Apple Praised for Bold Move With A6 Processor

[kartu]

[citation][nom]Dangi[/nom]Of course A6 will run faster, that's what embedded systems do, you don't need that much CPU brute force if the system is fully optimized for it, the same way consoles can play games with performance close to computer games ( without AA ) with hardware thats way less powerful[/citation]
Consoles are not even remotely close to graphics qualitz of PCs, unless game was actually written for consoles then ported to PC. Graphic engines are very optimized as is (with Crysis 1 being a notable exception) there is no way you can get modern GPU performance out of GForce 5700 (that's what PS3 has).

But on topic, I wonder why on earth would anyone care about CPU performance on the phone, exactly what CPU intensive tasks is it doing pretty please?
I bet much more customers would care if they'd double battery life.

 

[tipoo]

For a company that hasn't made a custom ARM core before, it sure is impressive, but in the grand scheme of things Krait already had similar performance per watt and that's what, a year-ish old now? I expect Qualcomm to overtake it again quite soon.

Kind of sad but kind of a good thing that mobile SoCs wars are now more exciting than desktop processor wars. I wonder if ARM can scale up to laptops and desktops.

 

[tipoo]

[citation][nom]zwavergn[/nom]You do realize the dual-core A6 outperforms some quad-cores like the Nvidia Tegra 3 and Snapdragon S4, which are quad core chips, right?More cores does not mean it's better. A better architecture or design makes the difference. In Apple's case with the A6, they laid it out by hand instead of the usual automated tools and it gave significant performance boosts.[/citation]

Not sure why people are downvoting you, this is completely right. Tegra 3s 4 cores were outstripped by a dual core Krait and now this. Surely computer enthusiasts of all people know that cores plus clock speeds don't tell you anything outside of the same architecture.

 

[tipoo]

[citation][nom]kartu[/nom]GPU performance out of GForce 5700 (that's what PS3 has).[/citation]


It was part 7800 part 7600, where did 5700 come from?

 

[teh_chem]

I've actually continually given Apple credit for their generally-unappreciated internal chip design teams.

But for the most part, in most mobile devices, benchmarks and "twice as fast" is pretty meaningless when it doesn't honestly enable you to do any more than you could on the slower device.

Dual-core snapdragon platforms feel pretty much just as fast as quad core tegra or other platforms. It's all about implementation. The most cardcore powerful chip doesn't mean much if your software can't utilize it properly.

 

[kyuuketsuki]

[citation][nom]ericburnby[/nom]The newest S4 Pro with Adreno 320 can match the A6 but needs twice the cores and higher clock to do so.[/citation]Shows how much you know. The number of cores the CPU has has little to do with GPU performance. Also, who cares if it does use more cores and a higher clock? The only thing that matters is performance per watt. If they can put in more cores and a higher clock with comparable battery life, that's an advantage.

 

[kyuuketsuki]

[citation][nom]zwavergn[/nom]You do realize the dual-core A6 outperforms some quad-cores like the Nvidia Tegra 3 and Snapdragon S4, which are quad core chips, right?[/citation]Snapdragon S4 is not quad-core. The S4 Pro is, but there are no phones with that SoC in the wild and no benchmarks comparing it with the A6. Although we do know the Adreno 320 GPU it is paired with gives the A6 a run for its money.

The A6 is a nice SoC, there's no doubt. But it is already going to be equaled or overtaken by the new round of ARM SoCs coming out. Plus, it's still wrapped up in that iPhone/iOS wrapper, so no thanks.

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]syrious1[/nom]I would like to see some actual benchmarks, instead of a photo of the die.[/citation]
get and iphone 5 and perform your own benchmarks, lol

 

[bigdog44]

Why is apple being praised for doing what they were supposed to be doing. Isn't every company supposed to be using the 'form follows function' ideal...sheesh. And I think the console comparison above is accurate with regard to when they were introduced (with the exception of the Wii-nee of course). And of course the console will fall behind year after year in the same comparison because you cant upgrade it...duh. And another good point above is the one about uber powerful CPUs/GPUs in a phone being useless after a certain point. What average user is running 100 apps in the background while watching porn anyway? After the GPU can output full 1080p, what else does it need to do? SuperHD TVs will be doing all of the effortless upscaling anyway. Get to work on the batteries and performance/watt and idle performance. I'd be more impressed with mediocre speed and a battery that lasted a week!

 

[FlagMuffin1221]

[citation][nom]zwavergn[/nom]You do realize the dual-core A6 outperforms some quad-cores like the Nvidia Tegra 3 and Snapdragon S4, which are quad core chips, right?More cores does not mean it's better. A better architecture or design makes the difference. In Apple's case with the A6, they laid it out by hand instead of the usual automated tools and it gave significant performance boosts.[/citation]

But the OS also plays a role in the speed of a processor. Nvidia Tegra 3 is utilised in a variety of devices that use Android, all of which use different layouts and most likely different hardware such as RAM and storage. The A6 chip is tailored to iOS, and is only meant for iOS and the components of the iPhone. As a commenter stated before, much like game consoles which are designed to run games at similar framerates to PC's but with much less powerful hardware. Same thing with the A6, it's designed to run iOS and the iPhone's hardware.

 

[sundragon]

Are you guys so jaded that you can't give credit where it's due?

Instead of taking an A15 (great core, but hungry) and shoving it into a phone, they took the best features and pared it down to something less hungry - This was also hand laid which is more time consuming and expensive but yields an elegant architecture that uses less die...

Tom's is overrun by a bunch of android drones.

Finally - save the "benchmark or shutup" comments: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6309/iphone-5a6-sunspider-performance

I think Apple has done a lot for the cell phone industry - Before Android existed... I see a space for both (and more platforms) but what's with all the debbie downer comments?

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]Kyuuketsuki[/nom]Snapdragon S4 is not quad-core. The S4 Pro is, but there are no phones with that SoC in the wild and no benchmarks comparing it with the A6. Although we do know the Adreno 320 GPU it is paired with gives the A6 a run for its money.The A6 is a nice SoC, there's no doubt. But it is already going to be equaled or overtaken by the new round of ARM SoCs coming out. Plus, it's still wrapped up in that iPhone/iOS wrapper, so no thanks.[/citation]

The point is that few companies are making an effort to create custom CPUs... The Adreno isn't produced by LG or HTC...

Samsung produces ARM based CPUs but they are using the defacto standard A8/A9/A15 cores - nothing custom...

It's funny how when Apple does something good for the industry - it doesn't matter...

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[scannall]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]The tittle of best mobile SoC will be short lived because of the soon to be released Samsung's Exynos 5 Dual. A Dual-Core ARM Cortex-A15 CPU paired with a Quad-Core ARM Mali-T604 GPU.[/citation]

Yes. This back and forth has been going on for a long time. And I expect it will continue into the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see what the next iPad does with this A6 and whatever video cores they use in the next one. Maybe the next gen PowerVR graphics? Who knows. Speculation can be fun though.

 

[del35]

Try to connect to wifi and stream music to a bluetooth speaker or headphone and compare the quality of what you hear to the quality possible in the SGS3, and you will swiftly discover that the A6 processor is optimized to run moronsconcerns in the iJailedyou ecosystem. Indeed, not what a savvy user might want to do.

Thanks but no thanks. Dont want the iCrap plebeian logo anyway. Too smart to be seen with such ....t even if it is more expensive that the better phones. I can only go so low without losing my self-respect, and Apple does not cut the grade.

Leave Apple to the technologically challenged locust.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]scannall[/nom]Yes. This back and forth has been going on for a long time. And I expect it will continue into the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see what the next iPad does with this A6 and whatever video cores they use in the next one. Maybe the next gen PowerVR graphics? Who knows. Speculation can be fun though.[/citation]
The chip that will be used on the replacement of the new iPad will most likely have a PowerVR 5 series or even perhaps a 6 series GPU. Apple will have to compete with competitors upcoming SoCs, and those that use PowerVR GPUs will either have a 5 or 6 series GPU.

 

[john_4]

[citation][nom]nieur[/nom]if apple thinking of bringing their cpu on desktop it will simply fail. It requires years of research and development.[/citation]
Not if they are running OS X optimized for the CPU just like their IOS is.

 

[soundping]

Just buy a apple tee-shirt...it's cheaper

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]deftonian[/nom]It's a stretch to say consoles can play games with performance close to computer games... a very big stretch. Computers have such a huge range when it comes to performance so if you mean that consoles comes close to low end computers in regards to gaming, then you're accurate. But mid to higher end PCs will knock the socks off a console.[/citation]

I consider a Radeon 6670 DDR3 to be low-end, but it "knocks the socks off" of the consoles's graphics. The Trinity A10s such as the 5700 and 5800K have comparable graphics performance with standard dual-channel DDR3-1600 9-9-9-24 memory and can easily fit in an ~$300-400 desktop computer.

[citation][nom]john_4[/nom]Not if they are running OS X optimized for the CPU just like their IOS is.[/citation]

It doesn't matter how much optimization takes place in the OS, a slow enough CPU such as that of any of these *ultra mobile* SoCs will be noticeably slow in many tasks for a full desktop/laptop system.