Intel doesn't lack strong core design people despite what the 10nm delays and having to ride Skylake all these years would tell you, but everything around the core is a real pain for them as they failed to standardize it within the company.
Do you really think the result you see on the market only is the choice of engineers? Read my signatureGiven that AMD with so limited resources and having inferior process got so close to Intel suggests the other way.
It seems they have solid teams, but nothing extraordinary that other solid teams can't get close to pretty easily.
When I say solid I mean average. Not elite team.
It's a 64 bit architecture. No reason to expect it to address any more or less than any other 64 bit CPU.I wonder how much RAM A12X can address.
I guess I should be more specific.It's a 64 bit architecture. No reason to expect it to address any more or less than any other 64 bit CPU.
Yeah, it's been a sore point on the Apple side. Ironically, an 8th gen Core i3, the Core i3-8121U, supports 32 GB LPDDR4x, but as you know that's a (low volume) 10 nm part.It is interesting that Apple only uses LPDDR memory in portable/mobile devices. Intel's current memory controller supports 32GB of DDR4 but only 16 GB of LPDDR3 memory, not even LPDDR4. I think the 10nm delay is killing their memory support upgrades.
Ah, good to know, and good point.Apple is also InFO packaging for iOS devices, which means packaging the processor and DRAM with TIV's (through insulator vias). Unfortunately we have never had an Anandtech article on the power/latency improvements of this type of memory interconnect over BGA or SODIMM. TSMC claims power reductions which seems likely with so little copper in the interconnect. For Apple to use the A12X in a portable versus iPad PRO would mean a change in packaging as I doubt that they can get 32 GB of memory in package with the applications processor, even with the new 12 Gbit die that are now coming to market for LPDDR.
It's a 64 bit architecture. No reason to expect it to address any more or less than any other 64 bit CPU.
As I said, that's because of 10nm holding back architectures they developed. We were supposed to have Ice Lake in 2017, and Tiger Lake in 2018. Both were supposed to provide significant architectural uplifts in IPC and efficiency, with Tiger Lake having some ridiculously low powered idle that made Apple executives blink. It was like 9mW or some such don't remember the figure.Given that AMD with so limited resources and having inferior process got so close to Intel suggests the other way.
It seems they have solid teams, but nothing extraordinary that other solid teams can't get close to pretty easily.
When I say solid I mean average. Not elite team.
If I was an Intel share holder that was the 2nd most frightening thing to think about (Just after how badly the manufacturing advantage was managed to make it disappear).
It is not like they are not able to bring improvements in architecture at 14nm. They should have this kind of plans ready.As I said, that's because of 10nm holding back architectures they developed. We were supposed to have Ice Lake in 2017, and Tiger Lake in 2018. Both were supposed to provide significant architectural uplifts in IPC and efficiency, with Tiger Lake having some ridiculously low powered idle that made Apple executives blink. It was like 9mW or some such don't remember the figure.
They are able to, but TMG management kept assuring everyone that 10nm problems will be fixed shortly... in 2016.It is not like they are not able to bring improvements in architecture at 14nm. They should have this kind of plans ready.
Sorry but I don't eat that <redacted> hahaThey are able to, but TMG management kept assuring everyone that 10nm problems will be fixed shortly... in 2016.
Good ol' Francois himself suggested for Intel to port Ice Lake back to 14++ but it was rejected. This is probably Intel's biggest mistake they've made in the past few years, more so than 10nm issues.
This is the reality. Intel is ridiculously poorly managed. There's a reason for the mass exodus of engineers that Intel is experiencing. I personally know of quite a few that are now at Apple.Sorry but I don't eat that buls*t haha
That is a really bad excuse if they are any serious business this can't be real.
And Francois can't be trusted he talks a lot of nonsense and he is an Intel fanatic.
Good ol' Francois himself suggested for Intel to port Ice Lake back to 14++ but it was rejected. This is probably Intel's biggest mistake they've made in the past few years, more so than 10nm issues. .
Ice Lake was supposed to have 10%-15% IPC uplift. That's significant considering the margins we're working with today.In defense of Intel, I highly doubt Icelake Client on 14++ would have changed the competitiveness much. LPDDR4X is the one thing Intel badly needs but perhaps they did backport that with Whiskey Lake.
Skylake Server is already big enough as it is, anything with a bigger core die would not work.
Apple is trying and poaching engineers from everywhere, not only from Intel. Many engineers move there because the stock plan is really nice.This is the reality. Intel is ridiculously poorly managed. There's a reason for the mass exodus of engineers that Intel is experiencing. I personally know of quite a few that are now at Apple.
Ice Lake was supposed to have 10%-15% IPC uplift. That's significant considering the margins we're working with today.
Had Ice Lake released in 2017 on 10nm as intended, Zen wouldn't have even been a footnote to Intel. The delays made a huge difference.
Now that they are going to launch the product. I guess we should know more about the A12 soon enough.I highly doubt the 10-15% higher IPC. The main benefit is the lower power that 10 nm brings, not to mention the die space savings (and the aforementioned LPDDR4X). If they had gone to higher core counts earlier maybe they would have not lost any enthusiast share, but they could have done that on 14nm.
We already know that the first post in this thread pointed to a fake result since Apple claim 15% perf improvementNow that they are going to launch the product. I guess we should know more about the A12 soon enough.
You can put a fan in a laptop. And you can put a huge-ass fan in a desktop.The big issue with these mobile chips is that they cannot sustain full performance for long periods. The RAM dice are located above the CPU die on the same package which adds a LOT of thermal resistance.
I know this is apples and oranges, but the example is still valid... I have an ODroid XU4 (Samsung Exynos 5422 based), and even with a heatsink and fan it throttles pretty badly under some non-synthetic workloads due to how the package is assembled.
Obviously apple would almost certainly use off package ram in these scenarios as they have with other X class CPUs, but I wouldn't count A12 as competitive with recent x86 CPUs when they can’t sustain equivalent workloads without throttling.
EDIT: A Word...
You can put a fan in a laptop. And you can put a huge-ass fan in a desktop.
For an ultra-ultralight you may not want a fan, but then again the Y series Intel chips also throttle in this context. An A12 Bionic in a MacBook wouldn't be anywhere near as thermally constrained as it is in an iPhone, so it could be quite competitive against similar Intel chips (OS limitations notwithstanding).
Well, nobody in their right mind would suggest Apple would use the exact same design from phones up to desktops.The A12 in a package on package configuration (the only configuration it exists in) would be thermally constrained, that was the whole point of my post.
It would take an X class (A12X?) CPU with off-die DRAM to be used in a traditional Notebook\Desktop form factor due to the thermal resistance of having an entire extra package between the CPU and thermal solution. The whole reason POP exists is to free up valuable real-estate for the battery, apple has even gone through the trouble of folding the motherboard in half since the iPhone X.