Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad 1Gb of RAM is enough, be happy :)
- Thread starter MartinAppleGuy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Fun fact, RIM was late to the "real" smartphone game because they said in 2011 that their awesome new OS they were making would NOT RUN with less than 2gb RAM.
Understand that the idea of a smartphone with 2gb RAM a couple of years ago was ludicrous, but when the tech finally caught up to their ambitions, here we are the new Q10 and Z10, floundering.
And Samsung's 3gb RAM still amounts to a laggy experience because Android is such a pig for memory.
Read some of the reviews of the Note 3 and you'll see what I mean, half of their gimmicky features are either slow to open, or don't really work at all. Innovation!
Hi there. There resson I am going for the rMBP is because it is intel Iris GPU. 90% faster that Intel 5000 I believe. I only plan on playing GTA SA, Dirt 2, Minecraft... Nothing pushing it
Nice to here from you.
Hi there. There resson I am going for the rMBP is because it is intel Iris GPU. 90% faster that Intel 5000 I believe. I only plan on playing GTA SA, Dirt 2, Minecraft... Nothing pushing it
Or spend a little extra and get the Nvidia 750M and it'll be another 40-50% faster over the Iris I believe.
Hi there. There resson I am going for the rMBP is because it is intel Iris GPU. 90% faster that Intel 5000 I believe. I only plan on playing GTA SA, Dirt 2, Minecraft... Nothing pushing it
I'm not sure you'll be happy with the Iris GPU for any sort of gaming use. Yes, it's the best integrated GPU from Intel yet. However any modern discrete graphics card will beat the pants off it. I think it would really struggle with GTA and Dirt 2. Like I said I'm getting one for my wife but she does zero gaming. Maybe you need a PS Vita and a refurb MacBook Pro.
I wonder how no one sees it. They're saving the 2GB ram for the iPad Pro due in March. It's coming, and even more so now.
Expected specs and features -
10" and 13"/12" screen options.
2GB RAM
A8 Quad Core Processor
100% True Multitasking - Quasar-esque maybe.
Thicker, Better Glass, Wider Color Gamut.
Multi User Logins (Maybe in iPad Pro 2)
An optional Apple Mac Keyboard style Qwerty.
The Macbook Air & iPad are really just two totally different systems for mostly the same job. They have to kill the MBA, later if not sooner.
Expected specs and features -
10" and 13"/12" screen options.
2GB RAM
A8 Quad Core Processor
100% True Multitasking - Quasar-esque maybe.
Thicker, Better Glass, Wider Color Gamut.
Multi User Logins (Maybe in iPad Pro 2)
An optional Apple Mac Keyboard style Qwerty.
The Macbook Air & iPad are really just two totally different systems for mostly the same job. They have to kill the MBA, later if not sooner.
You think the A8 is going to be out by March!? A7X at best...
I'm not so sure about a pro in March though, its sounds plausible but how keen are apple to release a 13" tablet now that the mini is doing so well?
Besides that, it does seem like Apple no longer want to deal with iPad releases in March.
Most likely not. New iPads are released in Fall. They've moved it a year ago and I really don't see a reason for them to go back to spring release. iWatch or some sort of TV has a bigger chance of being released in spring than iPad Pro/Maxi/whatever lol.
And what's with quad core crap again? A7 is already faster than any other mobile soc.
Will quad core come to iDevices? It's probably the matter of time, but as seen with all the Android devices, quad core doesn't equal better performance, smoother experience, better responsiveness etc. So if Apple manages to increase performance every year without going quad core (and continues to offer the fastest and smoothest devices) I'm perfectly fine with it.
----------
I don't think there will be A7X at all. The "X" was there to point to more powerful, quad core graphics. A7 chip (it's GPU part) doesn't have four cores. It has a 4 cluster power vr 6430 clocked at 450 Mhz. Currently, the only more powerful thing they could use is power vr 6630, a 6 cluster GPU.
This new implementation from Img tech is different but much more powerful than their older series 5 (multi-core) GPUs which were inside A5X and A6X.
I don't think there will be an A7X either, but if I had to choose between an A8 or A7X in March...it would have to be A7X..that was all I meant
With just the basic services running, my Z10 is consuming about 400MiB.
Just opening the browser are only 16MiB more.
I don't think there will be an A7X either, but if I had to choose between an A8 or A7X in March...it would have to be A7X..that was all I meant
True.
People seem to forget that the last time we got a new A series chip in spring was back in 2011. (A5 in iPad 2)
Your one cool kid. I have decided to go for the quad core i7 15'' with Iris Pro.
Do you have a source for the 30% increase? Assuming RAM usage is increased by 30%, that equates to 23% less RAM. 769MB of RAM in the 32-bit iPad comes up to 1024MB with a 30% increase.
My take on this, other than Apple being stingy, is that Apple wants to keep app developers on their toes in regards to resource usage. Give devs 2GB to play with, and we'll end up with software that runs like a dog on previous versions of iPad.
Still, I think the iPad Air really should have come with 2GB RAM and start at 32GB of storage. The latter makes the lowest usable iPad $100 more expensive than it should be.
Knowing Apples history, none of that will happen. They held out on 2gb to save a buck.
It is great that the form factor of the iPad Air is improved, and I get that Apple is trying to protect their profit margins.
But the iPad is clearly positioned as the premium tablet on the market.
How expensive would it have been to go to 2GB of RAM? (for Apple - not us)
The touch sensor I understand would have been much more costly to produce, but probably not more RAM or even 802.11ac...
FWIW, I agree with the posters that say the iPad Pro will come out late 2014. Sooner would be a marketing catastrophe.
R
But the iPad is clearly positioned as the premium tablet on the market.
How expensive would it have been to go to 2GB of RAM? (for Apple - not us)
The touch sensor I understand would have been much more costly to produce, but probably not more RAM or even 802.11ac...
FWIW, I agree with the posters that say the iPad Pro will come out late 2014. Sooner would be a marketing catastrophe.
R
I can't find a bill of materials for the iPad Air yet but the iSuppli teardown of the iPhone 5s gives a cost of $11 for the 1GB of DRAM in that [ Source: http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/Ne...-Manufacturing-Cost-IHS-Teardown-Reveals.aspx ]
Apple's last quarterly sales figures for the iPad were 14.1 million [ Source: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2013/10/28Apple-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-Results.html ]. I couldn't quickly find cumulative annual figures so let's just estimate the year forward as four times the quarterly figure to give about 56 million units at $11 each for the extra DRAM means it could cost Apple in the region of 0.6 billion dollars straight off its bottom line if it were to eat the cost.
Admittedly Apple might gain a very few additional sales from people who are refusing to buy the Air because it only has 1GB but I really can't see that being many additional sales. Then there are the other issues like how would it impact battery life, is there sufficient die space to add the extra memory, heat issues, etc? If battery life was adversely impacted Apple might even lose more sales due to that than are gained from the "2GB or I'm not buying it" brigade.
Let's face it, Apple won't go to 2GB until it really has to.
If an iPad pro does come, it would make sense for a march release. Businesses wouldn't be looking to roll out new devices until after the forth quarter, and a pro model would be less attractive as a gift item then the iPad air. They might be willing to release it with increased ram as the air (and one gig of ram) would still be the target device for developers avoiding the mess of developers abusing the increase in ram.
Apple could increase the specs through the roof and it wouldn't much matter though as developers wouldn't target only the probably much more spendy flagship model so long as the lesser models are selling, so any benefit as far as software goes would be up to apple to implement. The only thing that I could see them doing to attract enough attention to it would be some sort of integrated file system, perhaps a yearly iCloud pro subscription with dropbox style access.
But IMO this is all day dreams.
Apple could increase the specs through the roof and it wouldn't much matter though as developers wouldn't target only the probably much more spendy flagship model so long as the lesser models are selling, so any benefit as far as software goes would be up to apple to implement. The only thing that I could see them doing to attract enough attention to it would be some sort of integrated file system, perhaps a yearly iCloud pro subscription with dropbox style access.
But IMO this is all day dreams.
This is stupid. I'll be glad if/when everything transitions to cloud based computing so no one can argue about meaningless specs. The only legitimate concern here is storage space, the rest is completely transparent to the user. The tablet is fast, it does everything required of it. If it needed more RAM it would have more RAM, Apple would not put it out there if it could not provide the consistent user experience associated with Apple products.
Other companies feel the need to pump their phones/tablets full of RAM as they all run Android and it is the only way they can 1up the competitor. That's why Samsung recently released some of it's own software, to achieve a selling point that wasn't purely hardware.
No fanboy.
Other companies feel the need to pump their phones/tablets full of RAM as they all run Android and it is the only way they can 1up the competitor. That's why Samsung recently released some of it's own software, to achieve a selling point that wasn't purely hardware.
No fanboy.