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

metsjetsfan

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 2, 2011
1,410
250
Sorry just impatient since we will know next week. but i was surprised they didnt tout efficiency gains. I know schiller briefly mentioned it.
 
It might be a combination of 14nm from Samsung and 16nm from TSMC. My guess is that they didn't mention it because they crammed a lot of introductions into the announcement. Plus, all those efficiency gains were simply to keep the battery life the same since the battery is smaller. They focused on performance this year.
 
It might be a combination of 14nm from Samsung and 16nm from TSMC. My guess is that they didn't mention it because they crammed a lot of introductions into the announcement. Plus, all those efficiency gains were simply to keep the battery life the same since the battery is smaller. They focused on performance this year.
I doubt that they're a combination of 14nm and 16nm. If they were, everyone would want the iPhone with the 14nm A9. Perhaps all the analysts meant 14nm for the A9 and 16nm for the A9X? A split like that has never happened before, so I find it hard to believe.

Anyway, it might be a while before we find out. I'll wait for the yearly teardown from iFixit and the analysis from Chipworks.
 
I doubt that they're a combination of 14nm and 16nm. If they were, everyone would want the iPhone with the 14nm A9. Perhaps all the analysts meant 14nm for the A9 and 16nm for the A9X? A split like that has never happened before, so I find it hard to believe.

Anyway, it might be a while before we find out. I'll wait for the yearly teardown from iFixit and the analysis from Chipworks.
Yeah i think there would be class action lawsuits for improper marketing if the chipset was that different. Even though it prob makes a negligible difference for 99.9 percent of the users

Only time i can remember is ipad 2 went from 45nm to 32nm(think) A5 but that was after it had been out for over 18 monthd
 
Yeah i think there would be class action lawsuits for improper marketing if the chipset was that different. Even though it prob makes a negligible difference for 99.9 percent of the users

Only time i can remember is ipad 2 went from 45nm to 32nm(think) A5 but that was after it had been out for over 18 monthd
Yes, I believe that has been the iPad with the most battery life (32nm version). We might see something similar for the A8 in the iPad mini 4.
 
I doubt that they're a combination of 14nm and 16nm. If they were, everyone would want the iPhone with the 14nm A9. Perhaps all the analysts meant 14nm for the A9 and 16nm for the A9X? A split like that has never happened before, so I find it hard to believe.

Anyway, it might be a while before we find out. I'll wait for the yearly teardown from iFixit and the analysis from Chipworks.
Fairly certain they mean a combination of what is in the A9 package. Probably 14nm for CPU/GPU and 16nm for the now in package M9 co-processor.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.