Leaks show an A8X as probable....
A8 has had trouble with the 400+ PPI of the 6+. I think this points to Retina HD displays in the iPads as well.
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 Man those new iPhone 6 screens make the iPad look like complete garbage...
- Thread starter Wiesenlooser
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Leaks show an A8X as probable....
A8 has had trouble with the 400+ PPI of the 6+. I think this points to Retina HD displays in the iPads as well.
It's the subtle affect of reduced glare. It makes a big difference to remove a layer of glass between you and the LCD the way they did with the iPhone. I was so disappointed that they didn't do that with the iPad Air lay year. It's the main reason I didn't upgrade at the time. I'm glad I waited because I think Apple is finally going to give the iPad the full anti-glare treatment.
I'm gonna blow your mind here, ready?
They can overclock the A8 CPU and add a quad core GPU as part of the A8X.
*Mind Blown*
Heh. They can, but will it drive it smoothly?
The A5X was a super A5, but it still failed. Still, the A8 is enormously more powerful than the A5X, so an A8X should be up to the task.
The situation when it came to the A5 is completely different to this current situation. The A8X will handle iOS 8 with ease.
Explain how it's different (I don't mean that smart, I'm genuinely interested in SoC technology.)
I realize that the A5=A5X except for two additional graphic cores which were still insufficient to drive the display. The A8 is a 20nm process with 5/6 times the performance of those chips. So even a 3x retina display should be handled?
Additionally, the A8 series produces less heat so you could theoretically increase the clock speed for greater performance and still maintain lower temperatures.
All assumptions you have made are the exact reasons why the A8X will perform fine. The 45nm process on which the A5 was based on, just produced too much heat and if Apple were to increase the clock speed on the 3 more than it is I would expect overheating issues.
Now with the A8, we have a significantly smaller 20nm process used. This allows much less heat to be produced that will allow an increase of clock speeds and then, maintaining those frequencies.
That is why this is different and why the new iPad's will handle a higher res fine.
----------
It's not the A8's fault. It's the scaler they use for the display. If you use zoomed mode, I believe lag goes away.
I'm gonna blow your mind here, ready?
I'm not mind blown by a quad core GPU.
Wow, I know!
The screens are already super high resolution. Why would you want more, when more will impact on graphics performance, without noticeably improving graphics quality?
You said higher resolutions would crush the A8 GPU, I said that increasing the clock frequency and adding a quad core GPU would negate that.
Also your second point, you type of people piss me off. "Computers don't need more than 1MB RAM" "What's the point of LTE?" "Higher res displays on laptops are nothing more than battery hogs"
GET OVER IT! Tech evolves and I'm glad tech companies don't listen to people like you because otherwise technological innovation wouldn't be possible at the insanely quick rate it is happening at.
And you were a jerk about it.
ie, you disagree with me, therefore I have to be wrong, and an idiot. Love that logic.
If people can't distinguish the pixels now, why would Apple need to improve the resolution? It's not like needing more than "1MB RAM", it's like putting 8 GB RAM on a 32 bit CPU.
I'm sorry if you took it like me being a jerk, my lack of emoticons didn't hep either!
It was meant to be light hearted jab. Obviously that doesn't convey well over text...
In that case, let's be friends
Anyways, I will be surprised if the iPad Air gets a higher resolution screen, absolutely shocked if the iPad Mini gets a higher resolution screen, and completely unfazed by the introduction of a 13" iPad with a ~1.5x resolution pixel count.
Yes. You are the only one. My screen doesn't look like a dim doll that is complete garbage.
I love my rMini. The next one can only be better. Complete garbage? Really? Look, send me yours and I'll properly dispose of it for you.
In that case, let's be friends
Anyways, I will be surprised if the iPad Air gets a higher resolution screen, absolutely shocked if the iPad Mini gets a higher resolution screen, and completely unfazed by the introduction of a 13" iPad with a ~1.5x resolution pixel count.
Yeah I don't think the mini will get a display bump in terms of resolution, maybe the rest of the display tech though, such as display lamination and the improved polarizer layer.
retina hd lol. what a nice term that means nothing. I do love my 6 plus though
welll... it does mean something haha
before the 6, iphone screens didnt reach HD resolutions
Typing with a gimped hand so apologies in advance for any typing mistakes.
The iPad Mini's Retina Display was below the color range of the iPhone's and the iPad Air. It's immediately noticeable.
The realities of this are far more important though, and annoying because of it.
Smaller screens are easier to make at better color range and etc because they don't need to hit the same type of production milestones as bigger displays. This is a good example of processors and yield rates, and especially sapphire for the front. All of these things have mass production yields.
I completely expect the iPad Mini this year to get better panels this year because the yield rate for creating these types of displays in ways that match the iPhone 6 Plus, and iPad Air are much more manageable. These are devices that could potentially need 100 million made per year. Every measure after the panels being perfect is another variable that could make a perfectly good panel useless.
The Kindle Fire last year had a better display then the iPad Mini and probably iPad Air. The Kindle Fire (about same size as iPad Mini) sold probably 20 million units last year. Compare that to the need to make in mass quantities the displays for the iPad Air and iPad Mini.
I completely expect the iPad Air to be the same resolution but possibly better bonding to the display this year. The iPad Mini was thicker then the iPad Air. I expect that gap to close a bit this year.
It's a cliche to say this, but there is truth to it. It's hard to do manufacturing miracles at about 100 million units per year. The Surface has optically bonded displays to the glass. Why? I don't think theres more then 10 million sold of the Surface in total so the yields are perfectly fine in their manufacturing range.
The iPad Mini's Retina Display was below the color range of the iPhone's and the iPad Air. It's immediately noticeable.
The realities of this are far more important though, and annoying because of it.
Smaller screens are easier to make at better color range and etc because they don't need to hit the same type of production milestones as bigger displays. This is a good example of processors and yield rates, and especially sapphire for the front. All of these things have mass production yields.
I completely expect the iPad Mini this year to get better panels this year because the yield rate for creating these types of displays in ways that match the iPhone 6 Plus, and iPad Air are much more manageable. These are devices that could potentially need 100 million made per year. Every measure after the panels being perfect is another variable that could make a perfectly good panel useless.
The Kindle Fire last year had a better display then the iPad Mini and probably iPad Air. The Kindle Fire (about same size as iPad Mini) sold probably 20 million units last year. Compare that to the need to make in mass quantities the displays for the iPad Air and iPad Mini.
I completely expect the iPad Air to be the same resolution but possibly better bonding to the display this year. The iPad Mini was thicker then the iPad Air. I expect that gap to close a bit this year.
It's a cliche to say this, but there is truth to it. It's hard to do manufacturing miracles at about 100 million units per year. The Surface has optically bonded displays to the glass. Why? I don't think theres more then 10 million sold of the Surface in total so the yields are perfectly fine in their manufacturing range.