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.
New Multi-Core iPhone with Firmware 3.0?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You also have to realize that apple is constantly developing hardware. They don't just stop once they have something released and focus in on software. They also can't just stop development of software and focus on hardware. While the iPhone development is a whole group, sub-groups develop different parts. One group works on software, one on hardware. I am sure there are sub-groups within those two groups as well. Before getting upset that this might be happening and there is no mms or video recording, realize that hardware has to evolve. Hardware is the foundation for the software.
People didn't really care about iLife or iWork at Macworld, they wanted new hardware or updated hardware.
People didn't really care about iLife or iWork at Macworld, they wanted new hardware or updated hardware.
In theory better.
If you have 4 cores and 1 is powerful enough to react to any demands in sleep then you can shut down the other 3. If you only have one then you are limited to how low sleep power can go.
Even in use you only have to pay for the power you want to use.
In theory.
They could just detect the type of iPhone you have and make the App store only reflect apps that are available on your phone. It detects firmware when you tap download anyway.
Several apps will not download onto your phone until you update your firmware to a certain level. I was having backup issues, so I procrastinated on upgrading my firmware and then I realized certain apps wouldn't download.
I can't imagine the phone making that big of a performance leap anyway.
Don't discourage progress!
Thank you Aristotle for bringing some sense in this thread. This rumor makes perfect sense and ties up nicely with Snow Leopard. What are the most power-efficient "processing cores" available today? GPU cores. Is it all about GHz today? Not anymore since these things generate way too much heat (ie waste way too much energy) at the speed they need to be run to keep up with Moore's law. Only solution is to have multiple cores, and to have software that can take advantage of it. You can imagine one core for the basic kernel of the OS, 1 core for the iPod part, 1 core for the phone, 1 core for the apps (I'm just simplifying and making things up of course). Don't use the ipod? Turn off that core and save almost 25% of your power draw ! The underlying improvements in Snow Leopard will be easily integrated in the iPhone version of the OS and allows the iPhone to have a much more efficient operation. On desktop machines, Snow Leopard will be all about performances. On mobile devices, it will be all about power management. When using a single and even a dual-core system, these 2 parameters are very much tied together. Not so much when you start having many more cores, and 4 seems like a good start for a phone...The ignorance in this thread is astounding. What is a CPU? You must be joking.
I see a lot of people here confusing mobile ARM processors with desktop processors. They are quite different.
A 32GB, quad-core iPhone would sure be a nice graduation gift this summer... Bring it on Apple !!!
Um, first off. Power.
Second, size. As much as I like my iPhone, I simply much prefer using my MacBook Pro for everyday things. I can type at 90+ words per minute (I can do something like 30 on the iPhone), and big screen size, can multitask, do anything.
Tablet, not iPhone!
An iPhone has not got the juice to support a quad processor. But the NetPad sure can! If you've seen the info on the new batteries in the MacBook Pro, the cells are really thin. The Pro has two layers of them, but think one layer taking half the space in the NetPad and bingo! That's where a quad processor will go.
An iPhone has not got the juice to support a quad processor. But the NetPad sure can! If you've seen the info on the new batteries in the MacBook Pro, the cells are really thin. The Pro has two layers of them, but think one layer taking half the space in the NetPad and bingo! That's where a quad processor will go.
Let's hope so.
It should! However do realize that the iPhone has several ARM processors in it already. These are not accessible to user apps but rather are in various signal processing chains. Apple could transfer a lot of that signal processing to the main processor complex. Qualcomm has suggested as much for some of it's SMP SoC that they are promoting.
Let's hope that Apple doesn't go overboard with that approach. In any event even a couple of processors combined with GPU processing could make for a vastly improved iPhone. More importantly a Newton 2 type tablet could be very impressive.
Now if only Apple could get the product out the door.
Dave
I really hope so. As both a user and developer the ability to run multiple apps is critical to many. As a developer it adds the potential for many useful apps.
It should! However do realize that the iPhone has several ARM processors in it already. These are not accessible to user apps but rather are in various signal processing chains. Apple could transfer a lot of that signal processing to the main processor complex. Qualcomm has suggested as much for some of it's SMP SoC that they are promoting.
Let's hope that Apple doesn't go overboard with that approach. In any event even a couple of processors combined with GPU processing could make for a vastly improved iPhone. More importantly a Newton 2 type tablet could be very impressive.
Now if only Apple could get the product out the door.
Dave
How so? Look at the current mobile gaming market (I'm assuming you mean DS+PSP in there too, my mistake if not), the DS is leaps behind the PSP in terms of hardware capability but the DS is still the most sold system and has more higher rated games.
IMO I don't like playing big powerful games on something not fully cut out for gaming as an iPhone, I don't even go for that stuff on my PSP.
I like the sound of a multicore iPhone though if it means running more apps side by side, and of course for power saving reasons.
This post is so stupid it hurts my brain!
Apple needs to improve performance with each and every hardware release. It keeps the platform vibrant with continously improving feature sets.
Dave
No reasonable person can say that the iPhone is currently at an acceptable performance level. Beyond that limiting performance so that the ignorant don't get confused on serves to punish the user base as a whole. It also tends to emulate the portable game platform market where the platforms quickly become stagnent.
Apple needs to improve performance with each and every hardware release. It keeps the platform vibrant with continously improving feature sets.
Dave
Its easier to put 4 cores in a phone than in the MBP because its only a cheap processor theyre making into 4 cores, its not like theyre putting a 90C socket 775 monster in there.
iPhone 3.x OS with Snow Leopard underpinnings and an alternate GUI app for desktop like functionality?
Clustering? How about OLPC like net capability for local users? With ability to run apps on the server side, who really needs it?
Is this finally ATNN?
Rocketman
Clustering? How about OLPC like net capability for local users? With ability to run apps on the server side, who really needs it?
Is this finally ATNN?
Rocketman
What do you mean the iPhone is not "fully cut out for gaming"? Do you also consider the Wii not fully cut out for gaming? Look at when the appstore was released and now how many games sell per day on the platform. The market and potential of that thing is huge.
Except, as Raggedjimmi pointed out, two replies above yours, the history of games on the DS (and the GBA and the GBC before it) completely contradicts this logic.
When the DS Lite is in shortage at Christmas time, some five or six years after the DS came out, and it routinely has games that outsell games on the newest consoles, it's very hard to agree with your logic.
Nonetheless, I think perhaps what can happen with gaming on the iPhone is that the more sophisticated 3D games -- the next generations of the Brothers in Arms type games -- will perhaps have to have varying levels of rendering, just like desktop games do, so that they can work across the iPhone/iPod line.
Great, I'm sure iphone developers would take advantage of this. Also I hope Firmware 3.0 or earlier includes push notification b/c it's LONG overdue.
Hey I do!
Dave
It would be one very smart move to have 4 cores in a SMP configuration. In any event people don't realize that the iPhone already has many ARM cores in it. By some counts 5 cores. These are NOT cores free to user processes but rather hang out in the I/O subsystems. If Apple can reconfigure iPhone to make more cores available to the user, we as users will win big time.
Yes we do. You would too if you knew what this could mean for you in the future.
Quad cores make all that possible along with performance when you need it.
Dave
I'm sorry, but a quad-core iPhone (discreet cores) is not going to happen. First off, the Cortex A-9 and A-8 are not targeted towards ultra compact mobile devices like phones and iPods. Battery life would just suck, and we all know Apple is all about extending battery life. The ARM1176JZF-S CPU used in the iPhone and iPod touch do have co-processors that help the main CPU and lower power consumption by being specialized (MP4 acceleration and what not).
It doesn't work out all neat and pretty like that. Multithread scaling is not perfectly linear by any means. If that was true, why stop at four! why not have 16 ARM11s in that bitch all running at 1/16 of the clock speed...0mgZ0rs!
Personally, I think the ARM11 CPU has the power for what the iPhone and iPod Touch is used for. I say reduce the process (90nm > 65nm > 45nm), tweak the design for efficiency (P.A. Semi), and increase the clock speed a tad; increasing performance as well as battery life.
I would much rather have more battery life than a moronic quad-core crippled iPhone / iPod Touch. The battery tech isn't there yet (and the new 17" MBP's battery is nothing special. It's the same lithium-polymer technology just in a different form factor and larger). I'd much rather have push or regulated background process support than a dual or quad cpu in my Touch.
LOL. I think not. I need quad-core to do copy & paste? Simply moronic.
It doesn't work out all neat and pretty like that. Multithread scaling is not perfectly linear by any means. If that was true, why stop at four! why not have 16 ARM11s in that bitch all running at 1/16 of the clock speed...0mgZ0rs!
Personally, I think the ARM11 CPU has the power for what the iPhone and iPod Touch is used for. I say reduce the process (90nm > 65nm > 45nm), tweak the design for efficiency (P.A. Semi), and increase the clock speed a tad; increasing performance as well as battery life.
I would much rather have more battery life than a moronic quad-core crippled iPhone / iPod Touch. The battery tech isn't there yet (and the new 17" MBP's battery is nothing special. It's the same lithium-polymer technology just in a different form factor and larger). I'd much rather have push or regulated background process support than a dual or quad cpu in my Touch.
LOL. I think not. I need quad-core to do copy & paste? Simply moronic.
Ok, but Quad Core is definitely not needed to implement Notifications and C&P.
I just don't understand why they already develop 3.0 instead of just releasing the long promised Notifications.
i have seen a ARM Cortex-A9 MPCore whith 4 cores benchmark and and it performs is similar to 70-80 % of intel core 2 it may out perform mobile parts by intel than for them for just part of the power needed to run a similar intelThe ignorance in this thread is astounding. What is a CPU? You must be joking.
I see a lot of people here confusing mobile ARM processors with desktop processors. They are quite different.
A quad core ARM processor is quite possible but your dual core laptop processor would still kick its arse any day in terms of raw processing power.
I look forward to this new iPhone revision. I should be eligible for an upgrade by the time it comes out.
part
leet see if i can find the pdf
Now you're just talkin' dirty!!! Keep goin!
Don't discourage progress!
No kidding! Seems to me over half the folks here are actually PISSED that apple would even consider this. What gives? I like
and want to see new things, don't you?I hope you get your wish along with mine.
That would be really cool. I would think they would have to keep it affordable though. Ya know, more folks with video-chat capable handsets the more people would use the service.
I invite a webcam or iSight attachment (or built in) to my 3G iPhone any day of the week with open arms. If a multi-core iPhone will bring about these changes, then so-be-it...