Question can the iPad Pro's A9X be overpowered by the A10 ?

[TheRealAlex]

Cellphones are small and need to make sacrifices for temperature regulation and battery conservation. As beefy as the A9X is could a simple non X chip over power the iPad Pros Processor ?

I am going to say no because the iPhone 7's A10 will be clocked slower to account for battery efficiency and smaller size of course. So I am going to guess no.

What evidence is there ? I have not looked up the benchmarks but I think the A8X was surpassed in a few months by the A9.

I hope not.

 

[Wackery]

The A10 will do better because the next iOS will cripple devices with A9/A9x for no reason other than to get people to buy the new one.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

i think the a10 will kill the processing side, but the X will always be better graphically

 

[TheRealAlex]

The A10 will do better because the next iOS will cripple devices with A9/A9x for no reason other than to get people to buy the new one.

This is Apple Not NVIDIA.

 

[Wackery]

This is Apple Not NVIDIA.

And?

 

[PTLove]

Depends. If the A10 is a die shrink or a new core I'd expect to it beat the A9x by a good bit. My question is more why does this concern you? I don't see see a reason a reason to be worried. Absolutely no software would overpower your A9X.

 

[brand]

Question can the iPad Pro's A9X be overpowered by the A10 ?

I hope not.

I can not think of a reason why someone would hope for technology to not get better as time passes. In fact it seems somewhat ignorant.

 

[Andres Cantu]

It's certainly possible. Normally, I would have said that Apple would save any big performance improvements for the iPhone 7s's A11 chip, but since rumors say the big redesign will be for next year's iPhone, I could see them trying hard this year and slacking off next year.

 

[TheRealAlex]

It's certainly possible. Normally, I would have said that Apple would save any big performance improvements for the iPhone 7s's A11 chip, but since rumors say the big redesign will be for next year's iPhone, I could see them trying hard this year and slacking off next year.

Elaborate please.

 

[12vElectronics]

Depends. If the A10 is a die shrink or a new core I'd expect to it beat the A9x by a good bit. My question is more why does this concern you? I don't see see a reason a reason to be worried. Absolutely no software would overpower your A9X.

What he said. The A9X will be a powerful tool for many years.

 

[TheRealAlex]

What he said. The A9X will be a powerful tool for many years.

With respect to all posters here. But the same was said for the A8X and it last 15 months before being blown away by the A9X.

 

[bufffilm]

Why speculate...when the a10 debuts, we'll know soon enough.

In the meantime...life goes on.

 

[Andres Cantu]

Elaborate please.

No problem! For the most part, Apple likes to make big performance leaps in the "S" cycles (or odd-numbered) A-chips. Here is the breakdown:

• A4 was basically an overclocked A3 (if you can call the 3GS's SoC that)
• A5 brought the first dual-core design (big leap in performance, gigantic leap in graphics)
• A5X was the worst Apple A-chip to date, as it's the only chip to have stayed the same in CPU power as its one-whole-year predecessor, the A5, all while only doubling the graphics power (when the Retina display demanded a quadrupling)
• A6 is the only exception to the rule, since it more than doubled the A5's CPU power (the graphics not so much)
• A6X finally brought an adequate chip for the iPad's Retina display
• A7 brought the first 64-bit architecture to a smartphone and doubled CPU performance (and more than doubled graphics, which is more than Apple claimed)
• A8 was a disappointing chip overall, as it only improved CPU power by 25% and graphics by 50%
• A8X was a good chip, and the only A-chip to date to have a third-core, yet I suspect that third-core will remain unused for most cases
• A9 brought almost double CPU power and graphics
• A9X did something similar to the A9

Basically, for the most part, the "regular" iPhones had pretty boring A-chips whereas all the action has been in the "S" A-chips. However, with all of these rumors saying that Apple will hold back on their "killer" design until 2017, that would mean that they would spend more resources on the design rather than on the SoC. This would imply a better-than-expected A10 chip while an averagely-improved A11.

Of course, if Apple doesn't deliver the "killer" design until the iPhone 8 (or 2018's iPhone), then I would expect a weaker A10 and a stronger A11.

 

[TheRealAlex]

No problem! For the most part, Apple likes to make big performance leaps in the "S" cycles (or odd-numbered) A-chips. Here is the breakdown:

• A4 was basically an overclocked A3 (if you can call the 3GS's SoC that)
• A5 brought the first dual-core design (big leap in performance, gigantic leap in graphics)
• A5X was the worst Apple A-chip to date, as it's the only chip to have stayed the same in CPU power as its one-whole-year predecessor, the A5, all while only doubling the graphics power (when the Retina display demanded a quadrupling)
• A6 is the only exception to the rule, since it more than doubled the A5's CPU power (the graphics not so much)
• A6X finally brought an adequate chip for the iPad's Retina display
• A7 brought the first 64-bit architecture to a smartphone and doubled CPU performance (and more than doubled graphics, which is more than Apple claimed)
• A8 was a disappointing chip overall, as it only improved CPU power by 25% and graphics by 50%
• A8X was a good chip, and the only A-chip to date to have a third-core, yet I suspect that third-core will remain unused for most cases
• A9 brought almost double CPU power and graphics
• A9X did something similar to the A9

Basically, for the most part, the "regular" iPhones had pretty boring A-chips whereas all the action has been in the "S" A-chips. However, with all of these rumors saying that Apple will hold back on their "killer" design until 2017, that would mean that they would spend more resources on the design rather than on the SoC. This would imply a better-than-expected A10 chip while an averagely-improved A11.

Of course, if Apple doesn't deliver the "killer" design until the iPhone 8 (or 2018's iPhone), then I would expect a weaker A10 and a stronger A11.

Double salute to you for that. 2 questions the A9X should be a Tri Core but it's not are there significant changes between the A9 vs the A9X like cache or die size ?
And lastly my guess is that Apple might just might slap a A10 in the iPhone 7 but it's just gonna be an A9 with 3 Core but clocked for a Smartphone.

 

[jeremiah256]

The A10 will do better because the next iOS will cripple devices with A9/A9x for no reason other than to get people to buy the new one.

Where do people get this? My current MacBook Pro and iPad are both from 2011, both running well on the latest OSes. And I'm not any kind of outlier, plenty of people are still rocking the iPad 2 and even older MacBook Pros. My old, flat Apple router still works, my Apple TV 2 works. I can name Apple failures/misteps (iPad 1 and iPad 3 being inadequate, for example) but that is far different from purposefully crippling devices. Any examples?

 

[12vElectronics]

With respect to all posters here. But the same was said for the A8X and it last 15 months before being blown away by the A9X.

I still have devices running A6 and it's perfectly fine.

No one is saying the A10 won't be faster. What I'm saying is WHO CARES. The A9X will still be plenty powerful and competent.

 

[Videomanmac]

I heard the A40 will be something.

 

[stlredbird]

I heard the A40 will be something.

The A41 will make the A40 look like a chump.

 

[AliMacs]

Doesn't matter even if it's A10X, A11X, A12X and so on. Why? Because it's still iOS. Mobile OS that is crippled. Until they introduce iOS 10 with much performance enhancement, iOS 9 still doesn't even take full advantage of the A8 processor.

 

[Andres Cantu]

Double salute to you for that. 2 questions the A9X should be a Tri Core but it's not are there significant changes between the A9 vs the A9X like cache or die size ?
And lastly my guess is that Apple might just might slap a A10 in the iPhone 7 but it's just gonna be an A9 with 3 Core but clocked for a Smartphone.

Thank you

If they went by logic, the A9X would have been a tri-core chip. I'm guessing that they never wanted to add a third-core to the A8X, but it was the only easy way to make it more powerful (since somehow the gains from the 28nm to 20nm reduction weren't enough to significantly boost performance). The A9 has a 104.5 squared-millimeters die size while the A9X has a 147 squared-millimeters die size. Even with the bigger size, the A9X lacks the 4MB L3 cache from the A9, but it makes up for it with dual-channel memory (compared to the single-channel memory from the A9).

While I would love to see a tri-core A10 (because it would destroy everything else in the multicore GeekBench score), I don't think Apple is heading in that direction. I'm expecting the A10 to get similar performance to the A9X, but nothing too different.

P.S.: don't pay too much attention to the comments that say it doesn't matter how much more powerful it will be. It does matter, in my opinion for two reasons: it's always incredible to see a smartphone SoC near or surpass the previous generation's tablet SoC, and it's even more incredible to see it near the power of desktop chips (slowly, but growing at a MUCH faster rate than Intel). It's not to far-fetched to think that a quad-core A-chip in a year or two could break the 10,000 GeekBench score.

 

[Wackery]

Where do people get this? My current MacBook Pro and iPad are both from 2011, both running well on the latest OSes. And I'm not any kind of outlier, plenty of people are still rocking the iPad 2 and even older MacBook Pros. My old, flat Apple router still works, my Apple TV 2 works. I can name Apple failures/misteps (iPad 1 and iPad 3 being inadequate, for example) but that is far different from purposefully crippling devices. Any examples?

 

[RedOrchestra]

?

The video tells one story - the real problem for mobile devices is that App developers stop developing for older iOS and so if you want to keep using your Apps to their fullest, you have to upgrade the iOS to the latest.

 

[Macalway]

Planned obsolescence is actually not a myth. It was huge for a couple of years in the 70's. It was like mass hysteria, where everyone thought, for some insane reason, that it was a good idea and the way of the future. Of course, it backfired horribly and lasted a very short time as some kine of twisted business model.

What goes around comes around, so watch out

 

[keviig]

I for one would love for the A10 to outperform the A9X, despite owning an A9X powered iPad Pro at the moment. More performance in the same power envelope means progress, and progress is good! Imagine then how powerful the A10X will be.

 

[Wackery]

I for one would love for the A10 to outperform the A9X, despite owning an A9X powered iPad Pro at the moment. More performance in the same power envelope means progress, and progress is good! Imagine then how powerful the A10X will be.

A100 is the one to beat with its next gen inter dimensional quantum physics processor