much interest and dealings with chip manufacturers lately. Something's amiss. It Seems like they are loading up on capacity. But for what? What is it they think will drive demand to such an extent that they need all these firms cranking out chips.
Click to expand...

Well clearly they are buying up all the chips and manufacturing time to block all other phone/tablet manufacturers from being able to have their own supply ;)
 
So the so called "no innovator" Samsung successfully developed a new 14 nm processor since the patent dispute, while all Apple delivered is a Windows8/Android ripoff thin layer of paint for an OS.
 
Hey guys - I came up with a new drinking game. Every time you see the words "fanboy" (or some spelling variation thereof) or "innovation" (or variation thereof) somewhere in these forums, take a shot.

You should be waiting for an ambulance in about 15 minutes. Good luck!
 
Renzatic said:
The most simplistic and incredibly basic way to explain what a processor does is to think of it as a space where a current of electricity moves along a bunch of channels through a series of gates. A CPU operation is when a current has traveled through enough gates to perform a task. The farther the current has to travel along the channels between these gates to perform a task, the more power that's required to push it. If you shorten the channels between the gates, then it takes less power to move a current to perform an operation. The end result is a more efficient CPU that can do the same task at a lower voltage setting.

The advantage smaller CPUs have for mobile platforms is that they're easier on batteries, since they don't require as much power to run an operation as a larger CPU at the same speed, and don't produce as much heat.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the smaller die size also decrease the physical space taken to complete said task? Thus increasing not only battery life but also performance.

Correct me if i'm wrong.
 
Kid Vorpal said:
Hey guys - I came up with a new drinking game. Every time you see the words "fanboy" (or some spelling variation thereof) or "innovation" (or variation thereof) somewhere in these forums, take a shot.

You should be waiting for an ambulance in about 15 minutes. Good luck!
Click to expand...


Here is another drinking game, every time someone says Samsung is evil, or says its ok for Apple to violate someone else's patent or defends apple breaking the law you take a drink....
 
leroypants said:
And fanboys are pathetic.
Click to expand...

Childish more likely .. Then again, its the internet .. Wouldn't expect anything else ..

----------
leroypants said:
Here is another drinking game, every time someone says Samsung is evil, or says its ok for Apple to violate someone else's patent or defends apple breaking the law you take a drink....
Click to expand...

Can I just drink when someone mentions Apple or Samsung or Google or simply ... phone ?
 
Renzatic said:
The most simplistic and incredibly basic way to explain what a processor does is to think of it as a space where a current of electricity moves along a bunch of channels through a series of gates. A CPU operation is when a current has traveled through enough gates to perform a task. The farther the current has to travel along the channels between these gates to perform a task, the more power that's required to push it. If you shorten the channels between the gates, then it takes less power to move a current to perform an operation. The end result is a more efficient CPU that can do the same task at a lower voltage setting.

The advantage smaller CPUs have for mobile platforms is that they're easier on batteries, since they don't require as much power to run an operation as a larger CPU at the same speed, and don't produce as much heat.
Click to expand...


And you have more chips in the same wafer :)
 
Xgm541 said:
Doesn't the smaller die size also decrease the physical space taken to complete said task? Thus increasing not only battery life but also performance.

Correct me if i'm wrong.
Click to expand...

From the way I understand it, yeah. A 14nm chip running at the same voltage as a 22nm chip is performing the same tasks faster. This is the way things are usually set up for desktop CPUs. Intel keeps the clocks and voltage settings of their new smaller die chips about the same as the previous generation chips, but you'll still see a bump in performance.

Oletros said:
And you have more chips in the same wafer :)
Click to expand...

And this, which I believe means they can fit more channels and gates onto a chip, which means a chip of the same size can perform more tasks per second.

There's a lot I'm hazy on, and by a lot I mean an absolute crap ton, but I believe this is the basics of how it all works.
 
Last edited:
Brandon263 said:
Samsung is evil.
Click to expand...

If true, then much of your iPhone is evil. Do the right thing: get rid of it.

----------
sw1tcher said:
If this story is true about Apple signing a new deal with Samsung, then I'd say Apple needs Samsung more than Samsung needs Apple.
Click to expand...


If not for Samsung, Apple would not exist as we know it. Yes indeed, Apple needs Samsung very much.
 
Val-kyrie said:
This is not necessarily bad. While I am no engineer, I had the following thoughts:

1) Competition is good. A win to produce chips at 14nm only means Samsung has obtained a contract for that process node. Samsung is on notice that more companies are vying to produce chips for Apple and they will have to compete for (rather than assume) Apple's business. Their chokehold on Apple is not as tight as they thought.

2) Perhaps there is a year (2014?) for which Samsung is not producing chips for Apple. This would prevent them from having access to Apple's technology for that year and if so, when Samsung resumes production the following year, it would put them a year behind in (knowledge about Apple's) engineering.

3) Apple is loading up on (and investing in?) chip suppliers due to different needs for current and future products (iPods, iPhones (premium and base models), AppleTV, iTV, iWatch, etc.). Perhaps Samsung will develop the chips which require cutting edge node technology, while TSMC and GF will continue to produce older chips on proven technologies. The exception might be next year if TSMC (and GF?) have already proven the ability to produce chips at 20nm.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I had to log in and say that you're the definition of a sheep.
 
In the meantime Samsung seems to be the player who decides the rules. But competition is good for the customers, so no complaint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back