Is it safe to assume that future ASi CPUs for desktops will have just Firestorm cores and no Icestorm, which should further increase MT performance?
I know Apple was trying to get to market quickly, but I fail to understand why we need Icestorm cores in a non-mobile CPU, especially with this already (really) low TDP.
More likely they will ship more Firestorm cores and keep the Icestorm. Their future chip designs will likely be cross desktop/mobile. Keeping Icestorm lowers the cost in whole by allowing them to ship more chips and gives about a 30% performance gain in multicore.
Far more interesting to me is the idea that in heavy use, the Icestorm cores can run the OS, notifications and all that, allowing full uninterrupted use of the firestorm cores. Also when the mac is in idle it uses far less power.
Basically, I fail to see a reason to not keep them :).
> Far more interesting to me is the idea that in heavy use, the Icestorm cores can run the OS, notifications and all that, allowing full uninterrupted use of the firestorm cores. Also when the mac is in idle it uses far less power.
It's impressive what Apple has been able to do when they can fine tune macOS and ASi to work together.
I know Apple was trying to get to market quickly, but I fail to understand why we need Icestorm cores in a non-mobile CPU, especially with this already (really) low TDP.