Apple A10 Fusion is ** Quad-core big.LITTLE **

[Arachnotronic]

Wouldn't the addition of LITTLE cores and the controller alone be worth calling it a major update? One would think so. Plus, I believe the new photo DSP is built into A10 as well.

A10 is a HUGE update over A9.

CPU cores clock much higher (and this likely required significant optimization/reworking of the physical design), perf/clock looks up modestly, memory controller is probably improved, GPU looks like a Series 8XT design (perf/power increase over 7XT in A9 suggests its more than a higher clocked Series 7XT). ISP is massively improved, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that a lot of other details have been worked on as well.

A10 is a serious achievement.

 

[Eug]

A10 Fusion tops 3500 in single-core for Geekbench 4. Wow.

https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/240915

Here are its competitors (if legit, and if you believe in Geekbench 4):

https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/singlecore?page=361

 

[greatnoob]

Heck, I'm awfully tempted to pick up the iPhone 7 in jet black. It looks amazing, and it reminds me of my black iPhone 4 (still my favourite smartphone design). But, I have to keep telling myself that my 6S will probably last me for the next 2-3 years no problem.

As long as they don't screw up iOS updates I think us 6s owners should be sweet for at least the next 3 years. I didn't upgrade until my 5 year old iPhone 4 started becoming extremely slow at the end of last year. Had to change the battery back in 2013 but it still worked nicely until I updated to iOS 7 but I guess the 4 was outdated when it was announced (higher resolution retina display + same GPU as the 3gs). Seeing as most games and apps are being developed for the 5 and 5s now, I'm eagerly awaiting for what game developers can do with the 6s (Eisenhorn is a solid example of the A9(X)'s graphical power).

 

[Eug]

As long as they don't screw up iOS updates I think us 6s owners should be sweet for at least the next 3 years. I didn't upgrade until my 5 year old iPhone 4 started becoming extremely slow at the end of last year. Had to change the battery back in 2013 but it still worked nicely until I updated to iOS 7 but I guess the 4 was outdated when it was announced (higher resolution retina display + same GPU as the 3gs). Seeing as most games and apps are being developed for the 5 and 5s now, I'm eagerly awaiting for what game developers can do with the 6s (Eisenhorn is a solid example of the A9(X)'s graphical power).

iPhone 4's CPU was OK for its time, which remember was 2010. And it remained a decent performer until it got iOS 7, back in 2013. I do agree it was probably the CPU that was a problem to a large extent though, since the 512 MB memory was the same as the iPad 2 and iPhone 4S, which have 2X or more CPU power and which did well through iOS 8. It was really only iOS 9 in 2015 that brought those to a crawl.

I upgraded my iPhone 4 to iOS 7 in 2013 but felt it slowed down the phone too much and thus felt the need to upgrade. However, even if I had been on iOS 6, I would not have been able to last until last year, because of the slow speed and because of the fact a lot of apps stopped supporting iOS 6. Furthermore, surfing on the iPhone 4 was slow for rendering unless you only used light mobile sites. In fact with regards to the OS version, you can't even run some of the latest versions of the apps now unless you have iOS 8 or even iOS 9. Thus, in 2013, I upgraded to the 5S.

On the 5S, I've noticed that there is significant lagginess in Safari now, something I don't notice with my wife's iPhone 6s (A9, 2 GB) or my iPad Air 2 (A8X, 2 GB). So, it's time to upgrade again, hence my order of an A10 Fusion iPhone.

People say that we have too much compute power in our phones, overkill with what we need to do with them. While that may be partially true when the phones come out, that becomes false in as little as 2-3 years, so if you keep your phones a long time like we in our household do, it makes sense to get the latest model.

Actually what some of my friends do is buy a new phone every year and sell the one year-old phones for maybe 65% of what they paid for it. That actually makes sense, because you're always at the top of the heap and you only end up spending a third of the cost of the phone each year, but it's a PITA to sell phones on the used market so we haven't bothered much with doing that.

tl;dr:

Despite all the statements that today's phones are overpowered for what we do on phones, I think flagship phones operate really well for 2 years, and just reasonably well for 3 years. After that, all bets are off. If you keep your phones more than 18 months, it makes sense to want high CPU power and lots of RAM, even though it may seem like overkill at the time of purchase.

 

[HiroThreading]

As long as they don't screw up iOS updates I think us 6s owners should be sweet for at least the next 3 years. I didn't upgrade until my 5 year old iPhone 4 started becoming extremely slow at the end of last year. Had to change the battery back in 2013 but it still worked nicely until I updated to iOS 7 but I guess the 4 was outdated when it was announced (higher resolution retina display + same GPU as the 3gs). Seeing as most games and apps are being developed for the 5 and 5s now, I'm eagerly awaiting for what game developers can do with the 6s (Eisenhorn is a solid example of the A9(X)'s graphical power).

I echo a lot of what Eug said above, but the iPhone 4 was very well engineered. The CPU was brisk, the battery life was amazing, the retina display was revolutionary and iOS 4 was a great mobile OS to use. Even the antenna gate issue was overblown, IMO.

I purchased mine at launch and used it up until the iPhone 5S launch... So that was around 3 years of usage? Even after that, I gave the iPhone 4 to my mum and she was pretty happy with it (she needed it just for emails, phone calls and messaging). Now my mum has my iPhone 5S, and the iPhone 4 acts as a spare travel/business phone.

 

[witeken]

A10 is a HUGE update over A9.

CPU cores clock much higher (and this likely required significant optimization/reworking of the physical design), perf/clock looks up modestly, memory controller is probably improved, GPU looks like a Series 8XT design (perf/power increase over 7XT in A9 suggests its more than a higher clocked Series 7XT). ISP is massively improved, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that a lot of other details have been worked on as well.

A10 is a serious achievement.

One thing that you've (I've) gotta give Apple credit for is their consistency. Every generation their is a nice, meaningful graphics bump, and even though Apple has got this "desktop-class" architecture for a few years now, CPU's still improving as well.

Of course, one could rightfully argue that Apple will eventually fail to do those consistent 2x improvements as well; an exponential trend can't go on forever. So you could argue that Apple chips are just time-shifted; Intel's chips had the same continuous improvement as well, until they hit the wall. Of course in the mobile space this is also compressed in time because they can leverage the desktop learning curve. So it's only a matter of time until Apple hits the wall. Now, with frequencies far into the 2GHz and very high throughput architecture, I would argue that that time is about there. Maybe they will make the architecture boost to 3GHz to claim their last 50% improvement, but that will be a boost of a few seconds, of course, which will slowly become more seconds as they go down the process nodes (which are now slower anyway). Of course they can still go quadcore or triple core, but that won't boost single core.

GPU is another story and Intel could learn a few things from Apple there (or Nvidia or AMD).

 

[Arachnotronic]

One thing that you've (I've) gotta give Apple credit for is their consistency. Every generation their is a nice, meaningful graphics bump, and even though Apple has got this "desktop-class" architecture for a few years now, CPU's still improving as well.

Of course, one could rightfully argue that Apple will eventually fail to do those consistent 2x improvements as well; an exponential trend can't go on forever. So you could argue that Apple chips are just time-shifted; Intel's chips had the same continuous improvement as well, until they hit the wall. Of course in the mobile space this is also compressed in time because they can leverage the desktop learning curve. So it's only a matter of time until Apple hits the wall. Now, with frequencies far into the 2GHz and very high throughput architecture, I would argue that that time is about there. Maybe they will make the architecture boost to 3GHz to claim their last 50% improvement, but that will be a boost of a few seconds, of course, which will slowly become more seconds as they go down the process nodes (which are now slower anyway). Of course they can still go quadcore or triple core, but that won't boost single core.

GPU is another story and Intel could learn a few things from Apple there (or Nvidia or AMD).

Never under estimate an extremely smart, focused team that has to deliver an impressive product on a tight deadline. The Apple CPU team has many of the industry's best architects working for it.

If you think Apple is going to settle for 5-10% performance increases annually, then I don't think you know Apple

 

[witeken]

If you think Apple is going to settle for 5-10% performance increases annually, then I don't think you know Apple

They will have to. If they want at least 20% per year, then clock speed will increase from 2,4GHz now to 2.9GHz to 3.5GHz to 4.2GHz... see where this is going?

You say Intel doesn't need competition, but simultaneously you think Apple can keep inventing better CPUs out of thin air forever, so why else can't Intel do this?

 

[Arachnotronic]

They will have to. If they want at least 20% per year, then clock speed will increase from 2,4GHz now to 2.9GHz to 3.5GHz to 4.2GHz... see where this is going?

You say Intel doesn't need competition, but simultaneously you think Apple can keep inventing better CPUs out of thin air forever, so why else can't Intel do this?

Apple is going to be able to get a pretty easy multi-core perf boost when they add SMT to a future core. After that, the combination of improved process tech should allow them to continue to drive up frequency. That, in combination with steady perf/clock improvements, should allow them to deliver 15%+ boosts in performance each year.

Intel honestly could probably do better in terms of performance improvement in legacy code if they didn't have to devote so much time to developing, implementing, and validating these new instruction set architecture extensions (such as AVX/AVX2, TSX, SGX) that pretty much nobody uses. That stuff adds a ton of complexity and takes away resources/manpower that could be used to juice performance in legacy code.

They also seem to get tripped up a lot by manufacturing stumbles these days...Kabylake is nice and all, but in 2017 Intel should have been readying up Ice Lake, not Coffee Lake and Cannon Lake.

As far as competition goes, I stand by that. It's not like Intel is just holding back on a bunch of perf/power enhancements that it's going to wait to deploy when some other company catches it with its pants down. This is the best Intel can do at the moment.

 

[Qwertilot]

Also there is I think simply much more at stake for Apple in terms of keeping their annual speed bumps going.

There are absurd profits riding on keeping each new generation of iphones upgrading en mass for as long as possible. Big economies of scale too. You could see Apple playing with stuff with on chip HBM etc before Intel can in any quantity.

 

[witeken]

Also there is I think simply much more at stake for Apple in terms of keeping their annual speed bumps going.

Faster iPhones aren't going to make people buy more of them. Faster CPUs, OTOH, will make people and businesses buy more CPUs (and chipsets, 3D NAND, 3D XPoint, OPA and silicon photonics for data canters).

 

[Eug]

FWIW, yesterday I installed the Golden Master for iOS 10 on my iPhone 5S. (It's publicly available now.) It officially comes out tomorrow.

It is 10.0.1 (build 14A403).

This adds a tiny bit more legitimacy to the Geekbench 4 iPhone 7 results since most indicate it is running 10.0.1 (not 10.0).

BTW, the iPhone 7 started shipping yesterday, so we should have more benches and spec detail confirmation in a few days.

 

[Arachnotronic]

FWIW, yesterday I installed the Golden Master for iOS 10 on my iPhone 5S. (It's publicly available now.) It officially comes out tomorrow.

It is 10.0.1 (build 14A403).

This adds a tiny bit more legitimacy to the Geekbench 4 iPhone 7 results since most indicate it is running 10.0.1 (not 10.0).

BTW, the iPhone 7 started shipping yesterday, so we should have more benches and spec detail confirmation in a few days.

Ton of GB4 entries for iP7/iP7+ in the database, FYI.

 

[Eug]

Ton of GB4 entries for iP7/iP7+ in the database, FYI.

Yes, but the first GB4 entry was iOS 10.1 which made me wonder if it was legit or not. The second GB4 entry was iOS 10.0.1, and most of the entries since have also been iOS 10.0.1. In retrospect though I do think the first 10.1 result was legit (despite its 396 GHz clock speed), since the single-core and multi-core results are very similar to subsequent results, and since the cache and memory details are the same.

Also, what I meant about more A10 benches coming soon was that we'd get benches other than Geekbench. So far all we have is Geekbench. That said, Geekbench was enough to get me to purchase, not just because of the great score, but because it "confirmed" the 3 GB in the 7 Plus. Thus, I'm now 99% sure the iPhone 7 Plus leak was intentional, as it happened shortly before the pre-ordering process went live. BTW, it seems from the shipping delays on the various models, this year the orders are likely much more weighted towards the 7 Plus than in previous years. Probably for most people it's because of the dual-lens camera, but in my case the 3 GB RAM clinched it.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yes, but the first GB4 entry was iOS 10.1 which made me wonder if it was legit or not. The second GB4 entry was iOS 10.0.1, and most of the entries since have also been iOS 10.0.1. In retrospect though I do think the first 10.1 result was legit (despite its 396 GHz clock speed), since the single-core and multi-core results are very similar to subsequent results, and since the cache and memory details are the same.

Also, what I meant about more A10 benches coming soon was that we'd get benches other than Geekbench. So far all we have is Geekbench. That said, Geekbench was enough to get me to purchase, not just because of the great score, but because it "confirmed" the 3 GB in the 7 Plus. Thus, I'm now 99% sure the iPhone 7 Plus leak was intentional, as it happened shortly before the pre-ordering process went live. BTW, it seems from the shipping delays on the various models, this year the orders are likely much more weighted towards the 7 Plus than in previous years. Probably for most people it's because of the dual-lens camera, but in my case the 3 GB RAM clinched it.

yeah, the 7 Plus is great. It's killing me to have to wait until Sept. 23-Sept. 27 to get my phone, all 'cause I slept through my alarm and got up 3hrs after the pre-ordering started.

 

[witeken]

yeah, the 7 Plus is great. It's killing me to have to wait until Sept. 23-Sept. 27 to get my phone, all 'cause I slept through my alarm and got up 3hrs after the pre-ordering started.

In which ways will it be so much better than your current one (6s Plus I assume) that you want it so early/fast?

 

[Eug]

In which ways will it be so much better than your current one (6s Plus I assume) that you want it so early/fast?

The new camera is a huge step forward for iPhones.

But yeah, it's not the end of the world to have to wait an extra week or so.

In my case though, the 3 GB RAM and faster CPU will come in very handy, so I'm glad I'll get it sooner. My 5S with A7 and 1 GB RAM from 2013 is sometimes quite laggy when surfing, something I don't notice anywhere near as much (but do occasionally) with my iPad Air 2 with A8X and 2 GB RAM.

The iPhone 7 Plus has twice the CPU power as my A7, and three times the RAM. My 5S also does not support Live Photos, but the 6s does. Live Photos are great when you have little kids.

 

[Qwertilot]

Faster iPhones aren't going to make people buy more of them.

Actually, I suspect they probably do. There's this ongoing cycle of people upgrading their phones really very fast. It isn't rational for huge numbers of people - and maybe hasn't been for a year or two - but the big thing for sustaining it ($$$$) is keeping the sentiment that the technology is advancing at considerable speed alive for as long as they possibly can.

 

[Eug]

In my view, if you enjoy having the performance on your phones, realistically phones can maybe last 3 years but an update after 2 years is strongly preferred.

It's overkill to update every year IMO, but then again, from a financial perspective it doesn't actually save much money to wait 2-3 years unless you're on contract, because you end up losing a lot of resale value in the second year. And by the end of the third year, the phone isn't worth much anymore.

I have friends who upgrade every year for this reason. The main reason I don't update my phone every year (besides not needing to) is because I find selling used phones on Kijiji / Craiglist irritating, and obviously, selling to a store will net you a lot less money. I tend to keep mine 2-3 years and then repurpose them or give them away, although I occasionally will sell them, esp. the ones that are only 2 years old.

OTOH, for my wife who doesn't value the performance as much as I do, you can add about one extra year to the above numbers. ie. Realistically a phone might last as long as 4 years, but an update is strongly preferred at about the 3 year mark.

And for those on contract, around here the contract length is 2 years, so if you're staying on the same plan, you may as well upgrade after 2 years.

 

[Arachnotronic]

In which ways will it be so much better than your current one (6s Plus I assume) that you want it so early/fast?

A10 Fusion, wide color display, way better camera, black finish. I want to take lots of high quality photos of my cats and view them in wide color

 

[Eug]

A10 Fusion, wide color display, way better camera, black finish. I want to take lots of high quality photos of my cats and view them in wide color

The funny part about the glossy jet black finish is they already did that in 2008 with the iPhone 3G.

 

[Arachnotronic]

The funny part about the glossy jet black finish is they already did that in 2008 with the iPhone 3G.

Yeah but that's plastic

 

[stingerman]

Faster iPhones aren't going to make people buy more of them. Faster CPUs, OTOH, will make people and businesses buy more CPUs (and chipsets, 3D NAND, 3D XPoint, OPA and silicon photonics for data canters).

Faster phones mean more advanced software features.

 

[stingerman]

They will have to. If they want at least 20% per year, then clock speed will increase from 2,4GHz now to 2.9GHz to 3.5GHz to 4.2GHz... see where this is going?

You say Intel doesn't need competition, but simultaneously you think Apple can keep inventing better CPUs out of thin air forever, so why else can't Intel do this?

I don't think Apple is near the limit yet. Their goal is to maximize performance / watt and there is a lot more headroom for that, imo. We haven't seen the full impact of fan out yet, and that promises performance increase at a greater pace. Eliminating bandwidth bottlenecks throughout the architecture while significantly decreasing power usage is something we have to look forward to in addition to basic core performance enhancements.

Apple also has been hardening some of their key software functions into the silicon and there i a lot more they can do in this respect to. Accelerating LLVM emitted higher level instructions to allow them to be executed faster, will have more of a performance impact.

And, we are getting closer to newer and faster materials than strained silicon.

 

[Eug]

Faster phones mean more advanced software features.

And more advanced software features mean the user experience suffers on older slower CPUs.

I am experiencing this now with my A7 iPhone 5S. It's still quite usable for the most part, but not infrequently I get quite annoyed with it. In contrast, in 2013, it seemed screamingly fast.