Apple's A4 Processor is Based on Cortex A8, Not A9?

[cmaier]

Here's another bit of news. The next A-series apple chip won't be an A9 either. Apple will use its architectural license to do its own design.

It will be multicore, in order retire, with a huge cache.

 

[Sander]

It comes out in May - June, it also uses that E-Ink.

Pixel Qi != E-Ink.

 

[iRACK]

I think you've made an important point here. Even though I feel underwhelmed by the iPad presentation we saw recently, I agree that this platform could well signal the future. I also think that the days of needing a full computer to do a lot of the heavy work is slowing, and we'll see the device or mobile device take the lead. For example, using an iPad plus a combination of some of the emerging software-as-a-service options (say dropbox, spotify, photoshop.com or iwork.com and host CRM software) is going to satisfy a lot of the middle ground functionality needed for both corporates and individuals.

The building of more cloud services (and massive data centres) with embedded functionality means we need less big spinning hard drives and heavy processing power (often underutilised) to be on our desks all the time. Some tasks might need it for a while yet, but the shift is on.

I've been building my own home network with NAS drives to hold music and video but yet even as I do it, I know that the dollars spent on it is going to be made redundant sooner rather later a simple model of a couple of thin client type devices (iPad) and the data and some of the processing being streamed from somewhere like here to wherever I am.

The future is a light weight device and platform model which will involve more subscriptions and more trust but this is offset by lower maintenance costs and continuous improvements in functionality. If the service providers and manufacturers get the balance right it really will change the way computing is done.

I agree with you guys. It does have huge potential.

Just think about ONLive. (www.onlive.com) They will start streaming 3D Games to devices! Processing power is somewhere else. Picture is being transmitted onto you device.

It is an amazing vision. Platform and Hardware independent gaming! Just think about it. X-Box, Playstation, Big Ass graphics card, all obsolete.

They already showed CRISIS being streamed to an iPhone but iPhones screen is to small. But think about an ipad with an external BlueTooth controller. BOOM. That would certainly rule!

This is just one example of a client dominated World. All you need is the bandwidth so.... (well lucky me)

 

[CyberBob859]

SJ bashed netbooks during the iPad's introduction but it sounds more and more like Apple's netbook:

Netbook: single core low power Atom processor
iPad: single core low power A4 processor

Netbook: multitasks poorly
iPad: doesn't multitask at all

Netbook: handles Flash poorly
iPad: doesn't handle Flash at all

The netbook misery usually comes in around $250-$500 (but can go up to $800 or so with options), while the iPad magic will come in at $500-$830.

At least with the netbook, there are some different processor options from some companies (dual core Atom 330, Nvidia Ion, Broadcom HD chip) and Flash 10.1 Beta to help smooth over the rough edges, if you're willing to pay for them.

 

[iRACK]

SJ bashed netbooks during the iPad's introduction but it sounds more and more like Apple's netbook:

Netbook: single core low power Atom processor
iPad: single core low power A4 processor

Netbook: multitasks poorly
iPad: doesn't multitask at all

Netbook: handles Flash poorly
iPad: doesn't handle Flash at all

The netbook misery usually comes in around $250-$500 (but can go up to $800 or so with options), while the iPad magic will come in at $500-$830.

At least with the netbook, there are some different processor options from some companies (dual core Atom 330, Nvidia Ion, Broadcom HD chip) and Flash 10.1 Beta to help smooth over the rough edges, if you're willing to pay for them.

What you forget is that the Netbook is trying to be a computer. The iPad is not.

 

[cmaier]

So can I infer from that very good explanation that multitasking is the chief advantage of the A9 and this is the explanation why there will be no multitasking for this generation of the IPAD if it uses the older A8?

There is no difference in multitasking (at the user level) between an A9 and A8. Imagine we have an A8 and an A9, and each has two adders in it, so each can add two numbers at a time. Now imagine I have a program which adds some numbers. Here's what happens on each processor:

A8
---
----Adder 1 --- Adder 2
1) A=B+C
2) D=A+E
3) F=G+H


A9
---
----Adder 1 --- Adder2
1) A=B+C --- F=G+H
2) D=A+E

In other words, the A8 cannot execute the F=G+H instruction because it is stuck behind D=A+E (and D=A+E cannot execute until A is first calculated in A=B+C).

So the A9 makes better use of the multiple copies of certain hardware units (called ALU's - these include things like adders, shifters, etc) which means instruction streams can execute somewhat faster.


ps: My example doesn't describe the difference between out-of-order issue and out-of-order retire, but that's probably not relevant at this level. Some designs do out-of-order issue but in-order retire.

 

[Fast Shadow]

There's no way this thing has been under development since 2003.

Everything about it screams "rush job".

 

[InfoSecmgr]

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Instead of useless posts such as this one, why don't you enlighten all of us then?

 

[alent1234]

Wow, that is seriously pathetic. I just keep getting less and less impressed by the technology in there. And they brag about a CPU that's not really custom, and not even Cortex A9 based?

that's why they got rid of the "our most advanced technology" from the website and just left the part about the magical device

 

[aegisdesign]

This is very interesting... I guess it to be a power consumption thing. The fact that they made it themselves with the software makes it seem as snappy as it is. (But would the A9 make Safari snappier?)

It's not a power consumption thing.

CPU power usage is dwarfed by the demands of the screen. A 10" backlit screen is going to suck way more juice than an ARM CPU no matter which generation it is. It's milliwatts of difference, not watts.

 

[a.gomez]

not surprised - why would they put a real CPU in a Toy?... like putting an i7 in the Fisher Price Nickbook.

 

[Becordial]

I agree with you guys. It does have huge potential.

Just think about ONLive. (www.onlive.com) They will start streaming 3D Games to devices! Processing power is somewhere else. Picture is being transmitted onto you device.

It is an amazing vision. Platform and Hardware independent gaming! Just think about it. X-Box, Playstation, Big Ass graphics card, all obsolete.

They already showed CRISIS being streamed to an iPhone but iPhones screen is to small. But think about an ipad with an external BlueTooth controller. BOOM. That would certainly rule!

This is just one example of a client dominated World. All you need is the bandwidth so.... (well lucky me)

Just checked out ONLive. I'd never heard of it before but it looks fantastic. Our telco company has announced that next year it will have mobile broadband speeds that are much higher than what ONlive specify as being needed to play games in 720p glory, so as long as their servers deliver then gameplay should be excellent. To witness great gameplay with simple hardware needs will be an incredible experience, especially if we see bt controllers made for iPad use. Video out on iPad is a no-brainer too!

 

[cmaier]

not surprised - why would they put a real CPU in a Toy?... like putting an i7 in the Fisher Price Nickbook.

"real CPU."

Guys, an A8 is not inherently worse than an A9. Your performance will be, essentially, average_instructions_per_cycle * clock rate. A9 should have higher average_instructions_per_cycle. A8, on a given technology node, could have higher clock rate (I say "could have" because I'm not sure if A9 increased the number of pipeline stages).

Take that performance number and divide by watts, and A8 might make a lot more sense, particularly if the real target of the A4 is the next generation iPhone.

 

[aegisdesign]

Why don´t people get it. It is not about specs or anything it is about the freaking software that runs on top of it. This 10" device plays 10 hours of Video continuously! Runs smooth like hell (go to youtube watch them Hands On sessions).... Just look at iWork running on it at impressive speed.

So it is about software...

This is aimed at the mass consumer market! This is not a computer. It is an iPad.

So, like the AppleTV then? The excellent Apple software makes up for the poor hardware?

 

[ToroidalZeus]

What you forget is that the Netbook is trying to be a computer. The iPad is not.

What you forget is that the iPhone (was a huge success because it) is trying to be a computer. The iPad needed to take this one-step further and be a full-fledged computer.

 

[Azmordean]

I think you've made an important point here. Even though I feel underwhelmed by the iPad presentation we saw recently, I agree that this platform could well signal the future. I also think that the days of needing a full computer to do a lot of the heavy work is slowing, and we'll see the device or mobile device take the lead. For example, using an iPad plus a combination of some of the emerging software-as-a-service options (say dropbox, spotify, photoshop.com or iwork.com and host CRM software) is going to satisfy a lot of the middle ground functionality needed for both corporates and individuals.

The building of more cloud services (and massive data centres) with embedded functionality means we need less big spinning hard drives and heavy processing power (often underutilised) to be on our desks all the time. Some tasks might need it for a while yet, but the shift is on.

I've been building my own home network with NAS drives to hold music and video but yet even as I do it, I know that the dollars spent on it is going to be made redundant sooner rather than later and replaced with a simple model of a couple of thin client type devices (iPad) and the data and some of the processing being streamed from somewhere like here to wherever I am.

The future is a light weight device and platform model which will involve more subscriptions and more trust but this is offset by lower maintenance costs and continuous improvements in functionality. If the service providers and manufacturers get the balance right it really will change the way computing is done.

Ugh! I hope I'm dead before this happens. Replace computers which are user controlled with a completely scripted and controlled (and MONETIZED) "experience"? I don't think so. They can pry my computer from my cold dead hand .

More seriously, I do think the point of the iPad is to monetize presently free web content and put Apple in the position of "content broker" through the use of wonderfully designed software disguising DRM and proprietary formats. I used to love Apple for their innovative designs and well put together computer hardware. Increasingly I find I really hate a lot of where they are heading and what they represent.

 

[Minimoose 360]

We have a situation here.


You have to admit Apple is always behind the times in terms of their processor choices, maybe minus the Power Mac G4

 

[Garion]

not surprised - why would they put a real CPU in a Toy?... like putting an i7 in the Fisher Price Nickbook.

I think you'll be amazed to see just how many different tasks people will use this "toy" for, once purpose built iPad apps start appearing.

Personally I believe the iPad will see use as a professional tool in areas where no netbook has ever gone before.

The form factor, weight, size and prize alone will make it a very compelling platform for a wide range of professional uses. An always-online general computing device with a rugged design, and a user interface that can change on the fly according to the software you run on it? Oh, the iPad will be far more than a toy after a year on the market, that's for sure.

 

[Eidorian]

Ugh! I hope I'm dead before this happens. Replace computers which are user controlled with a completely scripted and controlled (and MONETIZED) "experience"? I don't think so. They can pry my computer from my cold dead hand .

More seriously, I do think the point of the iPad is to monetize presently free web content and put Apple in the position of "content broker" through the use of wonderfully designed software disguising DRM and proprietary formats. I used to love Apple for their innovative designs and well put together computer hardware. Increasingly I find I really hate a lot of where they are heading and what they represent.

I worry when Apple's patronizing digital playpen is seen as the "future of computing".

 

[Wolfpup]

As long as the processor of the iPad does its job aka running the machine, and running it well it is F´N unimportant what the Hardware is.

Right now maybe it can, given it's just running a single tasking OS. If they ever get ambitious with that though...

This is aimed at the mass consumer market! This is not a computer. It is an iPad.

Computers are the mass consumer market. And this is being marketed as a computer...but it's heavily, heavily stripped down in both software and hardware despite the full price tag.

"real CPU."

Guys, an A8 is not inherently worse than an A9. Your performance will be, essentially, average_instructions_per_cycle * clock rate. A9 should have higher average_instructions_per_cycle. A8, on a given technology node, could have higher clock rate (I say "could have" because I'm not sure if A9 increased the number of pipeline stages).

A9 can hit higher clock speeds in addition to having better performance at the same clock. A8 is basically a Pentium 1, A9 is a pretty modern design.

 

[Shin3r]

I understand that Apple in no way spent a billion dollars developing this chip. The iPad is very expensive for the power it has, and the Apple fanboys, despite all the evidence refused to believe that Apple did not spend 1 billion dollars developing this CPU, because to them it justified the price. They were using it as a defense for the people who were saying that the ipad was too expensive. So I'm interested to see what they would say now. If those who were saying that Apple indeed spent a billion developing this chip read this story, I would imagine that they will immediately start saying that in no way in hell did Apple spend that much, and that someone would have to be stupid to believe that.

What I hate about posts like this is that you automatically get off topic by bringing up Fanboys, which I believe you were the first. When you do that, what you are trying to say is that "anybody" who has something to say that doesn't fit your reality is a fanboy. You have ruined instantly a perfectly nice discussion by injecting this into conversation. The reality is that you are just as bad as the fanboys when your argument targets them instead of just letting your opinion of the facts or lack thereof stand on its own merit.

Now to actually lend to a proper discussion...

I'm not sure whether Apple spent 1 billion or 2 dollars. I don't have the knowledge either way, and no one else does either. *speculation*- let's enjoy it as such.

I don't really care what processor the thing has and I understand some people do and that's fine. I did see the keynote which had a demo of need for speed which looked great. Also, all of the other demoes were beautiful and everything was fluid. Because of this, the processor does not really become an issue, but I understand it might for others.

 

[Wolfpup]

I think you'll be amazed to see just how many different tasks people will use this "toy" for once purpose built iPad apps start appearing.

Personally I believe the iPad will be adopted as a very serious computing device in areas where no netbook has ever gone before.

The form factor, weight, size and prize alone will make it a very compelling platform for a wide range of professional uses. An always-online general computing device with a rugged design, and a user interface that can change on the fly according to the software you run on it? Oh, the iPad will be far more than a toy after a year on the market, that's for sure.

It sort of is a new niche, so maybe it will find success, but if it's anything like the iPod, the programs available will stink. Most iPod programs are either near useless or replicate functionality on a web site, or severely crippled, or unstable, etc. The platform is a joke next to what Palm OS was, let alone Windows or OS X.

 

[dernhelm]

not surprised - why would they put a real CPU in a Toy?... like putting an i7 in the Fisher Price Nickbook.

I worry when Apple's patronizing digital playpen is seen as the "future of computing".

I worry when any discourse on the topic degenerates into name calling and the use of derrogative terms.

 

[anthonymoody]

Why would it?

It sounds like Apple took an off the shelf SoS and supercharged it. Why deal with the inefficiencies of an early design of the A9, and instead supercharge more proven technology.

All the people who have had hands on with the iPad say it is very fast, who cares what is under the hood if it does its job properly.

Plus, instead of thinking about "future proofing", think craigslist. I routinely sell old Apple gear for very high return. In some cases it is possible to "rent" apple gear for about 10% per year you keep it and I suspect the iPad will be the same.

Right now I am buying a new 17" MBP every time they announce a new one. I typically buy a new one for about $3200 and sell the old for ~$2900 (usually with minor upgrades). After the first year of pain buying the unit, I now pay only $300 per year for a bleeding edge top of the line laptop. This next upgrade will be the harshest since I skipped the uMBP, but still should be able to sell my current unit for $2500 or so when the new processors come out (hopefully) soon. This is cheaper than buying a new netbook every year for a MUCH better machine (and how many netbooks can take the abuse of a hard year of use?).

When the next generation comes out, sell the old and buy the new, future proofing hardware is what we did in the 90's.

Exactly. If anything this impresses me even more about the work Apple did in the A4.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

what they're overlooking is the magic that is also infused into it.

Im trying to get my degree in Magic right now so as I can get a job making apps and take advantage of said Magic.



On another note another poster said Apple was slow to to use the latest process I x2 that, this is just how Apple does things. Not a negative but not a positive.