or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tipoo

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7460/apple-ipad-air-review A lot of disgruntled iPad 1 owners will tell you lack of RAM is it's achilles heel, I hope this 30% increase in its RAM use with no increase in capacity doesn't hurt it.    People saying Mavericks like compression will help: Anand measured how much RAM was in use under load. If it was compressing something, it would have been factored into how much was used. Even if it is using compression, it's no magic cure. 
I think that's missing my point. A7 doesn't help the Surface at all for one, and while I'm sure Qualcomm will get there soon the point is that Intel is already competitive with them. Short term, ARM chips may keep getting wins, but in the long view of Intels roadmap I think they'll dominate this space just like they dominated AMD. It's hard for anyone to compete with a company that can drop 5-6 billion on a new uarch and think nothing of it. Just ask AMD. 
With Bay Trail getting cost, performance, and power draw competitive with ARM chips, I don't see much sense in keeping with ARM in this form factor. A tablet just like this but with Bay Trail and full on Windows would be pretty appealing. I'm not sure what RTs future will be given how competitive Intel is getting, perhaps it will end up merging with Windows Phone and stay in phones and phablets. 
Apple usually doesn't fudge numbers, but it seems clear the 90% boost for the 13" was a bit much to claim. The Iris Pro 5200 in the 15" is also a tad slower than the old 650M default, especially when you start cranking the resolution/filtering/details as it seems bandwidth constrained.
Apple has claimed the A7 has twice the GPU power of the A6 in the 5S reveal, and now twice the GPU power of the A6X in this one, yet they aren't calling the iPad one an A7X part. I wonder what's going on, and where the retina Mini falls.
I'm confused. A7 just brought the iPhone to iPad 4 graphics levels with the A6X (a6X had double the GPU resources of the A6, thus the same-ish performance as the A7), but they're saying the same A7 doubled it from the iPad 4...? Yet it's not an A7X? I wonder if they just dropped the X naming scheme but are doubling resources as usual for the larger iPad. Or if that's the case, which one does the Mini use?   
Seems like they intend to support A5 for a long time, given how many new products are still using it. 
Doesn't seem likely given power consumptions scaling with clock speeds. Doubling resources is far more efficient than doubling clock speed. And even if it was clocked higher, double the performance of the A7 would merit an X, I would think. 
What, lol...I am happy about it. I'm just curious. Are they just not naming it A*X now, or is it really an A7, in which case how did it double the GPU speed from A6X when the A7 in the iPhone was just about the same? I wouldn't' come to sites like these if "just being happy about it" was enough :P
I'm confused. A7 just bought the iPhone to iPad 4 graphics levels with the A6X (a6X had double the GPU resources of the A6, thus the same-ish performance as the A7 on purely GPU), but they're saying the same A7 doubled it from the iPad 4...? Yet it's not an A7X? 
New Posts  All Forums: