iPhone 6 to feature blazing-fast quad-core A8 processor – report

“Apple was the first smartphone maker to pack a 64-bit processor inside a smartphone with the iPhone 5s, and it looks like the iPhone 6 will kick things up a notch,” Mark Spoonauer reports for LAPTOP. “According to a new report, Apple’s big-screen sequel will have a quad-core CPU under the hood (up from dual core) along with quad core graphics.”

“According to the Commercial Times of Taiwan, Apple is working with chipmaker TSMC, which means the company could be dumping Samsung as its primary supplier,” Spoonauer reports. “It’s no secret that Apple and Samsung’s relationship has been damaged by ongoing copyright court battles, and this could be one way Apple is distancing itself from its main rival.”

“The A7 processor inside the iPhone 5s is already quite fast, beating the Samsung Galaxy S4′s Snapdragon 600 CPU by a wide margin in the Geekbench 3 performance test,” Spoonauer reports. “However, the Snapdragon 801 CPU doesn’t benefit from 64-bit architecture as the A7 does and A8 will. iOS 7 and its apps are built on 64-bit, which supposedly delivers desktop-class performance. 64-bit also paves the way for smartphones with memory capacity that exceeds 4GB. Today the highest-end smartphones have 3GB of RAM. It remains to be seen how much system memory the A8 chip might support.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related article:
Samsung cut out as TSMC starts stamping out Apple A8 chips for 4.7-inch iPhone 6, sources say – March 5, 2014


  1. How long before these “tech journalists” understand that having greater than 4GB of RAM is NOT the only benefit to a 64bit processor?

    As if Apple is hitting the ceiling of RAM for a 32 bit processor. They are not. And it is not the reason why Apple developed the 64 bit Architecture.

    1. A critical function in the 64bit instruction set is the CPU virtual instructions which will allow the OS to support multiple virtual machines to execute applications and even to allow running multiple iOS version of iOS at the same time. I hope iPad-pro will use that functionality with an 8-core CPU to provide advance multi-tasking, Multi-windows(Quad iOS running), and even multi-screen.

      1. Need an education on the line of Apple products? I’m here to help. Ever heard of the MacBook Air? No? You can order one from $999. It’ll do everything you’ve just listed, and more too, for a lower price than an iPad Pro.

        1. Need an education on computers? For the same price, I can get an ASUS or MSI laptop that can severely outperform any macbook and most iMac’s (as they use mobile/laptop grade parts). And if I wanted a desktop, for over £5000 I could Apple’s highest end iMac. But if I had a brain, I’d go for a custom PC with specs better than ANY Macintosh machine that was personalised for my use. Don’t go throwing around false advice to people who don’t know better.

    2. True, However, many of the advantages that Apple has built into its 64-bit chip could’ve been done on a 32-bit. What Apple opted to do, however, is essentially have 32-bit and 64-bit in separate chips on the phone, meaning they could simply no longer need to include backwards compatibility in the 64-bit portion of the chip.

      It was, indeed, an improvement… but there was a distinct marketing choice made as well… and it was a very Apple move to make a clean break from 32-bit architecture.

      1. Yes many of those things could have been done on 32-bit but I think people miss the point and the real reason why the 64bit was absolutely needed for them. It was because of Touch-ID. The chipset that they used which includes hardware accelerated encryption support which they use for Touch-ID ONLY comes in a 64bit variant. Being 64Bit was a by-product of them needing the hardware accelerated encryption that was offered by that chipset….

  2. I note it’s taken about seven years – since the introduction of the iPhone in 2007 – and the copycat devices which followed, with Steve Jobs’s assertion that Android was a stolen product – for Apple to sever ties with Samsung. I’m hoping for someone to publish an article shortly detailing that transition, and analyze why it took so long. It would be enlightening.

    1. The reason is simply that Samsung is able to supply both the quantity and the quality of components that Apple needs. Seven years ago there were no alternative suppliers, but Apple has ensured that there now are some excellent alternatives.

      It takes time for other manufacturers to be able to meet Apple’s requirements, but Apple helps them by investing money, or paying vast sums up front for supplies.

      I have no doubt that Apple wants to stop dealing with Samsung as soon as possible, but Apple won’t risk either component shortages or poor quality components to de-rail it’s plans.

    2. If it were easily done, Apple would have done it four years ago. Apple’s requirements are huge and it’s options few. It will be nice when they can completely sever ties with Samsung.

  3. 64 bit, 20nm, 4 cores, all taking up less space than other 32 bit 4 core devices. Makes room for even more coprocessors, all using less power than before, all the while taking huge profits away from Samsungs bank account and giving it to TSMC(TSM). Nice patient long term plan, Apple.

  4. A series chips will soon be ripe to make way into Macs.

    Macs that are very powerful, super energy efficient, weighs almost nothing, thin as pencil lead and no fans.

  5. Looking at the (possible) spec for the A8, it’ll out-perform my G3 PowerBook by a wide margin.
    Who’d a thunk it, a mobile phone with the processing power and memory of a high-spec laptop or desktop PC.
    So looking forward to my next upgrade come September.

    1. Everybody would have thunk it. Your G3 is an antique.

      However, A-series chips are not outpacing the advances in Intel chips. If you want power, and you have a wall to plug into, then you need a desktop class chipset.

    2. A series in a mac, running what software?
      iOS on a Mac, not likely…
      OS X on A series, possible, but there wouldn’t be any software.

      Ask developers to port (yet again) for a single machine (or single series)? Possible but not too practical; look at the people on here still bemoaning the loss of the PPC interpreter (rosetta) after Snow Leopard. It was painful to get developers to port apps over and that was the ENTIRE LINE moving to Intel.

      Unless there is some way to execute existing OS X apps, I can’t see them putting an A series in a Mac. (as demonstrated by Microsofts half assed surface hybrid No software=No sale)

      1. Oops. on rereading I see you were suggesting (as has been done many times here) that Apple was going to use the A series in a Mac.

        Nevermind… Keep moving… Nothing to see here…

  6. This article get’s it partly right but I think the power of the A7 compared to the competition is understated. Yes it beats the Snapdragon 600 by a mile but it also pretty handily beats the Snapdragon 800 as well. If this is true and they are going quad core, as long as they also increase the clock speed at least a little for single core/single thread operations then this thing will yet again be leagues ahead of what’s out there.

  7. Sigh. 64 bit doesn’t especially help performance, in fact in some ways it can hurt performance by using more cache and memory. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a good move, but it’s tiring to see people say oooh, how fast it is because it is 64bit.

Reader Feedback
