Four New iPad Pro Models Spotted in Chinese User Manual on Apple's Website [Updated]

[Michael Scrip]

The switch from 3G to 4G seemed much more dramatic.

Exactly. I remember having a 3G phone in a 4G world... and it sucked. Because 3G sucked.

But 4G is pretty good today. So I'm not necessarily excited for 5G (though I'd take it if my next device has it built-in)

Another thing to consider is which flavor of 5G your carrier has.

There is mid-band T-Mobile 5G which provides greater coverage.

But there is also mmWave Verizon 5G which only works outdoors on the sidewalk in visible view of the node.

So as a Verizon customer... the chances of me regularly using 5G in the next few years is slim to none.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Exactly. I remember having a 3G phone in a 4G world... and it sucked. Because 3G sucked.

But 4G is pretty good today. So I'm not necessarily excited for 5G (though I'd take it if my next device has it built-in)

Another thing to consider is which flavor of 5G your carrier has.

There is mid-band T-Mobile 5G which provides greater coverage.

But there is also mmWave Verizon 5G which only works outdoors on the sidewalk in visible view of the node.

So as a Verizon customer... the chances of me regularly using 5G in the next few years is slim to none.

4G is good today because it's LTE.

 

[BeatCrazy]

Apple SoC design team might not even have a roadmap for A15-A16 yet and it won't be pulling out impressive performance without bigger node shrink.

A16 design is likely 'nearly locked' from a final design standpoint. I've talked with the team at Apple responsible for this. Not A16 timelines in particular, rather that's how many revisions they are working on ahead of the currently-shipping chip.
[automerge]1584471098[/automerge]

It sounds like you're focusing too much on throughput speeds.

The appeal of 5G to me is shorter latency and better management of capacity. The faster speed is just an additional bonus.

The other point (that I mentioned already) is that current 5G chipsets are better at 4G than older 4G chipsets.

Curious - what applications/scenarios are you utilizing where ~40ms LTE latency is too slow? Please don't say web page requests

 

[tonywalker23]

I don’t know if I’m too unique of a consumer for this but an iPad Pro mini would be amazing. Not from a performance perspective but the form factor. I use my mini daily for my work and it’s much better for travel (whenever that resumes). Probably not enough demand for Apple to make it but maybe one day!

I've said that since I got my iPad Pro 11. For my use (reading and studying as a seminary student and teaching from the iPad as a youth pastor) an iPad Pro mini would be perfect! I tried the mini with the older pencil and it just wasn't ideal. Nowhere to quickly stick the pencil and no official keyboard.

If they made an iPad Pro that was around 9.5" or so I would probably get one immediately.

 

[EugW]

But what's the tangible benefit? I get that latency will be better, along with throughput and capacity, I just don't see where that's an issue with 4g today and where those improvements would actually be tangible/noticable. Don't misunderstand me, I'm genuinely ignorant and would like to know why I should pay a premium for 5G, certainly I understand that overall it's an improvement just as 4G was over 3G, I just don't see where it will help your typical wireless customer's experience. The switch from 3G to 4G seemed much more dramatic.

In areas of congestion, 5G should be more reliable than 4G. Similarly, latency should improve. While it might not always make a huge difference if you're just checking email, but if you're reliant on cellular for real workplace usage, it might make a a significant difference. That is, if it's done correctly.

The other thing is that often times, at least early on after things have been properly implemented, those with the capability to take advantage of new technology get more consistent access than those with older technology, simply because there is less congestion on the new tech. With some of local carriers here, this is exactly what happened. After 4G was implemented, those with 4G phones had consistent access. That actually diminished over time, as more and more subscribers got 4G phones. Since then the carriers have been playing catchup. Yes, you could argue it's because the carriers aren't supporting 4G well enough, but the problem is two fold: 1) They have more incentive to invest in future technologies, not past ones, and 2) 4G doesn't handle congestion as well in the first place.

Curious - what applications/scenarios are you utilizing where ~40ms LTE latency is too slow? Please don't say web page requests

Latency definitely isn't consistently <40 ms when in congested areas.

The problem is people keep arguing about near-perfect 4G LTE vs near-perfect 5G. What they should be discussing is real-world 4G LTE vs real-world 5G. And in my neck of the woods, real-world 5G actually exists.

 

[high heaven]

Why not wait longer and then use A14 instead of A13X?

 

[EugW]

Why not wait longer and then use A14 instead of A13X?

A14 would most likely be a serous downgrade in performance from A13X, just like A13 is a serious downgrade in performance from A12X.

And if Apple didn't develop A14X years in advance, it wouldn't even exist as an option this year.

 

[MacRazySwe]

I've been waiting since October. Can they just release it already? Might as well wait for the rumored Late-2020 if they don't show up soon.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Why not wait longer and then use A14 instead of A13X?

Triple cam and early A14 now, A14X when the fall/winter model that has mini-LED backlighting and 5G is ready?

If there’s going to be a price increase for the new features, they could split it up. $50 now, $100-ish later.

 

[Anson_431]

4G is good today because it's LTE.

Yeah I actually quite agree with what you said (if I'm not mistaken). I don't think a lot of people even understood what LTE means, perhaps more accurately, the number of people who knows the definition of LTE is slim to none.

It took a really really long time for 4G to actually become mature and widely usable, yet if my memory serves me right, we are not currently utilizing the full bandwidth of 4G either due to multiple constraints.

Do kindly correct me if I'm wrong though!

 

[name99]

Now the questions are:

• Which CPUs are being used? A13x, or already A14x? Aka is the iPad Pro late to the party or early?
• How much RAM do these new iPads have? Still 4GB, or maybe 8GB across the board?

A13X.
But there are multiple interesting questions about it.

- still 4+4 cores? Or upgraded to (6+6? even 8+8?) along the way to the ARM macs... The first benchmark leaks will answer that.

- still 7nm or Apple's first 5nm product? I'd bet on 5nm. We'll be able to guess this from the chip size after iFixit does their first teardown.

- interesting packaging? The A12X was a remarkable package, details here:

The Packaging of Apple’s A12X is… Weird | Siliconica

sst.semiconductor-digest.com

Basically a cheaper version of the same 2.5D packaging that's used for HBM or for AMD's chiplets. There are many reasons for Apple to keep pushing tech like this; DRAM so close to the chip uses less power (and less space), and allows for the construction of a single SoC out of pieces (like AMD). Will the A13X be just a slightly optimized version of the A12X packaging, or will it be the next experiment as Apple keeps learning? (For example, again as part of learning for the ARM macs, Apple could fabricate all the "standard" A13 stuff (security, flash, memory controller, media, ISP, ...) on one small 7nm die, and the "performance" stuff (say 8+8 cores and a GPU 2 or 3x the iPhone size) on a separate 5nm die...

 

[MRrainer]

I'm still trying to figure out why Apple needs stores at all. I haven't bought an iPhone or iPad from an Apple store in like...

...ever.

Everything's online. Same prices. No driving. No standing in line. Overnight delivery.

I only bought cables and accessories there. The store is rather very conveniently located and has a greater selection than closer stores of other retailers.

But the Store is more about experiencing the products anyway. That was Steve's original vision about it.

Remember the original iPad? Pundits laughed about it. People had to hold it in their hands to appreciate it. And then they literally had lines of buyers around the block.

Yes, I order online, too. But a lot of times, the haptic sensation of holding a product in your hand cannot be replaced. And certainly not for Apple products.

 

[mi7chy]

Check out the google translate of the manual:
"The iPad Pro (11-inch) and iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (3rd generation) contain lasers that may damage the lasers during repair or disassembly and may cause harmful invisible infrared laser radiation. "

Is this the FaceID or is this part of the new camera?

Time of flight laser for AR which is more of a gimmick and not enough of an upgrade. I'd only consider upgrading if it has:

OLED
8GB or more DRAM
Less gimped iPadOS or preferably MacOS on ARM port
Less restrictions on what apps you can run like emulators, Kodi, torrent clients, etc.
DeX functionality
VP9 and AV1 hardware decoding

 

[turbineseaplane]

Agreed. In the year of 2020 it does not make sense to have various model due to differences in small feature.

$ure it doe$
-Tim

 

[deconstruct60]

Maybe I don’t quite understand your post but I don’t see Apple doing both an A13X and A14X in so short a time period.

The A13X may have finished a while back and the camera subsystem has been a hang up. One of these model numbers was registered back in 2019 and has sat unused for an extended amount of time. That could shorten the gap. If Apple threw more than usual money and resources (people , sim time , etc) then could run concurrent teams longer too.

On the other side of the coin. Apple may not have access to "all you can eat" 5nm wafers at the yields that supports the whole normal iPad Pro unit flow. They could get some more expensive dies into a smaller number of higher priced (and higher net margin) system and still keep selling these Spring iPad Pro at more reasonable prices. ( think iMac 27" and iMac Pro 27" in terms of relative price points and volume. ). AMD isn't as poor as they were at the initial bidding process for 7nm wafer starts. Huawei isn't sitting still. Qualcomm , etc. Apple is certainly on the fewer unit sales at higher margins focus for products for last couple of years. Not sure why they wouldn't be fully drinking that kool-aid in their 2020 plans for iPad Pro. [ There was a story about how all of the TSMC 5nm 2020 capacity is fully booked. Not that Apple bought all of it. ]

Another curve ball could be whether Apple moves AppleTV to A12X or A13X and how they are trying to place relative to the gaming consoles. ( not as equivalent of 2020 versions but more affordable and "good enough"). Or throwing some A14X into an iPadBook ( reborn MacBook one USB-C port wonder ). The A__X aren't necessarily just heading to iPad Pro's.

No software really taxes the A12X as it is, as far as I can tell.

That is in part because iOS throttled apps. ( Anandtech had to modify Spec benchmarks to run for memory footprint. ). iPadOS doesn't have to throttle as much.

If there’s an A13X, I’d next expect an A15X next year. But who knows.

Actually the A13X would be somewhat of the odd duck. They have mostly followed process shrinks on the A_X sequence. If jumping to A13X there is decent chance there an issue on those transitions. Either longer/harder or cost implications. A15/A15X probably will be on a variant of 5nm also as A14 will be. Probably no huge jump in transistor budget.

 

[deconstruct60]

Perhaps. Counter-idea: A14X development hit a road block or the design goal changed to accommodate a changed product roadmap and A13X was deemed necessary because A12X wouldn’t stand up as well to A14?

Once the 14X design hit a hard block (and knew it was a hard block) it would hard to loop back and do a A13X and still get it out in less than the time . Unless hit that major block really early in the design, it doesn't line up with other rumor that there is a A14X queued up for late 2020 in a different iPad Pro.

A13X perhaps because it had something couldn't wait for the 14X timeline to provide. For example the Neural/ML/AI unit coupled to the new camera system to do AR at levels Apple wanted. That wouldn't have necessarily been a reactive "deemed necessary". Could have been there all along. Could be new software contributing to driving the insertion of the A13X here.

 

[kazmac]

I'll take new Mac Mini and/or iMacs starting at $1200 instead, Alex. /s

 

[HarryWild]

Now the questions are:

• Which CPUs are being used? A13x, or already A14x? Aka is the iPad Pro late to the party or early?
• How much RAM do these new iPads have? Still 4GB, or maybe 8GB across the board?

It probably A13X with 6GB RAM for the 11” and 8GB for 12.9” model.

 

[iPadified]

Some calculations. Number from wikipedia. A12X is 62 % larger than A12. An A13X at 7 nm would be nearly 160 mm2 if the same ratio applies and no optimisation of 7 nm node is done. A very larger chip and larger than A9X . No, there is a chance that A13X will use 5 nm just as A10X used 10nm before the A11 at 10 nm was introduced. The A10 was at 16 nm. If production of A14 starts in April, I bet they have a "low volume" (i.e 1-2 million A13X chips) production process up a running as we speak. Never mind it will be expensive chips as long as it clears the way for the A14 chip.

 

[Pentium]

Hoping this will happen soon!

 

[MacBH928]

I think a lot of people (on here) are probably in the same situation. The current iPad Pros are way more powerful than most people will ever need, but as we know there's a refresh coming, we're holding off.

For me, native mouse support with some sort of Apple keyboard (with trackpad) is a game changer for me - I could finally look to replace my laptop with an iPad.

hardware spec is only as good as the software it runs, releasing a 4Ghz iPad that will still only run Safari and Mail app won't change much.

 

[ascender]

hardware spec is only as good as the software it runs, releasing a 4Ghz iPad that will still only run Safari and Mail app won't change much.

😐

Last time I checked, the iPads could run more than those two apps, so is this a dig at the fact they don't run macOS? Or that you can't do "proper work" on an iPad?

 

[Stuipdboy1000]

Hmmm

 

[33man]

New iPad Pro announced officially

Apple unveils new iPad Pro with LiDAR Scanner and trackpad support in iPadOS

Apple today unveiled its most advanced iPad Pro, adding an Ultra Wide camera and studio-quality mics, and a breakthrough LiDAR Scanner.

www.apple.com

 

[spinedoc77]

In areas of congestion, 5G should be more reliable than 4G. Similarly, latency should improve. While it might not always make a huge difference if you're just checking email, but if you're reliant on cellular for real workplace usage, it might make a a significant difference. That is, if it's done correctly.

The other thing is that often times, at least early on after things have been properly implemented, those with the capability to take advantage of new technology get more consistent access than those with older technology, simply because there is less congestion on the new tech. With some of local carriers here, this is exactly what happened. After 4G was implemented, those with 4G phones had consistent access. That actually diminished over time, as more and more subscribers got 4G phones. Since then the carriers have been playing catchup. Yes, you could argue it's because the carriers aren't supporting 4G well enough, but the problem is two fold: 1) They have more incentive to invest in future technologies, not past ones, and 2) 4G doesn't handle congestion as well in the first place.


Latency definitely isn't consistently <40 ms when in congested areas.

The problem is people keep arguing about near-perfect 4G LTE vs near-perfect 5G. What they should be discussing is real-world 4G LTE vs real-world 5G. And in my neck of the woods, real-world 5G actually exists.

Good stuff, will be interesting to see if it's really much benefit in practice. I know I've used my 4G phones (both on AT&T and Verizon) in very congested areas like concerts and parades where there are thousands of people around and have never had an issue, where with 3G I definitely have had issues in the same scenario. The latency I'm having a difficult time seeing the benefit there, It's not like web pages/email/etc load slowly with 4G. I run my office on my surface pro connected to my iphone often and have no issues with accessing my desktop over remote connection or accessing things like Google Drive/Google Suite.

Even streaming HD movies and such isn't an issue, playing mobile games seems decent (I've used PS4 Remote Play on my ipad and it works surprisingly well over 4G). I can see 5G being useful mostly for that last one, gaming, but how much of a demand is there for that?

Once again I'm not saying I wouldn't want 5G as it is improved technology, it just seems like we are going to get gouged for it and I still don't see any compelling benefit. I'd be curious if there was a specific app, application, or work need that would see tangible benefits. For any high data application such as gaming I see the huge Achilles heel (as always) would be data consumption, so pay a premium to suck up your data more quickly. For me 5G will be something I enjoy when it's "free", or when the technology is incorporated so I don't have to pay a premium for it such as when 4G eventually totally supplanted 3G. Or better yet when we truly get "unlimited" data.