iPad Pro Tidbits: A9X Outperforms MacBook, Apple Pencil is Weighted, T-Mobile Financing and More

[shpankey]

I find it funny he's saying the Surface is trying to do too much angle. This is a backhanded way of saying doing less is better, and we can't compete w/ the Surface and are not trying to.

The Surface doesn't "try" by the way, it does both and does both extremely well. It's a tablet when you need it to be and a laptop when you need it to be. Switching between interfaces is a button press away, or automatic if you toggle a setting. It's hard to go back to JUST a tablet only.

Nice hardware though! But so wasted. Just my opinion. I started out w/ an iPad, but needed something more professional for work, and a full blown office was critical... so I ended up w/ the Surface 3. Couldn't be happier and honestly, it's as fast as I could ever need. Runs Office, AutoCAD and any app I throw at it and super quick at doing so. Unless you're some kind of harcore gamer, this hardware is a waste. I couldn't imagine being .001 second faster being something I'd even notice. So my point is, we are at the point where it's about the software more than the hardware.

 

[Keirasplace]

My assertion was over the top because I praised a product that you didn't enjoy using? Get over yourself. Clearly not everyone is as vehemently opposed to the Surface Pro line as you are, as evidenced by millions of happy customers. Apple also has millions of customers, but also some people that don't like them.

I don't think you seem to understand that people have different preferences from you, and that that is not a cause to bludgeon someone. In fact, it is a good thing... It allows people to cross the aisle and find new ways of innovating the products that they do like. You need to grow up.

Read your own tone, because seemingly you write without knowing what you put down.
You are the one who thinks everyone thinks like you, and go with unsupported assertions.
Saying the opposite doesn't make it so.

BTW, I own dozens of Unix boxes in my own home, even as a desktop, which nobody runs really, and don't even own a Mac. So, I understand perfectly well people running different things than me. Since that's basically everyone.

 

[uid15]

TIT: the prefix is TIT, not "TID"

 

[iPadProRumor]

Hands-down the Apple iPad Pro is the best iPad in the tablet in the marketplace. I would have to say that it is one of the most innovative products that Apple has come up within the last five years. The combination of having a really great display, capacitive touch sensors, and the exceptional build quality of the tablet pencil and keyboard makes this product in a class by itself.

 

[MH01]

Read your own tone, because seemingly you write without knowing what you put down.
You are the one who thinks everyone thinks like you, and go with unsupported assertions.
Saying the opposite doesn't make it so.

BTW, I own dozens of Unix boxes in my own home, even as a desktop, which nobody runs really, and don't even own a Mac. So, I understand perfectly well people running different things than me. Since that's basically everyone.

The first paragraph you wrote. Read it to yourself over and over..... And afterwards go back in your posting history and read your replies to forum members

Kettle....pot....

 

[Abstract]

Thank goodness someone brought this up.

Geekbench is nice and everything, but it spits out a number that's inaccurate as a cross-platform performance comparison tool. In this case, it doesn't work.

The fact of the matter is that, currently, there's nothing wrong with the MBPs, MBAs (other than that they suck), or the MacBooks and their Core M processor. That's not knocking Apple, A9X, or anyone/anything else. A9X is impressive for its power consumption, but they're more suitable for things like iPads and iPhones, and that's exactly how Apple should use them right now. If you actually got OS X running on an A9X ARM processor (not difficult at all because iOS and OS X share a kernel...), the results wouldn't be pretty. Sorry A9X, but you'd suck at it.

But yes, in a few years, Apple really should sell computers with A-series chips. They'd be crazy not to do so because it already runs most apps so well. iPads are computers, and they're probably better for the web surfers, emailers, online bankers, fantasy sports players, and video streamers out there. However, if you need a computer, then buy a computer.

The other thing is that people are VERY excited about how quickly Apple makes MASSIVE leaps of progress in their A-series chips, while knocking Intel because they've been "stagnant" for ages. Intel has been stagnant because they've hit a wall, and it's the same wall Apple will hit. Apple has seemingly made huge strides into catching up with Intel because Apple were starting from so far behind.

These tests are misleading.

1. Geekbench is not an accurate depiction of relativistic efficiency and power across two completely different architectures.

Linus Tarvolds:

"[Geekbench] actually seems to have gotten worse with version 3, which you should be aware of. On ARM64, that SHA1 performance is hardware-assisted. I don’t know if SHA2 is too, but Aarch64 does apparently do SHA256 in the crypto unit, so it might be fully or partially so.

And on both ARM and x86, the AES numbers are similarly just about the crypto unit.

So basically a quarter to a third of the "integer" workloads are just utter BS. They are not comparable across architectures due to the crypto units, and even within one architecture the numbers just don’t mean much of anything.

And quite frankly, it’s not even just the crypto ones. Looking at the other GB3 "benchmarks", they are mainly small kernels: not really much different from dhrystone. I suspect most of them have a code footprint that basically fits in a L1I cache.

-Linus"

• The test are skewed towards the ARM arch without considering x86
• The test are too simple to represent real world workloads

2. The respective GPUs in these SoC are NOT doing the same amount of work. The iOS/Android benchmarks are Floating Point-16 based whereas the graphics calculations under Windows is Floating Point-32. A much more demanding and higher precision mode.

3. These test are contingent upon there being nothing else running in the background residing in memory and using CPU & GPU cycles. Windows is HUGE, so there is probably more power reserve just to run the OS than there is for all of the potential that this ARM processor has.

 

[Crzyrio]

I find it funny he's saying the Surface is trying to do too much angle. This is a backhanded way of saying doing less is better, and we can't compete w/ the Surface and are not trying to.

The Surface doesn't "try" by the way, it does both and does both extremely well. It's a tablet when you need it to be and a laptop when you need it to be. Switching between interfaces is a button press away, or automatic if you toggle a setting. It's hard to go back to JUST a tablet only.

Nice hardware though! But so wasted. Just my opinion. I started out w/ an iPad, but needed something more professional for work, and a full blown office was critical... so I ended up w/ the Surface 3. Couldn't be happier and honestly, it's as fast as I could ever need. Runs Office, AutoCAD and any app I throw at it and super quick at doing so. Unless you're some kind of harcore gamer, this hardware is a waste. I couldn't imagine being .001 second faster being something I'd even notice. So my point is, we are at the point where it's about the software more than the hardware.

The one thing that the surface does horrible is the software. All apps are not optimized for both tablet and desktop. While Microsoft has done a good job this far making Windows suitable for tablet and desktop, it is still a long way out.

It's almost contridicting saying The surface does both well and then software is more than hardware.

 

[Benjamin Frost]

The one thing that the surface does horrible is the software. All apps are not optimized for both tablet and desktop. While Microsoft has done a good job this far making Windows suitable for tablet and desktop, it is still a long way out.

It's almost contridicting saying The surface does both well and then software is more than hardware.

I disagree.

Both the software and the hardware of the Surface are horrible.

 

[Crzyrio]

I disagree.

Both the software and the hardware of the Surface are horrible.

Ummm, did you ready my post? lol

I never mentioned either of them being good

 

[monochromator]

Thank goodness someone brought this up.

Geekbench is nice and everything, but it spits out a number that's inaccurate as a cross-platform performance comparison tool. In this case, it doesn't work.

The fact of the matter is that, currently, there's nothing wrong with the MBPs, MBAs (other than that they suck), or the MacBooks and their Core M processor. That's not knocking Apple, A9X, or anyone/anything else. A9X is impressive for its power consumption, but they're more suitable for things like iPads and iPhones, and that's exactly how Apple should use them right now. If you actually got OS X running on an A9X ARM processor (not difficult at all because iOS and OS X share a kernel...), the results wouldn't be pretty. Sorry A9X, but you'd suck at it.

But yes, in a few years, Apple really should sell computers with A-series chips. They'd be crazy not to do so because it already runs most apps so well. iPads are computers, and they're probably better for the web surfers, emailers, online bankers, fantasy sports players, and video streamers out there. However, if you need a computer, then buy a computer.

The other thing is that people are VERY excited about how quickly Apple makes MASSIVE leaps of progress in their A-series chips, while knocking Intel because they've been "stagnant" for ages. Intel has been stagnant because they've hit a wall, and it's the same wall Apple will hit. Apple has seemingly made huge strides into catching up with Intel because Apple were starting from so far behind.

If you looked at my reply to that post, Linus himself says there's no denying that the Twister core already is better than core M. It's just a matter of scalability towards the higher end Mac (if apple decided to put their Arm chip inside the lower specced model), Bootcamp support, and the headache of compiling OSX for both x86 and ARM in the transition period. The A9x is fully capable of running OSX, more so than a Core M.

 

[WowAppleWow]

There's no doubt this is the most impressive tablet anyone has ever built. Performance is staggering and all the reviews I've read are hugely positive.

If you want the best possible tablet experience, there is no doubt iPad Pro is the device you quite simply must own.

I agree, I'm hoping it can truly be a laptop replacement. If so, Ill be selling the rMBP very soon.

 

[Precision Gem]

I bought the iPad Air when it first came out, and a few month later, gave my Mac Book Air to my wife. I was never using it. I have a 27" Retina desktop too. I picked up the iPad Pro Friday, and it will replace the iPad Air. So for me the iPad Pro will certainly will be a replacement for a laptop. Having the keyboard (which hasn't arrived yet ) will be very nice when needing to type longer emails etc.

 

[_illusionistk]

If you looked at my reply to that post, Linus himself says there's no denying that the Twister core already is better than core M. It's just a matter of scalability towards the higher end Mac (if apple decided to put their Arm chip inside the lower specced model), Bootcamp support, and the headache of compiling OSX for both x86 and ARM in the transition period. The A9x is fully capable of running OSX, more so than a Core M.

LOL @ Bold. You have no idea what you're talking about.

It only matches Core M in these skewed synthetics test; tests that, by Linus' own words, favors ARM's uArch. The reason it favors ARM is because those cross-ISA code specifics programs only take into account the CPU front end(decode, cache, branch prediction).. The rest is either underutilized or not at all. (Linus alluded to this very fact in the email you or I quoted)

Intel processors actually have contention algorithms built into them when the FP and INT units are vying for resources; AFAIK, no such design exist in the A-series so its very possible that the A9 could beat Intel's Core M with simple code that mixes FP and INT work(re: 'the code is too simple' -Linus). If Primatelabs actually wrote algorithms that take advantage of the 256-bit SIMD capabilities of Broadwell, then they will come out far ahead, especially since the CPU uncore is built to support the throughput and isn't just a tacked-on feature.

Like Linus alluded to again, Geekbench represents the majority of trivial code that is being ran on these CPUs and for that reason; for comparing just ISA families to ISA families, GB is okay, but for comparing ISA to a different ISA in absolute terms is completely flawed and It frustrates me when people take this as gospel without considering the differences and when these numbers mean.

GPU:

FP16 vs FP32 and the Intel chip wasn't that much slower while performing higher precision workloads...

 

[Keirasplace]

LOL @ Bold. You have no idea what you're talking about.

It only matches Core M in these skewed synthetics test; tests that, by Linus' own words, favors ARM's uArch. The reason it favors ARM is because those cross-ISA code specifics programs only take into account the CPU front end(decode, cache, branch prediction).. The rest is either underutilized or not at all. (Linus alluded to this very fact in the email you or I quoted)

Intel processors actually have contention algorithms built into them when the FP and INT units are vying for resources; AFAIK, no such design exist in the A-series so its very possible that the A9 could beat Intel's Core M with simple code that mixes FP and INT work(re: 'the code is too simple' -Linus). If Primatelabs actually wrote algorithms that take advantage of the 256-bit SIMD capabilities of Broadwell, then they will come out far ahead, especially since the CPU uncore is built to support the throughput and isn't just a tacked-on feature.

Like Linus alluded to again, Geekbench represents the majority of trivial code that is being ran on these CPUs and for that reason; for comparing just ISA families to ISA families, GB is okay, but for comparing ISA to a different ISA in absolute terms is completely flawed and It frustrates me when people take this as gospel without considering the differences and when these numbers mean.

GPU:

FP16 vs FP32 and the Intel chip wasn't that much slower while performing higher precision workloads...

Funny how you seem to have read only what Linus said that actually matched your opinion and skipped his own conclusion about the whole of Apple's Ipad pro, which was NOT complimentary of Intel at all!!

 

[Renzatic]

Funny how you seem to have read only what Linus said that actually matched your opinion and skipped his own conclusion about the whole of Apple's Ipad pro, which was NOT complimentary of Intel at all!!

Linus Torvalds hates everything.

 

[_illusionistk]

Funny how you seem to have read only what Linus said that actually matched your opinion and skipped his own conclusion about the whole of Apple's Ipad pro, which was NOT complimentary of Intel at all!!

Actually, I expounded on his points. I don't see you or anyone else refuting them. If someone is more knowledgeable of these things then they can add to the discussion instead of just drive-by posting their quips at Intel and adoration of Apple.

 

[diamond.g]

It is interesting that Apple knew how fast the A9X is versus the Core M used in the rMB, yet still chose to go with the Core M for the rMB anyways. Wonder why...

 

[ctg7w6]

Read your own tone, because seemingly you write without knowing what you put down.
You are the one who thinks everyone thinks like you, and go with unsupported assertions.
Saying the opposite doesn't make it so.

BTW, I own dozens of Unix boxes in my own home, even as a desktop, which nobody runs really, and don't even own a Mac. So, I understand perfectly well people running different things than me. Since that's basically everyone.

Wow. You are really one of the worst people I have encountered on MacRumors. One of the rudest and most personally offensive. I am so glad you don't represent the community at large. Good day, sir.

 

[applezulu]

I find it funny he's saying the Surface is trying to do too much angle. This is a backhanded way of saying doing less is better, and we can't compete w/ the Surface and are not trying to...

That's just silly. What he's saying is that Apple isn't going to build any El Caminos. You know, for just a certain few people, an El Camino is probably just exactly what they wanted, and so good for them. For everybody else, an El Camino isn't going to cut it as a truck, and wowee it's not a pretty car. When another manufacturer looks at that and says, "Yeah, we're going to make a great car, and we're going to make a workhorse of a truck, but we're just not going to make an El Camino," I'm pretty sure they're not saying that they can't compete and they hope their customers will settle for less.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

BTW, I own dozens of Unix boxes in my own home, even as a desktop, which nobody runs really, and don't even own a Mac. So, I understand perfectly well people running different things than me. Since that's basically everyone.

So is that what people who run obscure desktop operating systems do, join forums for products they don't use or apparently even like and get into arguments about them? I mean I argue against Apple a lot, but I am an Apple customer and so it's in my best interests to discuss alternatives to something I'm already using. This is MacRumors, after all, not LinuxRumors.

 

[monochromator]

LOL @ Bold. You have no idea what you're talking about.

It only matches Core M in these skewed synthetics test; tests that, by Linus' own words, favors ARM's uArch. The reason it favors ARM is because those cross-ISA code specifics programs only take into account the CPU front end(decode, cache, branch prediction).. The rest is either underutilized or not at all. (Linus alluded to this very fact in the email you or I quoted)

Intel processors actually have contention algorithms built into them when the FP and INT units are vying for resources; AFAIK, no such design exist in the A-series so its very possible that the A9 could beat Intel's Core M with simple code that mixes FP and INT work(re: 'the code is too simple' -Linus). If Primatelabs actually wrote algorithms that take advantage of the 256-bit SIMD capabilities of Broadwell, then they will come out far ahead, especially since the CPU uncore is built to support the throughput and isn't just a tacked-on feature.

Like Linus alluded to again, Geekbench represents the majority of trivial code that is being ran on these CPUs and for that reason; for comparing just ISA families to ISA families, GB is okay, but for comparing ISA to a different ISA in absolute terms is completely flawed and It frustrates me when people take this as gospel without considering the differences and when these numbers mean.

GPU:

FP16 vs FP32 and the Intel chip wasn't that much slower while performing higher precision workloads...

Not my words man, just rephrasing Linus. I don't really have time, or the knowledge to argue about the validity of cross platform benchmark which will always skewed towards one platform or another, based on implementation.

You could look at browser performance test on iPad Pro vs MacBook(core m), Kraken or others. WebKit vs WebKit, because that's the only closest implementation on both platform, and most users would spent time on.

On AVX, yeah I hope Apple comes up with something to compete with that, now that AVX512 is just around the corner. But I don't think it is their best interest now, looking at the target platform (iOS). For tablet/ultra book setting, I don't think any software that took advantage of the AVX are targeted towards that platform. Even Photoshop and Illustrator hasn't implement that AFAIK.

 

[jase1125]

I disagree.

Both the software and the hardware of the Surface are horrible.

As an owner of both platforms, the Surface Pro 3 has fantastic hardware and software. The Apple fanboys just have a hard time admitting MS has caught up to Apple in the one area they had an advantage: design. Software has always been as good (except Win8) more of personal preference.

 

[campyguy]

As an owner of both platforms, the Surface Pro 3 has fantastic hardware and software. The Apple fanboys just have a hard time admitting MS has caught up to Apple in the one area they had an advantage: design. Software has always been as good (except Win8) more of personal preference.

I can't fault you for your opinion. IMHO the Surface 3 "package" works in some areas and fails miserably in a couple of areas. My small company and I own a couple of S3s, several PCs and several Macs - and we use Win 8.1Pro/10 Pro in VMs as well. The main failing, for me and several of my employees is the N-Trig pen/display combo - we've been Wacom users for over 15 years, and N-Trig (now a subsidiary of MS) just kills it, not in a good way for us. I think that MS will get the T-Trig tech working better sometime in the future, and the S4 line is a big improvement but it's still a far cry from Wacom's far-more-accurate option.

I'm passing on the Surface and waiting for the HP Spectre X2 to show up - serviceability, Wacom pen/display tech, USB Type-C/TB3 support out of the box, and a better warranty. Let's see how MS's Surface marketing staff dance and spin around like a bunch of dorks after that unit comes out.

 

[NT1440]

Linus Torvalds hates everything.

The one statement in this entire thread that is completely grounded in reality.

 

[jase1125]

I can't fault you for your opinion. IMHO the Surface 3 "package" works in some areas and fails miserably in a couple of areas. My small company and I own a couple of S3s, several PCs and several Macs - and we use Win 8.1Pro/10 Pro in VMs as well. The main failing, for me and several of my employees is the N-Trig pen/display combo - we've been Wacom users for over 15 years, and N-Trig (now a subsidiary of MS) just kills it, not in a good way for us. I think that MS will get the T-Trig tech working better sometime in the future, and the S4 line is a big improvement but it's still a far cry from Wacom's far-more-accurate option.

I'm passing on the Surface and waiting for the HP Spectre X2 to show up - serviceability, Wacom pen/display tech, USB Type-C/TB3 support out of the box, and a better warranty. Let's see how MS's Surface marketing staff dance and spin around like a bunch of dorks after that unit comes out.

Indeed the Wacom pens are better than the first gen surface pens. I am able to be slightly more accurate and better pen pressure control with my Wacom tablet. As I understand, the pens and Surface Pro 4 is much improved in this area. Some reviews state they are practically equivalent to the iPad pro and pencil with Wacom still the best. I will have a surface pro 4 soon and will be able to evaluate for my uses.

You have to admit, if not for the Surface Pro line there probably wouldn't be a spectre x2. The whole reason Microsoft got in the hardware game was to push OEMs to do a better job. Looks like it is working.