A4 SoC in leaked 4G iPhone???

[Tilpots]

Read and re-read the Gizmodo stuff, searched the forums here, but I can't find anyone revealing whether or not this leaked iPhone prototype has Apple's new A4 SoC, like the iPad. It should'nt have been too hard for the Giz guys too notice, yet where is the definitive pics or proof. Anyone seeing what I'm missing?

 

[Anthony T]

Read and re-read the Gizmodo stuff, searched the forums here, but I can't find anyone revealing whether or not this leaked iPhone prototype has Apple's new A4 SoC, like the iPad. It should'nt have been too hard for the Giz guys too notice, yet where is the definitive pics or proof. Anyone seeing what I'm missing?

I've been wondering the same thing, which makes me think that maybe the Gizmodo iPhone isn't the final product.

 

[-aggie-]

I've been wondering the same thing, which makes me think that maybe the Gizmodo iPhone isn't the final product.

You have to remember that Gizmodo isn't going to tell everything the first day. They probably want to milk this as long as they can.

 

[Tilpots]

You have to remember that Gizmodo isn't going to tell everything the first day. They probably want to milk this as long as they can.

Sure, but how can this not be the most important thing? It seems like they've had it for a while and knew Apple would want it back. Now that it's gone (or going), their credibility will take a hit for any "post reporting" simply 'cause they don't have it anymore.

 

[shazzam]

Oh I hope so! The innards are the most interesting bit now. I would like to see: A4 SOC, 802.11n, 64GB flash, 5 megapixel camera, better battery. Go go go!

 

[thelatinist]

Sure, but how can this not be the most important thing? It seems like they've had it for a while and knew Apple would want it back. Now that it's gone (or going), their credibility will take a hit for any "post reporting" simply 'cause they don't have it anymore.

If the processor is the most important hardware detail, you can expect that to be the last thing they reveal. Why would they spill the most important detail up front, when this way they've got hundreds of thousands of people refreshing their homepage waiting for the story?

Why should their later stories have less credibility than early ones just because they no longer have the device in hand? Surely the fact that Apple requested and took the phone back is the surest proof of its authenticity? And by now they must have photographed the phone from every possible angle, inside and out. They'll be able to offer us plenty of evidence for any claims they make in future articles.

 

[jayenh]

they've been quite conservative when it comes to specifics... maybe they simply daren't.

 

[Tilpots]

If the processor is the most important hardware detail, you can expect that to be the last thing they reveal. Why would they spill the most important detail up front, when this way they've got hundreds of thousands of people refreshing their homepage waiting for the story?

Why should their later stories have less credibility than early ones just because they no longer have the device in hand? Surely the fact that Apple requested and took the phone back is the surest proof of its authenticity? And by now they must have photographed the phone from every possible angle, inside and out. They'll be able to offer us plenty of evidence for any claims they make in future articles.

In journalism, you lead with your best stuff. Maybe they thought the pics were the best stuff, so that's what they went with, but their main readers are techies, so they have to know that's what we're waiting for. You don't see news anchors saying: "After this story about puppies, we'll bring you our Next to the Top Story." It doesn't work that way. Their credibililty will take a hit for withholding information like that if, if, they have it.

They've outed the employee, too. It's very possible they don't know what the processor is at all, but I wish they would come out and tell us one way or the other. The whole specs they listed were about dimensions and weight. Really? It's either poor reporting, or they don't know.

 

[thelatinist]

In journalism, you lead with your best stuff. Maybe they thought the pics were the best stuff, so that's what they went with, but their main readers are techies, so they have to know that's what we're waiting for. ... It's either poor reporting, or they don't know.

Of course they know that's what we're waiting for. That's precisely why they're holding it. Listen, their whole purpose is not to inform us, it's to drive hits to their website. By releasing the pics and other evidence, they have convinced us that they have the real thing (while nearly swamping their site, by the way). And now we are waiting on the edges of our seats, refreshing their home page every 10 minutes waiting for the next post. If they had released the processor and internals up-front without the evidence of authenticity, we'd all be denying they had anything; and if they released everything at once, there would be no need for us to go back.

 

[Geckotek]

Perhaps their lawyers have warned them that releasing specifics about the internals would equate to revealing trade secrets. And therefore, they are avoiding any specifics to cover their asses from being sued.

If we never see any details, I'm sure this will be the reason. If we eventually do, we know they are just milking the story.

 

[Tilpots]

Of course they know that's what we're waiting for. That's precisely why they're holding it. Listen, their whole purpose is not to inform us, it's to drive hits to their website. By releasing the pics and other evidence, they have convinced us that they have the real thing (while nearly swamping their site, by the way). And now we are waiting on the edges of our seats, refreshing their home page every 10 minutes waiting for the next post. If they had released the processor and internals up-front without the evidence of authenticity, we'd all be denying they had anything; and if they released everything at once, there would be no need for us to go back.

So in your assesment, what time frame do you think they will release these details? The whole world is looking at their page right now, geeks and regular folks alilke. They won't be back tomorrow and Gizmodo knows this. They have all the attention they could possibly get right now. If they know don't release this info now, they'll be missing their only chance to fully capitalize on the publicity. Unless...

Perhaps their lawyers have warned them that releasing specifics about the internals would equate to revealing trade secrets. And therefore, they are avoiding any specifics to cover their asses from being sued.

If we never see any details, I'm sure this will be the reason. If we eventually do, we know they are just milking the story.

This is an excellent point. Gawker has lawyers, too. And it's quite possible their counsel has advised them against getting too specific. So far, no legal lines appear to have been crossed. Very curious to this story behind the scenes.

 

[jtara]

I can't find anyone revealing whether or not this leaked iPhone prototype has Apple's new A4 SoC

I guarantee that they don't know. The only way to find out would be the saw the chip apart. That would make it "difficult" to return the phone to Apple unharmed...

 

[TSX]

Was the screen LED backlit?

 

[doubleatheman]

Would the A4 really be that big of an upgrade for the iPhone?

Considering the iPad has a battery thats ~3X larger than the iphone, the power use of the A4 at 1ghz is probably too high for the iPhone. And it has the same amount of ram as the current iphone. Apple would probably clock the chip down a bit if they used it in the iPhone.

Doesn't the iphone already have a 833mhz chip clocked down to 600mhz?

Since the last iphone update, the CPU has been about 31% boost in speed.

This would put us at: 786mhz on the new iPhone, which would probably be a good underclocked speed for the new iPhone.

I think it would be cool if they could make some kind of "turbo boost" like on the intel chips, work on the ARM chips. Leave the CPU way underclocked 90% of the time, and crank it up when were booting apps, or processing something. If the demand for 100% use remains longer than a few seconds, return to a lower power state. Otherwise we would loose too much battery life. Only short boosts for a few seconds would be reasonable.

 

[Tilpots]

I guarantee that they don't know. The only way to find out would be the saw the chip apart. That would make it "difficult" to return the phone to Apple unharmed...

I don't believe a saw is necessary. It should say so right on the chip. Now if you wanna do it ifixit style, you need a saw.

Would the A4 really be that big of an upgrade for the iPhone?

Considering the iPad has a battery thats ~3X larger than the iphone, the power use of the A4 at 1ghz is probably too high for the iPhone. And it has the same amount of ram as the current iphone. Apple would probably clock the chip down a bit if they used it in the iPhone.

Doesn't the iphone already have a 833mhz chip clocked down to 600mhz?

Since the last iphone update, the CPU has been about 31% boost in speed.

This would put us at: 786mhz on the new iPhone, which would probably be a good underclocked speed for the new iPhone.

I think it would be cool if they could make some kind of "turbo boost" like on the intel chips, work on the ARM chips. Leave the CPU way underclocked 90% of the time, and crank it up when were booting apps, or processing something. If the demand for 100% use remains longer than a few seconds, return to a lower power state. Otherwise we would loose too much battery life. Only short boosts for a few seconds would be reasonable.

Insightful post, but in answer to your initial question, the A4 would make a huge deal as it's credited with the reason for the iPad being about twice as fast as the iPhone 3GS. So that 31% increase, even underclocked, would be more like a 60% to 75% increase in speed.

 

[doubleatheman]

I don't believe a saw is necessary. It should say so right on the chip. Now if you wanna do it ifixit style, you need a saw.

Insightful post, but in answer to your initial question, the A4 would make a huge deal as it's credited with the reason for the iPad being about twice as fast as the iPhone 3GS. So that 31% increase, even underclocked, would be more like a 60% to 75% increase in speed.

I didn't know the iPad was faster! nice! It's exciting to see processors getting faster, and smarter with the same speed.

Kinda like you could buy a 3.4ghz pentium a few years ago. But it would be much slower than a 2.5ghz cpu now. (both single core comparisons)

The A4 would be very exciting if it could give a 60% boost.

 

[iTouch]

I guarantee that they don't know. The only way to find out would be the saw the chip apart. That would make it "difficult" to return the phone to Apple unharmed...

I doubt that since it comes in a package with plastic molding. I've never seen a part that was not labeled. Even smaller components are labeled so why would the CPU not be labeled?

 

[Apollo33]

I doubt that since it comes in a package with plastic molding. I've never seen a part that was not labeled. Even smaller components are labeled so why would the CPU not be labeled?

Gizmodo couldn't visibly see the components because they were encased in black plastic or something. They didn't want to open the casing, since they planned on returning the device and were worried about breaking something.

 

[vizkiz]

I didn't know the iPad was faster! nice! It's exciting to see processors getting faster, and smarter with the same speed.

Kinda like you could buy a 3.4ghz pentium a few years ago. But it would be much slower than a 2.5ghz cpu now. (both single core comparisons)

The A4 would be very exciting if it could give a 60% boost.

iPhone 3GS: 600MHz
iPad: 1000MHz

 

[doubleatheman]

I don't believe a saw is necessary. It should say so right on the chip. Now if you wanna do it ifixit style, you need a saw.

Insightful post, but in answer to your initial question, the A4 would make a huge deal as it's credited with the reason for the iPad being about twice as fast as the iPhone 3GS. So that 31% increase, even underclocked, would be more like a 60% to 75% increase in speed.

iPhone 3GS: 600MHz
iPad: 1000MHz

I only said 60% because of the above quote. I know 300 more mhz is only a ~30% physical upgrade.

 

[Geckotek]

Perhaps their lawyers have warned them that releasing specifics about the internals would equate to revealing trade secrets. And therefore, they are avoiding any specifics to cover their asses from being sued.

If we never see any details, I'm sure this will be the reason. If we eventually do, we know they are just milking the story.

Well, I was wrong on point 1 and right on point 2.

 

[vizkiz]

I only said 60% because of the above quote. I know 300 more mhz is only a ~30% physical upgrade.

I was referring to the part where you said:

I didn't know the iPad was faster! nice! It's exciting to see processors getting faster, and smarter with the same speed.

They are not the same speed, the iPad processor has about a 66.67% higher clock speed.

 

[Kingcodez]

Yeah I think it would be illegal for them to reveal what processor right now since it's still a mash up between the A4 and a different chip.

 

[kdarling]

Was the screen LED backlit?

Almost all mobile screens are nowadays. But Gizmodo could've at least figured out the resolution.

I guarantee that they don't know. The only way to find out would be the saw the chip apart. That would make it "difficult" to return the phone to Apple unharmed...

They could've X-rayed the chips, if they hadn't had a metal cover.

Gizmodo couldn't visibly see the components because they were encased in black plastic or something. They didn't want to open the casing, since they planned on returning the device and were worried about breaking something.

THIS.

Gizmodo showed photos of the parts being encased overall in metal boxes that they feared to remove without destroying the boards. Otherwise there's no doubt that Gizmodo would've revealed everything they found.

There are no markings on the board, but even so, the board was encased in metal all around so nothing could get through and would be very difficult to remove without breaking the device. Anyone trying to take this part off the phone would damage the device irreparably. On top of this metal, there was a thermal paste-like material. And on top of that, black tape. - Gizmodo

 

[Tilpots]

Yeah, the new Gizomodo article pretty much lets us know why they didn't reveal much tech information on their original posts. That at least makes some sense. I guess they didn't want to say originally that "We have the NEW iPhone! But we don't really know anything about it."