JanSt

Samsung: "Our next phones... 64-bit"

Samsung co-CEO Shin Jong-kyun revealed the news to the Korea Times. When asked whether its next generation smartphones will feature 64-bit processors like the iPhone 5S, he said, "Yes, our next smartphones will have 64-bit processing functionality."




http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2294216/samsung-says-its-next-phones-will-feature-64bit-processors-too



You know the rest.
http://blogs.adobe.com/captivate/files/2012/10/64-bit.jpg

Add a comment
20 comments

Stelph  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:13

To be fair, its not like he announced it in response to Apple, he was asked a question and he answered it, chances are the Samsung have had 64 bit planned long before apple announced it for the 5S

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:14

Absolutely... I already edited my post.

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:19

Nonetheless,
can't wait for the first trolls to "suddenly" realise 64-bit might have merits in phones?
Personally, I do not care much what any of them do - I want a device that works. That does what it claims it does well. Feels good etc etc... If it involves a yellow rubberband and a paperclip, so be it.

Stelph  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:24

Nonetheless,
can't wait for the first trolls to "suddenly" realise 64-bit might have merits in phones?
Personally, I do not care much what any of them do - I want a device that works. That does what it claims it does well. Feels good etc etc... If it involves a yellow rubberband and a paperclip, so be it.


Yup, TBH like the rush for Quadcore and Octocore etc I dont really know if the swich to 64 bit is a benefit yet. Samrtphones are different to Desktops and so something that is good on a desktop (i.e. more cores, 64 bit) might not be as good on a smartphone, I would argue that the rush to more cores for example was blinking stupid as Android didnt for a long time (and arguably still doesnt have) enough video editing/content creation apps that would warranty many cores, it just means the battery lasts even less time

Stelph  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:29

Did read an interesting point that the push to 64 bit, while a little pointless in smartphone (who needs over 3.5GB in a smartphone), might suggest that Apple are planning on producing a OSx version that runs on ARM in the future (they have been testing OSx on ARM)

Maybe eventually Apple will also produce a tablet that runs a desktop OS and when they do it will be "magical", I dont think any other company are puting desktop OS's on tablets are they?...... :p

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:30

The way I see it: I'm sure in the 5S it'll help using core native apps - Apple control every bit (pun) of the design and construction etc etc... If they for whatever reason figure that they can squeeze better performance out of it without a sacrifice of battery life, I'm all for it.
3rd party apps won't be affected either way, until devs go to the trouble of dealing with the new possibilities.
It's like "full multi-tasking" - many apps on whatever platform do not 100% make use of it.
Often it isn't even necessary, but they still lurk in the background without any good purpose.

Many phones are now so fast that you cannot even tell if you started an app fresh or if you maximised a minimised one...

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:33

Did read an interesting point that the push to 64 bit, while a little pointless in smartphone (who needs over 3.5GB in a smartphone), might suggest that Apple are planning on producing a OSx version that runs on ARM in the future (they have been testing OSx on ARM)

Maybe eventually Apple will also produce a tablet that runs a desktop OS and when they do it will be "magical", I dont think any other company are puting desktop OS's on tablets are they?...... :p


I read Kendrick's piece about an ARM Mac.
Some good points but not totally convinving.
But definitely: part of Apple's motivation to serve up 64-bit now, is certainly R&D.
They get 100 million paying guinea pigs.

cowbutt  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:48

Er, so what? Unless the device has >4GB RAM(+swap?) and/or process sizes of >4GB, 64 bit has no use other than willy-waving (* unless using an instruction set that supports 64 bit /also/ includes new instructions and addressing modes unavailable in 32 bit mode - cf. x86_64 vs. i386).

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 12, 2013 at 11:51

I agree... I bet Samsung and Apple didn't know that. :p

barrybarryk  Sep. 12, 2013 at 13:26

64bit ARM chips are backwards compatible (so you don't lose anything in the transition) and the wider registers do help in normal processing, not just in +4GB space adressing, but it requires a lot of software optimisation.

Though 64 bit ARM processors are no closer to x86 than the 32 bit ones, it won't help port OSX to a phone or tablet. And given iOS's greatest strength is its software support and OSX's biggest weakness is its complete lack of support it would be an incredibly dumb move, there's more chance of them slapping iOS on a laptop.

cowbutt  Sep. 12, 2013 at 14:48

64bit ARM chips are backwards compatible (so you don't lose anything in the transition) and the wider registers do help in normal processing, not just in +4GB space adressing, but it requires a lot of software optimisation.

I'm not an ARM specialist, but I would expect one loss in the transition; longer instructions as a result of the extra address bits. Which in turn means that you'll need more memory bandwidth to maintain performance of 64 bit code vs. 32 bit equivalent.

barrybarryk  Sep. 12, 2013 at 14:56

but it's not the case, the longer addresses go along the address bus not the data bus. The instructions don't get any longer.

Edit: Unless you mean they'll actually take up more space in memory. That is true but it doesn't really negatively impact performance due to bandwidth because the pipes will be 64 bit as well, it does mean code will take up more memory though.

cowbutt  Sep. 12, 2013 at 15:15

but it's not the case, the longer addresses go along the address bus not the data bus. The instructions don't get any longer.

Edit: Unless you mean they'll actually take up more space in memory. That is true but it doesn't really negatively impact performance due to bandwidth because the pipes will be 64 bit as well, it does mean code will take up more memory though.


The latter. e.g. a memory-to-memory copy will consist of an operand and two arguments (i.e. the source and destination addresses). In a 32-bit instruction set (assuming 32 bits used for all operands), such an instruction will be 96 bits (32 for each of the operand and two arguments). In a 64 bit instruction set, an equivalent instruction will be 32+64+64=160 bits. So an increase of 66% in memory bandwidth required. If the data bus linking memory to CPU is doubled in width, that (more than) suffices (but I didn't assume that this would be the case; see ye olde Motorola 68008; 32 bit registers, typically 16 bit internal processing, but 8 bit external data bus protocol).

As an aside, though, I note from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture#ARMv8_and_64-bit that A64 allows 32 bit VMs to operate within a 64 bit hypervisor. That could be quite interesting and facilitate split-personality devices (e.g. a phone that can operate in 'work mode' and 'private mode', with semi-hard barriers being enforced between both). That's probably more interesting in a mobile context than >4G addressable memory or process sizes. :-)

barrybarryk  Sep. 12, 2013 at 15:25

But the data and address buses are expanded to cope with the 64 bit demand, it's pretty much the definition of 64 bit (if you include the increased registers) since they are parallel connections not serial. Bandwidth is a nonissue.

The code still does take up more space in memory though, but the increased register support that 64 bit processors have can give great speed boosts with proper optimisation.

The VM/Hypervisor implementations would be cool but the only people that look like they're even attempting to go in that direction are canonical with their Ubuntu phone OS. With the right hardware it could be a great direction to go in but given they've managed to completely destroy Ubuntus domination of the desktop Linux market in the last few years I'm not holding my breath

Stelph  Sep. 13, 2013 at 09:50

[quote]As an aside, though, I note from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture#ARMv8_and_64-bit that A64 allows 32 bit VMs to operate within a 64 bit hypervisor. That could be quite interesting and facilitate split-personality devices (e.g. a phone that can operate in 'work mode' and 'private mode', with semi-hard barriers being enforced between both). That's probably more interesting in a mobile context than >4G addressable memory or process sizes. :-)

Kind of like BB10 does now then? :)

I agree tho, 64 bit is the natural progression of things, but I think Apple have been slightly sneaky bringing it out now when it doesnt really have any benefit for iOS7 as it is now, when features you mention come in then yes, but right now its just a snakeoil term for Apple to band around

SpeedyG  Sep. 18, 2013 at 16:39

Unless it drives my car, washes my clothes and cutlery, sing me to sleep and record every show I want to watch all at the same time, then I don't see why I need a 64 bit smartphone.

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 18, 2013 at 16:40

;)

Stelph  Sep. 19, 2013 at 15:50

Unless it drives my car, washes my clothes and cutlery, sing me to sleep and record every show I want to watch all at the same time, then I don't see why I need a 64 bit smartphone.

Because it reminds me of my sinclair 64k, my first ever PC "sob"

Cant program stuff on the iPhone like I could on old bricky tho

barrybarryk  Sep. 19, 2013 at 16:18

Surely you mean a 16k or 48k Spectrum
http://zombiegamer.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/spectrum.jpg
Just look at that beautiful rubber keyboard :D

Stelph  Sep. 20, 2013 at 11:51

Oh wait, it was the 128k spectrum I had

So the iPhone 5s is only half as good, lame

Email:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

Comment: