or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tipoo

So these two systems (in the base processor config of each) perform somewhat surprisingly close to each other, despite the low base clock of the Air it can turbo up to nearly the same speed as the turbo on the Pro. The GPU side is similar as well, both have 40EUs, one turbos to 1000MHz and the Pro to an insubstantially higher 1100MHz.  Benchmarks reflect that one too.     What I'm curious about though is long term sustained performance, ie a heavy render, or some light...
 And you do know that games can have different internal rendering resolutions than the panel resolution, right? The iPad 3 ran many of its games at non-native for example.   Therefore a game running with any certain internal rendering resolution on both would not be "poor" on the GN4 in comparison, maybe slightly behind. I know this is an Apple site, but the article reeks of blind fanboyism.      And to the earlier comment about having less subpixels, to that person do you...
Articles like this really just make me sad about the journalism here, in what universe is this "poor"? Slightly behind in some tests is what I'd call it, while ahead in other tests.               Etc etc. The objective minded can see more over here:    http://www.anandtech.com/show/8613/the-samsung-galaxy-note-4-review/8    Be sure to look for "offscreen" tests to be sure the test is run at the same resolution on all devices, more important than the...
"Leaked" iPhone 6 motherboards also showed 2GB. Glad if this is true though. My iPad with 1GB RAM boots apps out of memory way faster than my Android phone with 2GB. People can say iOS is lighter all they want, and it may be true, but it's not enough to make up for double or triple the physical memory. 
 Unless it doubles performance per core again (unlikely, single threaded gains are harder and harder to come by...They could do it by moving to 4 cores, but those would not help single and dual thread bound apps), I'd rather wait for Broadwell. Now, a separate product from the Air using an A9 could be interesting, ie the much fabled iPad Pro with a keyboard a la Microsoft Surface. But as for the proper Macs, it's still worth sticking to Intel.   And I think the GPU gulf...
I was expecting this, they probably have to wait for the Broadwell U parts, as the higher power drawing screen would be offset by the lower power draw CPU/GPU. And Core M at 5 watts isn't in the same class as 17 watt Broadwell will be. 
Yep. Intel has had a fab process advantage over the universe for as long as I can remember. I wonder if they will retain the lead with the next fab after this, or if the gap is bound to close. 
  Hm. Even Intel was having so many problems with 14nm they delayed Broadwell way past its due. If TSMC or Samsung launches it when this says, Intels fabrication process lead may be shrinking. 
Wait what? A8 just jumped a fab process, are you sure A9 will be 14nm? A10 is where I would expect that. 
We have a C2D/320M/4GB macbook in the family, just wondering if there would be a performance regression from Mavericks to Yosemite. I realize it's not out yet, but the public beta builds are getting pretty close to the final build, so I think some assessment would be fair. I'm particularly thinking about the graphics, as it uses a lot of transparency effects everywhere, would that make the 320M drop frames everywhere? Anyone using a system with that or a slower GPU on...
New Posts  All Forums: