Apple iPhone 11 Chipset Being Made By Intel

[TurbulentWinds]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/apple-iphone-11-chipset-being-made-by-intel-report/ar-BBF6mGg?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartanntp

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/the-next-iphone-x-might-finally-do-something-no-iphone-has-ever-done-before/ar-BBFowTm?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartanntp

Quote

Apple’s ongoing troubles with Qualcomm seem to have made it switch to Intel for its upcoming smartphones. Fast Company reported Friday that the company is working with Intel on a new 5G chipset for the upcoming iPhone.

This is interesting to say the least. I figured that Apple would make some sort of move over the whole Qualcomm business but I didn't expect anything this decisive. I am not familiar with how Intel has done in the handheld market, but from the fact that I have never even heard of a smartphone using Intel parts, besides the Atoms, Intel seems to be outclassed by Qualcomm in terms of experience. I am not sure though, so correct me if I'm wrong. This could go either way in terms of being good or bad for the consumer, though I do like to see a "risker" Apple.

[Bouzoo]

3 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

but from the fact that I have never even heard of an Intel based smartphone, I figure they are new to the game. 

They had Atoms for years, but it didn't turn out well. They pulled out of the smartphone market last year. They even passed on making chips for 1st gen iPhone in 2007. Best read this.

[Guest]

I remember a Lenovo phone being Atom powered. Don't know how good or bad it was though.

[TurbulentWinds]

1 minute ago, Bouzoo said:

They had Atoms for years, but it didn't turn out well. They pulled out of the smartphone market last year. They even passed on making chips for 1st gen iPhone in 2007. Best read this.

Oh dang, I didn't know that Atoms were meant to target the smartphone market. I have only seen them in cheapo laptops, netbooks, and SOCs.

[sazrocks]

Intel is not making the cpu for the iPhone, but the wireless chip. The cpu will still be designed in-house.

[TurbulentWinds]

Just now, sazrocks said:

Intel is not making the cpu for the iPhone, but the wireless chip. The cpu will still be designed in-house.

I understand, however, the wireless capabilities of a device are very important to the UX of the average consumer on a smartphone device. It will be interesting to see if this partnership will go father in future years.

[Bouzoo]

3 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

Oh dang, I didn't know that Atoms were meant to target the smartphone market. I have only seen them in cheapo laptops, netbooks, and SOCs.

They were used in everything that needed low voltage.

 

[aakopa]

Intel has made modems for iPhones for few generations at least right? 

[sazrocks]

26 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

I understand, however, the wireless capabilities of a device are very important to the UX of the average consumer on a smartphone device. It will be interesting to see if this partnership will go father in future years.

Sure, I don't disagree with you there; I was more referring to you inferring that this is an "Intel based smartphone" and how that is not true, along with responding to others in this thread that were relating this to atom, to which it is not related.

[bobhays]

26 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

They were used in everything that needed low voltage.

 

*low power

 

Not a big deal but a common misconception that voltage = power.

[Bouzoo]

5 minutes ago, bobhays said:

*low power

 

Not a big deal but a common misconception that voltage = power.

Well their official term is ULV, hence why I call it voltage by default. You'd have to be mental to think those 2 are equal.

[Dietrichw]

38 minutes ago, aakopa said:

Intel has made modems for iPhones for few generations at least right? 

Yes, iPhone 7s sold through AT&T have Intel modems, the rest had Qualcomm modems

[bobhays]

7 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

Well their official term is ULV, hence why I call it voltage by default. You'd have to be mental to think those 2 are equal.

Ahh I see, I often see people mix them up so I was just making sure

[TurbulentWinds]

18 minutes ago, sazrocks said:

Sure, I don't disagree with you there; I was more referring to you inferring that this is an "Intel based smartphone" and how that is not true, along with responding to others in this thread that were relating this to atom, to which it is not related.

Ok, I'll update the OP. I didn't know I was unclear.

[NumLock21]

4 hours ago, TurbulentWinds said:

Oh dang, I didn't know that Atoms were meant to target the smartphone market. I have only seen them in cheapo laptops, netbooks, and SOCs.

I don't think it was meant to target the smartphone market. It was their only cpu that has the lowest TDP, so they just grab whatever they have. Asus ZenFone 2 ran on Intel Atoms. The top end sku, had a quad core at 2.33GHz, with 4GB DDR3L, 64GB of nand storage, and Android 5.0. I'm sure it should it has not problems running Windows 10, and If this Intel Atom can run Android OS, I don't see why laptops with the same CPU can't run Android OS.

 

https://ark.intel.com/products/81195/Intel-Atom-Processor-Z3580-2M-Cache-up-to-2_33-GHz

[Trixanity]

4 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

I don't think it was meant to target the smartphone market. It was their only cpu that has the lowest TDP, so they just grab whatever they have. Asus ZenFone 2 ran on Intel Atoms. The top end sku, had a quad core at 2.33GHz, with 4GB DDR3L, 64GB of nand storage, and Android 5.0. I'm sure it should it has not problems running Windows 10, and If this Intel Atom can run Android OS, I don't see why laptops with the same CPU can't run Android OS.

 

https://ark.intel.com/products/81195/Intel-Atom-Processor-Z3580-2M-Cache-up-to-2_33-GHz

Atom had multiple SKUs under multiple codenames; different needs for different use cases. One targeted smartphones exclusively. That was killed years ago though. Atom in general is dead in the water. They've got a refresh coming up but nothing new on the roadmap and have axed product lines containing Atom left and right; the latest being upcoming Xeon Phi.

 

 

Don't know why we're even discussing Atom. The OP was a bit misleading, sure, but we all know Apple makes their own. They have no modem tech so they obviously have to contract out and they have done so to Qualcomm for many years but have also dual sourced it for a while means both Qualcomm and Intel. Intel isn't a new partner. What's new is that Apple considers Qualcomm to be vultures and want to ditch them completely. That means they probably expect to use Intel exclusively. However we don't know if Intel have enough supply.

[Matu20]

I don't like seeing big companies getting richer and richer, I'd want Apple to go with the underdog for once.

[FratStar]

2 minutes ago, Matu20 said:

I don't like seeing big companies getting richer and richer, I'd want Apple to go with the underdog for once.

Which in this market it is Intel.

[Coaxialgamer]

Intel isn't making anything. TSMC is. Intel is simply licensing the modem they designed to apple. It's just IP. 

[Trixanity]

44 minutes ago, Coaxialgamer said:

Intel isn't making anything. TSMC is. Intel is simply licensing the modem they designed to apple. It's just IP. 

No, Intel makes the modem and Apple puts it on the PCB. It would be better to integrate it but so far it has always been discrete. Neither Qualcomm or Intel wants to license their tech.

 

Example:

[Coaxialgamer]

3 hours ago, Trixanity said:

No, Intel makes the modem and Apple puts it on the PCB. It would be better to integrate it but so far it has always been discrete. Neither Qualcomm or Intel wants to license their tech.

 

Example:

 

Looked it up. Seems you're right, both chips are separate. Was mislead into thinking it was IP because most SoC's have it integrated. But i guess it makes sense if apple is dual sourcing. 

[Commodus]

Not surprising.  It's generally not a wise idea to depend on the cellular chipsets from the antitrust-happy company suing you because you won't pay outlandish royalties on every phone.  Not that far-removed from Apple's decisions to diversify some of its part supply away from Samsung... don't make yourself completely beholden to a company with a vested interest in hurting you.

 

I don't think this will necessarily be a problem, although I just hope that Intel is improving its technology so that people don't feel like Apple is 'settling' for less than the best just to get away from Qualcomm.

[Sniperfox47]

37 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Not surprising.  It's generally not a wise idea to depend on the cellular chipsets from the antitrust-happy company suing you because you won't pay outlandish royalties on every phone.  Not that far-removed from Apple's decisions to diversify some of its part supply away from Samsung... don't make yourself completely beholden to a company with a vested interest in hurting you.

 

I don't think this will necessarily be a problem, although I just hope that Intel is improving its technology so that people don't feel like Apple is 'settling' for less than the best just to get away from Qualcomm.

To be fair to Qualcomm, Apple agreed to pay them... and then illegally stopped paying them... If you agree to pay $3000 a month to rent a cardboard box, and then one month just stop paying it, you're in violation of contract and will likely get sued... Your landlord may be an abusive jackass, but you still agreed to pay him.

[Commodus]

2 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

To be fair to Qualcomm, Apple agreed to pay them... and then illegally stopped paying them... If you agree to pay $3000 a month to rent a cardboard box, and then one month just stop paying it, you're in violation of contract and will likely get sued... Your landlord may be an abusive jackass, but you still agreed to pay him.

I wonder whether or not Apple could have disputed Qualcomm's royalty rate as effectively if it kept paying, mind you.  Want to drag a company into court very quickly?  Stop paying its royalties, it'll respond very quickly!

[Trixanity]

2 hours ago, Coaxialgamer said:

Looked it up. Seems you're right, both chips are separate. Was mislead into thinking it was IP because most SoC's have it integrated. But i guess it makes sense if apple is dual sourcing. 

Yeah, you'd think it was integrated but I don't think it would work with Apple's design and production. They have both dual sourced modems and fabs. It would be a mess to integrate a bunch of dual sourced components that are designed by others onto the same die on different fabs.

Maybe if they go exclusively with Intel and Intel is willing to play ball both financially and in design, they could end up getting it integrated but we're moving into a sort of semi-custom territory then. Intel currently designs their modems around their own fabs so it'd be a new ball game for them.