iPad: Why Apple/everyone needs the iPad 5 ASAP (with A7X)

[mouser45]

So the surface reviews are out. Not something I'd be buying. 1st gen products seem to always be full of bugs/compromises, etc. This is quite relevant with the surface: 4 hours of battery life. Not good enough. HOWEVER, this is using a 17w ivy bridge CPU. Next gen Ivy bridge is 7W. That's a chip that will use 41% of the power draw of the current. Ergo, 2nd gen surface will have battery life jump from 4hrs to 12hrs (approx).

Why does this even matter? Aside from the major productivity issue, just look at the performance gaps:

Apple has done a great job of making relatively slow hardware feel very fast with iOS

As intel targets the mobile space, Apple's chip lead is going to evaporate and the battery life/performace trade off that so many other manufacturers have to deal with will be eliminated.

Unless Apple stays ahead of the curve that they created, it's going to be a much different story with Surface 2.0 and intel.

[Abazigal]

I don't see many people programming for the A7x chip, when the majority of IOS devices are still on an A5 chip (or variant thereof). There's rumours that the ipad mini2 may use an A5x chip even.

Also, real world comparisons find very little improvement of the A6x chip compared to the A5x. I find my ipad3 fast enough for my uses. What they ought to focus on is their OS, IMO.

[OSMac]

What are most people doing on a iPad that needs a faster chip?

I thought a convertible Win 8 device would be better but after using a few of them I'd take a iPad + win7 laptop combo instead.

The best win 8 tablet is the Asus Smart with a clover trail CPU, it's getting very little attention for what ever reason....

[maflynn]

Most people I know don't care what chip is in their iPhone/iPad.

My mini has the older A5 and I've not once incurred a performance issue. Sure it doesn't score high on benchmarks but it does everything I want it too. Isn't that's what important.

Some people get caught up on specs, yet most consumers don't care if there's an A5, or an A7 in the iPad as long as it works.

[Menel]

Originally Posted by mouser45

So the surface reviews are out. Not something I'd be buying. 1st gen products seem to always be full of bugs/compromises, etc. This is quite relevant with the surface: 4 hours of battery life. Not good enough. HOWEVER, this is using a 17w ivy bridge CPU. Next gen Ivy bridge is 7W. That's a chip that will use 41% of the power draw of the current. Ergo, 2nd gen surface will have battery life jump from 4hrs to 12hrs (approx).

Why does this even matter? Aside from the major productivity issue, just look at the performance gaps:

Image

Image



As intel targets the mobile space, Apple's chip lead is going to evaporate and the battery life/performace trade off that so many other manufacturers have to deal with will be eliminated.

Unless Apple stays ahead of the curve that they created, it's going to be a much different story with Surface 2.0 and intel.

No. We DO NOT need, and DO NOT want.
Don't be fooled by simple power numbers. Battery life and actual power consumption has more complex phases. Just because it may be able to scale down to 7W, doesn't mean it will all the time. Maybe... but don't assume anything in marketting speak.

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/02/05/...ed-experience/

"It's too big, too fat, and too reliant on its power cable to be a competitive tablet, and it's too immutable to do everything a laptop needs to do."

--The Verge

In battery tests, it lasted under four hours - less than half the stamina of the iPad and three hours less than Surface RT.

--AllThingsD

Depending on the video file, the system lasted between 3-3.5 hours;

--Ars



--Anand

And it's a porker
--Anand

Surface Pro is clearly in a different league of dimensions.
... the weight definitely makes it a lot less pleasant to carry around.

[CJM]

You realise the Surface Pro is significantly heavier and thicker than any tablet, right?

[mouser45]

Originally Posted by Menel

No. We DO NOT need, and DO NOT want.
Don't be fooled by simple power numbers. Battery life and actual power consumption has more complex phases. Just because it may be able to scale down to 7W, doesn't mean it will all the time. Maybe... but don't assume anything in marketting speak.

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/02/05/...ed-experience/

--The Verge

--AllThingsD

--Ars

Image
Image
--Anand

And it's a porker
Image--Anand

Originally Posted by CJM

You realise the Surface Pro is significantly heavier and thicker than any tablet, right?

Whoooooosh.

Read my post. I'm talking about surface 2.0

Apple has made slow hardware feel great with a limited OS. When the performance gap is gone, apples advantage is gone.

[bobbysmith]

I haven't heard many complaints that browsing is slow on the iPads. An actual real world problem though, is tab reloading -- especially since not all websites can be just reloaded.

[Tubamajuba]

Originally Posted by maflynn

Most people I know don't care what chip is in their iPhone/iPad.

My mini has the older A5 and I've not once incurred a performance issue. Sure it doesn't score high on benchmarks but it does everything I want it too. Isn't that's what important.

Some people get caught up on specs, yet most consumers don't care if there's an A5, or an A7 in the iPad as long as it works.

I purchased an iPad mini yesterday. I was somewhat reluctant to do so for one reason- I have an iPhone 5. How was I going to switch back and forth between the two devices and not be disappointed with the A5 in the mini?

When testing the two side by side, it is apparent that the iPhone 5 is faster than the iPad mini. But under every other fathomable usage scenario? The iPad mini is perfectly fine- I don't find myself needing an A6 at all. The gap will widen down the road, but for now, you are exactly right- the A5 is good enough for almost anything that you throw at it.

[darngooddesign]

Originally Posted by Abazigal

I don't see many people programming for the A7x chip, when the majority of IOS devices are still on an A5 chip (or variant thereof). There's rumours that the ipad mini2 may use an A5x chip even.

Also, real world comparisons find very little improvement of the A6x chip compared to the A5x. I find my ipad3 fast enough for my uses. What they ought to focus on is their OS, IMO.

Faster computers with better GPUs run the same games at higher settings and the same is true for iPads.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6472/i...-2012-review/5

If you will scroll down you can see the iPad 4 shows greater details than the iPad3, so while they aren't specifically programming for the A6X, it does have more benefits. I feel that Real Racing 3 will make this more apparant with the iPad 4 and 5 showing more details than the 3, and rendering more things further in the distance.

----------

Originally Posted by mouser45

...Read my post. I'm talking about surface 2.0.

Well the ipad 6 is going to be better than the Surface 2.0. See how much fun it is to speculate about future hardware.

[maflynn]

Originally Posted by Tubamajuba

When testing the two side by side, it is apparent that the iPhone 5 is faster than the iPad mini. But under every other fathomable usage scenario? The iPad mini is perfectly fine- I don't find myself needing an A6 at all. The gap will widen down the road, but for now, you are exactly right- the A5 is good enough for almost anything that you throw at it.

Maybe its my usage but I too have an iPhone 5 and I've not really noticed any differences. I mostly read, surf and email. I play the occasional game such as Temple Run and I've not really noticed much.

As I mentioned when talking about the new CPUs in the iPad 4, iPhone 5 vs the older models, my friends and coworkers see not difference in what they use. Most of us are not hard core gamers and that's probably the reason. I'm willing to conjecture that most consumers are not either.

[poloponies]

Originally Posted by mouser45

HOWEVER, this is using a 17w ivy bridge CPU. Next gen Ivy bridge is 7W. That's a chip that will use 41% of the power draw of the current. Ergo, 2nd gen surface will have battery life jump from 4hrs to 12hrs (approx).

Because the CPU is the only component that draws power? Check your math.

[KeepCalmPeople]

I think the Surface Pro/iPad comparison is Apples to Oranges. The iPad is a pure tablet - it is not designed to run OS X, it is not designed to run desktop applications. It is not designed to perform heavy-duty processing and compete with Macbooks etc. It is first and foremost a media consumption device. If Apple ever chooses to introduce a tablet form factor device running OS X, then you'll have a valid comparison. Surface RT vs. iPad - that's Apples to Apples.

[shortcrust]

Relaaaaaxx! Almost no one cares about benchmarks and processors when thinking about tablets and phones. As long as there aren't noticeable performance problems people will be happy with a device.

[aziatiklover]

Because my money is ready for a look alike ipad mini form factor to a 10".

[newdeal]

you are assuming that the cpu uses all of the power which obviously isn't true so the increase won't be anywhere near what you are thinking. Also the ipad OS is so light weight it doesn't need the horsepower of windows tablets. The surface pro is terrible as a tablet because it fails at everything that makes a tablet good, no fan, thin, light and long battery life

[Rodster]

Doesn't the Surface Pro use a different CPU architecture, Intel CPU? If so I agree with others that the A7X is an overkill right now but I sure as hell won't complain if the iPad 5 uses the A7X.

[dazz87]

Originally Posted by CJM

You realise the Surface Pro is significantly heavier and thicker than any tablet, right?

Man its thicker then my Zenbook.....

[Menel]

Originally Posted by darngooddesign

Faster computers with better GPUs run the same games at higher settings and the same is true for iPads.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6472/i...-2012-review/5

If you will scroll down you can see the iPad 4 shows greater details than the iPad3, so while they aren't specifically programming for the A6X, it does have more benefits. I feel that Real Racing 3 will make this more apparant with the iPad 4 and 5 showing more details than the 3, and rendering more things further in the distance.

----------



Well the ipad 6 is going to be better than the Surface 2.0. See how much fun it is to speculate about future hardware.

False, they are.

Even Anand states for NOVA 3

With the 4th gen iPad however, the developer was able to render at a higher native resolution which significantly improves image quality.

What's new

Optimized for iPad4

http://appshopper.com/games/the-dark-knight-rises

What's new

*Bonus Content - includes ClashMob, Vault of Tears, and Sky Cages expansion packs!

- Supports full iPhone 5 resolution, iPad 4th generation, and iPad mini - and it looks amazing!
- Fully compatible with iOS 6

http://appshopper.com/games/infinity-blade-ii

etc.

[SnowLeopard2008]

Comparing ARM-based devices to x86-based devices is like comparing sedans to sports cars. Sedans sip gas like 1000 year-old wine, sports cars chug the Big Gulp There's no denying the Surface Pro is faster than iPad 4 in performance benchmarks. But battery life is pretty anemic.

An accurate comparison would be Surface RT and iPad 4.

[darngooddesign]

Originally Posted by darngooddesign

...so while they aren't specifically programming for the A6X, it does have more benefits.

Originally Posted by Menel

False, they are...

Specifically programming for the iPad4 means that anything without the A6X is not supported. This is different from the iPad3 being supported but the iPad4 showing higher details.

[A Hebrew]

Who cares about benchmarks? The tablet world certainly doesn't.

[Gav2k]

The surface pro shouldn't be compared with standard tablets. It should be compared to the MacBook Air tbh given its internals... No why didn't they do that?

[barkomatic]

The vast majority of people use their tablet--and even their laptops--for entertainment purposes. Those who actually use them for work do little more than check their email or display pics or charts on them to make their coworkers think they are cutting edge. One does not usually need the latest hardware for that--except for some games and no developer who actually wants to make money will design a game that is beyond the second to the last generation iPad.

I will say that Apple badly, desperately, needs to refresh iOS so that it has an updated look and feel with added functionality. I'm really skeptical Apple has any intention at all of doing that however.

[ActionableMango]

Oh no, my SunSpinder and Kraken benchmarks (whatever the hell those are) scores are too slow!

**Throws iPad Mini off cliff**