Now I know why no Quad Core CPU in iPad 3

Discussion in 'iPad' started by redman042, Mar 17, 2012.

  1. redman042 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #1
    I think we all realize now that the LAST thing Apple could afford to do with the design of the iPad 3 was increase power consumption further. They've already stuffed a huge battery in there which takes nearly twice as long to charge, adds weight, and even makes the back a little warm. This is all to power that display and LTE radio. Adding a quad core would have made it worse.

    And of course obviously it's an issue of profit margin too. And the dual core is still nice and fast on the iPad 3.

    But now that I've had a solid day with this thing, I realize that Apple rode the ragged edge on acceptable power consumption to make this design work. Not that I mind, the retina display is oh so worth it.
     
  2. WLS macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    #2
    Yes people are complaining now about the warm/hot spot on their iPad which is above the CPU. I have WIFI only so I don't thinnk it is from LTE. People wanted a retina display and they got it, I don't see how Apple could have done much more and kept the same price point. Next year for the A6
     
  3. erawsd macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    #3
    Eh, I still don't see much of an advantage to quad cores in a Tablet. Most aren't doing any hardcore image/video processing and multitasking is minimal.
     
  4. LanEvo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    Location:
    NorCal
    #4
    Yea, quad-core is just RAW POWER!! where tablets do not really need that, in laptop and such yes, but tablets not so much. Which is why they went for the quad-core graphics. Either way, it would have been nice to have the quad-core. Next year should be the quad-core era, when they can bump the size down to 32nm or maybe even 25nm of the chips.
     
  5. newdeal macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    #5
    ...

    Next year will be quad core, and igzo screen so thinner and lighter again. The retina dispaly really does nothing for me to be honest
     
  6. linkgx1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    #6
    Cost is an issue and I think they want to wait for next year to put one in. That way it looks like a big upgrade.
     
  7. xraydoc macrumors demi-god

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #7
    The only reason I upgraded from the iPad 2 was for the screen. I love it.
     
  8. tips macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Location:
    On Top Of The World
    #8
    More than quad-core, I was hoping for a Siri in the latest ipad.
    I do not own a iphone 4s, but I heard its lot more fun talking/listening and its kind of good for kids 2-10 to pass time. This helps watch screen less but still get the entertainment factor needed for kids especially.

    Waiting to order online the latest ipad.
     
  9. noteple macrumors 65816

    noteple

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    #9
    Incremental upgrades. One step at a time.

    Just enough of a technology bump to get folks to buy it.

    Not too much of a bump so the price and margins can stay in the sweet spot.
     
  10. redman042 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #10
    The fact that knowledgeable technical people seriously doubted Apple could scale up retina display technology to the iPad size while maintaining speed and battery life is a testament to what they pulled off here.
     
  11. ktmracer350 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2011
    #11
    Along with keeping the same price point as the previous two releases is also pretty sweet.
     
  12. MykullMyerz macrumors 6502

    MykullMyerz

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    #12
    I agree with this. I'm usually a perennial upgrader when it comes to mobile devices but the inclusion of the retina display this cycle made me upgrade from the iPad 2 and I am so glad I did. This display is indescribable; it's definitely one of those things you have to see to believe.
     
  13. taedouni macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Location:
    California
    #13
    Honestly there is no need for a quad core CPU in the new iPad. There are no applications that will push the iPad .
     
  14. whtrbt7 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    #14
    A quad core processor doesn't mean that power drain would necessarily be higher. The reason why it wasn't included was due to the fact that it currently isn't needed. The quad-core graphics chip was however needed to drive the Retina display. The unfortunate part of this since the Retina display is trying to drive 4x the pixels, we experience heat dissipation from the heat-sink strapped to the A5X. If it weren't for the Retina display, we would have had an iPad almost exactly like the iPad 2.
     
  15. scriptlol macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2012
    #15
    Its amazing that we are to the point where the battery is the limiting factor in these devices instead of memory/speed/storage/etc. People always assume that the ipad is just packed full of circuit boards to do all the amazing things it does and when I send them the ifixit links, they are always blown away to find that most of the innards are battery and that the logic board is just a very small part of it.

    I think by the iPad 5, the device will be very nearly perfect, and hopefully we will see some breakthroughs in battery tech.
     
  16. spacepower7 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    #16
    From the reviews that I read, the one quad-core Android tablet still has more lag than the iPad 1, in regards to UI, Web and email. The main things I do with a tablet. The important thing is what you CAN do with a tablet, ie the apps, bc not everyone plays games and needs the highest scores on synthetic benchmarks.

    Really, who wants to deal with a launcher app and a task manager, not 99% of the world. Many computer users think Windows XP is complex, they don't want a tablet with the same complexity. That's the one thing MS could do correctly but might not.
     
  17. PPFee macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    #17
    It is my understanding as well that there isn't a single tablet OS out there that can properly take advantage of quad core cpu's, both in respect to power management and just using the available HP effectively. That being said, ill wait for iOS to be optimized properly before demanding quad core.
     
  18. richpjr macrumors 68030

    richpjr

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    #18
    Technology progresses so as batteries get more powerful and CPUs get more efficient, they'll make their way into future generations.
     
  19. onthecouchagain macrumors 604

    onthecouchagain

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    #19
    Honestly, the thing that Apple left out that I'm sour about is the front HD camera. Especially on such a high quality screen. :T
     
  20. MacAttacka macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2012
    #20
    If the quad core was built on a much smaller process with better power management features (ie 3 cores are switched off most of the time or a tegra 3 style junior core) then it would probably have a longer battery life. More cores does not necessarily = more drain
     
  21. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #21
    It's unclear just noting your post, but you know that each of these ARM cores is still slower than each individual core seen in something like a macbook pro. If it was the only hardware element holding back application development on the ipad, I think they'd go for it.

    This is a fairly common practice. Prices on other commodity items may not have shifted as much. In desktop displays it's pretty common for a design to last for 3-4 years. I doubt they'll change this one much for at least a couple cycles aside from smaller fixes to alleviate inconsistencies in manufacturing. People really don't need to purchase the latest one to own an ipad. I kind of wonder how many of them will be new purchases. Then of course there are a lot of people who buy one or two devices annually and redistribute the old model to family members.

    Well this is a thing where the hardware really needs to be there first. It may also be an issue of ram. The storage system of the ipad uses much slower NAND. I doubt it's appropriate as swap space as you would see under OSX.
     
  22. falconman515 macrumors 6502a

    falconman515

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    #22
    +2 .... If you get WiFi only version the display should really be the Only reason to upgarde!

    But SOOOOOOOoooooo Worth it! I would Never Go Back :D
     
  23. jjp007 macrumors regular

    jjp007

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Location:
    TexASS
    #23
    LOVE THE RETINA DISPLAY!! The camera is pretty sweet too I'm happy.
     
  24. Nemomnis macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    #24
    That is the point. I barely understand how people will make total use of the 4x GPU...
     
  25. jmpnop macrumors 6502a

    jmpnop

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    #25
    You're just justifying Apple's moves. Its plain marketing, nothing more. The next iPad will have quad-core CPU along with better front and rear cameras, etc. Look at the original iPad and the iPad 2. The original iPad had 256MB which clearly wasn't sufficient. Most people upgraded to the iPad 2. The iPad 2 had crap cameras, now there's a descent one in the new iPad. Thats just the way marketing works, stop defending it.
     

Share This Page