Big news: Apple to use Samsung CPU's in 2015

[StrangerGuy]

How exactly?

They compete in different fields.

Samsung makes high-end TV's (best selling in the US), theater solutions, smartphones (best selling Androids), digital cameras, robotic turrets for the army (exported to the US and other western countries), printer solutions, monitors (best selling after LG), processors etc.

Intel only makes processors.

Samsung is already mass-producing 14nm processors whereas Intel is still stuck at 22nm with Haswell. This doesn't exactly translate to "better technology" because a smartphone processor has lower clock speeds and are much smaller than desktop PC or laptop processors. But yes, Samsung and Intel can not be directly compared.

Until we get actual production chips in actual phones it is still speculation.

But this overused narrative of Intel destroying ARM like they did to AMD back in 2006 is getting really tiring. The landscape is so much more different. There are so many barriers to entry for Intel to mobile, stemming from consumer apathy to SoCs in general and none of major players now will have any intention to tie their business down to x86 or Intel to return to the days of Intel quasi-monopoly.

 

[Dari]

How exactly?

They compete in different fields.

Samsung makes high-end TV's (best selling in the US), theater solutions, smartphones (best selling Androids), digital cameras, robotic turrets for the army (exported to the US and other western countries), printer solutions, monitors (best selling after LG), processors etc.

Intel only makes processors.

Samsung is already mass-producing 14nm processors whereas Intel is still stuck at 22nm with Haswell. This doesn't exactly translate to "better technology" because a smartphone processor has lower clock speeds and are much smaller than desktop PC or laptop processors. But yes, Samsung and Intel can not be directly compared.

Posts like yours makes my head hurts. None of what you mentioned in the first paragraph is Samsung a leader in. Nothing. As for "Samsung is already mass-producing 14nm processors..." there is zero evidence to that. They've produced 14nm test chips but certainly aren't "mass-producing" them. I think they will begin mass-production in 2015. I think you meant NAND chips, which are currently at 10 nm. TBH, Samsung is primarily a leader in memory and NAND, basically the same thing IMHO...

 

[grkM3]

Posts like yours makes my head hurts. None of what you mentioned in the first paragraph is Samsung a leader in. Nothing. As for "Samsung is already mass-producing 14nm processors..." there is zero evidence to that. They've produced 14nm test chips but certainly aren't "mass-producing" them. I think they will begin mass-production in 2015. I think you meant NAND chips, which are currently at 10 nm. TBH, Samsung is primarily a leader in memory and NAND, basically the same thing IMHO...

But Samsung is the leader Lol

They have the best LCDs and by far the best oled screens and dominate the cell phone market.

They are also becoming a leader in home appliances and are competing head to head with ge here in the states and the quality is right up there if not better for half the price

Samsung is killing it in TVs and there 8 series is by far one of the best if the best you can buy at any price point

Sony today sucks and has lost all its glory it had back in the day.we used to have 4 generations of xbr sets and my family has left Sony for Samsung and Panasonic's

We replaced 2 xbrs for a 8 series and a vt50 plasma that looks better then the new 4k sony

Go see them side by side at best buy and tell me if you think the 4k Sony is worth 5 grand more over the Panasonic

 

[Dari]

But Samsung is the leader Lol

They have the best LCDs and by far the best oled screens and dominate the cell phone market.

They are also becoming a leader in home appliances and are competing head to head with ge here in the states and the quality is right up there if not better for half the price

Samsung is killing it in TVs and there 8 series is by far one of the best if the best you can buy at any price point

Sony today sucks and has lost all its glory it had back in the day.we used to have 4 generations of xbr sets and my family has left Sony for Samsung and Panasonic's

We replaced 2 xbrs for a 8 series and a vt50 plasma that looks better then the new 4k sony

Go see them side by side at best buy and tell me if you think the 4k Sony is worth 5 grand more over the Panasonic

I don't want to go too off-topic so I'll answer this and be done with it.

Samsung, LG, and others came to dominate televisions on price, not quality. The Japanese simply could not compete on price against the Chinese and Koreans. But if you went into any high-end store it was dominated by Japanese brands. It's one reason why everyone to this day still talks about Kuro plasmas and why the Kuros are out of tv business. My opinion on Samsung OLEDs are well known as are the reasons. When it comes to small factor OLEDs, AUO is simply superior. When it comes to large factor OLEDs, LG is faster to market and, according to some, better. When it comes to 4K televisions, Samsung is behind everyone (charging $40K for an 85" 4K when everyone else was charging $25K or less is a prime example of this). Whether it's better I don't know because I have zero interest until the 4K OLEDs from SONY and Panasonic start shipping next year. To say that SONY televisions "suck" without giving any reason why is to not take you seriously. Besides, considering the extra factors that go into making a quality product other than a panel, I don't anticipate a logical answer from you. However, if you can provide evidence (nothing photoshopped or made up) then I may look into it. I don't know much about kitchen appliances and I don't care to know.

The Economist did a write up on Samsung years ago and I believe I posted it here. Their strategy to winning is go into partnerships with competitors and then use economies of scale to out price their competitors. The logistical network is awesome too. However, everyone has caught on to this and it shows. Some of the new fields they've gone in they're struggling (e.g. batteries for hybrid cars and medicine). Worse, LG is now the largest panel producer because no one wants to subsidize Samsung's dominance anymore. Also, some time ago I showed that the Samsung Group, without rainmaker Samsung Electronics, is losing money. It doesn't bode well.

 

[grkM3]

I don't want to go too off-topic so I'll answer this and be done with it.

Samsung, LG, and others came to dominate televisions on price, not quality. The Japanese simply could not compete on price against the Chinese and Koreans. But if you went into any high-end store it was dominated by Japanese brands. It's one reason why everyone to this day still talks about Kuro plasmas and why the Kuros are out of tv business. My opinion on Samsung OLEDs are well known as are the reasons. When it comes to small factor OLEDs, AUO is simply superior. When it comes to large factor OLEDs, LG is faster to market and, according to some, better. When it comes to 4K televisions, Samsung is behind everyone (charging $40K for an 85" 4K when everyone else was charging $25K or less is a prime example of this). Whether it's better I don't know because I have zero interest until the 4K OLEDs from SONY and Panasonic start shipping next year. To say that SONY televisions "suck" without giving any reason why is to not take you seriously. Besides, considering the extra factors that go into making a quality product other than a panel, I don't anticipate a logical answer from you. However, if you can provide evidence (nothing photoshopped or made up) then I may look into it. I don't know much about kitchen appliances and I don't care to know.

The Economist did a write up on Samsung years ago and I believe I posted it here. Their strategy to winning is go into partnerships with competitors and then use economies of scale to out price their competitors. The logistical network is awesome too. However, everyone has caught on to this and it shows. Some of the new fields they've gone in they're struggling (e.g. batteries for hybrid cars and medicine). Worse, LG is now the largest panel producer because no one wants to subsidize Samsung's dominance anymore. Also, some time ago I showed that the Samsung Group, even with rainmaker Samsung Electronics, is losing money. It doesn't bode well.

Sony has been losing its ground in the high end for years now and the new xbrs are nothing special and have been beat in pretty much every review show down and even the new 4k sony lost to the Panasonic zt60 plasma and that us a 1080p screen the beat out sonys best and last time I checked Panasonic is made in Japan and not Korean.
They also bought pioneers kuro technology and are using it now in there plasmas.

Trust me my father is a TV nut and has over 50k invested in his collection and was an even bigger Sony fan boy then you are and he won't buy there TVs anymore after the last 34in tube wide screen xbr and a few xbr LCDs that were triple the price if Samsung's and looked terrible compared to them.

Sony plain old sucks now in TVs and is just using its name to push crap out.

Go ahead and walk into those high end stores and see what TVs they are showing in display.

Don't be surprised that there best TV is a Panasonic plasma and costs half the price of a sony

 

[Dari]

Sony has been losing its ground in the high end for years now and the new xbrs are nothing special and have been beat in pretty much every review show down and even the new 4k sony lost to the Panasonic zt60 plasma and that us a 1080p screen the beat out sonys best and last time I checked Panasonic is made in Japan and not Korean.
They also bought pioneers kuro technology and are using it now in there plasmas.

Trust me my father is a TV nut and has over 50k invested in his collection and was an even bigger Sony fan boy then you are and he won't buy there TVs anymore after the last 34in tube wide screen xbr and a few xbr LCDs that were triple the price if Samsung's and looked terrible compared to them.

Sony plain old sucks now in TVs and is just using its name to push crap out.

Go ahead and walk into those high end stores and see what TVs they are showing in display.

Don't be surprised that there best TV is a Panasonic plasma and costs half the price of a sony

Ok. I've made my point. You've made your (unconvincing) point. Now let's get back on topic.

 

[grkM3]

Ok. I've made my point. You've made your (unconvincing) point. Now let's get back on topic.

Unconvincing? Are you stating that the Panasonic zt60 is not the hands down best display ever tested?

Maybe you should go read a few reviews before talking about how well Sony is before chiming your biased opinion on here.

Here is one quick review on the zt60


http://m.cnet.com/reviews/panasonic-tc-p60zt60/35567247

Here is the first paragraph on there review on the zt60 Lol

Let me get this out of the way first: Panasonic's TC-PZT60 is now the best-performing TV we've EVER TESTED.*

And if you want to talk about quality this TV is hand built and the guys name that built your TV is on the back along with the beyond reference plate as it beat out the kuro in every benchmark to earn its beyond reference tag

 

[TheStu]

Oy! Both of you get your butts back on topic. Who cares who makes the best TV in a thread about Apple using Samsung fabbed CPUs???

Moderator TheStu

 

[dawheat]

Oy! Both of you get your butts back on topic. Who cares who makes the best TV in a thread about Apple using Samsung fabbed CPUs???

Moderator TheStu

You know that's a rhetorical question for those two when Samsung is the topic.

 

[dawheat]

Also, some time ago I showed that the Samsung Group, even with rainmaker Samsung Electronics, is losing money. It doesn't bode well.

Can you link to this? I'm curious what reporting games you think they're playing to turn a loss into a $21 bilion net profit in 2012.

 

[Dari]

Can you link to this? I'm curious what reporting games you think they're playing to turn a loss into a $21 bilion net profit in 2012.

I miswrote that. YGPM.

 

[lothar]

How exactly?

They compete in different fields.

Samsung makes high-end TV's (best selling in the US), theater solutions, smartphones (best selling Androids), digital cameras, robotic turrets for the army (exported to the US and other western countries), printer solutions, monitors (best selling after LG), processors etc.

Intel only makes processors.

Samsung is already mass-producing 14nm processors whereas Intel is still stuck at 22nm with Haswell. This doesn't exactly translate to "better technology" because a smartphone processor has lower clock speeds and are much smaller than desktop PC or laptop processors. But yes, Samsung and Intel can not be directly compared.

Bullshit.

 

[grkM3]

Samsung spent a crap load on 14nm tech and fab.


The success at racing towards 14 nm comes thanks to massive investment on Samsung's part. *Samsung spent*$11.9B USD on research and development, and*$27.1B USD on facilities*(including fab) development in 2012 -- one of the biggest budgets in the industry. *Among the big ticket items were a $2B USD new SoC line in South Korea and a*$4B USD addition to its Texas SoC chip line.

 

[dawheat]

Is there any actual evidence of Samsung producing CPUs at 14nm? I find it hard to believe that Intel has lost their substantial process advantage over everyone else.

Might need folks from the CPU forum to chime in, but maybe it's not a 'true' 14nm to 14nm comparison.

 

[lopri]

http://www.dailytech.com/Samsung+St...ablet+Smartphone+Flash+Chips/article29202.htm

But it's NAND, not CPU. And as you noted, often times "true" comparison is difficult.

P.S. I personally plead you not to invite CPU folks here. I escaped from that town.

Edit: On a quick search, it seems like lots of manufacturers do 19 nm for memory chips. So the reference may not have much force.

 

[lothar]

Is there any actual evidence of Samsung producing CPUs at 14nm? I find it hard to believe that Intel has lost their substantial process advantage over everyone else.

Might need folks from the CPU forum to chime in, but maybe it's not a 'true' 14nm to 14nm comparison.

There is absolutely zero evidence that Samsung is currently producing 14nm processors.
There is absolutely zero evidence that Samsung is ahead of Intel in process technology.

Anyone that suggests either is just blowing smoke, plain and simple.

 

[Mopetar]

But it's NAND, not CPU. And as y...r node, but I'm pretty sure it's exponential.

 

[Dari]

I wouldn't call it that difficult. The frequency that a CPU and NAND memory are operating at are orders of magnitude apart and the requirements, constraints, and tolerances for each are going to be different. If it's a process designed specifically for NAND production, Samsung would probably have to drop the clock speed by a considerable amount.

What I'm more curious about is what they're doing to fix the falloff in the number of program/erase cycles on a node like that. I forget the reduction rate when going to a smaller node, but I'm pretty sure it's exponential.

I think they're working on that issue with their controllers/software.

 

[Germanic]

Samsung spent a crap load on 14nm tech and fab.


The success at racing towards 14 nm comes thanks to massive investment on Samsung's part. *Samsung spent*$11.9B USD on research and development, and*$27.1B USD on facilities*(including fab) development in 2012 -- one of the biggest budgets in the industry. *Among the big ticket items were a $2B USD new SoC line in South Korea and a*$4B USD addition to its Texas SoC chip line.

Yeah they did and for good reason.

The reason for spending so much on new processor technology is to retain dominance in the CPU industry so Apple will have to rely on them again.

 

[joshhedge]

Bah the thread title is misleading.

Got me thinking Apple would use the EXYNOS SOCs rather than their FAB technology. Should read "Apple to continue using Samsung FABs in 2015". I don't believe anywhere on the web it was leaked that Apple would stop using them completely in the first place.

Logically it would never happen as every single application on the app store would have to modified to work with the new processors. It's not as if Apples SOCs are runt of the SOC litter and for Apple to remain competitive they need to go to a 3rd party SOC vendor. The only thing Apple needs is a process advantage and that is what Samsung can potentially offer.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Bah the thread title is misleading.

Got me thinking Apple would use the EXYNOS SOCs rather than their FAB technology. Should read "Apple to continue using Samsung FABs in 2015". I don't believe anywhere on the web it was leaked that Apple would stop using them completely in the first place.

Logically it would never happen as every single application on the app store would have to modified to work with the new processors. It's not as if Apples SOCs are runt of the SOC litter and for Apple to remain competitive they need to go to a 3rd party SOC vendor. The only thing Apple needs is a process advantage and that is what Samsung can potentially offer.

It has nothing to do with the ISA really, it's merely good business sense. Apple knows having their own chip design gives them the capability to customize their chips to their specific needs and also the flexibility to shop around fabs. Compared to zero control over the chip design and supply if they simply bought Qualcomm, Samsung or Intel finished SoCs; if they screw up or do some backstabbing of their own Apple will be in serious shit.

 

[jpiniero]

Bah the thread title is misleading.

Got me thinking Apple would use the EXYNOS SOCs rather than their FAB technology. Should read "Apple to continue using Samsung FABs in 2015". I don't believe anywhere on the web it was leaked that Apple would stop using them completely in the first place.

Logically it would never happen as every single application on the app store would have to modified to work with the new processors. It's not as if Apples SOCs are runt of the SOC litter and for Apple to remain competitive they need to go to a 3rd party SOC vendor. The only thing Apple needs is a process advantage and that is what Samsung can potentially offer.

The upcoming iPhone Cheap is rumored to be using Snapdragon, but only because it has integrated LTE, which the current Apple processors don't have.

 

[joshhedge]

It has nothing to do with the ISA really, it's merely good business sense. Apple knows having their own chip design gives them the capability to customize their chips to their specific needs and also the flexibility to shop around fabs. Compared to zero control over the chip design and supply if they simply bought Qualcomm, Samsung or Intel finished SoCs; if they screw up or do some backstabbing of their own Apple will be in serious shit.

Fair and true point, either way we are in agreement Apple is not going to use Samsung SOCs.