gen 1 = series 0?, series 0 vs. series 1 vs series 2

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Luba, Sep 9, 2016.

  1. Luba macrumors 65816

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #1
    Apple hasn't made it clear what's under the hood. I have a gen 1 stainless steel. I like everything about it, except it's slow. Perhaps watchOS 3 will be enough to speed things up to my satisfaction. Meanwhile, I did order a series 2 and will be waiting until the end of the month to get it.

    Is my gen 1 in effect, a series 0, meaning that the series 1 is faster than my gen 1 watch? If yes, it would be nice to know how fast the series 1 vs series 0. And how fast series 2 vs series 0. Anybody here know this information?

    Seems like Apple mis-priced the gen 1 AW which then required a few price reductions. And now retailers are heavily discounting their gen 1 inventory. Looks like best I can hope for is getting half of what I paid for my gen 1. If I can only get 25% of what I paid, I think I'll just keep it and hope that watchOS 3 will give me a 33% boost in speed.
     
  2. Julien macrumors G4

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #2
    Do you want me to run a side by side test right quick and post a video of it?:eek:

    Here is Apple's specs.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. Luba thread starter macrumors 65816

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #3

    That'll be great to see a video. How do you have a series 2 to run this test?? :)
     
  4. JohnApples, Sep 9, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2016

    JohnApples macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2014
    #4
    Some interesting things to note:

    Apple no longer appears to have the "Sport" designation on the Watch itself. It's now only used to refer to the bands.

    The new Sport models (sorry, Aluminum models) for series 2 now have a ceramic back, instead of "composite".
     
  5. KrisLord macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Location:
    Northumberland, UK
    #5
    Ceramic back is only on series 2, not series 1 (as per screenshot above)
     
  6. Julien macrumors G4

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #6
    It is called sarcasm to answer a rhetorical/unknowable question since no one here (or anyone not NDAed) has a Series 2 :apple:Watch to answer.
     
  7. Luba thread starter macrumors 65816

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #7

    Ah, ok . . . missed it.

    Read on another thread that my gen 1 or series 0 processor is a single core S1, while the series 1 is a dual-core S1. Would that mean it's 50% faster than my processor??
     
  8. JohnApples macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2014
    #8
    Whoops, my bad. Not sure how I misread that. Will change my post.
     
  9. Julien macrumors G4

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #9
    WOW, so you just rephrased your same rhetorical/unknowable question. :D

    All we know is what Apple said at the event and what is on the Apple site (plus a handful of event 'peek' videos). If I remember correctly Apple claimed that the S2 was 50% faster than the S1. The S1P (Series 1) seems to have the same CPU as the S2 but other 'left over' or inferior chips so it is very likely to be less than 50% faster than the S1. However without objective testing there is NO way to independently verify any type of performance gains.
     
  10. Luba thread starter macrumors 65816

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #10

    Well, I know we can't get exact figures, but if series 0 is a single core and series 1 is a dual core, I believe, in general, when it comes to computer processors you would get a 50% increase. So a quad core would be around 50% faster than a dual core, if the apps can take advantage of the quad cores. I believe that's the general rule of thumb, no?
     
  11. mlody macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2012
    Location:
    Windy City
    #11
    My wife is interested in the Apple Watch, heck, she was interested in it since pretty much day one, but I told her to stay away from a gen 1 product.

    Now, it seems like we have two many choices. She does not care about 50m water resistance nor GPS, but I am concerned about the actual performance. We all know that original Apple Watch is slow; however, our concern now is how much faster is S1P vs original S1 and if there is any significant difference between S1P and the new S2?
     
  12. Defender2010 macrumors 68030

    Defender2010

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Location:
    England
    #12
    Keep your current Watch - watchOS 3 makes a big difference.
     
  13. Luba, Sep 9, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2016

    Luba thread starter macrumors 65816

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #13
    Great news. It's too much of a hassle selling used stuff. I used to have fun with it.
     

Share This Page