Intel To Build Next Gen Processor For iOS Devices 255
BogenDorpher writes "It looks like Apple will be using Intel as a main processor manufacturer to power the iPad, iPod touch, and the iPhone. Apple, who currently uses Samsung, will focus on making a switch to Intel within a year."
Retribution (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Doubtful (Score:5, Informative)
The report from EETimes [eetimes.com] suggests Intel is only going after foundry business to produce the A-series processors for Apple, not that Apple is looking to change architectures.
It could be Apple leaving Samsung, or it could be they've decided to go with multiple suppliers for everything to reduce potential impacts from future disasters.
Re:Compatible? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:PA Semi? (Score:4, Informative)
Probably because (quoting Wikipedia): "P. A. Semi (originally "Palo Alto Semiconductor"[1]) was a fabless semiconductor company"
You still need a fab. Apple already knows how to design CPUs.
Re:Compatible? (Score:5, Informative)
Intel does what ever you pay them to make. The have a ton of fab shops. I'm sure if you had enough leverage and handed them a chip spec, you could get them to build PPC RISC processors too.
Apple comes in, says "We're going to want X millon of these A5s, and BTW I'm sure AMD would be more than glad to supply us with these chips AND the chips for our next laptops & desktops, your call."
Re:But the source? (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a similar report from EETimes [eetimes.com].
Of course that article says that the "Next Gen Processor For iOS Devices" (as well as the current A5) will be build by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSMC) (at least some of them), and that Intel may want to build the Gen after that.
Re:Remember the venom (Score:4, Informative)
That's somewhat oversimplified.
For years there were a lot of advantages to the PowerPC chips. They were fast, energy efficient, had nice extensions like AltiVec and so forth. RISC was seen as inherently better than older instruction sets like x86. Heck, all the computer architecture classes I taught in school taught MIPS, etc. Given backing by IBM et al, the PowerPC line was believed to be able to quickly scale up.
By the end of the G4 era of PowerMacs and certainly by the G5 era, the writing was on the wall. New processors weren't coming out fast enough. They weren't scaling fast enough. Breakthroughs in x86 chips brought about a renaissance of CISC. It was time to find something else.
None of that negates the fact that for a lot of the run of PowerPC macs, their processors were highly competitive (at worst, if not better) than x86 chips in many ways.
Re:Retribution (Score:2, Informative)
I don't know if you're being deliberately silly, but Samsung (among others) have designed a phone that appears to be deliberately an iPhone clone, down to quite small details. If you're aware of a phone that existed before the iPhone that most non-techincal users would easily confuse with the iPhone, I'd concede the point. Without debating the rights and wrongs of it, it's disingenuous to try to claim that there aren't a number of manufacturers copying the iPhone hardware and software design to cash in on the market.
Don't you mean that Apple designed the iPhone that appears to be deliberately a Samsung F700 clone?
http://technobuzz.info/android-users-apple-copied-off-samsung.html [technobuzz.info]
That's always the case (Score:4, Informative)
Intel spends massive amounts on fab R&D and as a result are usually a node (generation) ahead of everyone else. Intel has had 32nm online and working for quite some time now. All Sandy Bridge chips are 32nm, many gen 1 Core i series laptops are 32nm, and so on.
Other fabs are catching up, GF will probably have 32nm chips coming out fairly soon for AMD, but Intel has been doing it for a long time, has scaled things up and has it working well. Also they are already building their 22nm fabs.
Only time Intel got outdone to an extent was with some companies doing a 40nm half-node. TSMC scaled down the 45nm process to 40nm and it is what all the GPU makers use now. Fine but it was fraught with problems and took a long time to get it working right and producing in volume. By that time Intel had 32nm parts on the market.
Same thing may happen again, a number of companies like TSMC are looking at skipping 32nm and going for a 28nm half node, based on 32nm scaled down. If they get that producing this year as they think they can, then they'll temporarily be ahead of Intel until Intel brings 22nm online.
However over all, Intel is always ahead on this shit. They spend a lot of money to stay that way.