Computing

What's Inside the iPad's Chip?

(Page 2 of 2)

  • Tuesday, February 2, 2010
  • By Christopher Mims

Representatives of Imagination refused to discuss whether or not the A4 SoC uses an Imagination core. But Apple owns just under 10 percent of the company and all iPhone and iPhone touch models use Imagination's PowerVR MBC family of graphics cores. Imagination also recently confirmed that the iPhone 3GS uses the upgraded PowerVR SGX design. If the iPad continues this trend, it could take advantage of features of the Imagination graphics core that are uniquely well-suited to driving a screen as large as the one on the iPad.

For instance, Imagination uses so-called "tile-based deferred rendering," which helps drive a faster user interface. "You split a screen into little tile zones," says Kristof Beets, manager of business development for graphics at Imagination. This allows a chip's graphics cores to compute individual tiles of the screen--say, 32 by 32 pixels on an 800 by 480 screen, with data stored in on-chip caches. By avoiding the step where a full-screen renderer has to access RAM, the chip can render a screen full of images much faster.

A second feature of Imagination's technology that may be relevant is "deferred rendering." Normally, a 3-D algorithm will compute the location data of a given object after computing its shape and the lighting effects applied to it. This means that where pixels on a screen correspond to objects that are blocked by other objects, some of that computation is wasted. The same is true for objects in windows layered one on top of the other in a desktop environment. Imagination's chips, in contrast, compute the location data first, minimizing the number of computations that must be made and allowing for lower power consumption.

In April 2008, Apple acquired P.A. Semi, a chip manufacturer that specialized in power-efficient processors that use the PowerPC architecture--the same architecture used by Apple in its computers until it switched over to Intel CPUs in 2006.

"Some of [P.A. Semi's] engineers had ARM experience, and, of course, their chip-design knowledge would be transferrable to any CPU architecture," says Halfhill. "A highly integrated SoC like the Apple A4 would take at least 12 to 18 months to design, debug, and manufacture, however, making it unlikely that P.A. Semi engineers designed it from scratch."

In Halfhill's view, this makes it even more likely that the A4 chip is made primarily of designs that closely match existing ARM cores. "Apple would have had to move awfully fast to design its own ARM-compatible core and the A4 SoC in so short a time," he says. "That's why I think the A4 is built on existing cores from ARM."

Halfhill suggests that P.A. Semi engineers may have been brought on board for some project other than the A4 chip. "I wouldn't be surprised if many or most of the P.A. Semi engineers were assigned to another project--such as a future Apple A5 chip," he says.

Print

Related Articles

Eliminating the Laptop Charging Brick

A Google-backed startup says gallium nitride could make power electronics more efficient.

Dazzling Dual-Core Phones and Tablets

New processors are a big improvement, but it will take time for apps to take advantage.

Androids Will Challenge the iPad

Tablets powered by Google's mobile operating system are set to debut.

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

jbuberel

2 Comments

  • 732 Days Ago
  • 02/02/2010

PA Semi was a designer, not mfr

If I recall correctly, PA Semi was not really much of a manufacturer as they were a design shop. In fact, they were fabless up until the time they were acquired by Apple.

Reply

Gaetano Marano

246 Comments

  • 728 Days Ago
  • 02/06/2010

>>> but potential users want standard processor and OS >>>

.

but the large majority of potential users of iPad and TabletPCs that answered to my poll [ http://alt-pad.blogspot.com/ ] want standard processors with largely used operating systems and (most important) nearly ALL them want a MULTITASKING tablet

.

Reply

Mapou

353 Comments

  • 731 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2010

iPad's Graphics Library

Nice article. I have one comment.

Since "almost all" existing iPhone applications will run on the iPad, it's more likely that Apple is continuing to use upgraded versions of the same graphics cores present in the iPhone and iPhone 3GS, which were created from designs licensed by Imagination Technologies, based in the U.K.

This is probably but not necessarily true. The iPad could have a substantially different graphics hardware than the iPhone as long as Apple's software engineers were able to rewrite the graphics library with an identical code interface as the one used in the iPhone.

Reply

Mapou

353 Comments

  • 731 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2010

Agnilux

One more thing. It's worth noting that several of PA Semi engineers that had moved to Apple after the acquisition (e.g., Mark Hayter, Olof Johansson, Todd Broch), have since left Apple to form a highly secretive San Jose startup called Agnilux. Hopefully, TR will be on the lookout for any info that may come out of this mysterious outfit and inform the rest of us of their findings.

Reply

jragosta

2 Comments

  • 731 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2010

Cost?

I think the cost issue is also a red herring. It's almost always cheaper to buy an off-the-shelf component than to design your own and have it made. There's no reason to believe that's any different in this case.

I suspect that the energy savings issue is the key - or some other technical benefit to using their own chip design, not cost.

Reply

bozo777

2 Comments

  • 731 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2010

Re: Cost?

Cost can and is probably one important reason Apple is doing its own chips. If you have the design capabilities and the scale (volume), manufacturing your own designs is very likely to substantially reduce the unit cost of the chips.

Reply

rkomatsu

52 Comments

  • 731 Days Ago
  • 02/03/2010

A4 name as evidence

Another "evidence" for an Arm based processor: the name A4 may stand for Apple Advanced Arm Architecture.

Reply

Advertisement

bozo777

2 Comments

  • 725 Days Ago
  • 02/09/2010

Re: A4 name as evidence

Not correct. It´s A4 because it comes after A3, which is the one used in the latest iPod Touch.

Reply

rkomatsu

52 Comments

  • 717 Days Ago
  • 02/17/2010

Re: A4 name as evidence

Thanks for the info. That was my first guess, then I googled for A3 processor and nothing came, so I thought I was wrong. Can you provide a link?

Reply

lokolang2000

1 Comment

  • 730 Days Ago
  • 02/04/2010

Another Scenario

Hello!

I actually don't know the inner workings of mergers and acquisitions in the IT industry.

This article paint a compelling case. If you do the math the PA Semi guys couldn't have designed the A4 chip given that Apple only acquired PA Semi in August 2008.

Since most mergers and acquisitions take between a couple of months to years to fulfill regulatory requirements. I would presume that they would already had something binding which allowed them to work prior to the announcement of August 2008.

My two cents worth.

Reply

Advertisement

MAGAZINE

Can We Build Tomorrow's Breakthroughs?

Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.

Sponsored Content

Technologies from National Instruments

Taking a Measurement
Learn how to use your PC to take measurements

> Click here for more National Instruments Videos <
Whitepaper

BUILD VERSUS BUY
Understanding the Total Cost of Embedded Design

National Instruments has gathered customer information and data regarding some of the cost differences between building a custom solution versus using NI off-the-shelf tools. Using this data, we built the Graphical System Design ‘Build vs. Buy’ Calculator. The calculator can help show the financial differences between building a custom solution versus buying an off-the-shelf system. This paper discusses the benefits and drawbacks of both a traditional custom design approach and off-the-shelf embedded tools.

View full PDF > Listen to story >
Find us on Youtube

Videos

Windows on an iPad

More

Advertisement

Technology Review Lists

TR50

Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:

Lyric Semiconductor

IBM

1366 Technologies

Toyota

More

Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement