Next-Gen iPhone & iPhone Nano Speculation
- Thread starter Arun
- Start date
anexanhume
Veteran
And he failed at providing any evidence of thatUnless I missed something that is.
I'm eagerly awaiting what will be found and if Anand will apologize if he's wrong.
He claims he has sources he won't disclose. I think it makes sense when you realize how unlikely quad core is and how a 1.6+ GHz frequency on A9 cores just doesn't make sense. Apple always uses frequencies that lag other commercial offerings. They use strong parts at low frequencies, not the other way around. We'll see.
french toast
Veteran
I'm with Laurent on this..
And he failed at providing any evidence of that
I'm eagerly awaiting what will be found and if Anand will apologize if he's wrong.
I don't recall any case where Anandtech hasn't retracted on spots where they've been wrong, but I might have missed something. I recall quite a few cases where they don't just delete or modify paragraphs with mistakes in articles, but simply strike out the wrong parts to still be visible to the reader and update underneath with the correct one.
Could be the assumption came from the 2nd slide here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6279/apples-iphone-5-uses-a6-soc-arm-cortex-a15s-inside and combined with the "A6" name.
I just fail to see that quite high clocked dual A9 CPUs couldn't deliver similar results and why A6 has at any price to stand for a new technology generation but that's just me.
2*A9@1.6GHz probably doesn't make that much sense under the light that other SoCs at the moment don't have as huge GPU blocks amongst other aspects. Other than that the OMAP4470 has 2*A9@1.5GHz under 45nm (and a much more humble single SGX544@384MHz). I assume the tricky part is the GPU block and its respective power consumption; however the CPU block itself singled out is anything but absurd for 2*A9@1.6GHz under 32nm.
For the record ST Ericsson has two dual A9 mainstream SoCs on its roadmap both under 28nm if memory serves well. One clockes the 2*A9 at up to 1.85GHz and the other up to 2.3GHz and yes 28nm is a totally different chapter.
Yes it's unusual for Apple and you're right in the notion that they rarely invest in frequency but there's also a lot of pressure from the competition. Theoretically 2*A9@1.6GHz doesn't sound like an as much wild scenario; personally I'd prefer of course the 2*A15 scenario at more humble frequencies but that's besides any point.
On CNBC they said all the workers following the live blogs were repeating "Thunderbolt" and "sapphire."
These might catch on like Retina did.
That would be funny, if the change in the dock connector actually comes to be seen as a desirable new feature.
I'm extremely disapointed and fustrated about this new cable.
I was hoping that Apple would push big into wireless charging but I guess their profit margins will only allow them to sell extremely expensive cables with extremely expensive adapters.
Hopefully another company is able to push it foward
I was hoping that Apple would push big into wireless charging but I guess their profit margins will only allow them to sell extremely expensive cables with extremely expensive adapters.
Hopefully another company is able to push it foward
You're right, I'm just getting mad because so many people take what Anand writes for granted...
Not, that's me too
That slide could very well show OS improvements for flash management and/or faster flash memory (I don't have the comments accompanying the slide so I'm just wild guessing ).
On a sidenote xbitlabs seems to also have adopted the A15 story.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile...hone_5_New_Look_New_Feel_New_Performance.html
A quad core MP2?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile...hone_5_New_Look_New_Feel_New_Performance.html
A quad core MP2?
ltcommander.data
Regular
Does wireless charging take up a lot of room, particularly z-height? Given Apple's all about thinness anything new feature that compromises that is going to have an uphill battle getting included. Of course, if they put enough effort into it as they did figuring out their chamfer edge Apple could probably work something out.
The A6 introduction slide did say "2x faster CPU" though which you'd think would be in terms of theoretical number crunching specific to the CPU.Not, that's me too
True. However it's still not good enough indication for a preliminary A15 conclusion. It's not like you can't in theory reach twice the number crunching with a high clocked dual A9. It could be truly be that someone reliable told Anand at the event; that's of course a totally different story. Based just on the presentation (from what I've seen so far) and the A6 moniker I don't see anything that guarantees a dual A15 unless I've missed something.
I agree.
If they didnt call it A6 what WOULD they call it. We already have A5 and A5X, so did we expect A5Y, A5X2 ? Did they use a different name for the 32nm A5 ?
I think people are putting too much faith in a rather arbitrary numbering system
Last edited by a moderator:
The QI wireless plate is supposedly partially responsible for the increased thickness and weight of the 920. I cant see many people wanting a thicker and heavier phone for something thats essentially a gimmick. It sounds cool but in practise you need to buy a charger/pillow and you cant use the phone while its charging slower than a wall charger, the only thing you gain is that you dont need to plug in a cable or making sure it attaches properly to a dock
A5R2.
Hope anandtech isn't your source for that, as he states:-
"generally referred to as A5R2"
Which sounds a million miles from an official apple name
http://www.anandtech.com/print/6281
We all know that he has a point. Heck desktop GPU IHVs change product numbering/naming schemes too more than often, even if there's a simple die shrink involved. Wait a die shrink isn't even absolutely necessary, hence a GTX460 easily becomes a GTX560Ti even if both had been manufactured under 40G.
1.6GHz A5-based CPU would be "2x faster"
edit:
Jimmy Kimmel showed what Apple is really about
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdIWKytq_q4&feature=youtu.be
In short, he let people test the "iPhone 5", people praised it to heavens, said it's noticeably better, faster, thinner, heavier(!!!), lighter, has bigger screen and definitely faster than the predecessor, iPhone 4S, which some of the testers already owned, too.
In reality, what the people were testing, was standard iPhone 4S
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah I was going to post that, total gimmick. Not like you can charge anywhere in the house. You still have to be near an outlet, near some charger hooked to the wall. The only thing is not physically plugging in.
If you can charge while using it about the house, that would be something.
Otherwise, totally not worth it to make the thing thicker just for a gimmick.
Now, if they have a case with the plate integrated that you can take on and off easily, that might be a tradeoff.
But in reality, you're still tethered.
What's not to like about it? Other than maybe that it's not a micro USB plug in the phone end when it's a regular size USB plug in the non-phone end that is...
Wireless charging ISN'T wireless charging, and also completely stupid.
What the hell problem is wired "wireless" charging the solution to? Nothing! It's just more complicated, more inefficient (hugely so I might add; it wastes TONS of electricity), much more costly and resource intensive, and on top it isn't even wireless because you need a fucking box sitting on your desk with a coil in it, and a wire with power going to it. So what is it good for really? Other than being all buzzwordy and sheit?
I doubt the new cable's going to be more expensive than the old one. You think a wired "wireless" charger is going to be any cheaper? Think again.
You could repeat that test with anything that people in general are clueless about - technology in particular - and get exactly the same kind of result. Try playing people a bluray movie on a regular HDTV and tell them it's one of them newfangled 4K resolution videos for example.
In short, if you trick people, you're going to end up with tricked people. Nothing spectacular, revealing or surprising about that.