Apple's bought itself a chip company, P.A. Semi, that could make chips for future iPods and iPhones. The company was founded by Dan Dobberpuhl, lead designer of Alpha chips, who last year announced a 64-bit dual core processor that is said to be about 300% more efficient than the nearest competition, using only 5 to 13 watts at 2GHz.
Products using the chips won't arrive for a year, at least, but we can assume that Apple wouldn't spend $278 million without some plans to use 'em soon as it made sense, and I'm sure Intel and ARM aren't stoked. The negotiations, which finished recently, took place in The Steve's home. Owning its own chip design is an interesting move. While the iPhone's had a lot of off the shelf componentry, it makes sense that working on its own internal hardware could yield better devices. Or a PowerPC repeat..which is the architecture I believe that the above processor is built on.
More research on that chip shows how it achieves such power efficiency. From Ars: "For instance, the chip sports over 25,000 clock gates so that clock pulses to different regions of the processor can be shut off dynamically to save power...All of the PA6T's major on-die components have their own separate clock and voltage domains, so that the L1, L2, DRAM controller, I/O subsystem, and each of the two cores can all be placed in different low-power states independently of one another."
Of course, the chips in portable such as an iPhone and iPod (as Forbes speculates) wouldn't be running so fast as the chip above. While it's unlikely they'd use that dual core 64 chip in Macs, given the Intel switch was so recent, it's my guess that P.A. Semi has a unannounced mobile chip that Jobs lusts after. Stands to reason, although Owen at Valleywag believes that the lack of economic scale for Semi makes it more likely that the buy is for IP to be implemented by others, as a bargaining chip. Regardless of tactics, the unnamed chip would have to be very efficient to best other offerings.
Intel's mobile platform, Atom, by comparison, can do 0.8 watts of usage at 800MHz, and VIA has a 0.1 watt solution that runs at 500MHz. ARM, designer of the current iPhone chip, is boasting that they can do a 0.25 watt A9 chip with multicores at 1GHz.
Historically, P.A. Semi was trying to be the chip provider for Macs around the time they chose to go for Intel, and it is reported that Dobberpuhl was furious when they went x86, thinking the Intel talks were just a bargaining chip. Some think that P.A. Semi lost its chance to be a brand name like AMD or Intel, but clearly, being under the brand name of Apple isn't half bad. [Forbes, Ars, Reg, VW]











Comments
I thought potato chips XD!!! They would make a chip that is revolutionary. It would be in aluminum and would be as good as a lays original potato chip O.o.
There's something eerie and unwholesome about this post. BLAM, you frighten me.
Anyway, I hope this turns into classics that actually make full use of the graphics of the interface.
And you just know he paid in cash for that company. Straight out of his stash in his underwear drawer.
@skittlzncombos: I prefer mattress. With the disarray I keep my undie drawers in, money is not a good thing to keep in there.
Apple has money coming out the wazoo. It's ridiculous, they have billions in surplus. They should pull a Stanford and start making a bunch of useless shit. They could launch a fleet of satellites!
Boy, imagine Apple going back to chips that basically no other home system used, then we'd be right back to the old and now tired joke of that G5 Powerbook that Apple's been working on for the passed 3 years, and the Powermac that finally hits over 3GHz.
Digg please?
Digg please?
@Kaiser-Machead:
Form P.A. Semi website:
"P.A. Semi is a fabless semiconductor company delivering the world-class PWRficientâ„¢ processors for the multibillion-dollar high-performance embedded-computing markets."
So there you go, the keyword is embedded-computing--IE handheld devices, battery operated, specialized computing appliances.
(Not saying that the same technology can be applied to Desktop use, but very unlikely)
Apple could have the technology for lightsabers given to them by Mace Windu himself and they'd mess that up even worse than they messed up the iPhone.
Apple sucks, they'll be bankrupt in 3 years, 4 if someone, anyone, anywhere buys an iMac, what a piece of junk.
Awesome, 64-bit Macbooks with better battery life.
Or, dare I say, Mac Tablet?
@ILikeMacsWhatAboutIT: I hear overused sarcasm can sometimes influence/convince the person that wields it.
Diversification with in the field. I bet Apple will sell components to others, as well as licence technology. That way, when their competitors win, they also win.
@ILikeMacsWhatAboutIT: I can never tell if you are being sarcastic or really believe what you write. I've been reading it as sarcasm.
*watches his company stock go green ... again*
...and Dugg...
@Kaiser-Machead: Water-cooled iPhones! Boom!
Could this be the start of vertical integration for Apple for personal media devices?
@DeadWriter: I think he really intends to confuse us all. He's evaded the Banhammer for over 50 years, much like Grand Fisher.
$278 million? The rumors alone are worth that!
Dan Dobberpuhl is very well known in the processor industry.
@Nintenboy01: Yes, I'm confused when I read his comments.
@Brian Lam: @Brian Lam: its good to see that everyone unintentionally double posts every now and then.
...
@ILikeMacsWhatAboutIT: i strongly doubt that Mace Windu is any good with constructing light sabers. i mean... come on! his turned out PINK!
@danger_the_pirate: I usually can delete my posts but its not working tonight.
Obviously these chips run on either a)the smugness of apple users (fyi i have a mac [better than windows!]) or b) the power of BOOM!
So will Apple Corps sue when Apple makes Apple Cores ?
The question is will Apple Corps. sue when Apple makes Apple Cores?
@Ryanraven: BOOM!
Not a bad move to make.
Also like the poster even if it should have a giant Finnish hand coming down to squash the iPhone flat. :)
@DeadWriter: What?
Any chance in the near future for the iphone to work with Garmin GPS maps and an external bluetooth GPS receiver?
@DeadWriter: Baltimore.
@mumin:
It was purple, fool! Quit with da jibber jabber!
(oh dear..I'm very sorry......it seems viral)
Two strong business reasons to purchase:
1. license tech to provide lower costs from chip suppliers
2. enable exclusivity with chip vendors for unique product advantage when they implement tech owned by Apple
@brutek: It also goes along with Steve Jobs thought process of owning the hardware and the software side of technological devices. He said it at AllThingsD Steve/Bill gates interview and he's said it numerous times before.
nice graphics - shame that the Gawker Media slots ruin the page.
Wait a minute!! Don't you see what he is doing? Apple doesn't want people to notice they went to an expensive chip manufacturer to keep prices high. So they buy the cheap manufacturer and run his company to the ground. Got to keep the high price point.
@Miranda Kali: dark pink
Have we not worn out this image yet?
@mumin:
Lilac. (as pimp'n as lilac could possibly be)
As an embedded developer, I'm already working with the PA6T platform. There's quite a bit of interest for it in the embedded market. I will say that, compared to the PPC970 (G5), this platform has been a breeze to work with.
Interesting buy...
iPods, iPhones, Apple TV????
Simple purpose: PyStar.
Kaiser-Machead got close to this conclusion. Yes, Apple could use these chips but not as the basis for a Mac CPU. They gain too much by being able to run Windows. No, what is missing is something entirely Apple-owned that OSX must have in order to run.
A small, cheap, low power chip that cannot be emulated around is perfect. It can be inserted into iPhones or iMacs with little effort and ensure that Apple continues to own the hardware that OSX runs on.
@shawn_dude: 300 million dollars is a lot to pay for a dongle.
"@shawn_dude: 300 million dollars is a lot to pay for a dongle."
Not when the Mac OS is a good portion of your company's intellectual property. Sure, the iPod is nearly 60% of Apple's revenue, but keep in mind that Apple is a software company. Losing the rights to keep the Mac OS on Apple hardware could cost them billions.
300 million is a shot in the bucket for Apple Inc. anyway.
"No, what is missing is something entirely Apple-owned that OSX must have in order to run."
Maybe, but why do they need to own the company for that?
Start a discussion:
Login with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?