iOS 7 really shows that iPad 3 is a trial product

Discussion in 'iOS 7' started by SakuraSuki, Jul 29, 2013.

  1. SakuraSuki macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    #1
    The Apple A5X really isn't any powerful than Apple A5... The quad core graph card really was made for higher resolution. iOS 7 on iPad 3 is like a snail moving on her ground. Everything just take a second to respond. The experience is day and night compare with iPad Mini , iPhone 4S and even iPod Touch 5G...IOS 7 just butter smooth on these devices and I am sure iOS 7 runs great on iPad 4 and iPhone 5.

    iOS 7 really shows iPad 3 just a trial product for hat retina display.
     
  2. mr100percent macrumors newbie

    mr100percent

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2013
    Location:
    Ohio
    #2
    No

    That's ridiculous. I'm using it on an iPad 2, and while beta 2 and beta 3 were sluggish, beta 4 feels faster. Also, it's a BETA. iOS 6 betas also had some speed issues because of the debugging code littered throughout the OS.

    Complain if the final version is as slow as the beta. It's improving with each new release.
     
  3. Decimotox macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    #3
    I don't see why the iPad 3 would run more slowly than an iPad mini. The 5X is technically better than the 5, wouldn't you think? Perhaps your device is just messed
     
  4. SakuraSuki thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    #4
    Like I said, iOS 7 runs so much better on iPad Mini than iPad 3 shows something. Really, Apple A5+ really struggles on powering that retina display.iPad 3 even lags occasionally on iOS 6.

    ----------

    No. A5+ uses exactly same processor but with quad core graphic and higher memory for that ultra-high resolution. iPad Mini uses low resolution screen A5 is more than sufficient, A5+ however not. A6+ is more suited for that retina display
     
  5. ErikGrim macrumors 68030

    ErikGrim

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    #5
    The iPad 3 was a bit prematurely released. Which is why it was replaced with the 4 as soon as the A6 was ready.
     
  6. exynos-octa macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    #6
    The iPad 3 is not the great of a device really. Rare though yet interesting.
     
  7. Decimotox macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    #7
    Maybe it's because I'm drunk, but this makes no sense to me.
     
  8. jonnyb macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #8
    Neither does this
     
  9. Megakazbek macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #9
    The boost of processing speed in iPad 3 was not enough to fully compensate for its ultra-high resolution, so it is overall a bit slower than iPad 2/mini.
     
  10. WeegieMac Guest

    WeegieMac

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #10
    I'm convinced that people who don't have a clue what they're talking about just like to come on here and regurgitate stuff they're read and heard elsewhere in a vain attempt to sound knowledgeable when it comes to the whole iPad 3 debacle.

    I got my iPad 4 just under two weeks ago, we get a corporate discount and offer to take up an iPad every year with the company I work for so I got the 3 last year and opted to take the 4 this year. I was a strong defender of the iPad 3 and remain so despite owning and now using a 4 (my wife has since taken ownership of my 3).

    When using iOS 6 (I've not tried iOS 7 on iPad 3 as yet because my wife doesn't want to use beta software) there is very, very little difference in the OS performance. You can see that the iPad 4 is just that little bit smoother in the UI animations, but I mean just ... we're not talking an iPhone 4 versus iPhone 5 style gulf here.

    Where iPad 4 does excel, and this was my main reason for getting one, is in gaming performance. Games like Real Racing 3 and NFS Most Wanted gain extra frames per second and NOVA 3 running full retina resolution with all effects enabled is a sight to behold, and it holds a lightning quick frame rate in the process.

    However, NOVA 3 aside, it's not a night and day comparison. Real Racing 3 and NFS look identical, there's no loss of textures or reflection effects (although NFS does have motion blur when using nitrous on the iPad 4), and the iPad 3 stands up really well in the current game line up.

    Titles like Asphalt 8, Modern Combat 5, and Space Hulk may well begin to show the gulf between the A5X and A6X but the iPad 3 is not some bastardised device that's woefully inferior. It's a superbly capable device.
     
  11. ValSalva macrumors 68040

    ValSalva

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Location:
    Burpelson AFB
    #11
    I agree. IMHO if Apple hadn't released the iPad Mini with it's new dock connector it wouldn't have even taken the opportunity to release the iPad 4 when it did.
     
  12. Bathplug macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    #12
    The best ipad is probably ipad 2. Ipad 3 is a bit laggy, slightly thicker and warmer and didnt even last a year before games were to good for it as some (gta vice city & modern combat 4) are a bit sluggish on it. The ipad 4 is what the 3 should've been but it looks the same and basically just added the new lighting port. The ipad 2 was the best one so far, 3 and 4 are skippable and the 5 will be worth the upgrade from all iPads.
     
  13. Zcott macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Location:
    Belfast, Ireland
    #13
    Now that sounds suspiciously like someone who is still using an iPad 2 and trying to justify it ;-)
     
  14. Bathplug macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    #14
    I have an iPad 3 actually.
     
  15. liamry macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Location:
    Scotland
    #15
    My iPad 2 is fine, no problems at all on any Betas
     
  16. SakuraSuki thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    #16
    Yes, iPad 3 is an inferior product if it doesn't offer better performance than pervious product but 2x slower than successor product. I don't have iPad 2 now, so I am using iPad Mini as substitute, since iPad Mini basically is sunk down iPad 2 with better camera and wifi.

    Here you go, benchmarks:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    iPad 3 SunSpider Java Test

    [​IMG]

    iPad Mini SunSpider Java Test

    [​IMG]

    You see, iPad Mini even achieved better score than iPad 3 on Java test.

    [​IMG]

    iPad 4 got 2.3x score than iPad 3.

    The fact is that iPad 3 not much faster than iPad 2 or iPad Mini and sometime sluggish performance during intensive tasks (web pages with loads of pictures and video or gaming), shows iPad 3 just a test product for Apple.
     
  17. batting1000 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Location:
    Florida
    #17
    How does that show it was a test product lol
     
  18. Paradoxally macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    #18
    Um......the iPod touch 5G runs on A5, you cannot compare it to an iPad as the iPad 3 blows it out of the water in graphical performance alone.

    Only the A6(X) are faster.
     
  19. Nanasaki macrumors 6502

    Nanasaki

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    #19
    iPod Touch 5G A5 under-clocked to 800MHz... So it bond to be slower.
     
  20. Beachhead999 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    #20
    Its slow on ipad 4. especially typing.
     
  21. SakuraSuki thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    #21
    To me, iPad 3 just for Apple to test how retina display. The A5X is there for test general performance with iPad 3 and see if it needs a more capable processor.

    iPad 4 released half year after iPad 3 shows that Apple conclude A5X isn't really good for powering the retina display. So they decided to discontinue iPad 3 and push for iPad 4.

    You can argue Apple wants to unifies the lighting connector, but Apple can do so with revision of iPad 3, much like Apple did with iPad 2 with 32nm processor.

    The fact that Apple put a better processor in there means A5X wasn't a good choice.
     
  22. batting1000 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Location:
    Florida
    #22
    It may not have been a good choice, but that doesn't mean they did it intentionally. I think they released the iPad 4 knowing they made a mistake AND to give the iPad the Lightning connecting. I don't think you can say they released a trial product though.
     
  23. Armen macrumors 604

    Armen

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #23
    something something beta something something.
     
  24. WeegieMac, Jul 30, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2013

    WeegieMac Guest

    WeegieMac

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #24
    Did you even read my post or do you just like the sound of your own voice?

    Why are you telling me things I already know?

    Why are you talking to me like an idiot?

    Why are you talking to me like I own an iPad 3?

    I had a 3, I now have a 4. I have sat with the aforementioned games (go back and READ my post) and compared them, there's not much between the performance of current games. I acknowledged that the 4 will streak ahead with new titles like those also mentioned.

    Benchmarks don't always equate to real world use. And oh, don't make me repeat myself again. And since it was you who started being an arse first, go and play with your little iPad mini and it's two year old specs ... I'm off to use my A6X enabled iPad 4. You're mocking iPad 3 owners for having a "test product" when you're just as gullible by buying a shrunk down iPad 2 (a machine you already paid for) running specs from almost two years previous? Do one.
     
  25. SakuraSuki thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    #25
    Just to show you iPad 3 is inferior product. It doesn't offer better performance than pervious product but 2x slower than successor product

    Benchmarks don't always equate to real world use, true. But it shows the performance for each device, otherwise, benchmarking would be total useless.
     

Share This Page