nope i have played both side by side and the ipad 2 version had lower frame rate and less detail and less effects because is has slower CPU and half the RAM
Obviously you did not read the article I provided or looked at the side-by-side screenshots.
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.
Siri Reportedly Coming to iPad with iOS 6
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Obviously you did not read the article I provided or looked at the side-by-side screenshots.
It's not meant to be exciting, it's meant to work.. Well. And that's what it does. Go Android if you want some live wallpaper
No I'd like to stay thank u very much
You have failed to realise that Apple compiles the IPSW files individually. What comes to one device may not come to others. There are many examples of where Apple did not implement the full OS on a previous device. These include: Airplay, video recording and multitasking.
If Apple implements Siri on more than the 4S, I am confident that it will only be implemented on the new iPad.
Obviously you did not read the article I provided or looked at the side-by-side screenshots.
clearly you dont understand that the ipad3 is more powerful than the ipad2 in all aspects..
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
clearly you dont understand that the ipad3 is more powerful than the ipad2 in all aspects..
Sigh... dude. iDuel is right. Yes the A5X is a more powerful graphics chip than the A5 because it is quad core. but it also has to manage four times the pixels than the A5 does.
Heavy, graphics intensive games have proven that the new iPad is incapable of pushing the same effects at the higher resolution. I remember reading about one game (probably the one iDuel was referencing) that is working on an update which will give iPad 3 owners the option to choose between the full retina graphics, or all the special effects(but at iPad 2 level resolution). The iPad 3 isn't capable of doing both at the same time. That's all he's talking about.
Last edited:
I understand all that but what you two fail to accept is that the devs have not optimized their code for ipad3 hardware they simply ported it over and added more effects .. they have said once they have to to write code designed for ipad 3 it will make full use of its features which quick ports dont do.. but you can ignore that and think what ever makes you feel better about owning a blurry screened ipad2.
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
NOVA 3: released May 9th, two months after the iPad 3 was announced.
Check out this article
From the Article
That last little bit really seems to really imply that this problem will continue going forward. But whatever makes you feel better about having your "better in every way" (except weight, thickness, heat, battery life, and charge time) iPad 3...
well at least it has a better camera...
Citation Needed. Point me in the right direction to the quote from "Developers" who state that code optimization is necessary which does not include simply updating the resolution.
All of your posts on this thread have been trying to justify your iPad 3 purchase, and it is pretty evident when you use phrases like "better in everyway","blurry screened ipad2", or when you go on to talk about camera upgrades which are irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The ipad2's screen looks crystal clear, maybe you need your eyes checked.
That last little bit really seems to really imply that this problem will continue going forward. But whatever makes you feel better about having your "better in every way" (except weight, thickness, heat, battery life, and charge time) iPad 3...
well at least it has a better camera...
I don't see how that's a problem though. It isn't any different from how it was before the iPad 3, really- there is always a tradeoff here for a benefit there in graphics for games. The iPad 3 just has the option of an ultra high res "mode" for games that, due to their design, can support it. If the game can't, the iPad 3 can have the same resolution as the 2 but with much greater effects. Or something in between. I don't see the negative there. And the screen is certainly better in every way - in fact it's better in many ways than most other screens on most other computing devices in general.
NOVA 3: released May 9th, two months after the iPad 3 was announced.
Check out this article
From the Article
That last little bit really seems to really imply that this problem will continue going forward. But whatever makes you feel better about having your "better in every way" (except weight, thickness, heat, battery life, and charge time) iPad 3...
well at least it has a better camera...
the devs are trying to keep the ipad 2 market alive cause apple is still selling it lol they are pretending that it is still a contender so gullible folks like you will feel good about it
----------
I am a graphic designer and I had ipad1 which i used to display my portfolio and skipped ipad 2 cause i was spoiled but the iphone4 retina screen there was no way i was gonna settle for a 3gs quality screen on an ipad after that so for me the retina ipad 3 was the only choice for image quality and better performance in all apps due to faster CPU and more ram....
OKay im done...lol cause any person who says that the non retina screen of the ipad 2 is crystal clear in comparison to the ipad3s retina screen is irrational and not worth arguing with you have lost all credibility.. just like folks who thing the 3gs is as clear as the iphone4/4S.. so "you win"
it,s just awesome .i amazed by coming to know about this .
now it seems that the world,ll be at our fingertips shortly ?
And that,,ll be up to us, whether we want to move it .
now it seems that the world,ll be at our fingertips shortly ?
And that,,ll be up to us, whether we want to move it .
The CPU isn't faster (iPad 2 -> new iPad). The GPU is faster. To be honest Only doubling the cores of the GPU doesn't seem like a good fit for quadrupling the pixel density.the devs are trying to keep the ipad 2 market alive cause apple is still selling it lol they are pretending that it is still a contender so gullible folks like you will feel good about it
----------
I am a graphic designer and I had ipad1 which i used to display my portfolio and skipped ipad 2 cause i was spoiled but the iphone4 retina screen there was no way i was gonna settle for a 3gs quality screen on an ipad after that so for me the retina ipad 3 was the only choice for image quality and better performance in all apps due to faster CPU and more ram....
OKay im done...lol cause any person who says that the non retina screen of the ipad 2 is crystal clear in comparison to the ipad3s retina screen is irrational and not worth arguing with you have lost all credibility.. just like folks who thing the 3gs is as clear as the iphone4/4S.. so "you win"
um yes the A5X is faster due to have double the data throughput of the ipad2 so yes the data moves over the cPU at the same speed but the ipad 3 moves twice as much data in the same time frame..
You ipad 2 owners need to understand and accept that the ipad3 had 4xs the pixel density in its screen and double the ram and processing power so devs have options ..they can render graphics and 4x the quality of ipad2 or double the quality of ipad 2 either was the ipad 3 is far more capable of a computing device than ipad 2 and since reading is a large part of what people use tablets for the 4x resolution advantage of ipad3 is a massive advantage.. just cause your eyes are accustomed to blurry pixelated ipad2 visuals does not mean its better or even acceptable once better tech is out.. ipad3 screen = reference quality ipad2 screen barely even viewable for more than an hour..
"In the off-screen tests, the A5X produced 15,412 frames at a rate of 138 FPS, compared to 10,143 frames at 90 FPS for the iPad 2. As you may expect, the A5X trounced the Tegra 3"
fact is that the CPU and 512 ram of the ipad2 could never power a retina screen or push the data needed to run those apps...
face it you device is now old and second best and it looks just like the ipad1..lol
Last edited:
I don't have an iPad, just making observations. Where has it been shown that the A5X has double the throughput in CPU? Those glbenchmark results just show that the GPU is CPU starved in the A5X. A doubling of GPU power should equal a doubling of frame rate all other things being equal (note the frame rate isn't doubled).um yes the A5X is faster due to have double the data throughput of the ipad2 so yes the data moves over the cPU at the same speed but the ipad 3 moves twice as much data in the same time frame..
You ipad 2 owners need to understand and accept that the ipad3 had 4xs the pixel density in its screen and double the ram and processing power so devs have options ..they can render graphics and 4x the quality of ipad2 or double the quality of ipad 2 either was the ipad 3 is far more capable of a computing device than ipad 2 and since reading is a large part of what people use tablets for the 4x resolution advantage of ipad3 is a massive advantage.. just cause your eyes are accustomed to blurry pixelated ipad2 visuals does not mean its better or even acceptable once better tech is out.. ipad3 screen = reference quality ipad2 screen barely even viewable for more than an hour..
"In the off-screen tests, the A5X produced 15,412 frames at a rate of 138 FPS, compared to 10,143 frames at 90 FPS for the iPad 2. As you may expect, the A5X trounced the Tegra 3"
fact is that the CPU and 512 ram of the ipad2 could never power a retina screen or push the data needed to run those apps...
face it you device is now old and second best and it looks just like the ipad1..lol
When rendering at the native resolution (because the glbenchmark test has no way of doing that) you would see the difference.
I have asked for someone with a new iPad to run the benchmark in GLESView with OpenGL ES2.0 and using the Iron fist Boxing Kings (the one with multiple dudes face). So far no one has done so, for whatever reason that benchmark is more intensive than glbenchmark.
umm it is doubled .. okay do this go hook and ipad3 retina screen up to an ipad 2 and see what happens... you will see the ipad 2 hardware cannot drive the retina screen. but the ipad3 could easily drive the crappy ipad2 screen that the point.. Apple anted us to have 4xs the resolution while keeping performance and battery life and they did it.. if you prefer the low rez ipad 2 then fine..
I don't know about ipads specifically but on video cards for PCs double the power does not equate to double the frame rate.
the devs are trying to keep the ipad 2 market alive cause apple is still selling it lol they are pretending that it is still a contender so gullible folks like you will feel good about it
----------
I am a graphic designer and I had ipad1 which i used to display my portfolio and skipped ipad 2 cause i was spoiled but the iphone4 retina screen there was no way i was gonna settle for a 3gs quality screen on an ipad after that so for me the retina ipad 3 was the only choice for image quality and better performance in all apps due to faster CPU and more ram....
OKay im done...lol cause any person who says that the non retina screen of the ipad 2 is crystal clear in comparison to the ipad3s retina screen is irrational and not worth arguing with you have lost all credibility.. just like folks who thing the 3gs is as clear as the iphone4/4S.. so "you win"
I am not arguing against the fact that the iPad's GPU can handle the retina display. What I am arguing is the fact that the new iPad's hardware is not as optimized to run an application in the retina resolution AND perform advanced graphics effects. (reference: NOVA 3)
For being someone who is in Tech, you don't seem to understand the difference from a CPU and a GPU, as you keep trying to tell me that the A5X is some kind of giant leap in performance over the A5. The iPad 3's CPU was re-branded, yet the actual horsepower stayed the same as the iPad 2's A5. The graphics processor was updated. Unless you provide me proof (actual sources, not your own words) that the iPad's A5X processor is substantially better than the A5 on the iPad2, then everything you have said was heresay.
Throughout this whole debate, you have not provided any of us creditable resources to back up your claims.
Last edited:
138 fps isn't double 90 fps. At 720p the iPad 3 is CPU limited. At 1536p it becomes GPU limited (more so).
As long as you are doubling the actual processing power (going from say 750 shaders to 1500 shaders [ROPs, TMUs, etc]) it should double the FPS as long as you are not CPU limited, which is much easier to see at really high resolutions. The reason why you don't see that often in PCs is the manufacturer normally skimps in places other than shaders, but not in an exactly half kind of way. They also do things like use faster clocks and lower bandwidth memory on the cheaper parts.
Never said it could. Was just pointing out that in some cases the new iPad is CPU limited (pretty much anytime it isn't running at native resolution).
well okay so we agree that ipad 2 is perfect for folks who cant afford the superior visual quality of the ipad 3 or dont care about visual quality.. The ipad 3 does more and does it better than the ipad 2 so the only thing limited is the power and quality of the ipad 2 which is why it is cheaper and older..
Some iPad 2 owners are still using NOVA 3 to beat the new iPad with and make themselves feel ... something? Really?
How hard is it to acknowledge that it's long since been a common trade off for PC gamers, choosing between the highest resolution possible and having more visual effects?
If any developer codes a game for the new iPad and either a) keeps iPad 2 resolution but upscales it or b) chooses a higher resolution than iPad 2, but not the maximum of the new iPad (again upscaled but to a lesser extent) then more of the Quad Core GPU is "freed" to push visual effects and frames.
How hard is it to acknowledge that it's long since been a common trade off for PC gamers, choosing between the highest resolution possible and having more visual effects?
If any developer codes a game for the new iPad and either a) keeps iPad 2 resolution but upscales it or b) chooses a higher resolution than iPad 2, but not the maximum of the new iPad (again upscaled but to a lesser extent) then more of the Quad Core GPU is "freed" to push visual effects and frames.
Be honest, what spec of GPU card for a PC would be required to push a modern FPS at 2048 x 1536 with full DOF, anti aliasing, particle, lighting, and smoke graphical effects?
Let's be practical. What computer monitor is available with that resolution which is marketed to the mass market like the iPad's retina display is?