Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ARM Announces Dual-Core Cortex-A9 Processor Designs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My..........nevermind.
More news about the new ARM.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1533877/dual-core-arm-chips-apple-tablets
Yes you can't have OpenCL without GCD. I just believe OpenCL could be the driver.
With OpenCL you can push any sort of computation to the GPU that runs well on the hardware or benefits from parallel execution. One thing I'm kinda expecting from Apple is that the move sound processing on these embedded devices to a GPU node. That would seem like a good idea consider the squacking that comes out of my iPhone everytime the processor is loaded an sound is being made. It is an interesting thought, could a GPU be dedicated to OpenAL or parts of it and be a win.
But I have to agree on larger devices with more hardware from which GCD can benefit l, GCD should be offered up just as it is on the Mac. My point is you don't need a SMP processor to justify GCD as it is needed by OpenCL. Combine this with the idea that a better OpenCL compatible GPU coupled with a single ARM core might make sense, power wise on the smallest devices, you can see why I think OpenCL could drive the porting of iPhone OS to be GCD compliant.
In other words I see a better GPU coming before a SMP CPU in things like the Touch. Hey I could be wrong and won't be disappointed to see a dual core Touch. On the larger tablets I suspect all these features will be there and so will be GCD to exploit them.
Let's face it with the advances in CPU tech in the ARM space Apple can easily have a CPU that is anywhere from 50% faster to 2.5 times faster and still be single core.
Dave
It could very well be efficient but the thing is we can't forget that the ARM core can be supplied with very efficient vector like processors.
Well for the current crop of iPhone apps no it wouldn't be a constraining factor but that is due in part to the limited scope of iPhone apps at the moment. I'm certain though that you could find an example or two right now on app store that would benefit. We also have to realize that the context will change if newr larger devices come out. Lastly OpenCL isn't just a solution that leverages vector based algorithms.
With OpenCL you can push any sort of computation to the GPU that runs well on the hardware or benefits from parallel execution. One thing I'm kinda expecting from Apple is that the move sound processing on these embedded devices to a GPU node. That would seem like a good idea consider the squacking that comes out of my iPhone everytime the processor is loaded an sound is being made. It is an interesting thought, could a GPU be dedicated to OpenAL or parts of it and be a win.
I'm always nterested in better and faster but I have to wonder how close the iPhone is already. Remember they built SL based on things they did to speed up the original iPhone kernel, now the kernels are very similar.
But I have to agree on larger devices with more hardware from which GCD can benefit l, GCD should be offered up just as it is on the Mac. My point is you don't need a SMP processor to justify GCD as it is needed by OpenCL. Combine this with the idea that a better OpenCL compatible GPU coupled with a single ARM core might make sense, power wise on the smallest devices, you can see why I think OpenCL could drive the porting of iPhone OS to be GCD compliant.
In other words I see a better GPU coming before a SMP CPU in things like the Touch. Hey I could be wrong and won't be disappointed to see a dual core Touch. On the larger tablets I suspect all these features will be there and so will be GCD to exploit them.
Yes exactly; You need GCD to run OpenCL. Hopefully now you will see my reasoning here, OpenCL compatible hardware will drive the adoption or desire for OpenCL and thus drive the adoption of GCD dispatch. I know that is bottom up but I just see OpenCL compatible GPAs happening before SMAP CPUs.
Let's face it with the advances in CPU tech in the ARM space Apple can easily have a CPU that is anywhere from 50% faster to 2.5 times faster and still be single core.
Yes you are absolutely right! I just see more people chomping at the bit to harvest the power in the next gen GPUs we could get. My thinking would be more top down if I thought the next gen Touch where to get a SMP processor but I just don't think it will. A faster processor yes but not likely multicore. NOTE I'd love to be wrong in this reguard.
Dave
I just want to ask. How does a functionally motivated design even get stale?
Does Apple need to make less functional designer cases for folks like you?
Rocketman
I too am curious to know how this ARM is at 0.25w per core while running at 2Ghz. The most efficient 2Ghz Intel Core2's run at 25w total. There are sub-2Ghz Core2's that run as low as 10w total. Maybe the 0.25w is not really at 2Ghz. That would sound more reasonable.
Time to think different.
Waiting for Intel is stupid as they will always be behind ARM, that simply due to the tiny core. The key reason to choose ARM is that it's low power nature allows for innovation in design and long battery life. Developers don't even come into the equation. In any event it is not like Apple is lacking developers as the thousands of iPhone apps suggest. Couple that with the extremely easy SDK XCode environment apps won't be a problem.
It is a given anyways that the APIs will vary from what we have seen on the Mac or IPhone. Either way developers will have to enhance their software for the supplied environment. Straight Mac APIs won't work on a tablet anymore than they would work on the iPhone.
In any event I think the best thing in the world would be for Apple to follow the lead set by iPhone / app store on this platform. All they need to fo is relax a few restrictions and they will have one hell of a platform.
Dave
That makes about as much sense as recompiling Mac apps for iPhone. To be successful Touch based apps have to be built from the ground up to work in that environment.
Waiting for Intel is stupid as they will always be behind ARM, that simply due to the tiny core. The key reason to choose ARM is that it's low power nature allows for innovation in design and long battery life. Developers don't even come into the equation. In any event it is not like Apple is lacking developers as the thousands of iPhone apps suggest. Couple that with the extremely easy SDK XCode environment apps won't be a problem.
It is a given anyways that the APIs will vary from what we have seen on the Mac or IPhone. Either way developers will have to enhance their software for the supplied environment. Straight Mac APIs won't work on a tablet anymore than they would work on the iPhone.
In any event I think the best thing in the world would be for Apple to follow the lead set by iPhone / app store on this platform. All they need to fo is relax a few restrictions and they will have one hell of a platform.
Dave
Absolutely, but I was thinking of an Apple Tablet that is light and small enough so that you always carry it with you AND that is capable of opening and editing NATIVE Apple iWork and NATIVE Microsoft Office files. THAT IS THE REAL KILLER TABLET.
A lot of factors, but a much simpler instruction set is big one. When you set out with a goal to do low power and build everything from the ground up with that assumption you get different results.
hum, seems I missed a little on the announcement
http://channel.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=20233
http://channel.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=20233
I don't see how. I think multitasking will be coming with OS 4.0. The main reason why the iPhone couldn't multitask is mainly due to RAM. The 3GS would be able to handle it but not earlier generations with 128MB. Granted, next year's model will handle it better but 3GS owners will have most of the features of the next iPhone.
Just as we lost MacOS when Apple switched from Motorola 68040 processors to PowerPC. And then we lost MacOS X again when Apple switched from PowerPC to Intel. No, wait a second, actually we didn't! MacOS X runs just fine on PowerPC and on Intel. And an ARM processor is much more similar to the Intel x86 processors than PowerPC is.
Now putting an ARM processor into an iMac doesn't make sense because the low power advantage doesn't count for much on a desktop processor, but if Apple wanted to create an ultra portable laptop with tremendous battery life by using ARM processors, there would be nothing stopping them.
Let me see...
Start XCode, open your project, open "Targets", click on your Target, Cmd-I for Info, and under the "Architecture" setting you add "arm". That's it. MacOS X is portable. For years when MacOS X ran on a PowerPC only, Apple had a secret project to make it work on Intel processors as well, and any Apple developer who wrote non-portable code got whacked over the head unless all code was portable. And all the external developers have learned how to write portable code as well. Today, any code that is written by a Macintosh developer with half a brain will work on any processor.
The number of transistors and onboard cache size.
Intel Core Duo chips have around 151 Million transistors, Atom (silverthorne) has 47Million and Arm whilst it varies between the cores, size of cache and any othe SoC bits like GPU. Are in the region of 2-3Million transistors for ARM 11/Cortex A8.
With all the power mgmt voodoo in the world, ARM still beats them hands down on power usage just due to the size of the chip and how many little switches you have to turn off and on.
My original 2g iPhone is feeling pretty slow, I hope the 4th gen phones are freaking fast. How will this stack up against Tegra?
Tegra is overrated. People see the Nvidia name and think it has to be something special. Tegra is using ARM 11 which is the same processor that is in your iPhone and the first generation. The 3GS, Pre, and the 32GB/64GB iPod Touch are using the ARM Cortex A8 which are far more advanced.
Tegra has a older core. AppleInsider has information (via Zune article) http://www.appleinsider.com/article...o_tegra_five_myths_of_the_zune_hd.html&page=2
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C144 Safari/528.16)
It would be awesome to have a dual core processor in an iPhone.
It would be awesome to have a dual core processor in an iPhone.
I don't think that we will see anything with a different screen size, The reason the app store is taking off is because the apps work on all iphones if they screw with that, and make different versions for different phones/screen sizes people might freak out!
What would the screen size have anything to do with how the apps are designed? Now, I don't know anything on designing apps but when you open any app on a computer it doesn't matter what your monitor size is, the app adjusts accordingly. Eventually, Apple developers are going to have to evolve the apps so they can compete with new technologies of other companies.
This article really misinterprets things.
Texas Instruments announced their Dual Core Cortex A9 mobile phone processor in February. It's called the OMAP 4 Series.
The OMAP Series of processor is used in handsets from Nokia and Palm. They will use it when it ships next year.
http://focus.ti.com/pr/docs/preldetail.tsp?sectionId=594&prelId=sc09021
The first Cortex A9 designs were shipping from ARM in 2007, and the first chips to incorporate the Cortex A9 design will be released next year.
A similar 2-3 year delay should be expected from when ARM ships this new 2GHz speed-optimised design to chip designers to shipping products.
Texas Instruments announced their Dual Core Cortex A9 mobile phone processor in February. It's called the OMAP 4 Series.
The OMAP Series of processor is used in handsets from Nokia and Palm. They will use it when it ships next year.
http://focus.ti.com/pr/docs/preldetail.tsp?sectionId=594&prelId=sc09021
The first Cortex A9 designs were shipping from ARM in 2007, and the first chips to incorporate the Cortex A9 design will be released next year.
A similar 2-3 year delay should be expected from when ARM ships this new 2GHz speed-optimised design to chip designers to shipping products.
Fixed screen apps can be viewed in a window on a larger screen like the iPhone app on Mac does, or be scaled to the screen by device hardware. There are benefits for having pixel definition like on the iPhone.
The mini-tablet (ATNN) can deal with this by supporting iPhone apps and "beyond iPhone" apps.
Rocketman
Do More
I hope the battery life is improved next cycle... I would like more than 1 day's battery charge for doing über stuff...
I hope the battery life is improved next cycle... I would like more than 1 day's battery charge for doing über stuff...
I know. I was just saying that it would require recode (you CAN'T expect that Mac OS X will run out of the box no matter how similar they are to existing processors) So Apple would need to recode some parts os the OS to make it work on these...Wouldn't make sense to put these processors in a iMacs considering how weak they would be VS an Intel C2D. I hope that you catch what I was trying to say.