backtop


Print 71 comment(s) - last by superstition.. on Sep 22 at 11:02 AM

Samsung wants to stay on its A game to beat Apple

Samsung sees that Apple is making an aggressive push into China, and will pump up the competition with powerful new 64-bit Galaxy products in order to keep Apple at bay. 

Shin Jong-kyun, Samsung’s mobile business chief, confirmed that Samsung wants to expand its business in the Chinese smartphone market during a meeting in Seocho-dong, southern Seoul.
 
“Samsung understands that Apple intends to boost its mobile business in China, as well as in Japan, meaning that we should try harder in these countries,” said shin.

Apple will sell its latest iPhones through China Unicom and China Telecom while also talking with China Mobile, which has a customer base over twice the size of the U.S. population. In fact, Chinese regulators gave the final required license for the iPhone to work on China Mobile Ltd's mobile network this week.

Samsung Galaxy S IV

Samsung plans to pursue the market with competitive products in hopes of swaying users from buying Apple's iPhones. For instance, Shin said the next set of Samsung Galaxy smartphones would feature 64-bit processors for more power and speed.

“Not in the shortest time. But yes, our next smartphones will have 64-bit processing functionality,” said Shin.

In addition, Samsung will hold a launch event for its latest 5.7-inch Galaxy Note 3 "phablet" in China.

Apple, on the other hand, just recently announced its iPhone 5S, which also features a 64-bit processor (the ARM-based A7). This will offer the market a high-end smartphone with enough power to run complex games and applications. 
 
As of the end of the second quarter, Samsung was the top smartphone seller in China with 19.4 percent of the market while Apple’s share was just 4.3 percent.

Source: The Korea Times



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

64 bit android?
By MacTech84 on 9/12/2013 11:31:06 AM , Rating: 4
The iPhone 5s will be 64 bit compliant with software and hardware. Samsung announces they will ship a 64 bit phone next year.... Doesn't Android need to be updated for that to happen first? Doh!




RE: 64 bit android?
By amanojaku on 9/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/12/2013 12:23:42 PM , Rating: 5
No, idiot. A 32-bit OS can not run natively on a 64-bit processor except in very special circumstances.

In the case of Intel processors, both Intel (and more importantly AMD) were well aware of a need for backward compatibility with Windows. They were very careful not to touch the underlying 32-bit architecture when adding in the AMD64 extensions.

Can you guarantee that smartphone processor core manufactures are doing the same? I can't and would bet that they absolutely require a 64-bit compiled OS for their cores. After all, these processor cores are expected to run not only Android, but iOS and Windows as well.

No worries though. Once 64-bit processors cores are available, Android will be compiled to work with it just as it is compiled to work with each specific architecture out there now i.e. Qualcomm, Exynos & Tegra.

I would recommend you do some more research yourself before spouting off calling others an idiot.


RE: 64 bit android?
By extide on 9/12/2013 4:36:54 PM , Rating: 2
Yes... duh you CAN guarantee they are doing the same because they are all implementing ARMv8 not some custom one off ISA... lol


RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/12/2013 6:26:20 PM , Rating: 2
Did you read my reply in the context in which it was written?

The person I responded to was making generalized statements regarding 32 on 64-bit support. My response was a refute to that generalization. It most certainly is not a given that 32-bit apps or OS will be supported on a 64-bit processor except under very specific circumstances (duh!). Does Intel's IA32 applications run on an IA64 processor? Absolutely not! But IA-32 does run natively on an AMD64 processor.

Why is that?

In order to provide 32 bit support on a 64-bit processor, you have to build that processor as a superset of the original 32-bit processor. In the Intel world, IA-32 and IA-64 are very different architectures even though the names are very similar.

As you rightfully mention ARMv8 is a superset if the previous 32-bit ARMv7 architecture. Because the ARMv8 includes the A64 instruction set, those instructions are used to provide the compatibility layer necessary to run 32-bit ARMv7-based Apps and system software.

That 32-bit compatibility does not arrive for free in the generalized world. The ability for provide backward full hardware level 32-bit compatibility must be designed in as a ikntegral part of the 64-bit processor core architecture.

In Arm and Intel/AMD's cases that has been done by extending the earlier architectures and allowing mode switching between the hardware modes. It is not correct to generalize that all 64-bit processors will be backward compatible with their forerunners as seen in the IA-32/IA-64 scenario.


RE: 64 bit android?
By extide on 9/13/2013 1:05:57 PM , Rating: 2
This is a smartphone article, about smartphone cpu's and smartphone OS's. I thought it was pretty obvious.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:18:14 PM , Rating: 2
Obvious or not, it stopped being all about embedded micro architectures when the guy posted this as a part of his bashing:
quote:
We already saw this with x86-64 CPUs running 32-bit Windows and drivers.


Thing is I am not so much calling out his generalizations but rather kicking him in the ass for bashing others with them. If he had left the name-calling off of his post, I would have probably left him alone.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:21:29 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and please understand that ARMv8 and Intel 64/AMD64 are not the only micro architectures out there even in the embedded world - though these are the most prominent. There are dozens and not all of them are promising this level of backward compatibility.


RE: 64 bit android?
By amanojaku on 9/12/2013 6:57:39 PM , Rating: 2
You want research? Here you go:
quote:
Both CPU cores are able to run 32-bit and 64-bit ARM code, as well as a mix of both so long as the OS is 64-bit.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6420/arms-cortex-a57...
quote:
Speaking at ARM TechCon 2011 in Santa Clara, Calif., ARM Chief Technology Officer Mike Muller said the new v8 architecture would consist of two main execution states: AArch64 and AArch32, with the former introducing a new A64 for 64-bit processing instruction set, while the latter would continue to support ARM’s existing instruction set.

“ARM V8 fully supports 32 bit ARMv7a software,” said Muller, adding that the architecture had been designed to “maximize the benefits across both 32-bit and 64-bit application areas."
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1260488
quote:
AArch32

The ARMv8 32-bit execution state, that uses 32-bit general purpose registers, and a 32-bit program counter (PC), stack pointer (SP), and link register (LR). AArch32 execution state provides a choice of two instruction sets, A32 and T32. Operation in AArch32 state is compatible with ARMv7-A operation.

AArch64
The ARMv8 64-bit execution state, that uses 64-bit general purpose registers, and a 64-bit program counter (PC), stack pointer (SP), and exception link registers (ELR). AArch64 execution state provides a single instruction set, A64.
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.a...
quote:
Of course, for compatibility reasons, we still support the entire ARMv7 machine in the new ARMv8 architecture, but when running 64-bit software, this part of the machine is not being used, and the area of complex legacy it had built up does not need to be active when running in the 64-bit ISA, unlike other architectures where 64-bit extension was simply added to the historical complexity and legacy of their 32-bit mode.

It is not possible, for example, for a 32-bit hypervisor to support a 64-bit operating system while executing in the HYP mode.

However, it should be noted that the halting debug view is no longer compatible with tools that today support ARMv7 halted debug even if the processor is running only 32-bit code. For this to work it will be necessary to have the debugger updated to support ARMv8. Self hosted AArch32 debug used by an OS however does not change.

For this reason, the ARM processors will run today’s 32-bit software without alteration and as such no impact to the ecosystem. Only key targeted areas of software will initially need to consider operating within A64 instruction set. The first is likely to be a hypervisor or any secure monitor code in such a system. Since the new hardware accelerated virtualization was first introduced in the Cortex-A15, which already supported much of the new page table format, updating such a hypervisor is manageable and many vendors have already started.
http://www.arm.com/files/downloads/ARMv8_white_pap...

Similar to x86/x86-64, ARM has 32-bit and 64-bit operating modes, known as states. You can run a 32-bit OS or 32-bit hypervisor on ARMv8. The information is freely available on the Internet, if you aren't too lazy to look it up. This is why the OP is an idiot (notice the username and number of posts: clearly a shill), and why you are one, too.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 12:40:33 PM , Rating: 1
Dude, I asked you to provide research to back up this statement:

"No, idiot. A 32-bit OS can run on a 64-bit CPU. It won't be able to take full advantage of the hardware's performance, but there won't be any compatibility issues...."

Please explain how reposting these bits of hardware discussions on one or two specific architectures justify your generalization that "A 32-bit OS can run on a 64-bit CPU" . One or two specific cases does not back up that claim as you are implying with your post that ANY 64-bit processor can run any 32-bit OS.

Specific discussions on a couple micro architectures does not back up this assertion. So I am still calling bullshit on it.

Try again. Better yet, show be evidence that an Intel Itanium can run 32-bit Windows 7.

Note: I don't give a rat's ass about the OP's user name or posting history. You have bashed this person with a stupid generalization that I would love to see you back up.

Maybe they guy honestly does not know and is simply asking the question. I personally don't know, but that doesn't make him an idiot or you less of one by calling him one.

There is no such thing as stupid questions, only stupid answers.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Samus on 9/12/2013 4:05:57 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly.

The first mainstream 64-bit desktop CPU's shipped in 2003, years before a common-place 64-bit OS was even available.

Virtually all Windows XP (there was that anomaly XP-64 that had no driver support) and most Vista installations were 32-bit. Windows 7 was the first OS that offset the 32/64-bit divide of the desktop market to become 64-bit dominant, and that was late 2009.

So it's important to get 64-bit ARM CPUs out now, even if nothing takes advantage of it, in order to guarantee a) backwards compatibility b) developer interest and c) improve their design over time.


RE: 64 bit android?
By danbob999 on 9/12/2013 9:53:31 PM , Rating: 2
Linux AMD64 is available since 2001. It was released before the first AMD64 CPUs.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Shadowself on 9/12/2013 1:48:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
“Not in the shortest time. But yes, our next smartphones will have 64-bit processing functionality,” said Shin.


Note he is NOT saying they will be shipping a full 64 bit processor in any phone, just "64-bit processing functionality". Hell, most 32 bit processors can do 64 bit work (and many can do 128 bit work). This does not make them true 64 bit processors. At this point there is no way of knowing just how "64 bit" those coming Samsung processors will be.

And Samsung has not "announced" anything. One spokesman has been quoted in a "Us Too" statement. That is all.

However, when Samsung, the company shipping the most Android devices by far, does start shipping mobile devices with a 64 bit processor -- whenever that finally happens -- you can be certain that Google will have a compatible 64 bit variant of Android ready.


RE: 64 bit android?
By DerekZ06 on 9/12/2013 4:05:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Note he is NOT saying they will be shipping a full 64 bit processor in any phone, just "64-bit processing functionality". Hell, most 32 bit processors can do 64 bit work (and many can do 128 bit work). This does not make them true 64 bit processors. At this point there is no way of knowing just how "64 bit" those coming Samsung processors will be.


quote:
"Shin said the next set of Samsung Galaxy smartphones would feature 64-bit processors for more power and speed"


A 32bit processor doing 64 bit work will not have more power or speed. There would be more than a 50% hit in performance.

Samsung will ship full 64 bit processors because anything else would be inefficient.


RE: 64 bit android?
By extide on 9/12/2013 4:39:08 PM , Rating: 2
Not necessarily. For example, SIMD instructions allow current 64-bit CPU's to execute 128 bit and some even support instructions working on 256bit registers at full speed. (See SSE, MMX, etc)


RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:10:41 PM , Rating: 2
Depends if Samsung is making them support the full ARMv8 spec. In order to do that they have to implement the full AArch64 operating state. There is nothing stating that Any manufacturer is doing a full implementation in their v1 silicon.

I guess we will have to see.

Creating a 64-bit variant of Android should be nothing more than a simple recompile and regression test. Shouldn't take Google long since ARM is providing the development tools for ARMv8 developers to use.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Reclaimer77 on 9/12/2013 4:47:13 PM , Rating: 2
Apple's 64bit A7 is based on the already-existing ARMv8 specification. ARM has been 64bit ready for a while now.

It's also a trivial matter making 64bit Android. Linux has been 64bit friendly for like, forever, and ARM64 support is already in the mainline kernel.

Samsung looks to gain more from 64bit SoC's than anyone else. They already make phones with 3gigs of RAM. By next year we'll be seeing Samsung models with 4gigs of memory, maybe more. So there are definite gains to be had by going 64bit.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Shig on 9/12/2013 5:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
YES!

If you think your tablet is going to run fine with a 2500x1600 resolution screen on 2GB of ram, think again.

2GB of ram isn't even enough on my S4, I want moar.


RE: 64 bit android?
By danbob999 on 9/12/2013 9:56:47 PM , Rating: 2
2500x1600x32/8 = 15 MiB. You need only 16 MiB RAM to run a 2500x1600 tablet using 32 bit colors.
What take RAM is the applications, what you don't see.


RE: 64 bit android?
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/12/2013 6:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
Samsung's 64-bit SoC has been in development for quite some time now. Apple just managed to announce (but not actually deliver) theirs out the door first.

I am sure that Qualcomm is well under way getting their kraits on the ARMv8 bandwagon too.

When these phones come out in volume I have no doubt that 32GB + 4GB storage/memory will be the 'low end' specs on the block. The high end will have 64GB + 6-8GB memory (and cost you your first born son).


Wait for it...
By JasonMick (blog) on 9/12/2013 10:47:50 AM , Rating: 5
"Today Apple announced it was filing a new suit against Samsung for "shamelessly copying" its invention the 64 bit processor. An Apple spokesperson said that Apple was seeking at least a billion dollars in damages. He also said that Apple was considering suits against Intel and AMD after discovering they may have also stolen its 64 bit processor invention. When asked what benefits a 64 bit processor provides for a 1 GB phone the spokesman replied, "It's magical.""




RE: Wait for it...
By sleepeeg3 on 9/12/2013 11:36:45 AM , Rating: 2
Just when I was going to upvote your post, it was moved to the top and magically given full points. Interesting...


RE: Wait for it...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/12/2013 12:38:41 PM , Rating: 2
"Full points" is a 6


RE: Wait for it...
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/12/2013 11:51:32 AM , Rating: 3
"We invented the 64-bit processor!" OMGWTFBBQ this had me rolling around on the floor laughing.

So.... what does Obama have to say about this?


RE: Wait for it...
By testerguy2 on 9/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: Wait for it...
By extide on 9/12/2013 4:35:35 PM , Rating: 2
Did you even read the whole post you quoted?


RE: Wait for it...
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/13/2013 8:54:13 AM , Rating: 2
Doubt it, he is the type he sees the word Apple and goes into a blind rage of defense of them no matter what.


RE: Wait for it...
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:24:01 PM , Rating: 2
Apple Sux! Apple Sux Apple Sux!

.... waiting for it :D


RE: Wait for it...
By Any14Tee on 9/15/2013 12:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
Manchurian Candidate, please don't give him a pistol!


RE: Wait for it...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/12/2013 2:40:55 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Wait for it...
By Shig on 9/12/2013 5:12:32 PM , Rating: 2
You need a 64bit OS to address more than 3GB of ram. That's all I care about.

8GB-16GB phones and tablets, yes please


RE: Wait for it...
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 12:59:12 PM , Rating: 2
You can address 4GB with a 32-bit OS.

(don't look at Windows usable memory - that is misleading)


RE: Wait for it...
By xdrol on 9/13/2013 2:33:34 PM , Rating: 2
You can even address 4 PiB with PAE (52 bit address space) with an appropriate 32 bit OS. (Each process will be still limited to 4 GB, unless the process itself supports PAE.) The "best" 32 bit server Windows (2003 Datacenter edition) supports 128 GB.

(The funny thing is, the current 64 bit implementations only have active 48 address bits, so limited to 256 TBs..)


RE: Wait for it...
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 3:16:33 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm PAE, I guess I should have said 'directly address' :D
shop.

Doubtful that such a thing exists for ARMv7 though. Android & iOS will need to go full 64GB to support a linear 64bit memory space - no PAE for them.


RE: Wait for it...
By superstition on 9/12/2013 9:06:15 PM , Rating: 1
Just when I was going to point out the interestingly different tone of the comments reacting to Samsung's 64-bit bit plans (contrasting with the dramatic Apple bashing in the Apple topic)... you provide me with more evidence.

The irrational anti-Apple animus is amusing to see. I find it droll that so many apparently view Samsung as being a superior company. I wonder how long it will take for hating Samsung to become cool around here...


RE: Wait for it...
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:32:01 PM , Rating: 2
The anti-Apple animus is not because of the products, but it is because of Apple's anti-competitive nature in running their business.

I personally have not issue with Apple's products, though I would not own one since they do not include the features I want to see. Beyond that though, I do not like Apple's litigation-based business model and refuse to support it with my wallet. I admit that Samsung can be just as bad as Apple in this regard, but they have not always been like this. The litigation-based business model is something that Apple has taught them the hard way. Apple on the other hand has had this attitude since they first marketed their original Macintosh computers.


RE: Wait for it...
By superstition on 9/13/2013 9:37:25 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, nonsense.

Besides, it's not Apple that created an inept judiciary -- one that can't handle tech cases properly because the judges don't know technology well.

Pretending that Samsung is some sort of poor innocent who had no choice but to play dirty is beyond silly. I suppose Apple taught them how to hire people to write fake reviews, too? Apple taught them to quote .15 watt power usage figures for SSDs that use over 5 watts when writing? Apple taught them how to make a panel lottery for their televisions, so buyers don't know what they're getting for their money?

No. The anti-Apple animus here is an extension of the old religious war between the "PC" platform and the Mac platform.


RE: Wait for it...
By superstition on 9/13/2013 9:41:35 PM , Rating: 2
Apple also certainly isn't responsible for the brokenness of our patent system. Talk to your elected representatives and get them to fix the problem.


RE: Wait for it...
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/14/2013 7:25:59 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe Apple didn't create the broken patent system, but they are very adept at exploiting it. Look back at the rampant lawsuits when Apple tried to sue Microsoft for stealing the idea of Windows from them. Apple has a long history of malicious litigation friend.

Samsung isn't innocent (didn't I say that?), however they did not really start abusing the broken patent system in earnest until until AFTER Apple smacked them several times with IP-related suits.

Not sure what this grief is about:
quote:
Pretending that Samsung is some sort of poor innocent who had no choice but to play dirty is beyond silly. I suppose Apple taught them how to hire people to write fake reviews, too? Apple taught them to quote .15 watt power usage figures for SSDs that use over 5 watts when writing? Apple taught them how to make a panel lottery for their televisions, so buyers don't know what they're getting for their money?


Show me a major company, any major company, that doesn't pull out every stop to show their products are better than their competitors regardless of the 'honesty' of it. You think Apple hasn't pulled an even longer list of stunts? You really aren't that naive are you?

Personal view: Apple isn't hated for its products. Apple is hated because it it run by wankers. They have been this way for a very, very long time.

Yes, yes, Samsung has it's fair share of wankers too and is as prone as any other major company to bending unwritten rules in the name of market penetration.


RE: Wait for it...
By superstition on 9/22/2013 11:02:12 AM , Rating: 2
Apple is hated here because of the old Mac vs. PC religious war.


But does it....
By stevessvt on 9/12/2013 10:52:18 AM , Rating: 2
Have more GeeBee's?




RE: But does it....
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/12/2013 11:22:51 AM , Rating: 2
I prefer the Bee Gees.


RE: But does it....
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:33:28 PM , Rating: 2
The whole thing gives me the heebee geebees.


RE: But does it....
By Any14Tee on 9/15/2013 12:14:00 PM , Rating: 2
This whole tread seems have got lost in Massachusetts, apologies to Bee Gees.


Based on A57
By mjv.theory on 9/12/2013 11:37:18 AM , Rating: 2
Presumably Apple's A7 and next year's Samsung 64 bit will be based on ARM's A57 IP. One might presume that the ARMv8 A57 might also include other advantages along with a 64bit capability; perhaps improvements that are harder to accomplish merely by tweaking A9 or A15.

Also, with a much touted trend toward convergence, early experience with 64bit designs may pay off down the line. You can also think tablets, convertibles, notebooks, desktops or desktop replacements, and servers....televisions, set-top boxes, cars, fridges, drones, battle droids, orgasmatrons - basically, the usual suspects, and then everything else you didn't think of.




RE: Based on A57
By extide on 9/12/2013 4:40:58 PM , Rating: 2
Apples will probably be a ~custom implementation, but definitely ARMv8, while Samsung will probably implement a stock Cortex A57/53 of some sort.


RE: Based on A57
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:38:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can also think tablets, convertibles, notebooks, desktops or desktop replacements, and servers....televisions, set-top boxes, cars, fridges, drones, battle droids, orgasmatrons - basically, the usual suspects, and then everything else you didn't think of.


Oooo I want a one of those. Only it has to be able to address 8GB of memory so only 64-bit will do.


By WhatKaniSay on 9/13/2013 10:19:49 AM , Rating: 2
First, Samsung looked like foolish copy-cat when they rush out a badly cobbled “Smart watch” just to beat Apple to the announcement podium, only to be rightly ignored by Apple.

Now, they are truly acting amateurish by announcing a platform switch to 64-bit for unknown release date , ---just days after Apple revealed their own “ready-to-ship ” 64-bit iOS.

Guess what Samsung, Apple is planning on building a WiFi enabled iToilet with aluminum Unibody... now go and call a press conference to showcase your Vinyl clone Galaxy-Toilet with turbo charged jet engine that can slush any poop, but with 6 months useful life before Galaxy-Toilet 2 arrives.




hi
By rya14 on 9/13/2013 3:10:14 PM , Rating: 2
Amelia. if you think Stephanie`s artlclee is exceptional, on sunday I bought Infiniti from having made $5898 this-past/five weeks and-more than, $10,000 this past month. it's definitly the easiest-job Ive had. I started this 8-months ago and immediately started making a nice minimum $78, p/h. you can try this out ......... http://x.co/2LD0D




should have just went to 128bit
By michal1980 on 9/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: should have just went to 128bit
By bug77 on 9/12/2013 11:04:33 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, I don't get why a phone would need 64 bit processing either (not for a few more years anyway). Probably ARM/MIPS upgraded their designs and Apple/Samsung got the new architecture for free.


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By Argon18 on 9/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: should have just went to 128bit
By bug77 on 9/12/2013 11:46:25 AM , Rating: 2
64bit can handle double precision better, true, but I'm not convinced a mobile phone or a tablet needs that.

More registers is not inherently a boon of 64bit addressing.

And about 4GB RAM, it's just like I said: not for a few more years. But it's better to be ready then playing catching up, I agree with you on this one.


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By Dorkyman on 9/12/2013 1:03:14 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe I'm just living in the past, but can someone please tell me how an app for a smartphone could be written to require the use of 4+GB? I do HD video editing as a profession and my editing program on my PC is perfectly happy in much less than 1GB. And video editing and rendering are really CPU-intensive tasks.

So to me this smacks of just a marketing gimmick, like pixels in a camera ("company X has 16 megapixels, so we have 24!!!")


By ClownPuncher on 9/12/2013 1:37:05 PM , Rating: 2
You're a patient man if you can put up with 1gb.


By Solandri on 9/12/2013 1:55:24 PM , Rating: 2
The only apps I can think of right now which use huge amounts of memory are large 3D simulations, and massive databases which need to be in RAM for maximum speed (e.g. Google's search servers).

Looking to the future, memory needs are going to explode once 3D video becomes mainstream. The pieces for this are already in place or in development. A light field camera can capture 3D images natively, or you can simulate it with 2+ lenses and a bunch of computer processing. On the display side, quantum dot displays could conceivably be used to create holograms if you make the addressable dots small enough and can do massive fourier transform calculations in real-time.


By Shadowself on 9/12/2013 2:16:30 PM , Rating: 2
Think more along the lines of 64 bit integers. Integer math is less processor intensive than floating point math. (I remember a while back when a chip I used did all integer operations in one cycle with relatively low power in while floating point either took more cycles or more power. In fact the double precision floating divide took 17 cycles!). If more can now be done in integer math than FP there *might* be both a speed up and power savings. Maybe. I'm looking forward to some benchmarks on some real world applications to see if Apple's 2x speed increase holds up.

Apple explicitly stated that the doubled the number of registers in the A7 over the number available in the A6. That part shouldn't be in question.

It's less about the amount of RAM and more about the RAM access bandwidth. This was the gotcha that hit a lot of systems in the 16 to 32 switch and again in the 32 to 64 switch. If you're now pushing 64 bits around versus 32 bits the processor can get starved it you don't increase the memory bandwidth. Even if you double the processing speed of the CPU, as Apple claims, if you don't feed it fast enough it's all for naught. Apple has a very poor track record in properly scaling their historical systems' memory bandwidths. We'll just have to see how they did this time.


By danbob999 on 9/12/2013 9:49:26 PM , Rating: 2
Even 32 bit CPUs have 64 bit FPU (floating point units).
32 bit ARM CPUs even have NEON 128 bit registers for fast floating point operations.


By paulc543 on 9/12/2013 12:05:10 PM , Rating: 2
"To handle all the new multimedia capabilities, with manipulating videos, photos, etc."

Still not convinced enough (or any) people are doing that on a mobile phone to the extent that a 32 bit architecture is a real limitation. Likewise with the memory addressing. What phone has 4+ gigs of ram? None. They only recently commonly started including 2.

I'm not saying it's not a good move for the future, but to suggest people will see actual advantages today is stretching it.


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/12/2013 12:10:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And lastly, the one everyone seems to get hung up on, it allows for clean addressing of 4+ GB of ram. Microsoft got caught with their pants down in the PC world on this one. People buying PC's with 4 GB of RAM, but OS could only use 3.0 GB, or maybe 3.2 GB, because OS was only 32 bit. High end phones already have 2 GB of RAM. It makes sense to begin transitioning them to 64 bit *now* so that in a year or two, when 4 GB phones hit the market, you won't be stuck with only 3.2 GB usable.


You need to get something straight.

The "3.2GB out of 4.0GB usable" limitation comes from memory-mapped I/O of Intel processors where hardware board memory (i.e. video card buffers and communication registers) is mapped into memory below the 4GB line. However if you had more than 4GB of memory installed, while only 4GB was addressable, In Intel provided a means to map I/O over the 4GB boundary in the motherboard BIOS. But you have to have physical system memory available to map over. This is an Intel processor design feature and has noting to do with Microsoft or 32-bit architecture.

A 64-bit processor does not necessarily provide a more or less registers. The number of registers available is a function of the architecture of the specific processor - not its 'bitness'.

The larger 64-bit registers only come into play when loadfing or addressing 64-bit data. When used with legacy code only the bottom 32-bits of those registers are used for data or addresses. BUT in order to be called a '64-bit' processor, the core must be able to directly handle both 64-bit addresses and 64-bit data words.

Floating point registers are is usually 80 bits wide. A 32-bit processor has 80-bit FP registers (without 80 bit registers, it can't handle floating point calculations). A 64-bit processor will still have 80 bit FP registers. The actual bitness of the processor will usually be determined by its address and integer registers and its ALU - not its FPU.


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By extide on 9/12/2013 4:43:38 PM , Rating: 2
Actually the <4GB limit in Windows 32-bit Client versions is STRICTLY A SOFTWARE LIMITATION. With PAE you can support up to 64GB of ram on a 32-bit system (notably with the exception that a single process can only use 4GB at a time...) This is supported in Windows Server, Linux, etc.


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By retrospooty on 9/12/2013 12:18:45 PM , Rating: 2
"It makes sense to begin transitioning them to 64 bit *now* so that in a year or two"

On this I agree. Apple probably made a good move. It wont help yet, but having it now makes the transition easier. When it matters, it wont be a "transition".


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By Dorkyman on 9/12/2013 1:06:54 PM , Rating: 2
"In a year or two..."

Yeah, right.


By Tony Swash on 9/12/2013 2:15:32 PM , Rating: 1
Bear in mind that Apple's range of iOS devcies is highly integrated, the same chip families and SDK, the same service and development stack. The A7 chip appeared first in it's phones but an iPad refresh is only week away, I would have thought it highly likely that the A7 and M7 chips will appear in the higher end iPad models and iPads, with their very large number of high end apps, are widely used for intensive computing activity. This is typical Apple, big, early, foundational tech transitions that lay the basis for developments for years ahead.


By retrospooty on 9/12/2013 3:15:12 PM , Rating: 2
""In a year or two..."

Well, at some point. Right now, it doesn't hurt anything, in the future it will help, so why not? Just like Windows 64bit years ago. Everything that works, still works, and in the future, its already ready.


By aliasfox on 9/12/2013 1:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
Considering Apple keeps SoCs around for 2-3 years (A4 was 2010-2013, A5 looks to be 2011-2014), any chip introduced in 2013 will likely be expected to last until 2015-2016. If we assume that all new, high end phones released in 2015 will have 4+GB of RAM, then it makes sense to have your OS and APIs written for 64-bit architectures by that point. Releasing a 64-bit chip now means that Apple can still sell low-end A7 based devices in 2015 running on a 2015-current OS.

Though I guess from that perspective, it makes less sense for Samsung to do it right now if nobody expects them to a) keep phone models in production for very long, or b) update their phones to the latest OSes 2 years after release.


By amanojaku on 9/12/2013 12:38:45 PM , Rating: 4
There is so much wrong it this post it's not even funny.
quote:
A 64 bit processor handles large floating point calculations a lot faster than a 32 bit one does.
ARM has had 64-bit floating point since ARMv7. In fact, the most robust ARMv7 supports 128-bit floating point.

http://www.arm.com/products/processors/technologie...
http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/co...
quote:
It also provides a lot more CPU registers, and it increases the size of those registers; most 32 bit chips are somewhat constrained in this area.
This has NOTHING to do with 64-bit. In fact, increasing the register size technically leads to a decrease in the number of registers, unless a smaller process is used, or some other transistors are removed. Both seem to be the case with the new ARMv9: Thumb was removed, and I've read that ARMv8 was built on a 28nm process (vs. 32nm for v7), with 16nm planned by the end of the year. The number of registers has not increased at all: v7 supported up to 32, and so does v8.
quote:
And lastly, the one everyone seems to get hung up on, it allows for clean addressing of 4+ GB of ram. Microsoft got caught with their pants down in the PC world on this one. People buying PC's with 4 GB of RAM, but OS could only use 3.0 GB, or maybe 3.2 GB, because OS was only 32 bit. High end phones already have 2 GB of RAM. It makes sense to begin transitioning them to 64 bit *now* so that in a year or two, when 4 GB phones hit the market, you won't be stuck with only 3.2 GB usable.
Idiot. ARM has supported more than 4GiB of RAM since Cortex A7 and A15 (ARMv7) thanks to LPAE.

ARM has a better explanation for 64-bit that you provided:
quote:
An obvious reason for 64-bit is the support of more than 4GB of physical memory; however this is achieved in ARMv7’s LPAE extension on Cortex-A15 and Cortex-A7. Why then is 64-bit useful?

In server applications, OS and application software are frequently 64-bit today, so 64-bit pointers for virtual addressing are critical in these applications. Full support of AArch64, in addition to the power efficient ARMv8 architecture and power optimized microarchitectures, make Cortex-A50 series processors well suited to a broad range of applications in efficient low-power servers.

In the desktop environment, a larger virtual address space is important for modern desktop software APIs that may come to rely on having a vast virtual address space for techniques such as memory mapped file I/O and sparse addressing (e.g. for persistent objects). AArch64 also enables efficient 64-bit immediate generation meaning less need for literal pools.

A large program counter relative addressing range (+/-4GB) for efficient data addressing is helpful within shared libraries and position-independent executable. The ARMv8 instruction set, fully supported by the Cortex-A50 series processors, is optimized for clean code generation, with its orthogonal ISA and compiler friendly flexible addressing modes.

Support for 64-bit in ARMv8 will enable ARM processors to become more broadly deployed in server and desktop applications, and will provide future-proof support for the eventual migration of 64-bit operating systems to mobile applications.
http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a50/...

And to address Monkey's Uncle below:

quote:
The Cortex-A50 Series is the latest range of processors based on the ARMv8 architecture. The series includes support for the AArch64, a new energy efficient 64-bit execution state that operates alongside an enhanced version of ARM’s existing 32-bit execution state.

Cortex-A50 series processors are excellent 32-bit processors with 64-bit capability. They deliver more performance for ARMv7 32-bit code in AArch32 execution state, and offer support for 64-bit data and larger virtual addressing space in AArch64 execution state.
Yes, you CAN run 32-bit on 64-bit ARM, including a 32-bit OS. Idiot.


RE: should have just went to 128bit
By djc208 on 9/12/2013 11:38:23 AM , Rating: 2
Well it's still really only 32 bit, the other 32 are mirrors that the NSA can access, but it sounds good in marketing and it won't slow down your phone when they want to see how many cat videos you looked up yesterday.


By testerguy2 on 9/12/2013 1:32:50 PM , Rating: 1
Are you saying Samsung users give their info to NSA and watch cat videos?

Or did your butthurt lead you to forget which article you were posting on?


By Monkey's Uncle on 9/13/2013 1:34:07 PM , Rating: 1
Thats what she says.


By Any14Tee on 9/15/2013 12:15:57 PM , Rating: 1
So my wife says.


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki