If u dont care how its achieved buy an ipod classic. 160gb. Sold at the apple store as we write.
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.
Apple TV's A5 Chip Includes Surprise Die Shrink to 32nm [Updated: Same Chip Found in iPad 2]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If u dont care how its achieved buy an ipod classic. 160gb. Sold at the apple store as we write.
No.
They are practicing to build chips using the improved process. In the first round of chips a significant number has only one working core. So they build these chips, figure out what goes wrong, and keep improving. And by using the chip in the Apple TV first, they reduce the risk. They can always use single core 40 nm chips if the 32 nm chips don't work out.
Last edited:
An as-simple explanation is that this die shrink was being pursued for the current iPhone 4S, but yields weren't yet good enough so they went with their lower risk contingency of the 45nm process version of the chip.
Since yields were adequate for the single core required for the lower production volume Apple TV, it was able to proceed forward with the 32nm shrunken die plan.
-hh
Last edited:
1. there was not much competition at the time the 3G came out. There is a lot more competition now. Not upgrading the chip at least even a little would look really bad and like Apple really was resting on its laurels (they already kinda do look like it, and this from some one who is happy with the direction they are going. But I can see how it could appear they aren't staying on top of things when they are just evolving rather than putting anything really different. Making it so the phone doesn't even get a spec bump would look really bad).
2. This isn't an argument as to whether they will, but whether they should. And I say yes. The 3G in my opinion was the worst iphone to come out. Why? Because it stayed relevant so very short. Even before iOS 4 came out it was already starting to be laggy. Because it was running a chip that was a year old by the time it came out (and not even sped up or any augments to it). Notice the 3GS is still usable today, they even sell it as a really cheap option. It got a nice processor upgrade. (I also suspect the 4 isn't going to stay as relevant for long cause it didn't get much of a processor bump and had a screen that needed more processor power to deal with). The 3GS has managed to stay relevant a year and a half (so far) longer than the 3G was (they only supported it a little after iOS4 and then gave up on it pretty soon after).
The 32nm part is cheaper then a 45nm part, thats 1 reason to shrink, (though you have to pay for the cost of shrinking), it also generates less heat and draws less power. Given we know the Ipad 2 (new cheap one) is running this part, I am guessing all devices running the A5 part will be running this cheaper, less power using part as soon as Apple runs out of the 45nm A5s.
-Tig
----------
Since they are selling Ipad 2s with this part, I think the whole they are probably binning them theory probably needs to be thrown out. I am guessing the Iphone 4s is or soon will be using the part as well, they are probably just turning off the second processor in firmware, we do it all the time to save heat and power.
It's important to note that a new node is not automatically cheaper. The fab has to pay to develop these new technologies, and the equipment can cost million of dollars. I can guarantee you that the wafer, initially, is going to be more expensive. You may get more chips per wafer, but the wafer is going to be more. You buy the more expensive wafer because you get more parts that are smaller, draw less power, etc.
Hopefully the next iPhone will get a 32nm chip. I believe the A5X in the iPad is too large for the iPhone in the current state, so that won't be in it.
Dual core A5 @ 1+ GHz for the iPhone 5 (vs. iPhone 4S's 800MHz) should be possible because of the die shrink. Likely more power efficient, too, leaving some battery headroom for LTE radios. And as said in previous posts, it would make a perfect chip for a 1024x768 iPad mini.
Dual core A5 with the die shrink in the next-gen iPod touch, maybe even at the current iPhone's 800MHz (thus they can use chips that would otherwise fail at 1GHz). It could also be used in a revised 8GB low-end $99 iPhone 4S to take the place of the iPhone 3GS.
This, plus the single core A5 (dual core with one core disabled/defective) and Apple makes use of virtually every functional chip coming off this fabrication line.
Reserve the higher-priced A5X for the iPad 3 (and maybe the mythical Apple HDTV) and they've got a complete iOS product line for the next year.
Dual core A5 with the die shrink in the next-gen iPod touch, maybe even at the current iPhone's 800MHz (thus they can use chips that would otherwise fail at 1GHz). It could also be used in a revised 8GB low-end $99 iPhone 4S to take the place of the iPhone 3GS.
This, plus the single core A5 (dual core with one core disabled/defective) and Apple makes use of virtually every functional chip coming off this fabrication line.
Reserve the higher-priced A5X for the iPad 3 (and maybe the mythical Apple HDTV) and they've got a complete iOS product line for the next year.
THANK YOU SAMSUNG!!!
I truly thank you on behalf of all blind followers. Thank you for your new 32nm Samsung High-K Metal Gate manufacturing process. You are leaders in innovation and invention. Without you, none of this would be possible. Truly magical.
I truly thank you on behalf of all blind followers. Thank you for your new 32nm Samsung High-K Metal Gate manufacturing process. You are leaders in innovation and invention. Without you, none of this would be possible. Truly magical.
iPhone 5 will have shrunken A5 with more RAM. IPhone 5S will have A6. iPad 4 will be first to have A6.
It seems they're testing the waters with 32nm, it's good to know they'll be going with that next round of iDevices 
Yes, Apple needs people to upgrade and buy new every year. Therefore they will hold back on the technology as much as they can. So even if they could give you the perfect iPhone with quad core and NFC, etc, they won't, because of simple business strategy.
Possible. A5 will be 1.5 years old then. I just don't see Apple resting on their laurels when they've pushed the envelope continually with the iPhone.
Historically, the next iPhone has gotten the iPad processor. That's not possible with the A5X. Thus, Apple builds an existing processor on a new node to retire risk so they don't have to build a new processor on a new node with the A6.
You also have to consider that the reference to a successor to the A5 has been in Apple code for over a year when the next iPad launches if that is indeed when it comes out. If they were building it for the next iPad, they wouldn't even get first silicon back for another few months at least. Why have a reference to it in code before that? And if so, you're putting it in there to subtly advertise to your customers something new is coming. Why do that if you're just telling them their iPad will be outdated in a year?
Software (though technically we'd call it firmware usually) the parts are running dual core on the new Ipad 2, and the same parts are running single core on the Apple TV 3, so despite the part binning comments etc that started the article now that we know the same part are in the Ipad 2, we know that is not really happening. Its likely that there are iPhone 4S's running it as well, though chipworks hasnt said they have found one yet (though they are looking).
-Tig
Silicon chips have random defects - it's the nature of the materials and the process.
A wafer has many chips on it - some will be defective, some will be OK.
If a dual-core chip has a defect in the chip area for one core, it may still be able to function perfectly well as a single-core chip.
In the case of a shrink like this, it's quite possible that the number of chips which work correctly as dual-core is fairly low - but that a good number of them work fine as single-core chips.
_________________
As an example, Intel's "Celeron" CPUs early on were just Pentiums with half-sized cache. They were actually from the same wafers as the Pentiums, but had defects in the cache. Intel's process could disable the defective regions of the cache, and sell the chips as Celerons with half the cache as a Pentium.
Actually they are cheaper because more die fit on each wafer, the die for the new A5, is 41% smaller then the die for the old A5. Smaller die, more die's per wafer and thus a cheaper part. The same A5s are being used in the Apple TV3, and the newer cheaper Ipad 2's, which means the second core is disabled in the firmware on the Apple TV 3.
Sometime very interesting that I don't believe has been noted in this thread:
New iPad 2's are using this 32 nm A5 already. They say they're going to be checking new iPhone 4S models to see if they are also utilizing it. I imagine they likely are.
I am curious to see what kind of impact this has on battery life, if any at all.
EDIT: Might want to update the title to reflect that the iPad 2 is also taking advantage of the new A5 die shrink.
New iPad 2's are using this 32 nm A5 already. They say they're going to be checking new iPhone 4S models to see if they are also utilizing it. I imagine they likely are.
I am curious to see what kind of impact this has on battery life, if any at all.
EDIT: Might want to update the title to reflect that the iPad 2 is also taking advantage of the new A5 die shrink.
Last edited:
The non-binned parts plus 512mb ram are likely headed for the next iPod Touch. Apple will probably keep the iPod processor a generation behind for now. Hopefully the next iPhone sees some actual speed improvements. Dual-core Arm A15 at a smaller die size than current gen (ATV excluded). Should allow lower power and better processing. I'll guess 1Ghz A15 dual-core, 1GB ram, similar quad-core graphics to those in new iPador maybe newer, faster dual-core chip since the screen resolution is unlikely to change drastically. Then Apple could use the quad-core version of that chip in the newer iPad next spring.
Only reason I'm thinking the next iPhone gets an A6 before the iPad is because it seems unlikely Apple would keep the same exact chip but at a smaller sizeunless LTE and slightly bigger screen/resolution really kills the battery. But I think the Arm A15 is supposed to be more power efficient.
Only reason I'm thinking the next iPhone gets an A6 before the iPad is because it seems unlikely Apple would keep the same exact chip but at a smaller sizeunless LTE and slightly bigger screen/resolution really kills the battery. But I think the Arm A15 is supposed to be more power efficient.
Remember, Apple is still making the iPad 2 ($400), that means they plan to support the A5 for awhile. Also keep in mind the New iPad is exactly the same as the iPad 2 except for more RAM and quad graphics to support the Retina screen. I would say the iPhone 5 will be a A5, and I wonder if Apple will care to put more RAM in it, since the extra RAM in the New iPad is for graphics (more RAM means more power drain). However if Apple does add more RAM to the iPhone 5 then I think it will just be 768MB. The iPad 2, New iPad, iPhone 4S, and iPhone 5 will support iOS6. I give a %75 chance that the iPhone 4 (they are still selling the iPhone 4 too) and original iPad will support iOS6, but performance will definitely take a hit. The iPhone 5 will sell well, because of redesigned look (bigger screen), and LTE. The iPhone 5S will sell well because of A6, etc. iPad 4 will be first iOS device with A6.
lol I actually pre-ordered two of them when they were announced, then quickly returned it as it didn't seem to be a big improvement over the 2nd gen. I have a 1st gen that I replaced the WiFi card with a Crystal HD graphics card, connected to my Media server, plays everything from standard 1-2 GB encodes to 25-40GB mkv 1080P DTS encodes with XBMC or Plex. Yet I returned the 2 I pre-ordered and got a Mac Mini. Best decision I made, esp now that you can play Blu-Ray DVD's in OS X. No jailbreaking or such required and handles much more than the "hobby" device that Apple pimps out. Comparisons between iTunes 1080P demonstrate little improvement against their 720P movies, are overpriced and don't have DTS.