Re: [情報] Apple認為TSMC與***的晶片只有2%電力差異
聽說台積電的晶片比三星的貴70%
假設三星的賣20美元
台積的賣34 美元
差 14 美元
iPhone一台賣650美元
成本也只差2~3%
那蘋果怎不多用台積的?
反正2~3%沒差不是嗎?
※ 引述《mmmmmfff (發牢騷!)》之銘言:
: 原文請跳轉
: http://www.macrumors.com/2015/10/08/apple-a9-chip-2-3-percent-difference/
: 全文以及翻譯如下 翻譯有我個人加油添醋的語氣,不喜歡的話請看原文。
: (其實看第一段就夠了)
: Over the past several days, a slew of battery tests on the iPhone 6s and the
: iPhone 6s Plus have revealed some performance differences between
: models that have an A9 chip manufactured by TSMC and those with an A9
: chip created by Samsung. While variousbenchmarking and real world usage
: tests have shown differences of 6 percent to 22 percent, in favor of TSMC
: chips, Apple says that its own testing has shown battery life variations of
: only two to three percent.
: 在過去幾天,有大量兩種版本晶片製成的6s與6s plus的電力測試。
: 台積電與三星的A9晶片,在多方測試之下,有著6~22%的電力續航力差距。
: 但是蘋果認為,實際的差異只有2~3%而已。
: In a statement given to TechCrunch, Apple says that it has done internal
: testing and gathered customer data to determine the performance difference
: between the two chips in the iPhones.
: 在一份給TechCrunch的聲明稿中,蘋果表示經過內部測試以及蒐集了消費者的資料。
: 兩種晶片的差異已經有了結果。
: With the Apple-designed A9 chip in your iPhone 6s or iPhone 6s Plus, you are
: getting the most advanced smartphone chip in the world. Every chip we ship
: meets Apple's highest standards for providing incredible performance and
: deliver great battery life, regardless of iPhone 6s capacity, color, or mode
l.
: Certain manufactured lab tests which run the processors with a continuous
: heavy workload until the battery depletes are not representative of real-wor
ld
: usage, since they spend an unrealistic amount of time at the highest CPU
: performance state. It's a misleading way to measure real-world battery life.
: Our testing and customer data show the actual battery life of the iPhone 6s
: and iPhone 6s Plus, even taking into account variable component differences,
: vary within just 2-3% of each other.
: 我們設計的A9晶片根本是科技的尖端,你拿到的是世界上最棒的手機。
: 無論你拿哪個型號或顏色,你都可以得到最棒的效能、卓越的電量、快樂的人生。
: 最近很多人在幫我們做不同製成晶片的電力測試,喔,拜託,誰會那樣測。
: 現實生活有誰會拿著手機24小時不斷的讓CPU滿載阿。根本一點也不現實。
: 在一般日常使用下,電力只會差2~3%啦。
: Apple says that early battery benchmark tests conducted by customers,
: such as those weshared yesterday, are not reflective of real world usage
: conditions. The two to three percent difference that Apple has seen in data
: gathered from customers is "well within its manufacturing tolerances" and is
a
: level of variation that could be seen between two devices with the same chip
.
: Apple's statement on real world usage reflects what recent YouTube tests hav
e
: revealed. Side-by-side battery tests comparing a TSMC iPhone and a Samsung
: iPhone did not show differences as dramatic as benchmark tests have shown,
: but those videos are also not quite indicative of real world usage results.
On
: MacRumors forums, opinions on battery life have been highly mixed. While som
e
: users with Samsung chips have reported poor battery life, others have not
: reported issues.
: 這兩段只是做總結,基本上跟前面說的差不多,懶得翻了。
: 總之,蘋果承認兩種晶片有差異,但認為這只是公差的正常值。
: 不要噓我QQ,我只是在等官網開賣無聊,轉貼新聞不是在護航。
: --
: 很多飲料店都用保麗龍杯子 飲料你只要20分鐘就可以喝完
: 但是留下的保麗龍杯子 地球500年都消化不完
: 如果你買了就直接喝 請不要又拿一個塑膠袋包著喝
:
: 夏天冷氣不用開這麼冷 每人冷氣每調高一度
: 就可以省6%的電力 一整個夏天可以省84億度的電
:
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 131.215.220.165
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/iPhone/M.1444352728.A.C24.html
→
10/09 09:08, , 1F
10/09 09:08, 1F
推
10/09 09:10, , 2F
10/09 09:10, 2F
推
10/09 09:10, , 3F
10/09 09:10, 3F
→
10/09 09:11, , 4F
10/09 09:11, 4F
推
10/09 09:12, , 5F
10/09 09:12, 5F
→
10/09 09:12, , 6F
10/09 09:12, 6F
→
10/09 09:12, , 7F
10/09 09:12, 7F
→
10/09 09:12, , 8F
10/09 09:12, 8F
推
10/09 09:12, , 9F
10/09 09:12, 9F
推
10/09 09:13, , 10F
10/09 09:13, 10F
推
10/09 09:13, , 11F
10/09 09:13, 11F
→
10/09 09:13, , 12F
10/09 09:13, 12F
推
10/09 09:13, , 13F
10/09 09:13, 13F
推
10/09 09:13, , 14F
10/09 09:13, 14F
→
10/09 09:14, , 15F
10/09 09:14, 15F
→
10/09 09:14, , 16F
10/09 09:14, 16F
→
10/09 09:15, , 17F
10/09 09:15, 17F
推
10/09 09:15, , 18F
10/09 09:15, 18F
推
10/09 09:15, , 19F
10/09 09:15, 19F
→
10/09 09:15, , 20F
10/09 09:15, 20F
→
10/09 09:15, , 21F
10/09 09:15, 21F
→
10/09 09:16, , 22F
10/09 09:16, 22F
推
10/09 09:16, , 23F
10/09 09:16, 23F
推
10/09 09:17, , 24F
10/09 09:17, 24F
→
10/09 09:18, , 25F
10/09 09:18, 25F
推
10/09 09:18, , 26F
10/09 09:18, 26F
→
10/09 09:22, , 27F
10/09 09:22, 27F
推
10/09 09:23, , 28F
10/09 09:23, 28F
→
10/09 09:27, , 29F
10/09 09:27, 29F
推
10/09 09:32, , 30F
10/09 09:32, 30F
→
10/09 09:32, , 31F
10/09 09:32, 31F
推
10/09 09:36, , 32F
10/09 09:36, 32F
→
10/09 09:49, , 33F
10/09 09:49, 33F
→
10/09 10:01, , 34F
10/09 10:01, 34F
→
10/09 10:13, , 35F
10/09 10:13, 35F
→
10/09 10:13, , 36F
10/09 10:13, 36F
推
10/09 10:22, , 37F
10/09 10:22, 37F
推
10/09 10:23, , 38F
10/09 10:23, 38F
→
10/09 10:23, , 39F
10/09 10:23, 39F
推
10/09 10:31, , 40F
10/09 10:31, 40F
推
10/09 10:44, , 41F
10/09 10:44, 41F
噓
10/09 11:19, , 42F
10/09 11:19, 42F
噓
10/09 11:31, , 43F
10/09 11:31, 43F
推
10/09 12:00, , 44F
10/09 12:00, 44F
推
10/09 12:49, , 45F
10/09 12:49, 45F
推
10/09 14:01, , 46F
10/09 14:01, 46F
推
10/09 15:16, , 47F
10/09 15:16, 47F
推
10/09 15:35, , 48F
10/09 15:35, 48F
推
10/10 13:18, , 49F
10/10 13:18, 49F
討論串 (同標題文章)