Electronics Weekly Electronics Design & Components Tech News
As the gap between processes narrows, so the gap between processors is narrowing.
The advent of 64-bit ARM cores means that Apple’s in-house developed processors will be performing at a level between Atom and Core i3 in 1-2 years’ time says a report from KGI Securities’ Ming-Chi Kuo.
In that timeframe, Kuo is saying Apple may make the switch, and is preparing to do so.
One move is an intention to add GloFo to TSMC and Samsung for foundry.
Another move is developing ARM-based prototypes such as an iMac desktop with 4/8 64-bit quad-core CPUs, a 4-core-based Mac mini and a 13-inch MacBook with eight 64-bit quad-core ARM chips.
The software compatibility issue has been cracked, says Kuo.
An underlying assumption for Kuo’s thesis is that Samsung and TSMC will bring up 14/16nm processes this year and that these processes will produce chips performing as well as chips made on Intel’s 14nm process.
While it is clear that Intel’s cost structure means it can’t produce processors as cheaply as ARM processors can be produced.
You nailed it, Silverman
arsey is a great verb david. in the mannerisms dictionary what is the definition? I suggest “being a bit of a bollox”.
If Intel were dumped by Apple then I can’t see anyway Apple could then leverage the IP out of them for porting. In fact Intel would just offer a trade-in to companies to convert to PCs thus killing one of Apple’s best Mac markets.
Nonetheless the cash pile gives Apple a very big stick to force the stuff to be ported if Intel get arsey about it.
With their cash pile Apple could indeed do anything – but why bother. The current setup works well and keeps everyone happy.
@James : there’s no guarantees in this industry 🙂 But Photoshop, Quark and other 2D tools weren’t owned by Intel and maybe Apple helped them with the transisition.
There was huge pressure from the games industry for the latest consoles to go x86 because of the 3D ecosystem there, and for their prime creation tool to then go non x86 would be a step in the wrong direction.
Whilst Jobs owned Pixar the film industry would have just had to shut up and beared it but now that’s owned by Disney I suspect they would now be even more vocal.
But as I’ve said I believe a mixed x86/ARM Mac makes a huge amount of sense. Even if it was the full chip from the iPad (which it doesn’t need to be) then that’s only $32 on the BOM of what is a very expensive machine anyway.
Also everyone goes on about the ARM processor but remember the graphics processor in a Mac is anything but low power and that can’t be replaced with the iPhone subsystem or everyone would be screaming about retrograde steps.
With Apples cash pile, in various countries, they could do what every they wanted. Buy these companies or just start new ones doing the same thing.
They could probably buy Intel!
Do you really guarantee it won’t be ported, Mike? Remember Apple have already made this transition twice – from m68k to PowerPC, then PowerPC to x86/x64; the likes of Photoshop have already been ported through both of those.
A mixed ARM-x64 system might be interesting, though: offload most of the workload to a nice efficient ARM chip, only crank up an x64 core or two for heavyweight or legacy processes. Pretty much what ARM themselves do in their “big.LITTLE” arrangement, switching between two different classes of CPU depending on load…
Yes indeed, softly, softly catchee monkey, Silverman, like ARM’s decade-long stalking of the server market.
Intel play the long game. Some operation.
I asked Mike, Stooriefit, and he said that Intel Capital have invested in many of the companies which have developed the 3D utilities – e.g the Irish company Havok which does the physics of 3D. Mike said one reason Apple moved from PowerPC to Intel was to get access to this stuff as they could see Intel was slowly building this IP ecosystem in much the same way as ARM built their mobile ecosystem
I’ll try and button-hole Mike about this Stooriefit, we’re both at the IFS2015 meeting today.
That’s interesting – what is the code base that Intel controls which has the 3D content people over a barrel?
This could be a pay-off for the moves made about a decade ago when the big tech houses bought content producers (Microsoft and Sony spring to mind, with different levels of success).
Do you really expect Intel to recompile their code for ARM ? Not a chance !! They’d just force this industry onto PCs whereas at the moment they are happy with it being on Macs as those users tend to accept higher software prices.
Well, I dont expect such softwares to be written in assembly, and since x86 and ARM are both little endian, well, these softwares should somewhat recompile. That all the point of high level languages, isnt it ?
And how would you develop all the 3D content currently developed on Macs (i,e, most animated films) without Intel software ? One thing we can guarantee is that won’t be ported to ARM.
The Mac and iPhone are very different devices, but the obvious solution is to put an Ax processor in every Mac as a co-processor. That way all Apple software can be run without crippling the Mac which has never been cost-constrained anyway.