Two different chips here for the iPhone 7. There's the discrete modem and the A-series CPU/SoC. Could be talking about supplying one for the iPhone 7 and the other for future phones.
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.
Intel Has 1,000 Employees Working on LTE Modem Chip for the Next-Generation iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Two different chips here for the iPhone 7. There's the discrete modem and the A-series CPU/SoC. Could be talking about supplying one for the iPhone 7 and the other for future phones.
When Apple iPhone with e-SIM?
What is an e-SIM and how will it change smartphones for the better?
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/134...how-will-it-change-smartphones-for-the-better
What is an e-SIM and how will it change smartphones for the better?
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/134...how-will-it-change-smartphones-for-the-better
ROFL - that's the biggest untruth of the lot!
Intel bought Infineon about 5 years ago now. They are HUGE in the wireless baseband business; in fact, they are probably the only true competition to Qualcomm there is. In fact, Apple already used Intel's baseband chips in every iPhone up until the Verizon iPhone 4 (the regular GSM iPhone 4 had an Infineon chip), which used a Qualcomm baseband. As did the iPhone 5, up until the 6S today.
Even if the other foundries develop sub-14nm technologies of their own, everyone in the semiconductor business knows that Intel's fabs are top-notch. They certainly have better scale and facilities than TSMC or Samsung, not to mention the best engineers in the industry and the ability to profit from their developments with new techniques and materials. That means better yields (lower costs), but it also means the chip itself will be better: lower leakage currents, for instance.
Seriously, Apple and Intel teaming up is the mobile semiconductor dream-team. Apple's designs are incredibly far ahead of the industry, and Intel is the best chip manufacturer in the world with the scale to suit even Apple's demands.
I'm surprised it took them this long: Apple has needed a different partner to Samsung, and Intel has badly needed some exposure to the mobile market and a way to replace the flagging consumer PC sector (especially as the day of ARM servers threatens to draw ever nearer). It's taken Intel a long time to swallow its pride; they've been paying manufacturers loads of money to make x86-powered smartphones which just haven't taken off. Now they must realise that their best approach with this market is via Apple and making their ARM chips.
Tim Cook must be a happy man. He's a logistics guy after all, and if this works their constant CPU supply-chain headache would have just transformed in to a massive competitive advantage.
Currently Apple (like everyone else) pays a lot to use Qualcomm technology.
Each chip requires two payments. $15-$35 for the silicon itself, and then Apple pays another ~3.4% of the iPhone price on top of that, for the IP royalty.
(It is common for ETSI royalties to be based on phone price. This is partly meant to encourage lower priced phones so that more people can afford connectivity, but that is a price market which Apple avoids.)
Working with Intel could lower the silicon cost. Qualcomm will still have to be paid for their IP, but Intel might have a deal in place which would avoid the cost being based on phone price.
Each chip requires two payments. $15-$35 for the silicon itself, and then Apple pays another ~3.4% of the iPhone price on top of that, for the IP royalty.
(It is common for ETSI royalties to be based on phone price. This is partly meant to encourage lower priced phones so that more people can afford connectivity, but that is a price market which Apple avoids.)
Working with Intel could lower the silicon cost. Qualcomm will still have to be paid for their IP, but Intel might have a deal in place which would avoid the cost being based on phone price.
Last edited:
1000 employees to design a lousy modem chip (hardly in the class of their CPUs in complexity).... Hmmmm. Gee, how many Intel employees do you think it takes to change a light bulb? 
The problem for Intel is that:
1. They don't move fast enough for Apple. Its LTE Modem has to be even better than Qualcomm's to even compete. But using 1000 engineers shows how lumbering Intel is.
2. Their chip manufacturing process may not be as good as those of TSMC and Samsung - i.e. Intel chips will be slower and use up more battery power. It is up to Intel to show it can compete.
3. Intel is horribly inefficient. Does it take 1000 engineers at Intel to make one LTE Modem for Apple? Come on. How many Intel engineers does it take to screw a lightbulb?
4. Intel may not have enough fab factories to actually make the number of chips Apple needs. It will have to spend more, Baby. Billions more to get Apple to even look.
1. They don't move fast enough for Apple. Its LTE Modem has to be even better than Qualcomm's to even compete. But using 1000 engineers shows how lumbering Intel is.
2. Their chip manufacturing process may not be as good as those of TSMC and Samsung - i.e. Intel chips will be slower and use up more battery power. It is up to Intel to show it can compete.
3. Intel is horribly inefficient. Does it take 1000 engineers at Intel to make one LTE Modem for Apple? Come on. How many Intel engineers does it take to screw a lightbulb?
4. Intel may not have enough fab factories to actually make the number of chips Apple needs. It will have to spend more, Baby. Billions more to get Apple to even look.
I would be surprised to know if there are a 1000 people at Apple designing their main Ax CPU SOC's! Intel has stubbornly refused to follow the rest of the industry in outsourcing its manufacturing to Asia. These 1000 people probably include all the union knuckleheads sitting in the "jobs bank", all the supervisors supervising other supervisors and the rest of the stinky rot that is American manufacturing. I would be more comfortable with my parts being manufactured in Asia - in the hands of highly motivated workers, who take pride in what they do and are ready to do anything to keep their jobs.
When the carriers allow it. Apple wanted e-SIM instead of nano-SIM YEARS ago. But they obviously can't just force it if the carriers refuse to support it.
They've tried to sneak in the idea with the "Apple SIM" in iPads, to show the carriers that, look, the world doesn't end when people stop using traditional SIMs, but you know how carriers are --- it may take them another five years or so to accept this change.
Remembering how badly the Intel supplied modem in my Nokia N9 worked (bad 3G data connectivity was the main reason why I replaced what I otherwise still consider the best smatphone I've ever owned) I'd be somewhat worried if I was planning on getting an iPhone in the future.
Seriously, the obvious reason why Intel is putting so much work into a modem for Apple is because they seriously want to get into the mobile device business properly. There's really no better company to get to kickstart your entry into the mobile field than Apple. A good example of this is how Apple used Corning's Gorilla Glass on the original iPhone and now pretty much every manufacturer uses Gorilla Glass or something similar.
This is not the first time Intel has tried to get it's foot in between the door for the mobile market. They've been selling mobile x86 chips and modems for a long time. When Nokia and Intel decided to work together in combining Maemo and Moblin into MeeGo, Intel insisted they use their wireless functionality essentially locking the platform to Intel's wireless modems. What eventually ended up becoming the Luma 800 was Nokia re-engineering the N9 as a CDMA device for Verizon as Intel had decided not to make any CDMA modems.
For Apple's sake I hope this pays off for Intel as Intel has a history of putting huge amounts of money into technologies and products, then killing support when they're not as successful as expected and leaving all their users high and dry. With Nokia they eventually stopped developing the modems before producing a single 4G modem for the MeeGo platform, they once created had a whole new architecture (IA64, also known as Itanium or "Itanic") which they then abandoned and left people running corporate networks high and dry when Microsoft stopped issuing updates for the architecture and the real blunder was when Intel created a whole new wireless standard called WiMAX which they proceeded to abandon around 2010 when it lost to LTE in it's bid to become the 4G standard.
Seriously, the obvious reason why Intel is putting so much work into a modem for Apple is because they seriously want to get into the mobile device business properly. There's really no better company to get to kickstart your entry into the mobile field than Apple. A good example of this is how Apple used Corning's Gorilla Glass on the original iPhone and now pretty much every manufacturer uses Gorilla Glass or something similar.
This is not the first time Intel has tried to get it's foot in between the door for the mobile market. They've been selling mobile x86 chips and modems for a long time. When Nokia and Intel decided to work together in combining Maemo and Moblin into MeeGo, Intel insisted they use their wireless functionality essentially locking the platform to Intel's wireless modems. What eventually ended up becoming the Luma 800 was Nokia re-engineering the N9 as a CDMA device for Verizon as Intel had decided not to make any CDMA modems.
For Apple's sake I hope this pays off for Intel as Intel has a history of putting huge amounts of money into technologies and products, then killing support when they're not as successful as expected and leaving all their users high and dry. With Nokia they eventually stopped developing the modems before producing a single 4G modem for the MeeGo platform, they once created had a whole new architecture (IA64, also known as Itanium or "Itanic") which they then abandoned and left people running corporate networks high and dry when Microsoft stopped issuing updates for the architecture and the real blunder was when Intel created a whole new wireless standard called WiMAX which they proceeded to abandon around 2010 when it lost to LTE in it's bid to become the 4G standard.
I'm really surprised apple hasn't built their own chip fab yet for the sheer number of chips they require and their scrutiny for process. Sure it is expensive and complex but they would benefit greatly from it in the end being able to secure every aspect of production and quality and keep their technology out of the wrong hands.
I'm not referring to the complete loss of all signal.
More specifically, move the cellular portion of the antenna from the bottom of the iPhone to the middle or the top where your hand isn't touching.
That's what reviews are for. To test both chipsets, using the same carrier with the phones right next to each other.
According to the link in the main article http://newsroom.intel.com/community...2/intel-launches-new-mobile-socs-lte-solution it looks like this would be CAT 10
http://download.intel.com/newsroom/kits/mobileworld/2015/pdfs/Intel_7360_factsheet.pdf
Its not happening. Apple is most likely going to go for a jump for the existing X7 to X12 series from Qualcomm ( 9635 to 9645 or similar). Its got better speeds, improved battery efficiency (however marginal) and much more cutting edge technology compared to whats existing.
Likewise, they are also going to concentrate on A9 to A10 moving to a quadcore (at best - wouldn't be surprised if the came up with tri-core) with the 10nm process if its ready for mass production in time or with the improved version of the 16nm process from TSMC. This should lead to and improved battery life, increased performance and I really wish they don't make the phone any thinner. Tri-core or Quad-core, would require a larger die and if its not a 10nm process, i wonder how will the push the packaging without an issue for heat accumulation inside.
I doubt Intel is going to partner with Apple anytime soon.Expect any changeover for the iPhone 7S at the earliest.
Likewise, they are also going to concentrate on A9 to A10 moving to a quadcore (at best - wouldn't be surprised if the came up with tri-core) with the 10nm process if its ready for mass production in time or with the improved version of the 16nm process from TSMC. This should lead to and improved battery life, increased performance and I really wish they don't make the phone any thinner. Tri-core or Quad-core, would require a larger die and if its not a 10nm process, i wonder how will the push the packaging without an issue for heat accumulation inside.
I doubt Intel is going to partner with Apple anytime soon.Expect any changeover for the iPhone 7S at the earliest.
What do you mean? Samsung don't make LTE modems for the iPhone. How is their chip business in any way related to Apple potentially using Intel LTE chips over Qualcomm's?