I have the 9.7 Pro and am very happy with it. If a new one comes out down the road that is better, I can just sell this one and upgrade. No big deal, and no waiting for "the next one". I'd rather enjoy the device now.
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 Pro 9.7" 8th slowest out of all iPads from start up
- Thread starter ACG12
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've never had an issue with only having 2GB of RAM. The first iPad Air was crippled by the only one gig of RAM.
But on my Pro and Mini two gigs don't ever feel like a limit.
I never experience refreshes on Safari tabs, maybe sometimes on Games that have been left in the background for a while, but of course with the speed of the Pro means that you don't have to wait long for it to get it back running.
Fine, the big Pro wouldn't haven't to reload as much, but it has more pixels to push, it's bigger so more can be whacked in for heating and space I'd imagine.
iOS is really efficient. I have a old MacBook Air 11" that has 2GB of RAM and with El Capitan and r memory management and compression it never has a problem. So surely for iOS it's not that big a problem, right?
But on my Pro and Mini two gigs don't ever feel like a limit.
I never experience refreshes on Safari tabs, maybe sometimes on Games that have been left in the background for a while, but of course with the speed of the Pro means that you don't have to wait long for it to get it back running.
Fine, the big Pro wouldn't haven't to reload as much, but it has more pixels to push, it's bigger so more can be whacked in for heating and space I'd imagine.
iOS is really efficient. I have a old MacBook Air 11" that has 2GB of RAM and with El Capitan and r memory management and compression it never has a problem. So surely for iOS it's not that big a problem, right?
What is it with you people coming round here and trying to confuse us with your sensible logic. It's just not right I tells ya
None of my iPads have ever really bothered me (I've had them all bar the 9.7" Pro) I generally upgrade when a new one comes out so even the old ones with less than a gig were tolerable at the time.
I'm with you though, by the time it got to the Air 2 I never found myself wishing it had more memory. It did everything just fine. If it wasn't for the 12.9" Pro coming along I'd probably still have my Air 2 and I'd still be happy with it.
You're dead right too, iOS is incredibly efficient at doing what it needs to, to keep things ticking along. Obviously more memory means you get more Safari tabs open with less reloads and such. But even on my 1Gig iPhone 6+ that doesn't bother me much. I'm either on WiFi or 4G 99% of the time so pages load in the blink of an eye anyway and I've yet to encounter an app that gives me problems. This is actually the first time I haven't upgraded my iPhone as soon as a new one comes out, simply because I think the 6+ is good enough to do me at least until the 7 rolls along.
Just to put a graphical representation to what you're thinking, because we all like piccies surely
Here's a couple of screens I took not long ago when I was debugging one of my apps. Ones the 12.9" Pro, the others my iPhone 6+. Both with lots of apps in the background, including Safari with lots of tabs open, the iPad was even streaming from Apple Music in the background too at the time. And obviously my game is running while I test its impact on the system. I think the results are actually quite surprising.
iPad Pro 12.9"
iPhone 6 Plus
But all that said, I'm never going to say that more memory isn't better, of course it is, and we'd all like as much as we can possibly get really.
All I'm saying is that in the real world, especially for normal users who don't sit on these forums and other websites and analyse every aspect of iDevice components like many of us do.
For the people who buy the iPad they like and just get on with using it. The memory we are getting just now in the iPads and iPhones isn't the major bottleneck when it comes to overall system performance, and that means more than just reloading a web page.
I'm going to stop waffling on now, bloody morphine
No, I could go out and get an iPad Pro if I wanted. I've got the resources and the Apple Store is a 15 minute walk from my home. I may still do that, but I love a good deal and the refurb 128GB iPad Air 2 at $599 is also tempting and might make a suitable stop gap measure until the next refresh.
It appears to be and that's actually a very good point. I'd like to see the test again with undamaged iPads that are all either wifi only or cellular. He's using leftovers from previous videos
Pad.Odiously.Specced?
Painfully.Ornery.System memory?
[doublepost=1460817366][/doublepost]
The Air 2 is still a brilliant system and a bit of a bargain in some places. It'll last a few years yet. I think the Pro will outlast it by a couple of years, but most folk would probably have upgraded by then anyway.
one theory is,
since he 'started' all iPads by connecting them to power outlet,
--> all iPads are completely out of battery
--> iPads need to charge to some certain battery level before power itself up?
--> latest iPads have a larger power consumption/larger battery? so they need to charge longer before booting up?
(iPad pro 12.9 may be connected to usb-c source so a lot faster charging.)
since he 'started' all iPads by connecting them to power outlet,
--> all iPads are completely out of battery
--> iPads need to charge to some certain battery level before power itself up?
--> latest iPads have a larger power consumption/larger battery? so they need to charge longer before booting up?
(iPad pro 12.9 may be connected to usb-c source so a lot faster charging.)
this thread is going to live in infamy!
pages of debate over the slow boot time of one bent iPad that doesn't remotely resemble average or expected performance. and yet i'm sure it will continue to be discussed as though it is somehow relevant.
its like posting a picture of a mouldy orange with the statement that no one should eat oranges because this is what they all look like.
You orangeist, it might be a perfectly nice underneath all of that mould, you just need to take the time to talk to it and get to know it before writing them off as societies outcasts.
This is the fruit and veg appreciation society website isn't it? I saw Apple and signed up.
Damn it, I'm in the wrong place again
You orangeist, it might be a perfectly nice underneath all of that mould, you just need to take the time to talk to it and get to know it before writing them off as societies outcasts.
This is the fruit and veg appreciation society website isn't it? I saw Apple and signed up.
Damn it, I'm in the wrong place again
in retrospect, i really blew the fruit analogy opportunity here.
I just timed my 9.7 Pro. 16 seconds from power switch to login screen.
What should I do? Is it a pile of garbage? I'm afraid.
I think that the only remedy would be to see if it blends, and then throw it out.
I wondered myself that the other day, and couldn't find anything to suggest that it does.
Now the lightening port seems to be a slower one, USB 2 not 3, would that indicate to us the use of a slower storage medium?
Perhaps but not necessarily.
Just been poking around the internet again, comparing iFixit Teardowns and interpretations thereupon.
It would seem both use NAND Flash storage with the same controllers, but the iPad Pro 12.9 has Toshiba made chips and the iPad Pro 9.7 has Hynix made chips.
So effectively they should be the same?
Just transfer speeds over the lightening are not, which begs the question, why would they do that?
Edit:
So I found another site that confirmed my suspicions, and it turns out the new faster storage controller is part of the A9 chip, and is also present in the iPhone 6s.
It's also a case that different storage sizes are made by different chip manufacturers, so being made by different people shouldn't necessarily cause a huge effect on speed.
If the faster storage access is indeed many thanks to the new controller and that part of the A9 family, then it makes little sense for the iPad Pro 9.7 not also to benefit from it, especially if the iPhone 6s does too.
A summary of what I found myself too:
http://blog.fosketts.net/2015/09/28...t-cpu-and-graphics-in-iphone-6s-and-ipad-pro/
It would seem both use NAND Flash storage with the same controllers, but the iPad Pro 12.9 has Toshiba made chips and the iPad Pro 9.7 has Hynix made chips.
So effectively they should be the same?
Just transfer speeds over the lightening are not, which begs the question, why would they do that?
Edit:
So I found another site that confirmed my suspicions, and it turns out the new faster storage controller is part of the A9 chip, and is also present in the iPhone 6s.
It's also a case that different storage sizes are made by different chip manufacturers, so being made by different people shouldn't necessarily cause a huge effect on speed.
If the faster storage access is indeed many thanks to the new controller and that part of the A9 family, then it makes little sense for the iPad Pro 9.7 not also to benefit from it, especially if the iPhone 6s does too.
A summary of what I found myself too:
http://blog.fosketts.net/2015/09/28...t-cpu-and-graphics-in-iphone-6s-and-ipad-pro/
Last edited:
The storage itself, internally is actually quite quick. Not as fast as say the ssd in the Surface Pro 4, but faster than almost any other tablet on average.
The only different is as you say, the Lightning port. The 12.9" has a USB3 host controller and the 9.7" has a USB2 host controller. So the internal speed of the two iPads will be very similar. Only transfers to and from the iPads via the Lightning port will be faster on the 12.9".