Benchmarks on Third-Generation iPad Reveal 1 GHz CPU, 1 GB RAM

[Vtwo]

For people comparing it to the transformer prime, please note that in terms of graphics, the Tegra 3 is just on par with the A5 in the iPad 2 which each one 'winning' half of the graphics benchmarks.

In terms of the CPU, Tegra3 is definitely faster. But are people running CPU intensive tasks on their iPads. Do people plan to convert video, run massive simulations or running CS5 with multiple layers?

As for the A15, it is still sampling and we won't get the dual core version till June. Especially not in iPad volumes. We will probably see the quad A15 in the next iPad in March 2013.

 

[perealb]

Actually, it won't look better. The retina display doesn't automatically 'improve' the quality of an image that wasn't high quality to begin with.

I can't think of any website in their right mind that would display 'retina quality' images - that would take a ridiculously long time to load.

What people don't seam to understand, is that the retina display is mainly beneficial when viewing apps that conform to the new resolution (ie. updated images).

The new display doesn't just have more pixels, it's suppose to be of better quality.

There are plenty of websites that carry high resolution images. They are more common than not.

There will be plenty of apps that will come with the new iPad that are already adapted to Retina Display like Safari, Photos, Maps, Mail, Camera, Calendar, etc. Things that you use the most. Besides that, there will be a lot of developers in a rush to update their apps to the new resolution. I remember this process was rather quick from iPhone 3GS to iPhone 4. Now that the App upgrade submission process improved quite a bit, we'll see a faster upgrade.

 

[mattraehl]

IMHO, pricing of refurbs or even Ebay are not sufficiently low as to make up for the reduced usable lifespan (especially for the larger capacities). The only exception may be if you get a really good price/trade on a used device. This is because with iOS devices, improvements are being made rapidly, and devices are becoming obsolete at a faster pace then, say, Macs. With Macs you can buy a previous gen refurb and have it be worth it, especially when it's just a CPU/GPU bump that is the difference.

I have been thinking the exact same thing. I am curious to see if this changes over the next couple years. Right now the numbers are screaming "buy a new iPad every year and resell your old one" because the break-even point in terms of cost would be to keep an iPad for about 3 years before upgrading.

 

[h'biki]

Lucky you guys.
70% of "the New iPad" "upgraders" just just got a very crisp screen to play Infinity Blade on. Only a small % of the remaining 30% actually got something useful for their professional life.

Yeah! Most professional users don't spend their time reading or writing on their iPads! They do... um... what?

The sharper display the exact reason I upgraded. I spend a large portion of my day staring at that iPad screen. Far more than I do pushing its GPU or CPU. Sharper, more readable DPI is worth far more to the usability of the device than anything else.

 

[mandis]

I wasn't complaining because of Android Devices. Apple is in competition with itself, no one else.

You could cram an i7 into an Android tablet and it will still be so poorly executed that less than a dozen people would buy it.

I have yet to see an Android tablet in the wild. I think 3 people bought the Transformer Prime

My argument was that there is better hardware out there than the ipad for the same kind of price. But nobody cares about Android on a tablet! Windows 8 on the other hand??? I know it wont be out until next fall but I think we can all assume how the market trend is going shift from then on.

If Apple desires customer loyalty it needs to reward us with more future-proof hardware. Don't you think?

 

[Diversion]

You're only at stage one of the disappointment of the new iPad.
Just work through the stages.

1.Denial — "Those benchmarks aren't real. The new iPad is not even released."

2.Anger — "Why didn't apple show us the real benchmarks with data when they released the new iPad !!!"

3.Bargaining — "It only cost me $300 to upgrade to the new iPad from my iPad2. The screen is better anyway."

4.Depression — "Why did I even bother upgrading? Now my friends and family will know I was duped by apple into spending money that is not justified."

5.Acceptance — "Ok, apple got me with their hype. I will justify my purchase saying the screen is better for emailing & web surfing."

This is awesome, because this is almost exactly how my mind works

 

[Vtwo]

Is it possible to 'future-proof'?

Say that Apple gives us quad core 28nm processor with 128GB and retina. Then next year, they would need to have Octo core with 256GB and holographics thus making the quad core 'outdated'...

We cannot expect products to be innovative and future proof at the same time

 

[diamond.g]

Interesting. Compared to iPad 2:

1. Performance writing to an offscreen bitmap is very substantially higher (more than 60 percent).

2. Performance writing to the screen cannot be judged, because they both run the benchmark at exactly 60 frames per second.

3. Total benchmark time cannot be judged either, because the time writing to the screen is identical.

What is odd is double the graphics cores should double the speed (assuming GPU speed is the same), unless we are beginning to see a cpu bottleneck.

iPad 3 GLBenchmark: link.
iPad 2 GLBenchmark: link.

GLBenchmark 2.1 Egypt 720p: iPad 3 140 FPS, iPad 2 90 FPS
GLBenchmark 2.1 Pro 720: iPad 3 250 FPS, iPad 2 150 FPS

Yes, but keep in mind only the 720p tests don't have v-sync, so the others don't show anything other than them both being able to achieve 60 FPS at native resolution.

These results are less than double what the iPad 2 scores, but at 2048x1536 the difference may grow.

If anything the on screen results would be the same as the framebuffer that the test is rendering to isn't native resolution.

The real problem is these tests aren't very GPU intensive. Futuremark needs to hurry up and port their benckmarks to iOS/OS X...

I would be interested in seeing the results of the Iron Fist Boxing Kings test in OpenGL ES Viewer. on my 4s with default settings (using OGL 2.0) I get 1.3 fps. Anyone with an iPad 2 that can run the test for comparison?

 

[ncaissie]

i guess keeping the processor the same as the ipad 2 offset the (potentially) higher cost of the retina display...

They can just lower the wages of the foxcom workers.

I kid, LOL

 

[MythicFrost]

If anything the on screen results would be the same as the framebuffer that the test is rendering to isn't native resolution.

The real problem is these tests aren't very GPU intensive. Futuremark needs to hurry up and port their benckmarks to iOS/OS X...

I would be interested in seeing the results of the Iron Fist Boxing Kings test in OpenGL ES Viewer. on my 4s with default settings (using OGL 2.0) I get 1.3 fps. Anyone with an iPad 2 that can run the test for comparison?

Why do you say it isn't rendering at native resolution?

 

[ARM1968]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)

The new iPad is a Sirius step up from the 2. You can argue about it.

The next iPad will also be a step up. And that's the way we all know Apple likes to roll. Doesn't seem to be a flawed business model now does it?

 

[tbrinkma]

The 70% that just got a very crisp screen for "Infinity Blade" usually has a better job than someone who uses the iPad FOR there job.

There's a certain amount of truth *and* irony in that statement.

 

[MikhailT]

You're right, they silk screened a "X" after "A5".

There is a reason it isnt called iPad 3

You do understand that the GPU and memory are on the same chip as the CPU, right? They upgraded both the GPU/memory and left the CPU intact, making it an entirely different SoC than A5. We don't know about nm size but probably the same. iFixit will confirm this on Friday.

 

[brdeveloper]

Is it possible to 'future-proof'?

Say that Apple gives us quad core 28nm processor with 128GB and retina. Then next year, they would need to have Octo core with 256GB and holographics thus making the quad core 'outdated'...

We cannot expect products to be innovative and future proof at the same time

For me, future proof is a serviceable and upgradeable case. I love to upgrade ram, hard disk and processor (the last item is not upgradeable in macbooks but I already did it in some pc laptops).

 

[cdavi060]

great i just spent $500 on the exact same iPad i already have. man apple is starting to suck with these incremental updates!

Its easy to get away with on computers, but on disposable mobile Tech, you really need to beat yourself when releasing something new!

Your getting an effing retina display! how is that the same?

 

[filmantopia]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

There will always be a bunch of loud-mouthed complainers about Apple products. No matter what. If its an entirely new product, they point out how it will "fail", if a reasonable update, they complain it's incremental and not revolutionary. As if that's something to complain about... Taking an incredible product, the best on the market in fact, and making it better.

 

[vincenz]

great i just spent $500 on the exact same iPad i already have. man apple is starting to suck with these incremental updates!

Its easy to get away with on computers, but on disposable mobile Tech, you really need to beat yourself when releasing something new!

If you think the display is an incremental update, then you can keep using your grainy iPad 2. More for the rest of us!

 

[filmantopia]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I like all of the improvements of the new iPad, I just wish they would have gone to a 128 gig of memory. I would have paid the additional $.

I hear ya. One stands to reason that flash memory is still too expensive for even the higher consumer price tag to be worth it to Apple.

 

[tbrinkma]

iPad has nothing to do with usefulness.

It's more useful than your comment.

 

[HalfBlazed]

Only 1 GB of ram and a 1Ghz CPU?!?!

Oh no! Why did I just throw away my 12-core Mac Pro? I was under the impression I would be able to run After Effects and Premier on the new iPad! I knew I should have been rational!

But seriously folks. We all know that in general Macs and iOS devices can do twice the work with half power since Windows and Android are so grossly bloated. FanDroids and Windards never seem to be able to grasp this fact. Their favorite argument: This Windows laptop has a 12.4Ghz processors and 100Gb of Ram and it only costs 11 dollars vs your MacBook Pro that cost 2000 dollars. Well why is that last year the MacBook Pro was regarded as "The Fastest Laptop We've ever tested" by multiple, reliable sources? It obviously doesn't have the obnoxious specs as an Alienware Laptop PC. How come the Alienware isn't branded as a workstation grade machine. Its because Specs vs Performance are relative to the OS. It's like putting a V8 engine in 10,000lb truck and assuming that it will be faster than a 2,000lb car with a V6.

We all know the guys over in Cupertino will not make a machine with sub par performance. Smoothness, ease of use and reliability come standard in every last one of their wonderful products. This is why Apple has been so successful. This is why so much excitement surrounds the release of every new product. And this is why the "New iPad" will be just as amazing as the original regardless of the "specs."

(Early) 2011 Macbook Pro, 2.2Ghz i7, 16GB Ram, 750GB HDD // (Mid) 2011 iMac, 3.4Ghz i7, 16GB Ram, 256 SDD + 1TB // Original iPad 64GB Wifi // iPhone 4 16GB // iPod Nano // iPad 3rd Gen (in the mail)

 

[swordfish5736]

this is kind of useless in comparing ipad 2 to the new ipad. It even says it on the geekbench website:


"Finally, Geekbench 2 only measures processor and memory performance which means systems with similar processors but different graphics cards (such as some MacBooks and MacBook Pros) will have similar scores."

so yes we may see some improvement in certain tests cause of the memory. Apple didnt upgrade the processor in the A5 they upgraded the GPU and ram

 

[Bensalama21]

There's a certain amount of truth *and* irony in that statement.

Very true!

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows Phone OS 7.5; Trident/5.0; IEMobile/9.0; HTC; TITAN X310e))

In the current mobile space, you only need to look ay iOS and Windows Pone 7 to see that specs aren't everything.

As much as I love Android, it does seem to require more grunt to get adequate performance from it.
Those iPad specs seem fine as they are, especially that GPU on offer.

 

[Bensalama21]

Oh no! Why did I just throw away my 12-core Mac Pro? I was under the impression I would be able to run After Effects and Premier on the new iPad! I knew I should have been rational!

But seriously folks. We all know that in general Macs and iOS devices can do twice the work with half power since Windows and Android are so grossly bloated. FanDroids and Windards never seem to be able to grasp this fact. Their favorite argument: This Windows laptop has a 12.4Ghz processors and 100Gb of Ram and it only costs 11 dollars vs your MacBook Pro that cost 2000 dollars. Well why is that last year the MacBook Pro was regarded as "The Fastest Laptop We've ever tested" by multiple, reliable sources? It obviously doesn't have the obnoxious specs as an Alienware Laptop PC. How come the Alienware isn't branded as a workstation grade machine. Its because Specs vs Performance are relative to the OS. It's like putting a V8 engine in 10,000lb truck and assuming that it will be faster than a 2,000lb car with a V6.

We all know the guys over in Cupertino will not make a machine with sub par performance. Smoothness, ease of use and reliability come standard in every last one of their wonderful products. This is why Apple has been so successful. This is why so much excitement surrounds the release of every new product. And this is why the "New iPad" will be just as amazing as the original regardless of the "specs."

Amen! Windows users care about specs because it is a difference between a very slow PC and a slow PC... For macs, it's funny how besides when I use Final Cut Pro and start up times, I can barely notice a difference between my quad-core macbook pro and my 2009 Macbook. Why? Because Apple knows how to integrate everything together.

 

[whooleytoo]

Keeping the CPU more or less the same makes sense, in avoiding fragmentation. If, say, a games developer updates the graphics in their game to the new iPad's resolution, the game will likely perform on a similar level; just with higher resolution graphics.

OTOH, if they had significantly boosted the CPU as well, games developers would be tempted into incorporating higher poly-count models and scenes for the new iPad, which wouldn't work on older models.