Prepared to get voted down, but... The iPad 3 is SLOWER?!

[smiddlehurst]

Hi guys

So, the first comparison videos are turning up, and it shows that the iPad 2 is actually faster overall than the new iPad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kxTUhs4_Og

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XFdT3b8cpw

I write this post, as I don't understand - It seems very un-Applely. Let's sum up: The new iPad is thicker, heavier and slower. Why is this? Was Apple simply forced to use this processor to preserve the 10 hour battery?

I genuinely want to understand this - Not trolling.

Okay, let's break this down:

The first video is a startup test. Fair enough. Except that we don't know what software versions are running on the various devices or what software is loaded. In fact from the different background images you can tell that they're not identical at the very least, even if it's only that image that's different. Even if everything is the same and the third gen iPad is a bit slower at booting up... how often does this affect users? I think I've rebooted my iPad twice in a year (excluding software updates), 10 seconds extra ain't going to make much of a difference.

The second video is actually FAR more interesting as it shows real world tests and things are basically a wash. As you'd expect with the same CPU. The geekbench scores show 764 and 760 (2 v 3) or, if you prefer, roughly 0.5%. That's well within the margin of error you'd expect on benchmark software and, even if it's proven by multiple runs, is nothing you're going to notice in the real world.

So, in summary, the iPad 3 is just as quick in the real world as the iPad 2 despite driving a vastly improved display. In some situations it will be quicker thanks to more RAM and GPU power, in others it may be a fraction slower. Considering that there were no complaints over the iPad 2's performance I'd say that was more than acceptable given the screen upgrade and the extra demands that places on the system.

 

[MathiasVH]

Some people are not happy unless they are peeing in someone else's cornflakes. Of course, their threads are always 'only to inform others'. Yeah, right.

"Some people" are downright fanboys, doing everything they can to defend the company from which they bought a product, and convince themselves that the slightest step forward (like loosing 80 grams iPad 1 --> iPad 2) is HUGE and that a step in the other direction (like gaining 50 grams iPad 2 --> iPad 3) means nothing at all.

"Only to inform" you, I'm going to buy the iPad 3. I just genuinely don't understand why in the world you would release a product that is thicker, heavier and slower than its predecessor.

 

[clyde2801]

Classic apple, next year comes quad core. Pretty sure they could have done it this year...

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that they stagger features and technology to keep us running to the apple store every year or so. Or twice a year if you have an iPhone and iPad.

I will be surprised if next year they don't bring out a quad core, with full fledged Siri and a slightly better camera and announce that it's more revolutionary, etc., etc.

That said, I'm not entirely ruling out an iPad 3 if the screen blows me away AND I don't have to close as many apps as I do on the 2. Otherwise, I'll be content to stay put until next year's model.

I'd like to put all of my professional manuals, etc., on a Pad in PDF form, but I suspect that the screen will make little or no difference.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

Calm yourself, dude. Seriously. It's not the extra mm or grams that concern me, it's the fact that Apple has always lived by the philosophy: "Thinner, lighter, faster", and this goes against all three.

It is actually faster with graphically intense games. Oh, and just to prove your "Thinner, lighter, faster"-is-Apple's-philosophy: the iPhone 3G (second gen. iPhone) was not faster, not thinner and not lighter than the first generation iPhone.

 

[xraydoc]

Hi guys

So, the first comparison videos are turning up, and it shows that the iPad 2 is actually faster overall than the new iPad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kxTUhs4_Og

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XFdT3b8cpw

I write this post, as I don't understand - It seems very un-Applely. Let's sum up: The new iPad is thicker, heavier and slower. Why is this? Was Apple simply forced to use this processor to preserve the 10 hour battery?

I genuinely want to understand this - Not trolling.

2nd video shows nothing but iPhone apps being launched with nanosecond/microsecond differences. And a Geekbench difference of 0.2%. That's basically what you get if you run it multiple times on the same machine.

And the first video is contradicted by another video, linked above, showing the iPad 3 to boot faster. Besides, boot times are hardly a measure of the device's true speed. Different configurations, apps installed, music, video, etc.

While the iPad 3 isn't any faster than the iPad 2, it certainly isn't slower.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

 

[HolyGrail]

So the geekbench scores only relate to the cpu? How is this news? Both the cpu are basically the same. When Apple stated 4 times faster, weren't they suggesting it the gpu?

 

[Yumunum]

2nd video shows nothing but iPhone apps being launched with nanosecond/microsecond differences. And a Geekbench difference of 0.1%. That's basically what you get if you run it multiple times on the same machine.

While the iPad 3 isn't any faster than the iPad 2, it certainly isn't slower.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

I actually think that's significant detail. The fact that the iPad 3 won't perform any faster than the last one. That's pretty disappointing actually.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

"Some people" are downright fanboys, doing everything they can to defend the company from which they bought a product, and convince themselves that the slightest step forward (like loosing 80 grams iPad 1 --> iPad 2) is HUGE and that a step in the other direction (like gaining 50 grams iPad 2 --> iPad 3) means nothing at all.

"Only to inform" you, I'm going to buy the iPad 3. I just genuinely don't understand why in the world you would release a product that is thicker, heavier and slower than its predecessor.

The iPhone 3G was thicker, heavier and slower. The iPad 3 is right on par with the iPad 2 in terms of CPU speed, but the framerates and loading times of real games are actually much lower (= positive).

And there actually is a big difference in weight: the 3G iPad 2 was about 120 grams lighter than the 3G first gen. iPad. That's huge. The 80 grams in difference (between the WiFi only models), was much smaller bult felt bigger because of the new design.

As if making a product thicker is bad! I'd rather have Apple introduce an iPhone 6 later this year that's 9.2 mm thin but with much better battery life, than an iPhone 6 that's something like 7 mm thin but with the same battery life as the iPhone 4S.

 

[wallpaper01]

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that they stagger features and technology to keep us running to the apple store every year or so. Or twice a year if you have an iPhone and iPad.

I will be surprised if next year they don't bring out a quad core, with full fledged Siri and a slightly better camera and announce that it's more revolutionary, etc., etc.

That said, I'm not entirely ruling out an iPad 3 if the screen blows me away AND I don't have to close as many apps as I do on the 2. Otherwise, I'll be content to stay put until next year's model.

I'd like to put all of my professional manuals, etc., on a Pad in PDF form, but I suspect that the screen will make little or no difference.

Yeah im going to buy one because my iPad 1 is so slow now and no point in going for an iPad 2 when new one has come out with an awesome screen.

Only thing that bothers me is I dont upgrade every year, and a year from now when the Quad core (probably) is released the apps will get heavier and want to use quad core and that leaves this 1ghz dual core feeling very slow!

Just wish they would future proof their products more! Lucky they have good resale value unless I wouldnt buy them. Nice to know I can sell it for a decent amount after 2 years.

 

[ZBoater]

I actually think that's significant detail. The fact that the iPad 3 won't perform any faster than the last one. That's pretty disappointing actually.

Really? Try running Real Racing HD at 2048x1536 on both the iPad 2 and the new iPad and see if...

Oh, wait...

 

[dukeblue91]

Wow the only real world difference I saw was the boot up time, the rest was minuscule to say the least.
Also lets wait and see when it comes time to crunch through heavy graphics cause thats where the quad core will shine.

 

[barkomatic]

The first video at least look suspicious. How does one know that the buttons were all pressed at the same time? You just see one finger at the top of each iPad and that's it.

It could be the new iPad is slower, but it also wouldn't surprise me that these videos were created to get hits on youtube.

 

[DuckSoup]

Do people really fully shut down the Ipad? I can probably count the number of times on my hand how many times I have shut down my ipad 1 or ipad 2 in the last two years. When I am not using it I just put it to sleep. .

My iPhones and iPod Touches I do fully shut down at least once per week, but my iPad 1, I'm with you. RARELY shut it down fully, maybe 3 times a year (not including iOS updates)

Mike

 

[xraydoc]

I actually think that's significant detail. The fact that the iPad 3 won't perform any faster than the last one. That's pretty disappointing actually.

But it is faster. Graphics frame rates are significantly higher, even with the 4x density on the screen.

 

[MathiasVH]

Just to put things into perspective, people:

Steve Jobs in his iPad 2 presentation:

"It is an all new design. It is not a tweaked design, it doesn't have marginal updates.", "... And it's dramatically faster. We've really gone all out on the graphics performance. Up to 9 times the graphic performance.", "Up to twice as fast on CPU-performance",

"It's dramatically thinner. A third thinner. So if you look at the numbers, gone from 13,4mm gone to 8,8mm thick, it's dramatic", "It's lighter as well. 1.5 pounds down to 1.3. And you might not think that this is a lot, but when you get down to 1.5 pounds, 1/10 of a pound is a lot"

This was the launch of the iPad 2. It represented a dramatic update on by-Steve-given key parameters: Weight, thickness and performance.

 

[ScubaCinci]

That video doesn't mean jack..ok the startup is a little slower, literally a few seconds. If you notice, that guy was also a bit slower to press the button initially. It has different hardware and maybe the driver for the display is larger and takes a bit more time to load. Geez...and I thought I was anal about stuff.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

I actually think that's significant detail. The fact that the iPad 3 won't perform any faster than the last one. That's pretty disappointing actually.

Yeah, I agree... the iPad 2 is slow. Unusable. I mean, it's unbelievable that people think the iPad 2 is fast and that a new device with many new features that is just as fast is okay... ...that's just terrible.

This is going to be hell. Safari will once again start up in 0.2 s, and I was really expecting Safari to at least start up in 0.1 s or less.

Apple really screwed up: giving us only LTE, an extremely high resolution display, a good camera and only giving us better loading times when you play or load a game. I mean, the real issue here is that Safari won't start up in 0.1 s but in 0.2 s just like before.

 

[HolyGrail]

So the geekbench scores only relate to the cpu? How is this news? Both the cpu are basically the same. When Apple stated 4 times faster, weren't they suggesting it the gpu?

 

[ThatsMeRight]

Just to put things into perspective, people:

Steve Jobs in his iPad 2 presentation:

"It is an all new design. It is not a tweaked design, it doesn't have marginal updates.", "... And it's dramatically faster. We've really gone all out on the graphics performance. Up to 9 times the graphic performance.", "Up to twice as fast on CPU-performance",

"It's dramatically thinner. A third thinner. So if you look at the numbers, gone from 13,4mm gone to 8,8mm thick, it's dramatic", "It's lighter as well. 1.5 pounds down to 1.3. And you might not think that this is a lot, but when you get down to 1.5 pounds, 1/10 of a pound is a lot"

This was the launch of the iPad 2. It represented a dramatic update on by-Steve-given key parameters: Weight, thickness and performance.

Is that the same Steve Jobs who thought the App Store would fail and who thought releasing an heavier, slower and thicker iPhone (the iPhone 3G) was a great update?

The CPU being the same is no big deal (basically it means everything is just as fast on the iPad 2 - and the iPad 2 was no slouch) and releasing a thicker, heavier and perhaps marginally slower iPhone (the iPhone 3G) turned out to be one of the best decisions for Apple ever: the iPhone 3G was the first real breakthrough success for the iPhone.

 

[Adidas Addict]

Okay, let's break this down:

The first video is a startup test. Fair enough. Except that we don't know what software versions are running on the various devices or what software is loaded. In fact from the different background images you can tell that they're not identical at the very least, even if it's only that image that's different. Even if everything is the same and the third gen iPad is a bit slower at booting up... how often does this affect users? I think I've rebooted my iPad twice in a year (excluding software updates), 10 seconds extra ain't going to make much of a difference.

The second video is actually FAR more interesting as it shows real world tests and things are basically a wash. As you'd expect with the same CPU. The geekbench scores show 764 and 760 (2 v 3) or, if you prefer, roughly 0.5%. That's well within the margin of error you'd expect on benchmark software and, even if it's proven by multiple runs, is nothing you're going to notice in the real world.

So, in summary, the iPad 3 is just as quick in the real world as the iPad 2 despite driving a vastly improved display. In some situations it will be quicker thanks to more RAM and GPU power, in others it may be a fraction slower. Considering that there were no complaints over the iPad 2's performance I'd say that was more than acceptable given the screen upgrade and the extra demands that places on the system.

Exactly what I was thinking but couldn't bothered to write.

Yeah, I agree... the iPad 2 is slow. Unusable. I mean, it's unbelievable that people think the iPad 2 is fast and that a new device with many new features that is just as fast is okay... ...that's just terrible.

This is going to be hell. Safari will once again start up in 0.2 s, and I was really expecting Safari to at least start up in 0.1 s or less.

Apple really screwed up: giving us only LTE, an extremely high resolution display, a good camera and only giving us better loading times when you play or load a game. I mean, the real issue here is that Safari won't start up in 0.1 s but in 0.2 s just like before.

Word

 

[MathiasVH]

Is that the same Steve Jobs who thought the App Store would fail and who thought releasing an heavier, slower and thicker iPhone (the iPhone 3G) was a great update?

Wow. Let me see if I get this: You're trying to prove I'm wrong about the critique of Apple, by giving more critique? Dude.. You're not making sense..

 

[clyde2801]

Yeah im going to buy one because my iPad 1 is so slow now and no point in going for an iPad 2 when new one has come out with an awesome screen.

Only thing that bothers me is I dont upgrade every year, and a year from now when the Quad core (probably) is released the apps will get heavier and want to use quad core and that leaves this 1ghz dual core feeling very slow!

Just wish they would future proof their products more! Lucky they have good resale value unless I wouldnt buy them. Nice to know I can sell it for a decent amount after 2 years.

If they future proofed their products more, they wouldn't sell as many.

 

[ugahairydawgs]

Classic apple, next year comes quad core. Pretty sure they could have done it this year...

I will be buying this because of the app variety and ease of use but I use a Windows 7.5 phone and the OS is far superior

Im sorry iOS is a load of rubbish. The notification center is a joke on the iPad. They need to upgrade this. Live tiles on Windows is amazing, apple need to get this sorted.

Not sure I will ever understand the fascination with those that like to gush on and on about Windows Mobile. I just don't see the usefulness of live tiles and the OS itself looks like it was developed by Fischer Price.

To each his own and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the hoity toity way many WM users on here like to rag on the unsphistication of iOS really just gets old after a while. Not sure if there is a legit desire to convert people to your OS of choice or if you are really just trying to convince yourself that your purchase was a good one. Whichever it is.....please stop.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

Wow. Let me see if I get this: You're trying to prove I'm wrong about the critique of Apple, by giving more critique? Dude.. You're not making sense..

Nope, I was just asking if we were talking about the same Steve Jobs who also approved thicker and heavier devices (heck: the iPhone 3G was heavier than the original iPhone, the 3GS heavier than the 3G, the 4 heavier than the 3GS, and the 4S heavier than the 4).

You are talking about how it is the exact opposite thing of what Steve Jobs, uh, 'believed in'. Steve Jobs was also that kind of guy who believed concessions could be made if the product was drastically improved. In this case, I seriously believe that Steve Jobs approved this thicker and slightly heavier iPad because this new iPad drastically improves the user experience with faster networking (LTE) and a drastically improved display (and the iPad is all about the display).

And as pointed out by others, the new iPad (iPad 3) is NOT slower. There are also YouTube videos which show us it is faster and the benchmarks are within the error margins.

So, ask yourself: what would you rather have? An iPad 3 with a retina display, an A5X chip, LTE and a better camera? Or an iPad 3 with LTE, better camera and a lighter and perhaps slightly thinner design but without the A5X chip and the retina display?

 

[RetiredInFl]

Slower, heavier, thicker (in the wrong places) ..... sounds like me when I passed age 64.