Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Sep 2013 18:25 UTC
Apple Apple's event is going on right now - and most of the new stuff already leaked weeks and months ahead of time. So, we're getting an iPhone 5S, an iPhone 5C, and iOS7 will be available later this month. I like the design of the 5C more than of the 5S; it's more playful, colourful - harking back to the coloured iMacs and PowerMac G3s. Too bad it doesn't come in red.

The fingerprint sensor in the 5S is interesting, but I wonder how accurate it will be in the real world; on top of that, with all the NSA news, I'm not particularly keen on Apple reading my fingerprint all the time. Supposedly, applications don't have access to it and it's not stored in the cloud, but I have little to no trust for companies.

The biggest news for me is the fact that the iPhone 5S has a new chip - the A7 - which has the honour of being the first 64bit chip inside a smartphone. iOS7 and first party Apple applications are all 64bit, and Xcode obviously supports it. While this obviously future-proofs the platform for more RAM, I wonder what other motives are involved here. ARM desktops and laptops, perhaps?

I doubt 64bit will provide much benefit today, but you have to hand it to Apple: at least they're done with the transition before it's even needed.

Thread beginning with comment 571792
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: so so
by cfgr on Wed 11th Sep 2013 09:16 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: so so"
cfgr
Member since:
2009-07-18

RAM is hardly the most power intensive component and it may save a lot of CPU cycles because there's less need for swapping, so in fact, depending on your usage you may end up with a better battery life.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: so so
by p13. on Wed 11th Sep 2013 10:37 in reply to "RE[5]: so so"
p13. Member since:
2005-07-10

RAM is hardly the most power intensive component and it may save a lot of CPU cycles because there's less need for swapping, so in fact, depending on your usage you may end up with a better battery life.


Actually ... ram is quite power intensive. It needs to be refreshed at each cycle. Granted, it's not going to measure up against the CPU,GPU and backlight enough to matter, but i wouldn't dismiss it. It uses about as much as the radio in some cases.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[7]: so so
by Lennie on Wed 11th Sep 2013 12:33 in reply to "RE[6]: so so"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Years ago it was true that RAM used as much power as the CPU in a server. I don't know if that still applies, but it should give you an idea of how power hungry RAM is.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: so so
by cfgr on Wed 11th Sep 2013 19:29 in reply to "RE[6]: so so"
cfgr Member since:
2009-07-18

Yeah, but relatively speaking it wouldn't make much of a difference. For a regular user, RAM uses about 4% of the total power compared to CPU (14%), GPU (14%) and GSM (44%) [1]. So if doubling the RAM can reduce CPU/GPU usage by 1/7th then that would be an improvement for battery life.

[1] http://www.nicta.com.au/pub?doc=3587

See http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12906083/correlation-between-mem... where someone made a much better and more complete post.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: so so
by tylerdurden on Thu 12th Sep 2013 03:27 in reply to "RE[5]: so so"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Not quite, Just because it's not the dominant power consumption component, it's still relevant to conserve as much power as possible or to have a low as possible power budget for the design, which is crucial for battery constrained devices like cell phones.

The larger the number of ram cells, at the same feature size, the larger the power dissipation. And that's assuming a design with the same number of RAM chips. If the memory is doubled by using 2x the number of memory chips things get worse,especially given the possibility of having to precharge and turn on and off (as quickly as possible) the data/address traces/lines in parallel.

Reply Parent Score: 2