Apple A14 - 5 nm, 11.8 billion transistors

[Eug]

A14 - First announced for iPad Air.

 

[Roland00Address]

So I missed the event, and have not had time to backtrack and watch the original thing or a summary.

Thus I ask, did Apple release any useful numbers?

 

[Eug]

So I missed the event, and have not had time to backtrack and watch the original thing or a summary.

Thus I ask, did Apple release any useful numbers?

No, but my gut feeling is M1 is roughly A14X/Z with tweaks.

4 high perf + 4 low perf CPU cores, plus 8 core GPU, although there is a 7 core GPU bin as well

Mac mini: M1 with 8-core GPU, fan
MacBook Pro: M1 with 8-core GPU, fan
MacBook Air: M1 with 7 or 8-core GPU, fanless

So basically, the MacBook Air is roughly the same machine as the Pro, but without the fan.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I think the difference between the MBP and MBA being essentially a fan make sense if we assume this is the A14X. The A12Z in the iPad Pro apparently runs right around 9-10w in sustained load, which is precisely the sustained thermal budget for the MBA. But as we all know that's because the iPad throttles, and all the cores engaged at once must be closer to 16-18w. We'll have to wait for benchmarks but it's probable that the MBP can maintain those peak speeds.

EDIT: If this is accurate, incidentally, it may have ramifications for battery life on each device. The trade-off on the MBA may be that it's much, much faster under load than the Intel variant (which throttles horribly) but actually may not have improved battery life while under load (light usage should be significantly increased, due to the efficiency cores). On the MBP, on the other hand, it's very possible that peak power draw may still fall under the 28w TDP of the Ice Lake chips, meaning battery life under load should improve as well?

 

[Doug S]

So I missed the event, and have not had time to backtrack and watch the original thing or a summary.

Thus I ask, did Apple release any useful numbers?

Unfortunately no real numbers, as with any event Apple targets at consumers. The product pages for the new Macs don't even show clock rates.

We'll have to wait until they ship next week and Anandtech et al can run benchmarks on them. Even if Apple had released numbers people would be complaining they didn't release the right numbers.

I'd be very interested to see them run SPEC, then have Rosetta 2 translate x86 compiled SPEC and run that and compare the results. The differences between the various subtests would tell us a lot about how well Rosetta 2 works in the real world.

 

[name99]

So I missed the event, and have not had time to backtrack and watch the original thing or a summary.

Thus I ask, did Apple release any useful numbers?

Apple didn't. AnandTech did. Go read their article as a floor to what to expect.

 

[IntelUser2000]

The A12Z in the iPad Pro apparently runs right around 9-10w in sustained load, which is precisely the sustained thermal budget for the MBA. But as we all know that's because the iPad throttles, and all the cores engaged at once must be closer to 16-18w.

How did you get those numbers? If its the system power consumption the SoC is going to be lower.

25W Intel/AMD systems get load power consumption of 45W in the ultrabook form factor. The non-CPU part takes a significant portion in both light and heavy load.

 

[insertcarehere]

How did you get those numbers? If its the system power consumption the SoC is going to be lower.

25W Intel/AMD systems get load power consumption of 45W in the ultrabook form factor. The non-CPU part takes a significant portion in both light and heavy load.

Notebookcheck pegs the (entire) iPad pro averaging ~11-12w under load fwiw.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

How did you get those numbers? If its the system power consumption the SoC is going to be lower.

25W Intel/AMD systems get load power consumption of 45W in the ultrabook form factor. The non-CPU part takes a significant portion in both light and heavy load.

@insertcarehere is correct, and I goofed. That 9-10w was, as you suggested, the total power draw of the iPad Pro while playing an intensive game per the Anandtech review.

In terms of the M1 MBA, then, I suppose how aggressively and how soon it has to throttle the chip to keep at 10w sustained probably depends quite a lot on the impact of the frequency increase over the A14.

 

[beginner99]

for example, if a Mac runs all the applications you need twice as fast with longer battery life compared to other computers in the same price range, why would you opt for something else?

Because I hate closed platforms that limit your software options.

 

[mikegg]

That’s just it. iPhone SoCs are already fast enough to do the work needed by 90% of families. I know this because my wife has an iPad 7 with its ancient A10 SoC from 2016, matched to an Apple Smart Keyboard effectively transforming it into a laptop. Performance of A10 isn’t exactly fast, but it’s fast enough for most usage, and A14 will be literally 3X as fast. Furthermore, A10 is roughly as fast as my Core m3-7Y32 MacBook. I don’t plan updating it anytime soon for performance reasons. My main reason to upgrade would be for stuff like dual USB-C ports.

That’s why I’ve been saying for so long now that A14 non-X would be perfect for a fanless 12” MacBook.

Apple actually already has applied for patents for such a dock, which docks the iPhone into a laptop, and turns it into a trackpad. I don’t think we’ll see it, but it would be perfect for many students for example if Apple could make it work slickly and for a decent price.

There's probably a reason why they never made it.

The Magic Keyboard for the iPad is already $300. Add in a screen, better speakers, battery to power the screen (since phone batteries are too small), and you're looking at a $600++ add-on. At this point, you're pretty close to a Macbook Air which does not require docking an iPhone.

This is my point. When you make a good dock for an iPhone, you're pretty darn close to the cost of a laptop.

 

[Richie Rich]

No, it is clear they used a 4 year cycle from A7 to A10. That doesn't imply that A11-A14 does the same. C'mon, does anyone really claim to extrapolate patterns based on a sample size of 1???

You could just as well have predicted A8 would be a 128 bit core, since they had gone from 32 to 64 bits after only one year of designing custom cores, so A8 would be 128 bit, A9 256 bit, and so forth

No offense, but you have no clue what you talking about here. Jim Keller said that CPU uarch need ground up design every 4 years and if possible every 2 years. Where did he get that? Wasn't he working at Apple's CPU design team? Yes, he was.

Another confirmation of A15 being BIG uarch change is Nuvia Phoenix's performance. The lowest range for Phoenix for 4.5W is 1900 pts at 3 GHz which is +20% above A14. That's huge jump after only 5% uplift of A14. And remember A11 Monsoon as first 6xALU core was +19% IPC uplift in GB5. G. Williams designed A15 before he left in 2018 (A15 design started in 2017 or maybe together with A14 in 2016). Nuvia Phoenix is probably very similar to A15, his last child in Apple.

 

[MarkizSchnitzel]

Seriously dude?
In the same comment that you accuse someone else of acting in bad faith, you're going to claim that Apple are DELIBERATELY (for god knows what reason) creating iPhones that are not what most people want?
OK, then.

I did not say that. Apple as a trendsetter certainly has a huge impact on what people want though. And people seem to change their mind and claim that what is provided is what they want, even though until recently they claimed otherwise.
Like, rounded backs, until few weeks ago, they were great, because it makes the phone seem slimmer and more comfortable to grab, more natural feel, blah blah. Now, blocky design is more comfortable.

My issue with apple is that they deliberately postpone updates simply because they can. And this is alright, it's the position they have earned with their success. Still sucks though.

Check Anandtech's battery life benchmarks - the iPhone 11 beats pretty much all Samsung phones despite having a smaller battery. So tell me again why you think Apple should make EVERYONE'S phone 10% heavier just to serve YOUR needs.

I'm not saying they SHOULD. I WISH they did. I wish everybody did.

That being said, I am surprised that with all this vertical integration they are so proud of, they are unable to cram bigger batteries in the same body.
How is it possible that Samsung is able to engineer a phone that is smaller, with a bigger screen, lighter AND with bigger battery? Yes, battery life is even worse there, but this is too be expected, because of inherent inefficiencies of android/hardware.
The reason surely is that they are holding back because.. They can. They keep this ace in the sleeve.

It's the opposite with SOCs. They had a great run these past few years.

 

[Thala]

For your first statement (area) i was asking for a source - like a die analysis.

The second statement regarding power is wrong, because you assume the same activity - which is ridiculous. For starters, if a gate is not switching, there will be no switching capacity to charge.