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 iPad 5 Spec's Leaked: 2Gb of Ram Confirmed
- Thread starter lewisd25
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He only has the hardware (from what I have seen from his images, that appears true; just the hardware in the casing), so there is not screen.
----------
It is unofficially confirmed. Just wait until the teardowns for the official
----------
I found the iPad mini to be average for gaming. Well when I say that; it was still better that all other 7'' tablets at that time
Actually, 256mb of Ram for iPad 1 and 512mb for iPad 2 wasn't seen as great for the time. Many people weren't happy with it and believed they should have been doubled in both cases. As for 2GB in iPad 5? Well, if it's true, I reckon that NOBODY will complain about that.
Last edited:
You are right. The iPad 1 only had 256Mb of RAM as development costs were so high for such a large screen. Well, that is what I believe any way...
----------
2Gb of RAM is going to be great
Lol don't make excuses for apple's stingy choices. Just like how one guy tried to tell me that 2GB ram wouldn't fit in the iPhone 5 and 5s.
Seriously though, they sell the iPad for a lot of money, and a laptop of equivalent price cost a lot more to make than the iPad does. Screen can't be the reason why they'd sacrifice on ram.
Of course if you're calculating in R&D prices that's always different, but everything should be assumed with that not being a factor unless it's a last resort retort hah.
I think the increased RAM would have an affect on the iPhones shot battery life though; the iPad is not so much a problem.
I think more likely it was a test case. They skimped because it was a new market and unsure how people would take to an iPad. Why break the bank on a gamble?
It's possible, but to my own knowledge RAM effecting battery life is only a very minimal factor. However I will not dispute that possibility, but I think it is much more reasonable to assume that apple was simply too stingy. Because if you really wanted to argue it, you could say that they did the same thing for all their products....to preserve battery life. But in reality, ram is very expensive, and that's more likely the reason - dey cheap lol
RAM works differently from flash storage.
Increasing Flash storage however is purely down to physical space and cost. Because Apple control both hardware & software, they are in a position to be able to try and increase efficiency and reduce resource requirements.
For sure, part of the reason iPad 1 and iPad mini would seem a little under specified though would be because they are introductory products and Apple won't invest too much into these devices until they are proven sellers.
- 2GB RAM takes roughly twice as much power as 1GB RAM of the same spec.
- 2GB Flash storage however uses roughly the same amount of power as 1GB flash storage.
Increasing Flash storage however is purely down to physical space and cost. Because Apple control both hardware & software, they are in a position to be able to try and increase efficiency and reduce resource requirements.
For sure, part of the reason iPad 1 and iPad mini would seem a little under specified though would be because they are introductory products and Apple won't invest too much into these devices until they are proven sellers.
Your post made baby Jesus cry. The RAM in "i" devices is on the CPU die. It's not that much more expensive to add more RAM, though it takes up more space on the die. The amount of power to run the additional RAM is negligible.
The additional RAM on the iPad will help it multitask better in iOS 7. 64-bit opcodes take up a bit more space than 32-bit ones (not double, because of the increased efficiency and functionality of each opcode in 64-bit), so the extra RAM is welcomed.
Add me to the list of Day-1 purchasers. I have to upgrade my iPad 1!
Add me to the list of Day-1 purchasers. I have to upgrade my iPad 1!
Now that will be a massive upgrade!
It was either a iPhone 5S or a iPad 5. My iPhone 4's ability to run iOS 7 decently was the deciding factor. It works just fine. My iPad, however, not so much.
It was either a iPhone 5S or a iPad 5. My iPhone 4's ability to run iOS 7 decently was the deciding factor. It works just fine. My iPad, however, not so much.
The jump from 1 to 2 was a big improvement for me - the additional RAM really showed! I enjoyed the jump to the 3 just for the screen; never really saw much by way of performance though. The jump to the 4 was actually the smallest jump but I know it was a big gain for some users - mostly in games but I still wanted to switch so all my devices were using lightning.
I do agree that an increase to 2GB in RAM for the 5 would be noticeable though, lots of browser tabs tend to show up a lack of RAM.
Your post made baby Jesus cry. The RAM in "i" devices is on the CPU die. It's not that much more expensive to add more RAM, though it takes up more space on the die. The amount of power to run the additional RAM is negligible.
The additional RAM on the iPad will help it multitask better in iOS 7. 64-bit opcodes take up a bit more space than 32-bit ones (not double, because of the increased efficiency and functionality of each opcode in 64-bit), so the extra RAM is welcomed.
Add me to the list of Day-1 purchasers. I have to upgrade my iPad 1!
I agree completely. I did not know the ram was located directly on the die itself also (as cache is) but that makes sense. RAM still remains to be one of those most expensive parts of a computer (or phone). You basically stated the same thing as what I did, but more politically correct. I don't know everything about all configurations but I know enough about general concepts to still provide the right answer
Here is a news report to the leaked specs of the iPad 5 and mini 2. http://www.iphonehacks.com/2013/09/ipad-mini-2-specs-leaked.html#.UlLXBba9Kc0
Last edited:
He does have a point though, some iOS devices age much more gracefully than others. The iPad 1 wasn't "great for its time", the RAM limitations became very obvious very quickly. It could barely keep a single Safari tab in memory and complex apps tended to crash rather often. In contrast, the iPad 2 holds up pretty well. The iPad 3 on the other hand is ageing very badly; the A5X is just not cut out for the Retina display. Same goes for the iPhones - the 3GS remains usable until today (on iOS 5 at least, which is two OS-jumps), while the iPhone 3G wasn't even good for one OS revision (ask anyone who tried to run iOS 4 on that turd).
That's totally wrong yet again. There is no implementation of Rogue that will deliver 1TFlops/sec. The G6630 will not and is not intended for that. Some future Rogue iteration with 16 clusters might but not the G6630 with 6 clusters.
PS3 and Xbox are around 240GFlops/sec in total.