Web browsing is no faster on Ipad2 - 4.3 is the main factor

[Chilean.Miner]

Well, it seems like iOS 4.3 (with its new javascript engine) will make the ipad 1 just as fast as the new ipad 2.

Check out this story from ars technica

So, now I'm begging to wonder if this upgrade is worth it. No ram increases, web browsing the same, a cheap toy webcam on front and back, and 2 ounces lighter...what do you all think?

 

[thelookingglass]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; zh-cn) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Where did you get the idea that there were no RAM increases?

 

[Maaz]

rofl these threads are just too funny.

 

[saving107]

its funny how the new iPad hasn't even been released yet and people are already disappointment by its speed, camera quality and design.

wow

regarding the cameras, why were people expecting anything different? this is not a point-and-shoot camera, and it'd be odd if you try to use it as one.

Engadget Xoom Review:

There's no question that it's nice to have a 5 megapixel camera and LED flash on the back of the Xoom, but we found little utility in actually having a decent shooter on a device of this size. It's hard to imagine a scenario where you're using the Xoom as your main camera. Besides looking ridiculous, it's not all that convenient to handle something this large when you're trying to snap away. Another issue is the sheer glare of the screen -- shooting in daylight proved to be a challenge, and sometimes we couldn't even see the display well enough to snap a photo.

 

[DS3]

Did you actually read the article? Incredibly misleading title.
The only actual number I saw in there was 1.5x faster javascript benchmarks.

To that I'd say.
-50% faster does not equate to "no faster" as you put it or "mostly unchanged" as they put it. Thats a nice upgrade for that one task, and we have no clue on others.
-As the article states, even if the immediate speed for existing apps isn't some insane performance boost, its when developers code specifically to exploit the processor that you will see the real upgrades.

And there is almost no chance the ram isnt at least 512. If its 256, their hd video editing app is a miracle.
edit: well it does occur to me I heard iMovie will be on the iPad 1, I'll be interested to know how it runs. Regardless, noone has said its 256 and the good bet is on 512.

Also, the only way the iPad will ever be significantly lighter is if there is a battery breakthrough.

 

[saving107]

DS3,

iMovie will not be on the first iPad (since it lacks a camera), but Garageband is said to function on both iPads.

 

[DS3]

I saw something about using the camera connection kit to import movies into it, but I can't remember clearly so maybe that was still just for the iPad 2 or just speculation...


edit: Here is the test the speed post is talking about

I really can't comprehend how a serious site like ars technica views that data and uses it to base an article around questioning the ipad 2s speed. Looks pretty damn good to me. I read in the comments of an article on this that the xoom's results for this test were 2500 ms, in between the ipad and ipad 2.

And regardless of how much of it is from the OS (oh no!) and not the device, people who sold their iPad and are upgrading are in for a treat by the looks of the chart.

 

[Pressure]

Would it really have hurt you so much to do a simple search?

Besides a fully 50% faster running a, mostly, single-threaded benchmark is quite impressive in my eyes.

 

[smiddlehurst]

Thanks DS3 for posting that image (guess what I was just about to go google?) as it really proves the point quite nicely. Running on (presumably) near-identical software releases the iPad 2 is coming in almost 50% faster on a single benchmark. Considering that benchmark is unlikely to really push the hardware (is it making full use of the dual core processor, is it taking advantage of the graphics processor etc) I'm actually surprised it's that much of an improvement.

Personally I'd say (and this is rare) Ars has it completely wrong in this case. I'd say that result suggests that the real world experience could be noticeably improved in the iPad 2 and the brief hands-on tests that have been posted from the Apple event seem to support that conclusion.

Ultimately though we're only going to find out for sure when reviews start hitting at the end of the week and as real world users get their hands on the device.

 

[Michael CM1]

Duh?

I watched the keynote, and I almost 100 percent recall Steve Jobs mentioning some JavaScript improvement in iOS 4.3 helping run Safari much faster. There's nothing on the iPad 2 claiming it's the iPad that is behind this. There's a link to iOS 4.3, which the iPad 2 ships with, claiming it has a speed boost.

http://www.apple.com/ios/

However, I also think you're a fool not to expect a speed boost with a processor using two cores instead of one at the same clock speed. That alone won't double the speed at which a task runs, but it's damn close if the software is written to take advantage of it.

 

[Coukos34]

Would it really have hurt you so much to do a simple search?

Besides a fully 50% faster running a, mostly, single-threaded benchmark is quite impressive in my eyes.

Exactly. I was initially disappointed, but after realizing that this is not a multithreaded benchmark, it is actually quite impressive using on core.

 

[MythicFrost]

Well, it seems like iOS 4.3 (with its new javascript engine) will make the ipad 1 just as fast as the new ipad 2.

Check out this story from ars technica

So, now I'm begging to wonder if this upgrade is worth it. No ram increases, web browsing the same, a cheap toy webcam on front and back, and 2 ounces lighter...what do you all think?

No, the new Javascript engine is 2.5x faster on an iPad running 4.3 vs 4.2, but the iPad 2 is still 1.6x faster than the iPad 1 even after those improvements. Being only 60% faster doesn't mean it isn't based off the ARM Cortex A9, it just means it's probably being bottlenecked elsewhere.

 

[FLYING SE7EN]

Will other browsers like Atomic and iCab be able to make use of the new JavaScript engine?

 

[briand05]

As somebody said it is 1.5X faster than iPad 1 running the same OS, not to mention the iPad 2's time basically exactly matches the Xoom. I don't see the problem here.

 

[Full of Win]

Once again, this pig is really going to be an iPad 1.5...and that is being generous.

 

[Coukos34]

Once again, this pig is really going to be an iPad 1.5...and that is being generous.

Wow, you have no idea what you are talking about

of course your name says it all...

 

[fertilized-egg]

Wow, you have no idea what you are talking about

of course your name says it all...

All I can say is Ars really messed it up with this one considering their usual high standard. A simple glance at the previous benchmark completed by Tegra2 against the numbers from A8-based devices would tell you that kind of improvement is exactly what you'd expect from A8-> A9 dual core for SunSpider yet Ars took the more sensational approach. (and they actually think Apple would put EXTRA effort to make the slower A8 into dual core instead of using the faster ready-made A9 dual core? Do they think Apple engineers have gone nuts?)

But yes, it's been known for a while that pretty much every SoC outside Snapdragon will use 1Ghz A9 dual core, including the A5, Tegra2, Exynos, OMAP4, etc. All of them will perform pretty similarly for this generation. The differences will mainly be found in graphics and multimedia handling AFAIK.

One thing that bugs me is that while everyone loves to chat up about negative specs about the iPad 2, even the dubious 256MB rumor, nobody talks about the positives, most notably the friggin' fast 3D graphics processor. When the Xoom has a dualcore A9 CPU in Tegra2, it's an amazing spec. When the iPad gets the dualcore A9 CPU with a much faster GPU, people still say "the iPad's spec is weak..." And here I thought GPU speed is one of most talked about specs at any point in time?

 

[urkel]

DS3,

iMovie will not be on the first iPad (since it lacks a camera).

do you have a source for that? Because everyones big excuse for the weak camera is to shoot with another camera then import it in through the connection kit. So I'm not sure why iMovie would be restricted to only the iPad 2.

 

[Full of Win]

Wow, you have no idea what you are talking about

of course your name says it all...

Benchmarks are benchmarks. I look at empirical testing, not Apple brand tripe, when forming an opinion. I guess if someone takes marketing speak for facts, then they might see the new iPad as a true version 2.0.

BTW - read the article, which is another outstanding Ars piece.

do you have a source for that? Because everyones big excuse for the weak camera is to shoot with another camera then import it in through the connection kit. So I'm not sure why iMovie would be restricted to only the iPad 2.

It's in the apple announcement a week ago.

 

[fertilized-egg]

Benchmarks are benchmarks. I look at empirical testing, not Apple brand tripe, when forming an opinion. I guess if someone takes marketing speak for facts,

No you pick and choose benchmark results that fit your agenda and claim it as "facts." Look at this one using SunSpider 0.9

Look at where dualcore A9 devices(OMAP4, Tegra2, Exynos) are relative to single core A8 (Nexus S) and Snapdragons (MyTouch 4G, Nexus One, etc) Which indicates benchmark result of ~50% improvement from the CNet article is exactly where you'd expect the A5 to be in comparison to the older A8 A4. Also it tells you this benchmark doesn't benefit all that much from having a dualcore as a single A9 should outperform the equally clocked A8 by default.

And here's one using the latest Samsung Galaxy Tab with a Tegra2 A9 dualcore with the latest SunSpider benchmark. It's pretty much identical to that of the iPad 2.

http://www.carrypad.com/2011/02/17/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-hands-on-sunspider-test-good/

Enough facts for you?

 

[OptyCT]

These type of threads are starting to take on a similar tone to those before the latest MacBook Pro updates. People who were whining about the new MBP specs were quickly silenced after user/tech media benchmarks began to emerge soon after the MBP's release. The same will be true of the iPad2. The iPad is being upgraded to dual-core. This alone will make for a much faster user experience.

I think Ars Technica had to bash the iPad after their scathing review of the Xoom. Their hoping the headline, "Early iPad 2 benchmarks: CPU performance remains mostly unchanged", will bring some Android fanboys back.

 

[fertilized-egg]

These type of threads are starting to take on a similar tone to those before the latest MacBook Pro updates. People who were whining about the new MBP specs were quickly silenced after user/tech media benchmarks began to emerge soon after the MBP's release.

The ironic part of course is that "Full of Win" is the person who's asking people to see the benchmark and don't listen to the "marketing&brand tripe." It's amazing how hypocritical some can be accusing people on an Apple forum to be irrational and brainwashed when they won't even look at the data that's been available for weeks now. Then again, he seems to be hellbent on milking his "iPad 2 = iPad 1.5" gimmick to its fullest.

I think Ars Technica had to bash the iPad after their scathing review of the Xoom. Their hoping the headline, "Early iPad 2 benchmarks: CPU performance remains mostly unchanged", will bring some Android fanboys back.

I'm just so disappointed in their pseudo-intellectual sensationalism. I expected better from Ars.

 

[Carouser]

Once again, this pig is really going to be an iPad 1.5...and that is being generous.

What criteria would it have to hit to be iPad 3? Or maybe there actually no criteria at all, since 'iPad 2' is just the name of the thing and not a unit of measurement, so it's meaningless to say it's 'really' iPad 1.5. I suppose if they called it iPad 2000 your head would explode.

 

[Coukos34]

Benchmarks are benchmarks. I look at empirical testing, not Apple brand tripe, when forming an opinion. I guess if someone takes marketing speak for facts, then they might see the new iPad as a true version 2.0.

BTW - read the article, which is another outstanding Ars piece.

You have been on this whole tirade about how the iPad 2 is more like a version 1.5....I don't get your reasoning for this. The CPU/GPU combo is more than competitive with what competitors will be bringing to this market even by years end, and yet they are slimmer, lighter and faster. What makes it such a "1.5" product. There is no basis to that statement. If you are one of those people who think it should have had a "retina" screen, and that's why you are disappointed, well get over it. That technology is not yet ready for the market and especially at that pricepoint.

I'd love to hear why exactly you think the iPad 2 is not a worthy successor anyway. What did they really miss upon that you expected? Only thing I can think of is that you are defending your original iPad. Do us all a favor, and take your negativity and agenda somewhere else

 

[Full of Win]

No you pick and choose benchmark results that fit your agenda and claim it as "facts." Look at this one using SunSpider 0.9

Look at where dualcore A9 devices(OMAP4, Tegra2, Exynos) are relative to single core A8 (Nexus S) and Snapdragons (MyTouch 4G, Nexus One, etc) Which indicates benchmark result of ~50% improvement from the CNet article is exactly where you'd expect the A5 to be in comparison to the older A8 A4. Also it tells you this benchmark doesn't benefit all that much from having a dualcore as a single A9 should outperform the equally clocked A8 by default.

And here's one using the latest Samsung Galaxy Tab with a Tegra2 A9 dualcore with the latest SunSpider benchmark. It's pretty much identical to that of the iPad 2.

http://www.carrypad.com/2011/02/17/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-hands-on-sunspider-test-good/

Enough facts for you?

I was comparing two devices, running the same version of an operating system (iOS 4.3), and one assumes the same code to run Java. When such a comparison is made, and the variable is the hardware running said software, the so-called iPad 2 (or iPad 1.5) is not much faster than the original iPad.

I’m guessing you are not a scientist. If you were, I’m sure you would see the value of keeping variables in a comparison at a minimum. This is basic science, KEEP THE NUMBER OF VARIABLES TO A MINIUM. Try not to add too many exogenous factors that will lead to incorrect conclusions. Do you not agree? When you bring in different OS’es and code bases, you are adding too many variables to be informational. Who is to say Goolge will not offer a refined version of their software tomorrow, making your position moot.

Now, if they were running the same code, sure it would be a good point. However, they are not.