if a quad-core, like 4G connectivity for the iPhone 4S, will too severely impact battery life i can definitely see them going with a beefed up dual-core setup.
Quad-Core CPUs allow a better power management. So your fear is unfounded.
if a quad-core, like 4G connectivity for the iPhone 4S, will too severely impact battery life i can definitely see them going with a beefed up dual-core setup.
Quad-Core CPUs allow a better power management. So your fear is unfounded.
To the ones which cite that the GPU is more important: No such thing exists in iDevices. The Ax are doing all of it - much like the AMD Vision chips for mobile devices.
Samsung was rumored to be introducing next-gen Galaxy Tab with a dual-core Cortex A15 based Exynos chip at MWC later this month. It is not unlikely that Apple might get first hand at the chip if they are aggressive enough.
Even if Apple passes on updating the CPU cores for the next iPad, I highly doubt they'll also neglect the graphics, especially if the "retina" display makes its way to the iPad.
But what about ram? I would think they'd have to go to a gig, but that's what people said last time and it didn't happen.
And yes, the extra ram makes a difference. With multiple web tabs open, tabs often have to reload after switching. And quitting other apps (even though that's supposed to be unnecessary) makes that reloading happen less often.
I think there is a general misconception that some people think if the processor has more cores or is running at a higher frequency, this will determine the speed of the device. Sure, since iPad tablets don't have a GPU, it is true to some degree. Thinking about a quadcore, you have to have an app which uses four different threads at once with at least two using the full capacity of the core to see a difference. Now, even with the higher resolution, how many apps will do that? Next thing: Using 4 cores at full speed will be nearly impossible with the current RAM configuration. The bandwith and/or speed would have to be increased to allow more data to be calculated actually getting to the cores. If I would be in charge of what to improve, I would go with more cache, higher bandwith for RAM (e.g. like PC dual channel) and other optimizations before I touch the amount of core or speed of cores. Simple reason: using more cores or higher frequency - someone mentioned 2GHz - causes higher temperature and hot spot which then causes 2 problems users don't apreciate: Lower battery life and a heatPad instead of an iPad. Since Apple is all about customer experiance, I don't think the quality control would let this one slide.
Edit:
To the ones which cite that the GPU is more important: No such thing exists in iDevices. The Ax are doing all of it - much like the AMD Vision chips for mobile devices.
Nope, sorry. There is a GPU.
What people are getting confused by is that it's a system-on-a-chip. Apple license the IP from ARM and Imagination and others and build a chip that integrates all of them. There was another story a few days ago about a speeh processing company whose IP had been licensed by Apple for integration inside their SoCs. It's also got a load of customisations like hardware acceleration for face recognition.
In a PC, you might have separate CPU, controller and GPU chips (amongst others). With a SoC, those are all located on the same physical package. The idea behind that is this simplifies the design, gives you better performance and power consumption, in high-level terms. I think Apple even includes the RAM chips inside the A5 package.
There is still a separate graphics processing unit. It's provided by Imagination. Apple pays them royalties for it.
Obviously when people talk about a GPU, they mean the processing unit in charge of the 2d/3g graphics operations, doesn't really matter if it's located on the same chip as the CPU or if it's a different bug 5 inches away. It's still a circuit dedicated for graphics, hence a GPU.
But if you still believe there is no GPU in the iDevices, then don't look here, since they even manage to benchmark that nonexistent GPU.
Oh, they will almost certainly update the graphics. However I tend to put more weight into the idea that the next chip will be quad-core Cortex-A9 based rather than dual-core and Cortex-A15.
Also, note that "announcing" is not the same thing as "shipping".
Errr... nope. If you look carefully, you will see that all calculations (except some specifics like earSmart, WiFi, memory controler, etc) go through one of the 2 cores. No "GPU" there. Virtually, yes, they exist and if you compare graphics, you compare that speed. In these kind of mobile devices though it is done by the CPU cores. If you think a set of commands is a seperate processing unit, fine. But since the "processing" is done by the CPU, there is only a "G" and a "U" left from the GPU.
Also: The RAM is not on-die. It is the Toshiba DRAM Y890A111222KA - seperate chip. Look at the teardowns.
Quad-Core CPUs allow a better power management. So your fear is unfounded.
The funny thing is that I tried to google search to verify and the top hit is a tweet where Gruber jokes that he is wrong. I'll have to pay closer attention in the future. However, the pure gold comment was in reference to no new hardware at WWDC 2011, which was widely expected and not a surprise.
But Ive said it before and Ill say it again: Jim Dalrymples sources at Apple are gold.
Errr... nope. If you look carefully, you will see that all calculations (except some specifics like earSmart, WiFi, memory controler, etc) go through one of the 2 cores. No "GPU" there. Virtually, yes, they exist and if you compare graphics, you compare that speed. In these kind of mobile devices though it is done by the CPU cores. If you think a set of commands is a seperate processing unit, fine. But since the "processing" is done by the CPU, there is only a "G" and a "U" left from the GPU.
Also: The RAM is not on-die. It is the Toshiba DRAM Y890A111222KA - seperate chip. Look at the teardowns.
That's hardly the same, these are just instruction sets extensions meant to accelerate specific calculations, sometimes not even graphics related and as you know, even with those you still need a dedicated GPU. So if anything, this just goes further to show you need much more than just to modify your CPU with new instruction sets to achieve some reasonable graphics performance and that's the case with iDevices as well.PS: Saying that the A4/A5 has a GPU on-die would be saying that Pentium and Athlon are GPUs as well since they have SSE and/or 3DNow on-die.
There is still a separate graphics processing unit. It's provided by Imagination. Apple pays them royalties for it.
Well, the dual-core Cortex-A15 based Exynos was planned to be shipped "in quantity" by Q2 2012. Assuming that iPad 3 ships in mid March, it is not unlikely for Apple to jump aboard the dual-core Cortex-A15 based design train. I do, however, agree with you that it'll make more sense for them to go with a quad-core Cortex-A9 and significantly bump the graphics, perhaps with a quad-core PowerVR SGX543.
Fair enough... and don't get me wrong - I'd LOVE to see Apple beat my expectations and make the next chip be A15 based. I just don't think it's likely based on the iBoot leak we saw that showed a model number that only increased by 5 (rather than 10 from A4 to A5). Granted, the iBoot could have been faked, but I kinda doubt it.
It really DOES NOT matter.
What we all want is a faster processor. Apple will deliver that.
/thread