Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Hardware, Apple, iPhone
Rumor: iPhone may get x86 processor, and pigs might fly
But no, apparently they weren't: Apple Insider has jumped on the x86Phone bandwagon as well (granted, they originally jumped in December of last year). It took Apple about ten years to decide to switch its computer line to Intel chips, but if you're willing to believe the reasoning on this one (and personally, I'm not), it's only going to take a tenth of that to decide that the iPhone needs an x86 chip, too.
[Via Techmeme]
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
cmc said 6:14PM on 3-12-2008
Erm...there is no time limit on switching processors. They will switch when Intel give them a good processor at the right price.
Reply
nylock10 said 6:20PM on 3-12-2008
Uhh, I thought iPhones ran on Intel processors?
If not, what the hell do they run on anyway?
Reply
mark said 12:00PM on 3-13-2008
And I thought the world was flat. Time to come out of the cave and LEARN things and stop assuming.
Scott Reynolds said 5:44PM on 3-13-2008
Intel does make a number of ARM variants, but as far as I can tell not the one in the iPhone.
Also, nobody seems to have noticed the title on the slide:
MID Market Segment Opportunities
It's just an opportunity, and in no way implies a commitment from Apple -- only that they haven't said "no" yet.
Dan said 6:35PM on 3-12-2008
ARM
Reply
austin said 6:35PM on 3-12-2008
the iphone is way into the future on that graphic. beyond navigation and game systems. i think they are just saying it will be used in smartphones and they chose the iphone for the picture of a smartphone
Reply
David said 6:45PM on 3-12-2008
Isn't that consistent with Intel devleoping more chipsets with integrated wireless, maybe 3G? I'd bet that they've at least thought of having the addition of 3G and the upgrading of the processor coincide.
Reply
dizilbdog said 6:49PM on 3-12-2008
Those chips have wimax imbedded in them. I don't know if apple would allow that, unless there is a ATT iphone and a Wimax chip phone
Reply
James said 10:31AM on 3-13-2008
That wasnt the original picture btw!!
I dont remember where I saw the original picture but someone wanted to play tricks and cropped an iphone picture there.
Who knows maybe the iphone will get intel chips one day but I'm wondering if the 2nd or 3r generation iPhones will keep the same design concept or it'd be bulkier since I'm trying to picture a 3g iphone and I'm guessing the design will have to change dramatically to fit 3g on it.
Reply
Håkan said 2:52AM on 3-13-2008
Is it really that bulky? I know of 3G phones which are much smaller than the iPhone, and they're about 3 years old. Of course, the iPhone also contains Wifi and stuff, but I still don't think it would be that bad.
Codey H. said 7:24PM on 3-12-2008
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3254&p=1
Not to link elsewhere, but I think the Intel Atom technology is what's being referred to here.
Reply
Liam said 7:30PM on 3-12-2008
I don't think this is going to happen. It'd take too much of a hit on battery life, really. Intel aren't designing or marketing these chips for phones yet, let's not get ahead of ourselves.
I think this is an area they are inevitably going to encroach on, though.
Reply
Edsel said 7:48PM on 3-12-2008
My Apple sources tell me it will be an 8086 processor for Apple's forthcoming line of iRetro computing devices.
Reply
defor said 8:14PM on 3-12-2008
Somehow i see this as unlikely, and more just a usage of clipart; another example would be the existance of the n800 nokia internet tablet in the middle of the graphic, clearly not a device using an intel cpu.
Reply
PrimeOne said 9:09PM on 3-12-2008
How is this so hard to believe? The Intel display demo of the Moorestown platform for the Atom (A.K.A. Silverthorne) line of chips would be the perfect beast for such an x86iPhone. The Moorestown Platform for pete sake looks like an elongated iPhone anyway. The Atom (Silverthorne) chip can be 1.2 to 1.7 GHz on par with the Pentium M chips. They are also dual core with the graphics and on board memory on the proc while at most using 1.5 to 2 watts of power! This chip under clocked with apples power management system would easily make battery life extremely lengthy while providing a sleeping beast of a platform for who knows what of a multitude of applications.
The easy move over to such a platform would easily allow future development and easy updating. The move away from the arm platform would also make a unified code base that Apple could easily start pushing as an x86 embedded version that would just be minor tweaks for a system that is so widely already known.
Reply
mmendoza27 said 1:14AM on 3-13-2008
That's what's weird. We are talking 1.7 Ghz (and performance compared to Pentium M) with 1.5 - 2 Watts usage. The iPhone runs at 412 Mhz (which it's underclocked) and uses 185 mW.
That means the Atom processor uses 2000 mW, so that's a bit of a difference. You'd have to majorly underclock the Atom processor to about 200 Mhz in order to get the same watt usage.
Is it practical to do that? Not really. I think there is a possibility that eventually the Atom processor (when it hits the 32nm fabrication) will hit the iPhone. But with the release of an SDK for the ARM iPhone, I think ARM is here to stay for a while. Even though Atom may be a beast!
Singulariter said 12:05AM on 3-13-2008
http://www.intel.com/technology/atom/index.htm
Reply
potato said 12:04AM on 3-13-2008
PrimeOne: This is hard to believe because 1.5 to 2W of power is *a lot* for a cell phone, even by iPhone/Blackberry/Treo standards. Seriously. Keep in mind that you can TALK on the iPhone (the heaviest power use level) and *charge* at the same time via USB, which only provides a paltry 2.5W max.
A cell phone processor (like the ARM that the iPhone runs) needs to run in the milliwatt range to be feasible. The Intel Atom is more targeted towards things like mid-sized tablets and ultraportable (an Eee PC on crack?).
There's really no advantage for Apple to switch to Intel on the iPhone at this point. The original switch was because:
A - IBM couldn't provide a faster PowerPC chip quickly enough, with low enough power requirements.
B - Compatibility with the rest of the PC world.
The iPhone faces neither of these problems. ARM processors are robust and face no major speed/heat/power issues, and there's no such thing as running Windows on your iPhone! :)
Reply
Kevin said 2:21AM on 3-13-2008
What a terrible post... This is the 3rd TUAW post in recent times that comes off as uninformed and uneducated. I prefer it when the knowledge source knows more than me about the topic at hand, not vice versa... sigh...
Reply
dmc said 3:37AM on 3-13-2008
Notice how the iPhone is the only image that's got a white border? It had to have been added on there
Reply