Here is where I'll eat my words. It does appear that the new display and maybe the A5X is what is drawing a lot of power. And the radio chipset is the MDM9600 which is a 40/45 nm chipset that's been used since last year. Last to know is whether the A5X is a 45 nm or 32 nm part.
That's a lot of high power drawing parts if they are using a display that requires 2x the light power, an MDM9600 chipset which is known to eat power, 2x that of mature HSDP chipset, and if the A5X is a 45 nm part, than wow. 42 Watt-hour battery indeed.
You're still missing the point if you are including the MDM9600 in a measure against what makes the 42W battery last as just long as the 25W battery in its predecessor.
You're still missing the point if you are including the MDM9600 in a measure against what makes the 42W battery last as just long as the 25W battery in its predecessor.
Yeah, yeah, 4G is not the "problem". I'm eating my words after all. But it grates on my design senses such that I think Apple is reaching here. Every single part in the device has a certain power draw, and you have to be judicious about them. You get caught in a box were every decision you make results in some unsavory consequence: weight, size, and heat. A 42 WHr battery to power the device to 10 hrs on WiFi and 9 on LTE!
When I see that 42 WHr battery, and it only yields the same usage performance as prior iPads, it just grates.
Hopefully the tear downs and further testing will determine the partials. Based on the 10 and 9 quoted hrs, the MDM9600 is costing 4.2 WHrs. That's ~80% of the iPhone battery. The display, WiFi and the A5X is burning about 3.5 to 4 W when running video or browsing over WiFi. That's 50 to 70% more than the iPad 2. Just don't like it. I'd rather they keep the total power draw less than 3 W and make the device thinner, lighter and last longer.
They're caught in a mis-timing with the immaturity of display tech as it is apparently still amorphous silicon and it seems only Intel can produce CPUs at 32 nm or better.
Yeah, yeah, 4G is not the "problem". I'm eating my words after all. But it grates on my design senses such that I think Apple is reaching here. Every single part in the device has a certain power draw, and you have to be judicious about them. You get caught in a box were every decision you make results in some unsavory consequence: weight, size, and heat. A 42 WHr battery to power the device to 10 hrs on WiFi and 9 on LTE!
When I see that 42 WHr battery, and it only yields the same usage performance as prior iPads, it just grates.
Hopefully the tear downs and further testing will determine the partials. Based on the 10 and 9 quoted hrs, the MDM9600 is costing 4.2 WHrs. That's ~80% of the iPhone battery. The display, WiFi and the A5X is burning about 3.5 to 4 W when running video or browsing over WiFi. That's 50 to 70% more than the iPad 2. Just don't like it. I'd rather they keep the total power draw less than 3 W and make the device thinner, lighter and last longer.
They're caught in a mis-timing with the immaturity of display tech as it is apparently still amorphous silicon and it seems only Intel can produce CPUs at 32 nm or better.
I bet if you go to Airplane Mode, which turns off all wireless components, and do an iBooks test you'll probably not get much more than an extra hour at 50% brightness. That display is just a huge power draw... but that's a good thing over another year of 1024x768, right? I certainly think so. Hell, I would have paid extra for that display.
Yeah, yeah, 4G is not the "problem". I'm eating my words after all. But it grates on my design senses such that I think Apple is reaching here. Every single part in the device has a certain power draw, and you have to be judicious about them. You get caught in a box were every decision you make results in some unsavory consequence: weight, size, and heat. A 42 WHr battery to power the device to 10 hrs on WiFi and 9 on LTE!
When I see that 42 WHr battery, and it only yields the same usage performance as prior iPads, it just grates.
Hopefully the tear downs and further testing will determine the partials. Based on the 10 and 9 quoted hrs, the MDM9600 is costing 4.2 WHrs. That's ~80% of the iPhone battery. The display, WiFi and the A5X is burning about 3.5 to 4 W when running video or browsing over WiFi. That's 50 to 70% more than the iPad 2. Just don't like it. I'd rather they keep the total power draw less than 3 W and make the device thinner, lighter and last longer.
They're caught in a mis-timing with the immaturity of display tech as it is apparently still amorphous silicon and it seems only Intel can produce CPUs at 32 nm or better.
Something about "letting the perfect be the enemy of the good" comes to mind, as well as, "if I can't have next year's tech today I'm determined to be unhappy, or well at least 'grated' about it," and "future feature shock causes present buying paralysis."
So Apple gave us what they thought was the best iPad they could sell today at the price point they've stuck to. That's just how the Apple falls. And I'm buying....
I bet if you go to Airplane Mode, which turns off all wireless components, and do an iBooks test you'll probably not get much more than an extra hour at 50% brightness. That display is just a huge power draw... but that's a good thing over another year of 1024x768, right? I certainly think so. Hell, I would have paid extra for that display.
Probably even less then an hour in airplane mode. My general sense is the MDM9600 draws about 2x the power of a mature 3G radio chipset, which in turn drew more power than WiFi. But my old 3GS lasted a long time in airplane mode.
If they can actually ship an IGZO display, it'll buy back about 30% from the display. If the A5X is a 45 nm part, a 32 nm die shrink will buy back another 30% or so. Then a MDM9615 will likely be 30% more efficient as well. So, they can cut down the size of the battery in 2013 model to 30 WHr or so and achieve the same times while reduce its weight and thickness. Something has to be saved for an increase in CPU performance though. A Cortex-A15 CPU core is likely to draw 30 to 40% more power if the Dhrystone MIPS scores are any indication.
Comments
Here is where I'll eat my words. It does appear that the new display and maybe the A5X is what is drawing a lot of power. And the radio chipset is the MDM9600 which is a 40/45 nm chipset that's been used since last year. Last to know is whether the A5X is a 45 nm or 32 nm part.
That's a lot of high power drawing parts if they are using a display that requires 2x the light power, an MDM9600 chipset which is known to eat power, 2x that of mature HSDP chipset, and if the A5X is a 45 nm part, than wow. 42 Watt-hour battery indeed.
You're still missing the point if you are including the MDM9600 in a measure against what makes the 42W battery last as just long as the 25W battery in its predecessor.
You're still missing the point if you are including the MDM9600 in a measure against what makes the 42W battery last as just long as the 25W battery in its predecessor.
Yeah, yeah, 4G is not the "problem". I'm eating my words after all. But it grates on my design senses such that I think Apple is reaching here. Every single part in the device has a certain power draw, and you have to be judicious about them. You get caught in a box were every decision you make results in some unsavory consequence: weight, size, and heat. A 42 WHr battery to power the device to 10 hrs on WiFi and 9 on LTE!
When I see that 42 WHr battery, and it only yields the same usage performance as prior iPads, it just grates.
Hopefully the tear downs and further testing will determine the partials. Based on the 10 and 9 quoted hrs, the MDM9600 is costing 4.2 WHrs. That's ~80% of the iPhone battery. The display, WiFi and the A5X is burning about 3.5 to 4 W when running video or browsing over WiFi. That's 50 to 70% more than the iPad 2. Just don't like it. I'd rather they keep the total power draw less than 3 W and make the device thinner, lighter and last longer.
They're caught in a mis-timing with the immaturity of display tech as it is apparently still amorphous silicon and it seems only Intel can produce CPUs at 32 nm or better.
Yeah, yeah, 4G is not the "problem". I'm eating my words after all. But it grates on my design senses such that I think Apple is reaching here. Every single part in the device has a certain power draw, and you have to be judicious about them. You get caught in a box were every decision you make results in some unsavory consequence: weight, size, and heat. A 42 WHr battery to power the device to 10 hrs on WiFi and 9 on LTE!
When I see that 42 WHr battery, and it only yields the same usage performance as prior iPads, it just grates.
Hopefully the tear downs and further testing will determine the partials. Based on the 10 and 9 quoted hrs, the MDM9600 is costing 4.2 WHrs. That's ~80% of the iPhone battery. The display, WiFi and the A5X is burning about 3.5 to 4 W when running video or browsing over WiFi. That's 50 to 70% more than the iPad 2. Just don't like it. I'd rather they keep the total power draw less than 3 W and make the device thinner, lighter and last longer.
They're caught in a mis-timing with the immaturity of display tech as it is apparently still amorphous silicon and it seems only Intel can produce CPUs at 32 nm or better.
I bet if you go to Airplane Mode, which turns off all wireless components, and do an iBooks test you'll probably not get much more than an extra hour at 50% brightness. That display is just a huge power draw... but that's a good thing over another year of 1024x768, right? I certainly think so. Hell, I would have paid extra for that display.
Yeah, yeah, 4G is not the "problem". I'm eating my words after all. But it grates on my design senses such that I think Apple is reaching here. Every single part in the device has a certain power draw, and you have to be judicious about them. You get caught in a box were every decision you make results in some unsavory consequence: weight, size, and heat. A 42 WHr battery to power the device to 10 hrs on WiFi and 9 on LTE!
When I see that 42 WHr battery, and it only yields the same usage performance as prior iPads, it just grates.
Hopefully the tear downs and further testing will determine the partials. Based on the 10 and 9 quoted hrs, the MDM9600 is costing 4.2 WHrs. That's ~80% of the iPhone battery. The display, WiFi and the A5X is burning about 3.5 to 4 W when running video or browsing over WiFi. That's 50 to 70% more than the iPad 2. Just don't like it. I'd rather they keep the total power draw less than 3 W and make the device thinner, lighter and last longer.
They're caught in a mis-timing with the immaturity of display tech as it is apparently still amorphous silicon and it seems only Intel can produce CPUs at 32 nm or better.
Something about "letting the perfect be the enemy of the good" comes to mind, as well as, "if I can't have next year's tech today I'm determined to be unhappy, or well at least 'grated' about it," and "future feature shock causes present buying paralysis."
So Apple gave us what they thought was the best iPad they could sell today at the price point they've stuck to. That's just how the Apple falls. And I'm buying....
I bet if you go to Airplane Mode, which turns off all wireless components, and do an iBooks test you'll probably not get much more than an extra hour at 50% brightness. That display is just a huge power draw... but that's a good thing over another year of 1024x768, right? I certainly think so. Hell, I would have paid extra for that display.
Probably even less then an hour in airplane mode. My general sense is the MDM9600 draws about 2x the power of a mature 3G radio chipset, which in turn drew more power than WiFi. But my old 3GS lasted a long time in airplane mode.
If they can actually ship an IGZO display, it'll buy back about 30% from the display. If the A5X is a 45 nm part, a 32 nm die shrink will buy back another 30% or so. Then a MDM9615 will likely be 30% more efficient as well. So, they can cut down the size of the battery in 2013 model to 30 WHr or so and achieve the same times while reduce its weight and thickness. Something has to be saved for an increase in CPU performance though. A Cortex-A15 CPU core is likely to draw 30 to 40% more power if the Dhrystone MIPS scores are any indication.