Why didn’t the Ultra get a nice new chipFinally! We are getting a new chip. It is time. I want the new Apple Watch Ultra to perform like an M2 chip. Blazing fast! Supercharged!
It would have been ideal but that’s Apple.Why didn’t the Ultra get a nice new chip![]()
A faster CPU can mean a better battery life if it can get the job done quickly and go back to idle/sleep. If a slow inefficient CPU has to run at full load for a longer period it's just going to drain the battery quicker assuming both CPUs use the same amount of power.How is this important? And I mean that question 100% seriously. I have a series 8 watch. If it were 500% faster, how would that be noticeable to me? When I check a notification or a run distance or something else, would I see a difference between 5ms and 1ms?
I wouldn’t hold my breath on another chip update next year, considering they used a chip based on the 7 nm A13 for 3 years. 5 nm has been widely available since 2020, and the Apple Watch is rumoured to get it this year. It could be 2026 before the AW gets a chip made on a 3 nm process.I'd rather wait another year if necessary and jump straight to 3nm.
Totally agree. Only battery improvements from the chip are worth anything.Not really like the watches have been a lag-fest last couple of years though
Hey Apple, if you don't install macOS, an A15 is useless, on the contrary, explain to us how you will manage an A15 in the space of an Apple Watch, without dissipation, if it already has problems in an iPhone.
However, we are not waiting for an A15, if anything you should explain to us why you are always selling us the Apple Watch 4 with some improvement for 5 years, we are waiting for the blood glucose measurement, the no longer being a companion of the iPhone, the possibility of DEFINITELY burying that uselessness that are the smartphones from which wearables and tablets exist, and you know it, because before iPhone the project was born for iPad.
So ok, recycle the A15 that you couldn't sell, but that's not what we want, and you'll have to prove to us that it's not rubbish, as already happened in the past with updated CPUs on old form factors.
Umm, they won’t be putting a full A15 in the Apple Watch. Most likely it will be a dual core chip based on the little (efficiency) cores of the A15 (the A15 is a 6 core chip with 2 big cores, and 4 little cores). It will also have a significantly cut down GPU and lack several other A15 components that aren’t needed for a watch (or HomePod) chip such as the ISP and neural engine.Hey Apple, if you don't install macOS, an A15 is useless, on the contrary, explain to us how you will manage an A15 in the space of an Apple Watch, without dissipation, if it already has problems in an iPhone.
However, we are not waiting for an A15, if anything you should explain to us why you are always selling us the Apple Watch 4 with some improvement for 5 years, we are waiting for the blood glucose measurement, the no longer being a companion of the iPhone, the possibility of DEFINITELY burying that uselessness that are the smartphones from which wearables and tablets exist, and you know it, because before iPhone the project was born for iPad.
So ok, recycle the A15 that you couldn't sell, but that's not what we want, and you'll have to prove to us that it's not rubbish, as already happened in the past with updated CPUs on old form factors.
I don't know if there's any history on the watch side, but in software counts start at zero, including references to position. So, in psuedocode:Okay, this has convinced me to finally upgrade my Stainless Steel Series 4 44mm to the Apple Watch Ultra Series 1. Battery life is starting to become an issue, especially because I have been exercising a lot more this year.
I assume they're going to pull the same crap and name the second one the Series 1?
array myArray = ['a','b','c'];
print myArray[0];
print myArray[1];
Apple sits on almost 50% of the entire smart watch market -Nobody comes close in performance and build quality at the same price point, so they barely have to do anything to maintain sales.Hey Apple, if you don't install macOS, an A15 is useless, on the contrary, explain to us how you will manage an A15 in the space of an Apple Watch, without dissipation, if it already has problems in an iPhone.
However, we are not waiting for an A15, if anything you should explain to us why you are always selling us the Apple Watch 4 with some improvement for 5 years, we are waiting for the blood glucose measurement, the no longer being a companion of the iPhone, the possibility of DEFINITELY burying that uselessness that are the smartphones from which wearables and tablets exist, and you know it, because before iPhone the project was born for iPad.
So ok, recycle the A15 that you couldn't sell, but that's not what we want, and you'll have to prove to us that it's not rubbish, as already happened in the past with updated CPUs on old form factors.
They’ve been solid. Based on rumors newer OS will be more taxing.Not really like the watches have been a lag-fest last couple of years though
I think battery could be the biggest improvement here with a new chip. Hopefully.How is this important? And I mean that question 100% seriously. I have a series 8 watch. If it were 500% faster, how would that be noticeable to me? When I check a notification or a run distance or something else, would I see a difference between 5ms and 1ms?