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

Photo of iPad 3 Logic Board with "A5X" System on a Chip

rovex said:
Of the something that's set to be half as much as the iPad yet apparently twice as powerful.
Click to expand...

Twice as powerful?

In what way?

VGA cameras, five inch screen, three hour battery, empty shelves in the app store and 4GB memory cards?

The thing is free-falling in sales, would be surprised if it lasts the year.
 
Concorde Rules said:
Not... really.

A dual core that has the ability to switch down to 800Mhz from 3.2Ghz uses less power than a quad that has the same ability. (This is assuming that the cores don't have the ability to completely power off, i.e. p = 0). However, the additional switching circuits and what not will still consume a tad more power than if they weren't there at all.

And you can't just split one task over four cores, some things are linearly threaded and hence *can't* be split over cores...
Click to expand...

Sorry I didn't read through the entire article! but why does it need to be so Technical if everybody else really don't give a ****? we will be all happy as long as everything from our everyday task works! As least that's for me! I dun mind to keep all my datas at a 3rd party render as long as they keep my files saftey!
 
what are people's thoughts on a storage update? they didn't update iPad 2 so shouldn't it be time? i'm really hoping so because then the middle unit would suffice ;)
also considering the textbooks will be GBs in size it would be pointless for any student (at least) to opt for a 16GB.
 
First post!

I just thought I'd point out if you compare it to the A5/logic board in the iPad 2:
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-2-Wi-Fi-Teardown/5071/2

The chip is quite a bit larger, and the whole logic board has a dramatically different layout.

So that rules out an over clocked A5, and an iPad 2S.

My guess is it's a late stage prototype. When the 3 does come it'll have a chip called the A6.
 
rmwebs said:
I still think the following will happen:

Base model will be an iPad2, basically the iPad 2 with a boost (hence the A5X). It'll be 16GB.

Upper models (32gb and 64gb) will be the iPad 3 with an A6.

Kind of how they went with the iPhone by keeping the 3Gs on sale.

The reason I think this is a possibility is because the cost of the new screen and other changes would obviously increase the costs, and Apple generally never increase the price when a new model is released, they just introduce higher end ones, then eventually discontinue the low end ones and cut the high end prices (again, like they did with the 3G).
Click to expand...
On one hand I agree, too much high cost upgrades in rumors to mantain current pricing.
Next gen cpu
Quad cpu
Next gen gpu
Quad gpu
LTE
1gb ram
32gb base storage
2x res lcd

But 1. Its costly to r&d, qualify, etc new silicon like the A5X... And your examples of keeping iphone 3gs and iphne 4 on sale... They didnt get new soc or features... And no new lower cost parts other than the 8gb iphone 4 but thats a very simple enough alteration.

No... Based on Apples history, dont count on both A5X and A6, and dont countmon both 2S and 3. One or the other.
 
Phlashman said:
First post!

I just thought I'd point out if you compare it to the A5/logic board in the iPad 2:
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-2-Wi-Fi-Teardown/5071/2

The chip is quite a bit larger, and the whole logic board has a dramatically different layout.

So that rules out an over clocked A5, and an iPad 2S.

My guess is it's a late stage prototype. When the 3 does come it'll have a chip called the A6.
Click to expand...

A year can allow for better manufacturing and reduce the size of the SoC.
 
Phlashman said:
First post!

I just thought I'd point out if you compare it to the A5/logic board in the iPad 2:
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-2-Wi-Fi-Teardown/5071/2

The chip is quite a bit larger, and the whole logic board has a dramatically different layout.

So that rules out an over clocked A5, and an iPad 2S.

My guess is it's a late stage prototype. When the 3 does come it'll have a chip called the A6.
Click to expand...

so do u mean u name everything from apple out of your own preference?
Is that your company? why r u doing this? I am not trying to give u a hard time them but I am just trying to straighten things out a little bit! LOL

Honestly I don't think anyone in the know would talk to you!!!
I have the same experience! But i would really hope that your project works!
 
pgiguere1 said:
With the timeframe at which the iPad 3 will be released, we already knew it couldn't have a Cortex A15 quad-core processor, which will be released at the end of the year.

The choices were:

Dual-core Cortex A9 (like in the iPad 2)
Quad-core Cortex A9 (like in the PSVita)
Dual-core Cortex A15 (like the newly announced Samsung Exynos 5250, TI OMAP 5)

Given the poorer efficiency of quad-core processors in general and the better efficiency of the A15 architecture over the A9, a dual-core Cortex A15 would have performed better than a quad-core A9 that's clocked slower.

Apple usually cares more about real-world performance than about having impressive spec terms anyway. Those that would like to brag about having a quad-core phone are generally more interested in Android-based phones to begin with.

I think it's safe to assume that the A5X will not be a quad-core. The number of cores was the only "spec" Apple has talked about when they presented the A5. Now that the new A5X SoC doesn't have more cores, it's hard for them to justify an A6 being significantly better than the A5 without getting technical and explaining the architecture difference between a Cortex A9 and A12, which Apple obviously wouldn't do. A5X makes it sound like it's the same old dual-core processor, just faster (like iPhone 4S vs iPhone 4).

Now there are two possibilities:

  1. The A5X is still just an A5. It uses the same Cortex A9 architecture but it is now clocked higher. That would be weird since the iPhone 4S also uses an A5 with a different (slower) clock speed, yet they didn't rename the SoC just because of this. The "X" would basically just be a marketing term to make people feel like the CPU is new, while it's not really. All they would need is a bigger battery to compensate and good heat management, which shouldn't be a problem.

  2. The A5X is a new dual-core SoC based on the Cortex A15 architecture. It's about 50% more powerful and efficient than the A5. This would be even better than having a quad-core Cortex A9 (the only possible quad-core SoC right now) and the absolute best we could hope the iPad 3 to have. The iPhone 5 could have a new A5X as well and benefit from more power/efficiency without having a higher clock, which is desirable for a device as small as the iPhone.

tl;dr: Either the iPad 3 will just have a higher-clocked A5 and the "X" is just a marketing gimmick, or it will have a new dual-core Cortex A15 CPU which is actually more powerful and efficient (50% faster at same clock speed). No quad-core and that's a good thing.
Click to expand...

One thing to think about is Apple's A4 used the Cortex A8, & the A5 used the Cortex A9. Going to a Cortex A15 CPU would mean Apple would have to brand their processor the A6 because it denotes a new architecture. For that reason, I don't see the A5X being based on Cortex A15.

I see the following two options;

The A5X still uses the dual-core Cortex A9 CPU, but faster clocked. The GPU still remains dual-core but uses the new PowerVR Rogue GPU architecture. That GPU alone, at the same clock speed, would be at least 5X faster than the 543MP2 GPU in the A5 processor.

In option 2, we could still see a quad-core CPU / GPU based on the Cortex A9 & SGX543MP4. Even though it's quad-core it's still using the same architecture as the Apple A5.
 
pgiguere1 said:
[*]The A5X is a new dual-core SoC based on the Cortex A15 architecture. It's about 50% more powerful and efficient than the A5.
Click to expand...
Contrary to the iPhone, Apple advertises the iPad's CPU and clock speed:"1GHz dual-core Apple A5"

If "Cortex A15 core is 40 percent faster than the Cortex-A9 core, all things equal" (running at same clock speed and number of cores, that it), it makes sense to reserve the A6 moniker for something with greater architectural changes (A9 -> A15), rather than for another A9 derivative.

The average customer knows two things...
- "more MHz means faster"
- "newer CPUs" are faster than previous ones at same clock speed
...and compares "same" processors (Pentium II vs. Pentium II, PIII vs. PIII, C2D vs. C2D, Core i5 vs. Core i5) by their clock speed and core count.

If/when Apple release a Cortex A15 based iPad, its clock speed might not be much higher that previous A9 based ones. A 1.2 GHz Cortex A15 iPad might be clocked only 20% faster than previous ones - yet its performance will be much greater than the difference in clock speed, thanks to the more efficient architecture of the A15. This generational benefit in efficiency is exactly what they will want to emphasize by dubbing it A6 rather than A5.


Performance of the A5 is fine by today's standards anyway. I mean... what kind of apps would you want to run on an iPad, that would really use more multiple cores? Rather than a faster "CPU", more capable GPUs and more memory are needed to drive higher resolution retina displays (in simplified terms, as it's a SoC anyway).

Therefore, I think it's quite plausible that the iPad 3 will get a somewhat "speed-bumped" A5 based on A9, with better-graphics and more memory, which they might just call A5X".

smulji said:
I see the following two options;
The A5X still uses the dual-core Cortex A9 CPU, but faster clocked. The GPU still remains dual-core but uses the new PowerVR Rogue GPU architecture.

In option 2, we could still see a quad-core CPU / GPU based on the Cortex A9 & SGX543MP4. Even though it's quad-core it's still using the same architecture as the Apple A5.
Click to expand...
I concur. You just beat me by a mere 3 minutes (though that would just be my struggle with English language) ;)
 
Last edited:
damir00 said:
Twice as powerful?

In what way?

VGA cameras, five inch screen, three hour battery, empty shelves in the app store and 4GB memory cards?

The thing is free-falling in sales, would be surprised if it lasts the year.
Click to expand...

Nice omission of details. It's quoted as "3-5 hours" battery not 3 hours. And 5 inch is aplenty for many, let's not forget it's an OLED high res display too. The iPad's cameras aren't exactly anything to brag about either just in case you were wondering.
 
My guess is that the A5X will be a quad core version of the A5 and the reason they are still calling it the A5 is because it's still based on the same ARM core; the Cortex A9.

A4 - Single core Cortex A8
A5 - Dual core Cortex A9
A5X - Quad core Cortex A9
A6 - Quad core Cortex A15?
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Hurry up and release this thing already! You gotta love Craigslist, just sold my 11 month old 16gb wifi iPad 2 for $485. Fifteen bucks cost to use for almost a year. I'm ready for the upgrade..
 
I'm really hoping it's a dual core Cortex A15. Give me that, 1 GB of RAM, retina display, LTE, and 32 GB entry-level at $499 and I'll s*** myself and pre-order ASAP!
 
iJed said:
My guess is that the A5X will be a quad core version of the A5 and the reason they are still calling it the A5 is because it's still based on the same ARM core; the Cortex A9.

A4 - Single core Cortex A8
A5 - Dual core Cortex A9
A5X - Quad core Cortex A9
A6 - Quad core Cortex A15?
Click to expand...

Definitely a valid theory. See my post above.
 
pgiguere1 said:
Given the poorer efficiency of quad-core processors in general and the better efficiency of the A15 architecture over the A9, a dual-core Cortex A15 would have performed better than a quad-core A9 that's clocked slower.

Apple usually cares more about real-world performance than about having impressive spec terms anyway. Those that would like to brag about having a quad-core phone are generally more interested in Android-based phones to begin with.

I think it's safe to assume that the A5X will not be a quad-core. The number of cores was the only "spec" Apple has talked about when they presented the A5. Now that the new A5X SoC doesn't have more cores, it's hard for them to justify an A6 being significantly better than the A5 without getting technical and explaining the architecture difference between a Cortex A9 and A12, which Apple obviously wouldn't do. A5X makes it sound like it's the same old dual-core processor, just faster (like iPhone 4S vs iPhone 4).

Now there are two possibilities:

  1. The A5X is still just an A5. It uses the same Cortex A9 architecture but it is now clocked higher. That would be weird since the iPhone 4S also uses an A5 with a different (slower) clock speed, yet they didn't rename the SoC just because of this. The "X" would basically just be a marketing term to make people feel like the CPU is new, while it's not really. All they would need is a bigger battery to compensate and good heat management, which shouldn't be a problem.
    /QUOTE]

    What the hell are you talking about? There are about a million things that are wrong in your comment the largest of which being the fact that Apple has NEVER used a straight up ARM architecture for any CPU that went into an iPad. The CPU design is based on ARM's reference design but it is always an optimised one and is in fact considerably better than what they started off with. May I also remind you that the A5 used in 4S runs at mere 800 MHz yet manages to outperform processors running at 1.2 GHz in most benchmarks.
    Yes, a stock Cortex 15 design is considerably faster than a stock Cortex 9 quad core but at the end of the day that makes absolutely no difference when you are talking about Apple's designs. You have no way of telling how far they've taken the Cortex 9 design and considering the amount of time and energy that went into essentially creating a new CPU they would be mad to drop it for the supposed promise of Cortex 15 performance.

    So my money is definitely on a quad-core A5 CPU with upgraded GPU especially since they chose to name it A5X. You will get a Cortex 15 design, but that would take time. Don't expect Apple to pull a Tegra 2! But then again that's hardly the first time that Nvidia's messed up a hardware design ...
Click to expand...
 
besweeeet said:
Then it's probably just going to be a higher clocked dual-core, probably at 1.5GHz or higher. Maybe the GPU will be quad-core?
Click to expand...

Anand from anandtech thinks it is the same A5 on a 32nm process, so probably right.

pmz said:
Maybe it's a dual core A15 that has been branded A5X. Makes sense to me.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. A15 would be worthy of a whole new integer. Apple isn't afraid to add a letter if they see it as a revision and not new version.

Exhale said:
Thats not quite how GPUs work.
Click to expand...
In this case, it is. They advertise their architecture as a configurable number of cores.


Mr. Gates said:
That's a sweet little handheld. What's the battery life on that tiny screen ?
Click to expand...

Tiny screen? It's a handheld, not a tablet. As for better life, how long would you expect an iPhone to last running infinity blade 2?

aduteau said:
hummmm maybe The Verge was on to something first:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/8/2785486/ipad-3-back-photo-appears-a6-retina-display

If so ... Seems this time Joshua Topolsky had some good insides !
Click to expand...

Don't mention that here. Only Jim D is right!
 
I'm gonna predict it's a prototype unit to test the iPad 3 design, or if it is the actual production chip then I can only see a quad core CPU and GPU but based on the current A5 chips. I can't see it carrying the PowerVR 6 series or the new 3D transistor technology as I would think, those are big enough changes for an A6 brand name?

It's all speculation anyway.
 
chrmjenkins said:
Anand from anandtech thinks it is the same A5 on a 32nm process, so probably right.



I doubt it. A15 would be worthy of a whole new integer. Apple isn't afraid to add a letter if they see it as a revision and not new version.

In this case, it is. They advertise their architecture as a configurable number of cores.




Tiny screen? It's a handheld, not a tablet. As for better life, how long would you expect an iPhone to last running infinity blade 2?



Don't mention that here. Only Jim D is right!
Click to expand...

"Anand from anandtech thinks it is the same A5 on a 32nm process, so probably right."

Anand is pretty smart dude. Can you post a link where he says this?
 
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