OLED.
Apple going with IMG for years to come ?
- Thread starter tangey
- Start date
OLED.
Qualification, SGX540 apps ?
Baseband qualification is for the modem, and the full system itself has to go through the wireless certification anyway, so I do not think it is a great advantage over Nokia. I think Apple has a big advantage in its browser (webkit) core and UI than anything else compared to competition.
On the SGX540, what new applications do you foresee that will drive the adoption of this 3D engine in the iphone in 2010 ?
Let me answer point by point...
- The time from tape-out to final product availability can be much lower for Apple because they can co-design hardware and software at the same time (something nobody else can do) and the chip they do in-house doesn't require baseband qualification etc. like for Nokia.
Baseband qualification is for the modem, and the full system itself has to go through the wireless certification anyway, so I do not think it is a great advantage over Nokia. I think Apple has a big advantage in its browser (webkit) core and UI than anything else compared to competition.
On the SGX540, what new applications do you foresee that will drive the adoption of this 3D engine in the iphone in 2010 ?
You do realize Nokia's custom OMAP SoCs integrate both the app processor and the modem, right? This is how TI still has such a large percentage of the baseband market despite having no 3G IP of their own. Therefore, to switch to a new application processor, they have usually been required to go through baseband qualification...
This is something I think many of these companies are getting tired of as it also requires them to make the design choices even more years in advance, which is not usually a good thing in this business to say the least. So I'm not expecting things to work that way anymore beyond 2009/2010, but I could be wrong.
Have you seen the success of the games on the application store? Seems like more than enough of a justification to me
GAMES, a higher resolution screen, OpenCL, display games via video-out, etc. etc.
The big games cost $10 right now. $7 go directly(!) to the game developers. An overall number 10 sells ca. 3000 units a days (12/18/08), number 1 ca. 13.000 (12/22/08). That's between $630.000 and $2.730.000 a month (for something like SimCity). Or between $315.000 and $1.375.000 for a $5 game (for something like Tetris, Fieldrunners, Crash Bandicoot).
And that's just right now. The App Store is just 6 months old. And the installed user base just 1.5 years.
http://www.joelcomm.com/updated_iphone_app_sales_the_f.html
Display a touch based game on a video out to TV..Thanks, I would stick to my console
I would rather like to think bigger screens would drive more productivity applications. (If only MS would make their UI better).
Also, I would think making a case for having a virtual world application makes a lot of sense, than just games, at higher resolutions and screens. That would make me go wow.
So I'm not expecting things to work that way anymore beyond 2009/2010, but I could be wrong.
Have you seen the success of the games on the application store? Seems like more than enough of a justification to me
Precisely - if things do not work that way by 09/10, then Apple is not alone in having that advantage.
I am not so sure of hardcore games that would necessitate higher performance, coming to small screens. Maybe its just me.
Does anybody know how big the MBXlite (@90nm) in the iPhone is? Just to compare it to the speculated SGX54x (@40/45nm) for the 2010 iPhone (IMHO SGX545@65nm = 12.5mm2). Thx!
I am not so sure of hardcore games that would necessitate higher performance, coming to small screens. Maybe its just me.
Games for mobile devices and relevant game ports won't for sure become "lighter" as time goes by, that's a given. Besides even if the hardware is supposed to be "overkill" ISVs can always invest in additional IQ improving features. It's a shame IMG didn't make a full game out of PowerVR Racer. It runs with 4xFSAA on MBX.
No idea frankly about Lite@90nm; I'd figure though that a theoretical SGX540@40nm to be somewhere in the ~6mm2 region.
If Apple goes with the proposed SGX520@65nm (2.6mm2) for the iPhone 09 than that would mean double the GPU size for 2010. The SGX520 is really really small.
I don't think it's possible to say. Not only are Apples volumes for their iPhone and iPod products such that they would get very good deals, but in this case production facilities would be created for the purpose. Apple would effectively create the market. There has recently been production facilities set up for 3.5" AMOLED production (unfortunately digitimes reserves its article database for subscribers), but it's impossible to say if the volumes targeted could cover iPhone volumes. The wording doesn't suggest it.
OLED would be a great technology choice for phones though. Thin, good energy/legibility properties, extremely fast response time for games, films and camera viewfinder function. Life time is good enough to definitely be a non-issue for phones, so cost is the major question mark. But even going by existing products using OLED, it shouldn't be much of an issue for an iPhone. We aren't talking about $15 retail gadgets here, and the added value to the device would definitely be greater than the added cost. Plus, it would be a competitive advantage for Apple vs. its smaller volume rivals.
Exactly the reason why I have my doubts for Arun's proposed (speculative) roadmap. One aspect though I haven't thought of so far would be Apple targeting also some sort of competition to future handhelds, which I wouldn't expect earlier than say at least 2010 anyway.
I agree with Entropy, also both Samsung and TMDisplay seem to be doing a very good job of preparing to ramp AMOLED in the 2009-2010 timeframe; TMDisplay's 2.2" screen with only 100mW of power consumption total would be incredibly attractive for a RAZR-like phone. In fact, I have a small hunch we'll see that in 2H09...
As for SGX 540: you're massively overestimating its size. PowerVR publicly claimed it's substantially less than 2xSGX530, while that is only about 5.5mm² for <=150MHz on TI's not-very-dense 65nm process. SGX520 would likely be 3.5mm² on such a process IMO (remember 2.6 is also pre-layout iirc). So my guess is SGX540 would be maybe 9mm² on that same process, which might translate into 4mm² on Samsung's 45nm process unless you aimed it at a substantially higher clock speed, which is possible.
As for MBX Lite, it's really small; since MBX Non-Lite was 6.5mm² on TI's 90nm process, maybe MBX Lite would be ~3mm² on Samsung's 90nm process? I'm really just guessing there though.
As for SGX 540: you're massively overestimating its size. PowerVR publicly claimed it's substantially less than 2xSGX530, while that is only about 5.5mm² for <=150MHz on TI's not-very-dense 65nm process. SGX520 would likely be 3.5mm² on such a process IMO (remember 2.6 is also pre-layout iirc). So my guess is SGX540 would be maybe 9mm² on that same process, which might translate into 4mm² on Samsung's 45nm process unless you aimed it at a substantially higher clock speed, which is possible.
As for MBX Lite, it's really small; since MBX Non-Lite was 6.5mm² on TI's 90nm process, maybe MBX Lite would be ~3mm² on Samsung's 90nm process? I'm really just guessing there though.
Their own SGX whitepaper states 12.5mm^2@65nm for the SGX545.
3.5 square millimeters for just 2 TMUs is a tad too much for your 540 theory don't you think? I was thinking originally in the ~11mm2 region for 540@65nm and made a rough estimate for a non perfect shrink to be within any worst case scenario.
I don't know about OLEDs in mobile phones. Indoors they are great but outdoors in the sunlight they are much worse than good transflective TFTs. I guess the popular Nokia N85 with it's 2.6" OLED screen is the mass market leader for OLEDs in mobile phones. I had the chance to compare one with my Nokia E-Series transflective Display in a bright autumn sunlight and you almost couldn't see anything on the N85, while the E-Series was totally usable. And I guess the sunlight wasn't very bright compared to a Spain, Mexico, California etc. summer.
I know that OLEDs have many advantages, but for people in sunny countries I wouldn't be so thrilled about having one in my mobile phone.
Similar experience, even in the dark and rainy UK:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/feat...d_OLED_screens_Not_perhaps_the_Holy_Grail.php
4mm2@45nm (Samsung) vs. 6mm2@40nm (TSMC). Quite a difference you got there. Only time will tell :smile:
At the moment I think the best new feature for a small gaming system and/or phone could be a combination of the unipixel screen with a "nano-touch" system.
http://www.unipixel.com/
http://www.unipixel.com/assets/unipixel_whitepaper_20070717.pdf
http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/ (the picture says it all)
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/baudisch/projects/nanotouch/
http://www.unipixel.com/
http://www.unipixel.com/assets/unipixel_whitepaper_20070717.pdf
http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/ (the picture says it all)
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/baudisch/projects/nanotouch/
I think that's partially model-dependent. Look at Page 6 of this presentation: http://www.picommissioncoree2008.net/files/multimedia_card_player_samsung_sdi.pdf
SIA is a digital algorithm that increases the effective contrast and does result in a "washing out" effect with fewer shades, but it's better than nothing; and a good AMOLED is definitely much better than a transmissive LCD at least, although at 100K+ Lux I doubt even that and SIA can save you...
Long term, maybe. But apart from OLEDs, I can see other display technologies that are imho more likely to enter the touchscreen(smartphone) mass market in the next 2 years :
Better haptic feedback for touchscreens:
1. Real localized haptic feedback like Nokia's Haptikos (real life prototype was already shown over a year ago).
"Don’t be fooled by simple vibrational imitations folks, this is the real McCoy – you press a key on the screen, and it clicks under your finger with exactly the same sort of fingertip feedback as if you’d pressed a conventional keyboard key."
http://www.redferret.net/?p=9533
2. Real static tactile feedback (actually feeling the keys/deformed surface). No actual hardware was shown, yet (imho). Apple patent. Most likely further into the future than Haptikos.
http://www.unwiredview.com/2007/10/25/apples-touch-surface-keyboard-with-tactile-feedback/
Touchscreens with better multi-touch and more:
Sharp's new LCD screen with embedded optical sensors in each pixel. Supports multi-touch input and scanning. Only half as thick as the iPhone's touchscreen, prototype had the same 480x320 resolution as the iPhone. Mass production was announced for mid 2008. AU Optronics (AUO) and Toshiba Matsushita Displays (TMD) have already shown similar products, too.
It would provide more flexible multi-touch (more than two inputs, works with gloves etc.) and scanning (documents, business cards, could eventually be used for fingerprint recognition etc.)
http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/08/31/sharp.multi.touch.proto/
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2198082/sharp-multitouch-scanner-lcd
http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/02/sharp-shows-off-multi-touch-optical-scanning-portable-lcd/
Since OLEDs can't "reflect" and use the sunlight, they can only try to become much brighter on their own or use "cheap" tricks like these. But transmissive screens were once totally unusable outdoors (my Casio Cassiopeia PDA was unreadable), now they are just bad. So there's hope
Edit (because of the OLED):
Was just leaked: Samsung S8300 with 2.8" AMOLED WQVGA touchscreen, 8 MP camera, slider, just 12.8mm thick, made of duralumin, release march 09
http://dailymobile.se/2008/12/29/ex...slider-with-8-megapixel-camera-to-tit-stores/
So we're definitely getting there. From Nokia's N85 with 2.6" QVGA non-touchscreen to 2.8" WQVGA touchscreen. 2009, the year OLED took over (the smart/featurephones). Also, OLED touchscreen, front facing camera, 8 MP camera, dual-LED flash, all neatly packed in just ~11mm (display part of the slider). So no excuses for the iPhone 09 in terms of camera and flash
Last edited by a moderator: