backtop


Print 70 comment(s) - last by michael2k.. on Nov 4 at 1:14 PM


Anand Chandrasekher  (Source: itnews)
Chandrasekher's comments come back to bite him in the butt

It looks as though comments made by Anand Chandrasekher, SVP and CMO at Qualcomm, have really come back to bite him, as he has been reassigned within the company.
 
According to a statement provided to CNET, "Anand Chandrasekher, is moving to a new role leading our exploration of certain enterprise related initiatives. Anand will continue to report to Steve Mollenkopf, COO and President of Qualcomm. This will be effective immediately.”
 
The ruckus all started earlier this month when Chandrasekher was rather blunt in his assessment of Apple’s new 64-bit A7 processor that powers the iPhone 5S along with the upcoming iPad Air and iPad mini with Retina Display.
 
Chandrasekher commented, "I know there's a lot of noise because Apple did [64-bit] on their A7. I think they are doing a marketing gimmick. There's zero benefit a consumer gets from that.”
 
He went on to add, "Predominantly... you need it for memory addressability beyond 4GB. That's it. You don't really need it for performance, and the kinds of applications that 64-bit get used in mostly are large, server-class applications."
 
It didn’t take long for the comments to stir up a bit of controversy in the tech community, and a Qualcomm spokesman later attempted to distance the company from the statements regarding the relevance of 64-bit processors in mobile devices:
 
The comments made by Anand Chandrasekher, Qualcomm CMO, about 64-bit computing were inaccurate. The mobile hardware and software ecosystem is already moving in the direction of 64-bit; and, the evolution to 64-bit brings desktop class capabilities and user experiences to mobile, as well as enabling mobile processors and software to run new classes of computing devices.
 
It is unknown what role Chandrasekher currently holds at Qualcomm, but CNET reports that he has been booted from the company’s leadership page.

Source: CNET



Comments     Threshold


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

Was he dead wrong?
By SilthDraeth on 10/25/2013 1:46:02 PM , Rating: 2
Or is the answer more complicated?




RE: Was he dead wrong?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/25/2013 1:59:14 PM , Rating: 5
My guess is that Qualcomm will soon have its own 64-bit mobile processors for smartphones on the market soon and his comments undermine the company's rollout.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By exeedorbit on 10/25/2013 2:12:35 PM , Rating: 4
Bingo


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By vortmax2 on 10/25/2013 3:14:08 PM , Rating: 2
Ding! Ding! Ding!


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By Reclaimer77 on 10/25/2013 3:30:43 PM , Rating: 2
Do they really think anyone knows about this guys comment or will even remember it??

Unless you're a tech-site monkey like us lol, his comments have zero real impact.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By thelostjs on 10/28/13, Rating: 0
RE: Was he dead wrong?
By Rage187 on 10/28/2013 4:39:26 PM , Rating: 2
I make $20 off whoring out your mother. I only get $10 for your sister.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By michael2k on 10/25/2013 3:44:32 PM , Rating: 2
Especially since he's the [i]CMO[/i].

How is he going to sell 64 bit processors to customers if he is on record as saying they are unnecessary?


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By chripuck on 10/28/2013 2:26:32 PM , Rating: 3
Because Android phones are on the verge of having more than 4 GB of RAM? The Note already has 3 GB so he is entirely correct and does not undermine the company at all.

I'm really at a loss about this whole "fiasco." It's a non-event and largely true... smh.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By michael2k on 10/28/2013 6:56:08 PM , Rating: 2
Did you miss his quote?
"Predominantly... you need it for memory addressability beyond 4GB. That's it. You don't really need it for performance, and the kinds of applications that 64-bit get used in mostly are large, server-class applications."

Android isn't on the verge of having more than 4GB; by your own admission they are on the verge of having 4GB.

If 2014 is the year that Qualcomm releases a 64 bit SoC, but no one ships more than 4GB, then they have to counter the negative press the CMO generated; they have to convince people 64 bit isn't a marketing gimmick when their phones don't have more than 4GB.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By lunardude on 11/1/2013 4:09:15 PM , Rating: 2
iConsole.tv has been announced and is shipping devkits with 8 GB of RAM. So, yes, Android is on the verge of breaking the 4GB barrier.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By michael2k on 11/4/2013 1:14:35 PM , Rating: 2
Way to miss the point.

Tell me when an Android phone or tablet that sells in about 4m or so annually hits 6GB or so.

That's not going to happen until 2015 or so.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By Monkey's Uncle on 10/26/2013 6:33:29 PM , Rating: 3
Exactly!

That's executive-level damage control in action right there.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By jRaskell on 10/25/2013 5:05:08 PM , Rating: 3
He wasn't dead wrong, but some of what he said was just plain wrong.

It does provide some technical benefits beyond just memory addressability. Twice as many general purpose registers and more dedicated registers as opposed to dual-purposing some of the general registers (specifically, a dedicated Stack Pointer and Program Counter). Twice as many floating point registers. Twice as many SIMD registers. Hardware support for AES, SHA-1, & SHA-2 encrypt/decrypt. And a completely revamped instruction set (presumably revamped for the better, but that may be an erroneous presumption).

Whether or not these technical benefits translate into tangible benefits to the end-user is up for debate, but it's certainly more than just a marketing gimmick, and it is certainly the future of mobile processors


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By coburn_c on 10/25/13, Rating: 0
RE: Was he dead wrong?
By inighthawki on 10/25/2013 5:21:00 PM , Rating: 2
I disagree, there are numerous benefits to 64-bit beyond a larger physical address space. 64-bit pointers provide the ability to provide larger virtual address spaces (which can be used to reserve larger chunks of contiguous regions, or memory map files), have native 64-bit processing which will improve performance in any application that relies heavily on 64-bit values (IO is a key area here).

On top of all of that it provides future-proofing for when physical address spaces do need to grow beyond 4GB. And there are more reasons this is beneficial than just because apps get bigger. More memory means more apps open at once. When there is memory contention, the OS may no longer have to terminate apps, and they can now remain suspended in the background until you come back to them. This avoids the startup cost of the app since the working set is still in memory.

You're under a fatal assumption that phones having 4GB of ram means that it needs 4GB to run and it's bloated. More memory is almost always a good thing.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By TakinYourPoints on 10/25/13, Rating: 0
RE: Was he dead wrong?
By jmerk on 10/25/2013 11:02:26 PM , Rating: 2
my guess that someone said the same thing when AMD release their 64 bit processors in the late 90's. I also remember in the 90's if we need more than 2gb drives because that was the limit of fat16. Would you like to return to 2gb hard drives. You can't even run fully updated windows xp on that now. You are right, nothing on today's smartphones need 64 bit. However you need the hardware first before the software will come. It took years between 64 bit processors and mainstream software to catch up to use it. Even today there are still some software that still works on 32 bit.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/25/2013 11:11:32 PM , Rating: 2
Late 90's¿ More like mid 2000's.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By testbug00 on 10/25/2013 11:33:43 PM , Rating: 2
You are thinking of 64-bit as AMD did it (copied by Intel) for x86 CPUs.

Moving to 64 bit gives you more performance provided you don't have baggage, which ARM doesn't.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By chripuck on 10/28/2013 2:30:02 PM , Rating: 2
Since when does ARM not have baggage? Unless they are rewriting their entire instruction set in 64 bit and intend to provide zero backwards compatability for legacy hardware they HAVE to carry that baggage. Now granted they only have 10 years of baggage compared to 30 for Intel, but nevertheless, it's there.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By nafhan on 10/28/2013 3:16:17 PM , Rating: 2
Let me guess you're using a 386, still? Otherwise, I think you just called yourself a dumb customer...


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By coburn_c on 10/28/2013 4:23:27 PM , Rating: 2
Tons of hyperbole lobbed at me for my assessment of this superfluous feature. Wonder if it's an Apple thing or you all just like to bandwagon. If I wanted a low heat processor and only needed to perform lightweight functions I may well chose a 386, as it will run cooler than any modern desktop CPU. This is a mobile device, it runs on a battery, has a tiny screen with a huge DPI, and only needs to perform functions that can be sustained standing in line at Starbucks. It therefore doesn't need a 64-bit processor, which adds unneeded complexity and cost.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By inighthawki on 10/25/2013 5:14:54 PM , Rating: 3
To be fair, none of those things you listed are exclusive to 64-bit processors. You can add more registers and more hardware to any ISA, as well as develop a new ABI to interface with it and take advantage of it.

One very real advantage though is that the registers themselves are actually 64-bit. This means more data can be held per register, and 64-bit operations are faster. 64-bit values have a lot of benefits when you start getting into things like IO, where it's incredibly common to reference IO offsets greater than 4GB. Of course this is also all on top of the benefit of having larger virtual address spaces and support for more physical memory in the future. Large virtual address spaces are very beneficial if you tend to reserve (but not necessarily commit) a lot.


By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 10/26/2013 12:43:23 PM , Rating: 2
Well why do twice the work implementing updates to 32-bit and 64-bit when you can just get folks to upgrade to the 64-bit? Less dev time + more economy of scale by standardizing on 1 platform = profit


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By Monkey's Uncle on 10/26/2013 6:41:32 PM , Rating: 2
He was somewhat wrong.

64-bit does provide improvements per clock in a couple of areas:

Moving large amounts of data - 64bit processors have 64-bit registers that can move data in 64-bit chunks rather than 32-bit ones. Meaning it takes 50% less clock cycles to move the same amount of data in 64-bit vs 32-bit systems at the same clock speeds.

When you consider that almost 50% of the work being done in an application is moving data from place to place, this can equate to a much caster program.

There are other improvements in the ARMv8 instruction sets that further optimize things like data encoding that are much faster as well.

Saying Apple's A7 was a gimmick was poor judgement in someone at Anand's level @ Qualcomm since they are also attempting to get their 64-bit parts ready for market.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By BillyBatson on 10/25/2013 8:37:59 PM , Rating: 2
I think he was right, for the time being. He is right that it doesn't offer any true benefit in today's devices with today's software, maybe 5 years from now but not today. However being right doesn't always mean you make money. Whether 64bit in mobile is worth it today or not, if everyone starts making 64bit mobile chips and because of advertising that's what products everyone starts buying Qualcomm will have to transition to 64bit even if it is useless just to keep selling products. Clearly Qualcomm will be making the transition whether it wants to or not and didn't need one of its own talking down about their own not-so-distant tech.


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By rf40928 on 10/25/2013 9:26:43 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's hard to predict who need 64 bit cpu in their hand, but lets consider that in order for the software makers to show us: what & why we need it - with new 64 bit programs - first, 64 bit processors had to be a reality on smartphones.

Now that they are a reality.. you should start seeing benefits in a year. The iPhone 6 will see far more benefit then the 5s ( as far as software, not just performance ), but a someone had to release the first 64bit processor in a smartphone and now that "someone" did the point of debate is sort of trivial now. In a few years people will look back and be saying: "I can't believe we couldn't do this just 4 years ago" .. and they'll be saying that only because companies took the steps to push 64 bit cpus when everyone else was saying: "Why ?"


RE: Was he dead wrong?
By nafhan on 10/28/2013 3:12:39 PM , Rating: 2
More complicated.
1. You sort of need a 64 bit chip to do more than 4GB of RAM. So, everyone will have a 64bit SoC eventually.
2. There are slight performance benefits from the move to 64 bits in some application types (even with less than 4GB of memory).
3. IMO: the A7 is a great SoC - at least as good as anything Qualcomm currently sells in this space, which makes criticizing the "64 bit" thing seem silly.
4. The reality, though, is that there is little benefit to the consumer... now. The big benefit for the consumer (and Apple) will be having devices like future 8GB of RAM iPads running the same binaries as the iPhone 5s - Apple is planning for the future.


Marketing makes the world go round
By coburn_c on 10/25/13, Rating: 0
RE: Marketing makes the world go round
By michael2k on 10/25/2013 3:52:55 PM , Rating: 3
Except this guy was the Chief Marketing Officer.


RE: Marketing makes the world go round
By coburn_c on 10/25/2013 5:02:54 PM , Rating: 2
I fail to see what that changes. What he said was entirely accurate, the board cut his balls off for it, and it was all because of dimly lit bulbs who value the marketing over the product.


RE: Marketing makes the world go round
By inighthawki on 10/25/2013 5:23:45 PM , Rating: 1
Dead wrong. You are simply uneducated on the subject and your only concept of the benefit of 64-bit processors is more memory. This is something that most people struggle with realizing - there are more benefits than that. Go educate yourself instead of pretending you know what you're talking about. I certainly hope you don't work in the tech industry, you're probably making people dumber when you tell them things like 64-bit is useless if you don't have >4GB of ram.


By drycrust3 on 10/26/2013 12:32:48 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. Smartphones aren't just about now, they are also about the future. While it is true that a 32 bit processor is probably sufficient for now, the corollary of Moore's Law (which states the number or transistors on a chip doubles every two years) is Wirth's Law, which states that software bloat doubles every two years. In addition there will be a reduction in network costs, an increase in smartphone data caps, an increase in download speeds, and an increase in the sophistication of apps. All of which tell us people will be wanting more from their smartphone than now, so in two years' time it is easily conceivable that for the demand on the smartphone processor to have increased to close to double what it is now. In two years time it could easily be that no reputable manufacturer will be selling a smartphone without a 64 bit processor.
As I've said before, in the future it could well be that the iPhone 5s is regarded as the first true smartphone.


By Monkey's Uncle on 10/26/2013 6:55:57 PM , Rating: 2
And if I were on Qualcomm's board I would not only cut off his balls, but I would nail them up in the front lobby as a warning to other insiders that it is not wise to undermine the efforts your company has invested many millions of dollars on.

This guy is a CMO . He is not some outsider or lowly tech, but a very high ranking officer in the Qualcomm organization. What he says is taken as Qualcomm policy and gospel. The very, very last thing he should be doing is badmouthing the foundation of new tech that his own company is shortly going to attempt to sell. It doesn't matter if he is 100% right or 100% wrong. He is not in a position to say anything negative at all about the technology his company's upcoming products will be based on.

For Qualcomm - their product is the next generation of their SoCs and cores. And THAT my friend is the 64-bit version of them. It is Qualcomm's implementation of the same ARMv8-based architecture as Apple's A7. The last thing Qualcomm needs is a non-techie executive shooting off his mouth calling the the product they will be marketing as unnecessary.


Typical corporate treatment
By s_p_kay on 10/28/2013 1:11:42 PM , Rating: 2
SVP tells the truth and gets reassigned for it. There is little value to 64 bit processors in the current mobile devices. When apps that need 6-8GB memory and multi-GB working sets are rolled out then it will be of value, don't see that happening for another 3-5 years. It could come sooner but I don't see anything driving that kind of heavyweight mobile app at this point.




RE: Typical corporate treatment
By coburn_c on 10/28/2013 4:12:21 PM , Rating: 2
PAE would allow plenty of system RAM, no individual smartphone app should need more than 2GB. As for the other benefits, no one should be video editing on their phone. Nothing that runs on a battery should need more registers. IF they were secure in their 64-bit superiority they wouldn't have downvoted and hidden my arguments against this wasted development cycle. Although, this is perfect for the surveillance state, they can use a small low power device to manage several camera streams.


RE: Typical corporate treatment
By michael2k on 10/28/2013 7:10:21 PM , Rating: 2
You don't seem to realize that these SoC aren't only found on smartphones.

Apple's 64 bit A7 is found on 9.7" 2048x1536 iPads with 128GB of storage and network speeds of 60Mbps, or more.

Why exactly shouldn't you be editing videos on these things?


RE: Typical corporate treatment
By coburn_c on 10/28/2013 7:34:19 PM , Rating: 2
For the same reason you wouldn't host a web service on it. It is a battery powered mobile device. Just because it provides more power than the web servers of old doesn't make it suited to their purpose. Do you feign obtuseness only to anger me?


RE: Typical corporate treatment
By michael2k on 10/29/2013 1:48:02 PM , Rating: 2
I feign superiority to anger you.

People routinely use laptops to edit movies and photos. Why would they avoid doing so on an iPad [i]with a larger battery[/i]?

Your position makes no sense. iPads are used in similar situations as laptops, and can use similar software to boot. If 64 bit is good for the goose (laptops), it's good for the gander (tablets).

Apple's entire HW/SW stack in 2015 will be 64 bit only when they EOL the iPhone 5C and iPad mini (2012) When they drop 32 bit iOS, there will be no transition because it will have been completed in 2013; iOS, the apps, and everything else will already support it.


Idiot
By jameskatt on 10/26/2013 1:34:08 PM , Rating: 2
Idiot. Never diss Apple when you are trying to emulate Apple or if Apple is one of your customers.




Ironic
By Hector2 on 10/28/2013 10:25:14 AM , Rating: 2
It's interesting that, as Intel keeps making their mobile ICs smaller & smaller, ARM keeps making their ICs bigger & bigger.




Just wow...
By Hammer1024 on 10/25/13, Rating: -1
RE: Just wow...
By Flunk on 10/25/2013 1:55:37 PM , Rating: 2
Get used to it, this is how it works in the real world. If you know what you're talking about you need to run everything through the idiots in marketing before you say it to your customers.


RE: Just wow...
By stm1185 on 10/25/2013 1:55:45 PM , Rating: 5
The lesson here is you don't knock a marketing gimmick your own company will use in the near future.


RE: Just wow...
By retrospooty on 10/25/2013 2:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yup... You cant argue with marketing. If there is anything that recent tech successes have shown is that the real money is made by convincing the dull masses that they are getting something truly special. Whether its the truth or not is irrelevant.


RE: Just wow...
By michael2k on 10/25/2013 3:47:27 PM , Rating: 2
The problem here is that he was the Chief Marketing Officer.

So essentially he displayed his own incompetence by knocking the exact marketing gimmick his own company was going to use in the near future.


RE: Just wow...
By Solandri on 10/25/2013 7:15:12 PM , Rating: 2
In a roundabout, twisted way, that makes perfect sense. Chief Marketing Officer loses his position for speaking the truth instead of what would sell best.


RE: Just wow...
By Monkey's Uncle on 10/26/2013 7:00:03 PM , Rating: 2
The thing is the last thing a CMO should be doing is badmouthing the tech his own company has invested hundreds of millions of dollars implementing.

A particularly dumb move since his job is to make the tech look positive.

To be honest I am really surprise that Qualcomm didn't turf him outright.


RE: Just wow...
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 10/25/2013 2:27:15 PM , Rating: 4
Uh, not so much.

Apple is futureproofing and preparing the platform to make a smooth migration to 64bit.

Also, they've decided that the optimizations that are in the newer 64 bit ARM platform are not worth implementing on a 32 bit chip.

Apple's doing the smart thing here.


RE: Just wow...
By chripuck on 10/28/2013 2:31:23 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody is arguing that it isn't smart or that it will provide tangible benefits on day. The contentious point is that by the time that comes, the 5S will be obsolete and most likely not even be on the shelves anymore ergo selling it on that point is marketing hype pure and simple.


RE: Just wow...
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 10/29/2013 10:17:33 AM , Rating: 2
They've added ARMv8 optimizations as they've implemented A64, and that results in performance improvements:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-r...

Apple could have, in theory, implemented ARMv8/A32, but why do all that work on a part nobody cares about? It's not like they'd have dropped the end-user price any, and they wouldn't have saved one penny.. In fact, it'd have cost them more in engineering, testing, managing SKUs, etc.


RE: Just wow...
By DuckieHo on 10/25/2013 2:32:28 PM , Rating: 2
...except the ARM 64-bit ISA is also cleaner....


RE: Just wow...
By Argon18 on 10/25/13, Rating: 0
RE: Just wow...
By inighthawki on 10/25/2013 3:47:44 PM , Rating: 3
Amazing how many people still think the only advantage to 64-bit is address space.


RE: Just wow...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/25/2013 4:51:53 PM , Rating: 5
DT isn't where you generally find people who are technically knowledgeable


RE: Just wow...
By retrospooty on 10/25/2013 10:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
In all fairness the collective IQ goes up when you log off :P


RE: Just wow...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/26/2013 1:56:52 AM , Rating: 1
Haha, look who's feelings are hurt


RE: Just wow...
By inighthawki on 10/26/2013 3:13:32 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah I don't know what he's talking about. You seem to be the only other person here who is smart enough to acknowledge that 64-bit computing is useful for more than just "having more than 4GB of RAM"


RE: Just wow...
By retrospooty on 10/26/2013 9:47:33 AM , Rating: 1
I was just joking with him relating to other things, not making a comment on 64bit specifically.

I think 64bit is a smart move. Better to have it in ahead of when its needed than afterward. Not alot of benefit yet, as most things on a phone are specifically designed to be small and efficient, but it will come, and if the ecosystem is already ready and standardized it can only be good. It's an all plus and no minus move, just that the plus inst that apparent yet.


RE: Just wow...
By SteelRing on 10/25/2013 4:24:19 PM , Rating: 2
Well I don't see why he isn't saying the truth, and being punished for it is a bit excessive I think.

Sure there may be a need for addressing the future possibility of devices with 4+GB RAM, and there may be legitimate applications developed that require addressing that much RAM (holographic 3D Angry Birds anyone?) but it certainly does not mean you need it right now and he's trying to downplay Apple's move in this regard, thus (hopefully) help his company. And he got punished for it? nice.....

The fact remains we will not see those kinds of advanced apps and devices requiring 64-bit until at least a decade from now. and if anyone want to develop a RAM-gobbling apps, i'd say suck it, learn more programming and make your apps with less memory footprint, it's doable if you're not lazy.


RE: Just wow...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/25/2013 4:50:14 PM , Rating: 2
Memory addressing isn't the only reason for 64-bit. There are still demonstrable benefits even though it has just 1GB of system memory.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7335/58183...
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7335/58182...

It isn't a doubling in performance, but gaining a ~40%-60% increase in performance simply by moving an app from 32-bit to 64-bit isn't what you'd call useless either. Several music and video creation apps on iOS have already dramatically improved performance on the same hardware by switching over. It will benefit all hardware moving forward even before they hit over 4GB of system memory.


RE: Just wow...
By UpSpin on 10/25/2013 5:10:00 PM , Rating: 2
While you're right, the big problem remains, 64bit is mostly memory related. Of course, 64bit nubmers will be calculated faster on a 64bit processor than on a 32bit processor. So specific programs, compiled for 64bit systems, benefit from it.
But don't forget, that a 64bit number is also twice as large as a 32bit number. So 64bit programs (if they take advantage of 64bit) tend to consume more RAM than 32bit programs. Thus multitasking will become worse, if the amount of RAM remained unchanged.

So what the CMO said, was wrong. What Apple did was the right step. And there's no need to have 4GB RAM to benefit from 64bit. But not increasing RAM was a poor decision.

PS: Take the numbers on Anandtech with a grain of salt. We don't have the source code and thus don't know if Apple hasn't optimized the 64bit code outside of just switching to 64bit mode.


RE: Just wow...
By coburn_c on 10/25/2013 5:16:32 PM , Rating: 2
Those performance numbers are garbage. This will hamper performance in a number of ways. The least of which not being the laziness granted in the way of memory optimization nad file system bloat.


RE: Just wow...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/25/2013 7:01:23 PM , Rating: 2
That is a terrible argument for two reasons, one is that there have already been performance improvements in actual applications running on the same hardware just by moving over from a 32-bit version to 64. The other is that the "laziness" afforded by more capable hardware is an awful excuse for... anything really.

Would you rather things stopped improving so that developers have to work harder at optimizing software towards an inferior result? That makes no sense.


RE: Just wow...
By coburn_c on 10/25/2013 7:12:03 PM , Rating: 2
A 40-60% increase claim is garbage.

Also that depends on what you definition of improving is. Bloated, unoptimized fart apps with more animation than substance is not an improvement to me. What app are you running on your phone that needs over 2 gigs of memory space.

And that is the only reason for moving to 64 bit hardware. There are better ways of gaining performance, PAE for greater than 4GB total memory addresses, no current 64 bit software, and no other features that require 64 bit architecture.


RE: Just wow...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/25/2013 7:27:45 PM , Rating: 2
Excellent strawman there. "Fart apps" are like the Godwin's Law for mobile.

Again, music and video editing apps are what have seen the most improvement so far. Real-time processing that used to add chop are smoother after the transition. The same has happened with recompiled apps like web and media browsers. Again, these aren't hypotheticals, these are happening right now.

Another positive side effect is that it allows for greater performance in a more efficient package with greater battery life. An A7 with half the system RAM, half the clock speed, and half the battery size is faster with longer battery life than a GN3. Won't it be great when that level of efficiency and performance scales up and is available in larger devices? A 6" phablet with that level of power and efficiency would be an absolute powerhouse.


RE: Just wow...
By inighthawki on 10/26/2013 3:28:10 AM , Rating: 2
I see you have clearly never done any work at all in a kernel, any low level development, or many performance critical applications such as game engines where 64-bit operations are extremely common, and you will see a noticeable improvement when properly programmed.

There are tons of uses for 64-bit programming:
-Virtual address space ranges
-IO (seek offsets have been 64-bit values since forever ago)
-Time related functionality (64-bit performance counters)
-Unique identifiers (Many counters can roll over too easily on 32-bit)
-If the hardware doesn't already contain 128-bit SIMD functionality (which according to you, why would they?) you already also gain the ability to read (and write) twice as much memory over the bus at a time - simple operations like memcpy will see an immediate improvement (not 2x, but a big leap forward)
-64 bit registers make atomic operations on 64-bit data values actually possible, which reduces the necessity to perform multiple expensive interlocked operations and lock contention.

The list goes on. I don't know why you don't acknowledge these scenarios unless you simply do not know they exist.


RE: Just wow...
By Monkey's Uncle on 10/26/2013 7:11:37 PM , Rating: 2
Well, there is a simple cure for you.

Keep your current smartphone (if you have one) and never upgrade it.

Apple has let the genie out of the bottle by implementing their A7. To compete and move forward, everybody else is doing the same. So like it or lump it - 64-bit is coming. So stick your head in the sand and hope you never have to buy a 64-bit device or you can stay on the bleeding edge. The choice is yours.

Just remember though:
When you stick your head in the sand - your ass is sticking up in the air.


RE: Just wow...
By chripuck on 10/28/2013 2:39:36 PM , Rating: 2
Oh heaven's man, nobody is saying 64 bit has no benefit. The only point of contention is selling it as a marketable feature. I have the 5S and it's super smooth, but I can't say that there's a noticeable difference from my 5 with both on iOS 7.

I don't have the extensive knowledge of low level programming required to make an extensive argument for or against 64 bit, but I do know the single largest benefit is addressing larger amounts of RAM and simplifying larger mathematical operations. I would posit that only a small fraction of iOS users utilize Apps that benefit from these improvements.

I agree that it's a step in the right direction. But I think it's silly to paint Apple as being so innovative when it was the next natural evolution of mobile processors. Everybody and their brother (in the tech community) knew it was coming and while Apple beat everyone's expectations by 6 months to a year, it's not a game changer so lets' stop acting like it is.


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer














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