Quillz Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 The iPad marks the first time, to my knowledge, that Apple has powered one of their devices with an in-house processor, dubbed the Apple A4. (Makes me wonder what A1-A3 were like.) Considering Apple has a habit of changing processors from time to time (68k -> PowerPC -> Intel), I wonder if, eventually, all of Apple's products, from the Mac mini to the MacBook Pro to the Mac Pro will be powered by their in-house processors. The A4 is seemingly underpowered (1 GHz), but early reviews say that it's still a relatively speedy chip considering the device it's powering. Is it unlikely? I mean, if Apple can build their own processor for the iPad, I'm sure they could build one for the MacBook, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OOOOOOOO Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 For now, Intel will offer an unmatchable price compared to in house development/manufacture etc. Plus, the ability for developers to work with code they are entirely familiar with. I doubt Apple with move the higher end systems to custom just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted January 28, 2010 Veteran Share Posted January 28, 2010 Indeed it's an in house chip but as far as I know it's still an ARM processor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomZ Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 I think they called it the A4 because it was designed specifically for the tablet, which has a form factor similar to an A4 piece of paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 I think they called it the A4 because it was designed specifically for the tablet, which has a form factor similar to an A4 piece of paper. Oh, I didn't think of that. Yeah, that's probably why the processor is called A4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stetson Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 It's an Apple adaptation of an ARM style processor, similar to the one in the iPhone and many other smartphones but heavily customized. At the moment these types of processors provide very high performance/watt compared to Intel chips at the low end of the spectrum, but I'm not sure about their prospects in the higher end. Intel is already well on the path of more cores and smaller processes and will probably stay at the top end of desktop and mid-to-high end mobile for at least a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted January 28, 2010 Author Share Posted January 28, 2010 It's an Apple adaptation of an ARM style processor, similar to the one in the iPhone and many other smartphones but heavily customized. At the moment these types of processors provide very high performance/watt compared to Intel chips at the low end of the spectrum, but I'm not sure about their prospects in the higher end. Intel is already well on the path of more cores and smaller processes and will probably stay at the top end of desktop and mid-to-high end mobile for at least a while. But wouldn't Apple be more interesting in cost savings rather than cutting edge? It just seems like it'd be in their best financial interest to use their own in-house processors rather than Intel's. I'm not saying I'd like to see that happen, but it just seems the iPad is going to be the first of many future products to run completely Apple-designed hardware, right down to the processors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REM2000 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 i wouldn't have thought so for two reasons One moving everybody over again to a new platform would really cheese a lot of people off and could push people away from the platform. Two the A4 may be an excellent chip but it's not in anyway going to compete with intel's offerings in processing power and instruction set. The A4 is a custom made processor, probably with the gpu (or will have) on chip aswell, designed for mobile devices. I think we'll probably see something of the sort in the next iPhone/iPod touch (A2 ?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PL_ Veteran Posted January 28, 2010 Veteran Share Posted January 28, 2010 I can see it happening. It won't hurt too bad this time as Apple developers have already been making apps for this architecture. I'm just worried about Adobe and the like who are only just moving to Cocoa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XionUK Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 But wouldn't Apple be more interesting in cost savings rather than cutting edge? It just seems like it'd be in their best financial interest to use their own in-house processors rather than Intel's. I'm not saying I'd like to see that happen, but it just seems the iPad is going to be the first of many future products to run completely Apple-designed hardware, right down to the processors. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2010/01/almost_40_billi.html Almost forty billion dollars sitting in CASH. I highly doubt they are worried about spending a few extra dollars to get a processor that the work is ready to go and they have the software to do it. It would probably cost them a hell of a lot more to design and manufacture their own chips in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petvas Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 that isn't going to happen unless they also keep compatibility with the x86 and x64 architectures. One of the major selling arguments for Mac computers is that they can run Windows. That fact alone was responsible for the growth Apple computers have been experiencing the last three years..If Apple wants to commit suicide then they would stop having Intel processors in their products... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Itll never happen they would have to spend loads of money on licencing the x86 technology and they would have to build or outsource fabrication plants to make the processors, it would cost far more in the long run than just using Intel processors, the A4 is an ARM cpu and compared to x86-64 its far far underpowered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boz Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 A4 is basically slightly modified but essentially rebranded Tegra. Apple's A4 chip is ARM Cortex A9 with an ARM Mali GPU?For some of us, amid all the hubbub about revolutions and whatnot yesterday, the most significant announcement on hand was Apple's supposedly custom A4 CPU. Alas, in the cold and brutal light of the morning after, we're hearing that it is in fact a system-on-a-chip driven by a Cortex-A9 MPCore CPU "identical" to the one found inside NVIDIA's Tegra 2, while besting the iPhone 3GS significantly with its 1GHz speed and multicore architecture. The A4 is composed of that Cortex barnburner, an integrated memory controller, and the Mali GPU, making it an all ARM affair -- though we still don't know how much Apple and PA Semi did in terms of arranging and integrating those components within the silicon. While still not 100 percent confirmed, it would seem there were no revolutions on the iPad's processing front -- just a rebranded bit of well engineered hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabron Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 If their custom processors one day will match or beat of what Intel offer. I will not doubt that Apple will move forward to their own custom processors in all their computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted January 29, 2010 Member Share Posted January 29, 2010 I just don't see Apple switching. On price alone Intel would have the clear advantage. Plus like others have said it would cheese people off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech Star Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Doubt it. Running Windows on a Mac is because of the use of Intel chips. If they start using their own, they can kiss that good-bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Doubt it. Running Windows on a Mac is because of the use of Intel chips. If they start using their own, they can kiss that good-bye. But Windows runs also on AMD chips...0 I mean, don't they just have to put the same instructions on the chip to make it work? Plus they can add their own in-house instructions to the processor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech Star Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 But Windows runs also on AMD chips...0 I mean, don't they just have to put the same instructions on the chip to make it work? Plus they can add their own in-house instructions to the processor... So? Apple does not use AMD chips. We were talking about because Apple is using Intel chips right now, they can run windows on their computers. If they switch to something in-house (custom), then they will lose that functionality, unless they code something for Windows OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 So? Apple does not use AMD chips. We were talking about because Apple is using Intel chips right now, they can run windows on their computers. If they switch to something in-house (custom), then they will lose that functionality, unless they code something for Windows OS. Ok, let's just go to the source of my question : why can Windows run on an Intel and AMD chip, while it cannot run on an IBM chip? I believe it's because of the instructions told to the processors. For instance, the Core i5 has the following instructions : MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, x86-64, VT-x. AMD chips also have the x86-64 instructions. Is it the reason why it can run Windows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted February 1, 2010 Veteran Share Posted February 1, 2010 Apple would have to ask Intel for a license to make x86 chips (same way AMD has an x86 license from Intel) ARM is an "open" platform, x86 definitely isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 If they switch to something in-house (custom), then they will lose that functionality, unless they code something for Windows OS. Not if their in-house chip is based on the x86 instruction set as well. But like said multiple times before. Apple didn't build this chip from the ground up. According to many sources its basically just a slightly modified chip made by another company based on ARM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliott Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Can't see it happening any time soon. Basically, Apple just made their own Tegra because they could and it lets them avoid paying out and being tethered to Nvidia. The A4 (or a variant of it) will probably go into the iPhone/iPod touch at some point, but definitely not into their actual computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dysphoria Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Why would they switch? A4 is not a processor on it's own.... it's a silicon containing ARM CPU and an Nvidia's tegra GPU. Apparently the reason that they placed them on a single chip is that they use less space, and also it requires less power to run... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliott Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Why would they switch? A4 is not a processor on it's own.... it's a silicon containing ARM CPU and an Nvidia's tegra GPU. Apparently the reason that they placed them on a single chip is that they use less space, and also it requires less power to run... Tegra is a system-on-a-chip, just like the A4. The A4 doesn't have a Tegra in it. They both apparently use an ARM-based CPU and GPU. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stetson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Tegra is a system-on-a-chip, just like the A4. The A4 doesn't have a Tegra in it. They both apparently use an ARM-based CPU and GPU. :p Yep, this is pretty much a competitor to Tegra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts