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

Apple's A6 Chip Confirmed to Carry Triple-Core Graphics

Triple Core !! ?

Isn't this kind of "odd" ?

No phone has triple core..... dual core maybe.....or single. even Macs have quad-core, and before that we have dual-core... we never every have had triple-core anything.

so why Triple core ? :apple:

I'm guessing the boost never the less is like everything, only for demanding applications or games (mostly)

The "average joe" won't be using triple core, just like quad-core Macs its only depend on the app....

I would think this would be the same with IOS.

You may have as well skip triple core, and go for quad core... Just my 2 cents worth.
 
hitmantb said:
Pretty sure that is the US Galaxy S3 with S4 dual core processors, still very impressive scores.

CPU Benchmarks: Quad S4 > Jelly Bean Quad Exynos > iPhone 5 A6 = ICS Quad Exynos > Dual S4
GPU Benchmarks: Quad S4 Adreno 320 = iPhone 5 A6 > Quad Exynos Mali 400 > Dual S4 Adreno 225

The problem is, despite a revolutionary CPU with an unfair blend of CPU, GPU and battery efficiency, Apple chose to cripple this device with the smallest battery of any flagship. They really should have released another version with 4.8" screen, 3000 battery and no one will be talking about S3/Note. All other Apple products have different sizes to choose from. Can you even imagine the lasting power of such a model? People have different needs and desires. Android is bad with battery, but they are brute forcing it with Razormaxx HD and Galaxy Note 2.

As it stands today, I find S3 to be a more versatile device with $25 micro SD card greatly increasing internal capacity by 32GB, the much bigger screen, and removable battery (high capacity battery cover's only slightly increasing bulk and doubling battery life far beyond even iPhone 5). ICS/Jelly Bean coupled with vastly superior support for third party application integration (ability to open video with app of choice, message directly with Google voice, etc) also make iOS look a little too simple and rigid.

Native T-Mobile support is big too, customers are tired of high monthly prices, carriers are tired of high Apple subsidies, a lot of risk for Apple vs Samsung in the states as carriers are pushing Android more. Apple also really need a super cheap version of 4 to compete in all other countries, where iPhone is still too expensive.

As good as iPhone 5 was, Galaxy S3 already sold 20 million in 3 months and will come dangerously close to its numbers 1v1. Add in the 1000000000000000000000000000000000000 other Android devices, the quality issue with maps/black aluminum, I am not sure if Apple has enough legs after holiday season.

I understand Apple is the most profitable company on earth, but low market share worldwide will ultimately hurt them in the long run, especially without Jobs to introduce ground breaking products. Of course all dynasties come to an end, I can only hope for the best.

(Using Galaxy Note, will wait for Note 2 and may not come back to Apple ecosystem, but will always love Jobs and his creations)
Click to expand...

I think your right about the 4.8" iphone + , if they offered that plus the 4" they would kill the market (as long as they didnt hold back on specs on the 4.8)
 
ethana said:
Dear people defending Samsung Galaxy S3,

When it comes to speed, YOU LOSE.

Sincerely,

iPhone 5
Click to expand...

They lost way before that, like when the walked in the store and purchased that cheap plastic space station. We had to expand the elevators in our building so the few S3 users can get on. Had to accommodate them, you know how HR is.
 
Tech198 said:
Triple Core !! ?

Isn't this kind of "odd" ?

No phone has triple core..... duel core maybe.....or single. even Macs have quad-core, and before that we have duo-core... we never every have had triple-core anything.

so why Triple core ? :apple:

I'm guessing the boost never the less is like everything, only for demanding applications or games (mostly)

The "average joe" won't be using triple core, just like quad-core Macs its only depend on the app.... I would think this is the same with IOS.
Click to expand...

I really think that it is for the best performance/battery life ratio. There are motherboards that support triple desktop graphics cards.
 
tech4all said:
Sorry but the recent Javascript benchmark doesn't count as "some benchmarks" and that doesn't really do much for day-to-day tasks for most people . . . #justsayin ;)

LTE - it's been done
4" screen - it's been done and better
1GB RAM - it's been done
Pano camera - it's been done
Maps - Google is the maps titan at the moment
NFC - it's been done (Apple doesn't even support this, at least not fully)
Flash support - although Adobe doesn't support this anymore so it really doesn't have much grounds anymore for an Android plus I'll admit. And Flash is slowly getting out dated anyways.

I will say Apple is king for apps. Where Google is a fairly new to that. Apple is to apps as Google is to maps. Hey that rhymed! :p

And at least with the Galaxy Nexus an update is coming up that'll make the iPhone 5 look even more out of date.
Click to expand...

You must be one of the five people that brought a Galaxy Nexus.:p:p:p
Samsung claims 'minuscule' Galaxy Nexus sales numbers didn't harm Apple

----------
Jimrod said:
Can anyone explain why, when I run Geekbench on my new, plugged in iPhone 5 with all apps closed I'm getting a score in the 900's?
Click to expand...

Yes. You don't have an iPhone 5.
 
Last edited:
Tech198 said:
Triple Core !! ?

Isn't this kind of "odd" ?

No phone has triple core..... dual core maybe.....or single. even Macs have quad-core, and before that we have dual-core... we never every have had triple-core anything.

so why Triple core ? :apple:

I'm guessing the boost never the less is like everything, only for demanding applications or games (mostly)

The "average joe" won't be using triple core, just like quad-core Macs its only depend on the app....

I would think this would be the same with IOS.

You may have as well skip triple core, and go for quad core... Just my 2 cents worth.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with 3 cores?
 
nothing wrong with 3 cores at all...

I'm just saying, Apple not done 3 cores before....

ANything "first come" from Apple, surprises me :) Also, surprising they didn't just do quad core.... May as well.
 
Tech198 said:
Triple Core !! ?

Isn't this kind of "odd" ?

No phone has triple core..... dual core maybe.....or single. even Macs have quad-core, and before that we have dual-core... we never every have had triple-core anything.

so why Triple core ? :apple:

I'm guessing the boost never the less is like everything, only for demanding applications or games (mostly)

The "average joe" won't be using triple core, just like quad-core Macs its only depend on the app....

I would think this would be the same with IOS.

You may have as well skip triple core, and go for quad core... Just my 2 cents worth.
Click to expand...

The nice thing about graphics, actually, is that the scaling is automatic. Programmers don't need to do anything special to take advantage of the 3 GPU cores. Nor is 3 a particularly weird number. Meanwhile it can take quite a lot of effort to effectively take advantage of multi-core CPUs.

So actually even non-demanding applications and games will automatically take advantage of this.
 
Tech198 said:
Triple Core !! ?

Isn't this kind of "odd" ?

No phone has triple core..... dual core maybe.....or single. even Macs have quad-core, and before that we have dual-core... we never every have had triple-core anything.

so why Triple core ? :apple:

I'm guessing the boost never the less is like everything, only for demanding applications or games (mostly)

The "average joe" won't be using triple core, just like quad-core Macs its only depend on the app....

I would think this would be the same with IOS.

You may have as well skip triple core, and go for quad core... Just my 2 cents worth.
Click to expand...
GPUs work differently.

Basically, if you put 2 GPU cores together, they act like on GPU. In this case, we're talking about three GPU cores. The system, however, just sees it as one GPU. (Unlike CPUs, where developers specifically have to code for multi-core CPUs).
 
zbarvian said:
That's not what the benchmarks are indicating...

This phone is a powerhouse.
Click to expand...

The iPad '3' is driving *many* more pixels for the same test. That's why it pulls fewer FPS.

But, yes, the iPhone 5 does seem to be quite the graphics powerhouse.
 
Tech198 said:
Triple Core !! ?

Isn't this kind of "odd" ?

No phone has triple core..... dual core maybe.....or single. even Macs have quad-core, and before that we have dual-core... we never every have had triple-core anything.

so why Triple core ? :apple:
Click to expand...

There's no technical reason why you wouldn't use 3, or 5, or 6, or 7 cores. 50% more power than 2 cores. 25% less die space than 4 cores. So why not?
 
ok.... just like anything then ... why not do it coz its possible.

no reason at all ? I would have thought their must be something.. otherwise why wouldn't Apple just have used quad core instead.... because they can.. Theres more power there too ... battery reasons possibly ?
 
k995 said:
Funny when android is faster "its usability not power" when apple is faster "its power not usability"

Lol, people can be so stupid.
Click to expand...

No. When 'Android is faster' it's "Usability is more important than power.", when iOS is faster, it's "usability is more important than power. But it's faster, too!". :p

And it's invariably the android fanatics who come in with paper spec comparisons (like the 'but the S3 is quad-core' one early in the thread).
 
Pretty much says it
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    263.4 KB · Views: 109
hitmantb said:
Pretty sure that is the US Galaxy S3 with S4 dual core processors, ... I find S3 to be ... ICS/Jelly Bean ... Google voice... Samsung ... Galaxy S3 ... Android devices (Using Galaxy Note, will wait for Note 2 and may not come back to Apple ecosystem)
Click to expand...

Why are you posting on MacRumors? Do you think anyone here cares about that?


Tech198 said:
ok.... just like anything then ... why not do it coz its possible.

no reason at all ? I would have thought their must be something.. otherwise why wouldn't Apple just have used quad core instead.... because they can.. Theres more power there too ... battery reasons possibly ?
Click to expand...

More cores = more processor power = faster operation = more value.
More cores = more power usage = battery empties quicker = less value
More cores = bigger processor = more cost + less space for batteries.

So you calculate: How much value and cost are added going from 1 core to 2 cores, from 2 cores to 3 cores, from 3 cores to 4 cores and so on. And you pick the overall optimal number of cores.
 
Last edited:
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