• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New single-core A5 variant spotted. What will it be used for?

It can't be for iPhone cheap(er) though, it'd get killed by the Chinese Quad A7 phones.

Could be iWatch. Could be for iTV. Could you find a use for it in Macs?
 
Eug said:
The A5 in the Apple TV 3 was a dual-core CPU with one core disabled. A great way to may use of chips with one inadequate core.

However the latest version of the A5 is now single-core, and 50% smaller, on the same process.

http://www.chipworks.com/blog/techn...side-the-latest-apple-a5-from-a-new-apple-tv/

I'm thinking it can't just be for the Apple TV 3. What else then? iPhone junior?
Click to expand...

Any number of small scale devices? The Airport Express, maybe a redesigned Airport Extreme as well?
 
Tegeril said:
A cheap iPhone already exists. It's the 4S.
Click to expand...

When people say 'cheap iPhone' what they mean is a cheap UNsubsidized iPhone. The 4S is still $550 to buy unlocked, $450 for the 4. There are countries that don't subsidize their devices like the US does, and plenty of countries where an iPhone that costs $350 unlocked would sell very well.
 
I totally know what they meant, but I also don't think that product will ever exist. The response was supposed to sound "Apple" 🙂

All things considered, it'd be great to see something like that available in other countries, but I doubt it will happen.
 
Tegeril said:
A cheap iPhone already exists. It's the 4S.
Click to expand...
The CPU in the 4S would be way more expensive than the revamped single-core A5.

The dual-core A5 in the 4S is 122.6 mm2.
The new single-core A5 in Apple TV 3 is 37.8 mm2. That's less than 1/3rd of the die area.

As mentioned, the 4S isn't exactly cheap.

evanb07 said:
I dont think so. Maybe it would be used in cheap iPhone..
Click to expand...
I think we are saying roughly the same thing.

jpiniero said:
It can't be for iPhone cheap(er) though, it'd get killed by the Chinese Quad A7 phones.
Click to expand...
Nah. Quad isn't really what makes the phone attractive. The design, the OS, and the ecosystem do. Remember, the iPhone 4 still sells boatloads in North America, and that uses a slow 800 MHz single-core Apple A4. Although I prefer dual-core, a say 1.2 GHz 32 nm A5 would be fine for a phone at the lower end.
 
Last edited:
Eug said:
Nah. Quad isn't really what makes the phone attractive. The design, the OS, and the ecosystem do. Remember, the iPhone 4 still sells boatloads in North America, and that uses a slow 800 MHz single-core Apple A4. Although I prefer dual-core, a say 1.2 GHz 32 nm A5 would be fine for a phone at the lower end.
Click to expand...

I can't believe how many people I see that have "upgraded" and went for the iPhone 4. On the latest OS, you can tell there's a huge speed difference or at least I can visibly see it. I was using my girlfriend's 4S to look up a setting for her aunt who just got a 4, and well, the scrolling, the opening of apps, just everything was so much slower.

I can't believe people still use the 4. How much RAM did that thing have? 256? I can't remember.

Anyway, getting back on topic. I don't really have any idea what they would use that chip for.
 
dlock13 said:
I can't believe how many people I see that have "upgraded" and went for the iPhone 4. On the latest OS, you can tell there's a huge speed difference or at least I can visibly see it. I was using my girlfriend's 4S to look up a setting for her aunt who just got a 4, and well, the scrolling, the opening of apps, just everything was so much slower.

I can't believe people still use the 4. How much RAM did that thing have? 256? I can't remember.

Anyway, getting back on topic. I don't really have any idea what they would use that chip for.
Click to expand...

512MB.

My 4 is... choppy. Usually works alright, but every now and then... woof.

Considering that it's now the "free" iPhone for a lot of the bigger carriers, that explains its popularity. And it's hardly unusable, just not super-smooth all the time.

My contract's up in July. I'm holding out for one of whatever replaces the iPhone 5.
 
My niece still loves her iPhone 4. She didn't feel the need to upgrade to a newer phone, even after installing iOS 6. However, I upgraded from my iPhone 4 because it doesn't have LTE, and I personally felt it was too slow, esp. in iOS 6.

However, make a similar phone with a 50% increased clock rate to 1.2 GHz (at the same IPC), give it LTE, and give the phone at least 512 MB (like the 4 or 4S) or preferably 1 GB (like the 5) in late 2013, and it would sell quite well. And the performance wouldn't actually be half bad, at least on iOS 6. It'd probably slow down in iOS 7, but that doesn't really matter at the low end.
 
Eug said:
My niece still loves her iPhone 4. She didn't feel the need to upgrade to a newer phone, even after installing iOS 6. However, I upgraded from my iPhone 4 because it doesn't have LTE, and I personally felt it was too slow, esp. in iOS 6.

However, make a similar phone with a 50% increased clock rate to 1.2 GHz (at the same IPC), give it LTE, and give the phone at least 512 MB (like the 4 or 4S) or preferably 1 GB (like the 5) in late 2013, and it would sell quite well. And the performance wouldn't actually be half bad, at least on iOS 6. It'd probably slow down in iOS 7, but that doesn't really matter at the low end.
Click to expand...

My 4 wasn't feeling all that slow when I replaced it, though it does now. It's also heavy as all get out in comparison to the 5.
 
I expect the cheap iPhone to basically be an iPhone 3GS+ with a newer SoC for $350. I'm sure some people would be interested since it would be an iPhone, but unless it has a Retina display, I'm going to consider it as cheap trash.
 
Has no one considered the potential application of this SoC in an 'iWatch'. Very small, still relatively powerful and could have a power usage matched for decent battery life on said product.
 
Last edited:
joshhedge said:
Has no one considered the potential application of this SoC in an 'iWatch'. Very small, still relatively powerful and could have a power usage matched for decent battery life on said product.
Click to expand...

The second post mentioned the 'iWatch'. But as it stands right now, even this is probably still too large and power hungry for that application.
 
TheStu said:
The second post mentioned the 'iWatch'. But as it stands right now, even this is probably still too large and power hungry for that application.
Click to expand...

Ah my apologies, didn't notice the second line of text. Hmm, it will certainly be interesting to see what technology will be used when these new devices are inevitably launched.

I'm guessing they could theoretically use a single core A7 chip with single core graphics, which would still have comparable performance to the iPhone 4 with a lower power draw, potentially based on TSMC 20nm process, would that still be too power hungry?
 
Last edited:
Anand's analysis of the new Apple TV and new A5:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6834/apple-tv-2013-a1469-short-review-analysis-of-a-new-a5

DSC_9817_575px.jpg
 
Last edited:
joshhedge said:
Ah my apologies, didn't notice the second line of text. Hmm, it will certainly be interesting to see what technology will be used when these new devices are inevitably launched.

I'm guessing they could theoretically use a single core A7 chip with single core graphics, which would still have comparable performance to the iPhone 4 with a lower power draw, potentially based on TSMC 20nm process, would that still be too power hungry?
Click to expand...

Looking at the teardown of the last gen Nano you'll see that it had a 0.39 Whr battery in it. I don't know how much less power a hypothetical single-core hypothetical 22nm hypothetical A7 would draw compared to this A5, and the hypothetical iWatch wouldn't need as much horsepower as the aTV requires, so sure... maybe.

But, all that said, physical size is still an issue.
 
TheStu said:
Looking at the teardown of the last gen Nano you'll see that it had a 0.39 Whr battery in it. I don't know how much less power a hypothetical single-core hypothetical 22nm hypothetical A7 would draw compared to this A5, and the hypothetical iWatch wouldn't need as much horsepower as the aTV requires, so sure... maybe.

But, all that said, physical size is still an issue.
Click to expand...

Hypothetically speaking, touché.
 
Apple is still selling the 4th gen. iPod Touch starting at $199.

It's getting long in the tooth, and a single-core A5 update should still allow them to maintain a low-enough price point and good profit margin. They could leave the new 5th gen. model as-is starting at $299.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top