[Follow-Up] ARM Denies Rumors They Are Working on a 128-bit Mobile Processor

[dgstorm]

Just a couple of days ago we shared stories from across the web suggesting ARM is supposedly developing 128-bit mobile processors for the future. It turns out, this intel was wholly inaccurate as ARM themselves have come forward and categorically denied this. Here's a quote with the details,

Did you hear the joke about the 128 bit processor? Let me offer some factual corrections to an article which appeared a couple of days ago in the Korea Herald and which has fueled speculation…

This is an incredibly exciting time for the ARM ecosystem, with leading solutions from ARM partners taking computing to the next level. Over the past month, beginning at the ARM TechCon event in Santa Clara and continuing worldwide at our ARM Technical Symposia, we have publicly presented the future of ARM technologies to over 7000 engineers and counting. Those engineers have seen the facts:
ARM leads the way with our 32-bit CPUs supporting a range of power and performance points, including solutions using our big.LITTLE technology. These will be in about 10 billion chips sold in 2013 and will continue to grow for a very long time into the future.
ARM has launched a family of ARMv8-A architecture based processors that support 64-bit, and the first products based on these chips are coming to market.
In the coming year I expect we will see increasing announcements of 64-bit solutions across mobile, networking and server markets.

News reports have suggested that ARM is developing 128-bit processor technology: this is not true. 64-bit processors are capable of supporting the needs of the computing industry now and for many years to come. There are absolutely no plans underway for 128 bit ARM-based chips because they simply aren’t needed. Rumors to the contrary are simply incorrect.

Furthermore, comments attributed to any ARM executive including my colleague Antonio Viana that allegedly discuss any specific partner’s chip plans for the future or 128 bit development are inaccurate: no such comments have been made.

The ARM partnership is built around diversity of solutions, and ARM works diligently to assure our partners can announce their products at a time of their choosing, and showing their unique technical differentiation and value add. As a result, we absolutely do not disclose our partners product plans but defer to partners to make their own statements. The result is a vibrant marketplace of innovative solutions that serve a range of end application needs, which I find incredibly exciting.

That's a pretty strong denial. If you think about it, this really makes perfect sense. At least for the next several decades or so, it makes zero sense to have a 128-bit processor for a mobile device. The primary reason to move from a 32-bit processor to a 64-bit processor is to be able to access more than 3GB of RAM at one time. A 64-bit processor can actually access 16 Exabytes of RAM. To put that in perspective, that is the equivalent of 17,179,869,184 Gigabytes! It is unlikely we would need more RAM than that in a mobile device in this or the next generation.

Because of this reality, a 64-bit processor will likely be the flavor of all microprocessors for quite some time.

Source: ARM

 

[LoneWolfArcher]

It turns out, this intel was wholly inaccurate

Pun unintended?

 

[tgyberg]

Stop toying with us!

 

[kodiak799]

I am going to LMAO when phones come out late next year with 64-bit cpu's and still only 2-3 gigs of ram.

 

[akhenax]

A 64-bit processor can actually access 16 Exabytes of RAM. To put that in perspective, that is the equivalent of 17,179,869,184 Gigabytes! It is unlikely we would need more RAM than that in a mobile device in this or the next generation.

Speak for yourself there buddy. I need at least 15,000,000,000 Gigabytes just to play Candy Crush Saga.

 

[AECRADIO]

I think the Intel-ligence of the statement speaks volumes.
As for memory, I still do not understand WHY the device makers insist on stocking their products with minimal RAM, when memory is not costly, they can make the base memory at least 64 MB, and the user memory at twice this amount. ROM can also be generously increased as well.
Programs are constantly growing in size and complexity, and with the level of integration with CPU/GPU and overall speeds, even 64 GB will become bottom of the barrel.
I would love to see actual 64 GB devices that actually make use of a real 64 MB build, in terms of both CPU/GPU, and overall performance increases, not just random benchmarks that do little in the real world.
Device users can not make use of metaphysical data.
View attachment 68060
The above pic, is an Intel ATOM N2600 microprocessor, 32-bit architecture

Correction: Changed MB to GB as originally intended..

 

[liftedplane]

I think the Intel-ligence of the statement speaks volumes.
As for memory, I still do not understand WHY the device makers insist on stocking their products with minimal RAM, when memory is not costly, they can make the base memory at least 64 MB, and the user memory at twice this amount. ROM can also be generously increased as well.
Programs are constantly growing in size and complexity, and with the level of integration with CPU/GPU and overall speeds, even 64 MB will become bottom of the barrel.
I would love to see actual 64 MB devices that actually make use of a real 64 MB build, in terms of both CPU/GPU, and overall performance increases, not just random benchmarks that do little in the real world.
Device users can not make use of metaphysical data.
View attachment 68060
The above pic, is an Intel ATOM N2600 microprocessor, 32-bit architecture

MB? or GB? I'm confused... my first pc definitely had 32mb of ram... back in 1997, I definitely know I couldn't run any programs I run now (or at least not as smooth as I do) with less than 1gb and that's on my phone my PC has 16gb and my laptop 12gb.

I do think they need to stop releasing 16gb phones though... make them 32 and 64 only... no reason for 16gb when most of that is taken by the system and you don't have a physical slot for an SD card. that's why I'll never get a nexus device... ever.

 

[kodiak799]

See, the RAM deal is both to keep costs down AND to force people to have to upgrade every 2-3 years as Android and apps demand more and more ram.

But there simply is no excuse for not adding more storage. Again that's mostly Google (and the OEM's) pushing people to the cloud.

 

[combatmedic870]

Im sure we will see samsung or htc make the push to 4gb ddr3 ram very soon with the S5 or the htc two. I would love to see GPU's receive 256mb-51mb2 of ddr5 personally, on its own dedicated chip.


So 4gb ddr3 ram chipset and 256mb-512mb ddr5 dedicated, strictly for gpu. Bring it on.

I'd like to also see a speed increase in the memory. Samsungs move to USB3 is in the right direction. But I am not getting USB3 speeds. What ever the bottle neck is in the memory. I'd like to see it resolved next year(if its software, i'd like it fixed). The phone might be fast as all crazyness. But if it takes 15 seconds to transfer a 1.5GB file VIA USB3 (USB3 to USB3). Something is amiss.

 

[akhenax]

The phone might be fast as all crazyness. But if it takes 15 seconds to transfer a 1.5GB file VIA USB3 (USB3 to USB3). Something is amiss.

That would be because of the use of cheap nand storage technologies. If they up their performance specs for the nand, you will see those (read/write) transfer speeds increase.

 

[kodiak799]

15 seconds to transfer a 1.5gb file? LOL, it takes me 4+ hours to transfer 56gigs of music to my class10 SD.

 

[kodiak799]

Im sure we will see samsung or htc make the push to 4gb ddr3 ram very soon

Samsung announced in August they are now mass producing 3D-nand chips which boast capacity of 128gb to 1TB. So maybe we'll see 128gigs of internal storage in the S5 or Note4?

There's also new stackable ram coming from at least one mfr (forget who) and possibly Samsung such that 8gb would have the same footprint as 2gb.

Not sure about cost, but we COULD see a major leap in the hardware capability by the end of next year. However, because of cost (even if only talking like $20-$30) and "planned obsolescence" the new capabilities will be trickled out likely over several years.

Basically smartphones could be as powerful by the end of 2014 as current high-end ultrabooks. But we the consumer won't see such an option at any price. The appeal, to me, is dual-boot full Windows and basically be carrying the power of a laptop in my pocket.

 

[liftedplane]

Samsung announced in August they are now mass producing 3D-nand chips which boast capacity of 128gb to 1TB. So maybe we'll see 128gigs of internal storage in the S5 or Note4?

There's also new stackable ram coming from at least one mfr (forget who) and possibly Samsung such that 8gb would have the same footprint as 2gb.

Not sure about cost, but we COULD see a major leap in the hardware capability by the end of next year. However, because of cost (even if only talking like $20-$30) and "planned obsolescence" the new capabilities will be trickled out likely over several years.

Basically smartphones could be as powerful by the end of 2014 as current high-end ultrabooks. But we the consumer won't see such an option at any price. The appeal, to me, is dual-boot full Windows and basically be carrying the power of a laptop in my pocket.

I absolutely love the idea of a dual boot x64 cell phone with enough memory and drive storage to feasibly be used like this making me having to carry a laptop obsolete. Being able to natively run windows apps on the go using touch screen or bt keyboard and mouse. The ideas are truly endless.