or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple expected to pack ultrafast, dual core SGX543 graphics into iPad 2, iPhone 5
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple expected to pack ultrafast, dual core SGX543 graphics into iPad 2, iPhone 5 - Page 3

post #81 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

So why not quad core? Just look at what games a starting to roll out.

Why are you assuming cores are the only way to increase performance? Did you overlook or just ignore the reference to OpenCL support?
post #82 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I'm curious as to what you are doing where you can tell that it's the GPU that is too slow.

Games?

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #83 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

Games?

which ones?
post #84 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Why are you assuming cores are the only way to increase performance? Did you overlook or just ignore the reference to OpenCL support?

OpenCL gives any application access to the Graphics Processing Unit for non-graphical computing. I don't see how OpenCL helps games for example.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #85 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

which ones?

Are you drunk or what?

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #86 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

OpenCL gives any application access to the Graphics Processing Unit for non-graphical computing. I don't see how OpenCL helps games for example.

You also dont seem to see how PowerVR SVG543 is a considerably more powerful GPU than the SVG535. You clearly stated it has to have 4x as many cores to run 4x as many pixels. Again, thats not a logical assumption, IMO.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #87 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

Apple's UI is really smooth, the best in the business. But TANSTAAFL. Having more CPU and GPU power will enable bigger and better software. They must maintain parity with competitors. There are 4 different dual-core SoCs with higher end GPUs coming throughout this year that'll go in phones and tablets. Eventually the advantages of better horsepower will take over Apple's advantages.

You're incorrectly applying the free lunch concept. Future CPU and gpu power is not the price to be paid for apple having really smooth UI. Development cost is where the lunch bill is paid for their UI. Apple will enjoy the CPU and gpu power gains that the rest of the industry will.
Also, if the competition needs to wait for more horsepower to achieve what apple does now then apple should be able to use that same horsepower to stay ahead.
post #88 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Sony is rumored to be using the same multiple core SGX543 architecture in its forthcoming PlayStation Portable 2, potentially using four or eight cores, and likely driving the clock chip faster.

If the PSP 2 has a quad SGX, it puts it on par with the original XBox, possibly even higher with advances in shader processing etc. The next gen consoles are around 10x faster than that. They don't have to push a high resolution though nor do they have to reach 60FPS, which some next-gen developers aim for.

New mobile phones are coming out every year so they are developing the hardware faster than console makers who spread out the releases over 5 or more years. The current iPhone has the same RAM as the PS3 and 360.

These developments can really help raise the bar for mobile gaming and I hope that the developers of the big game franchises realise this and start porting the original versions over.
post #89 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimi88 View Post

i have some real doubts the ipad 2 will be dual core, ive read a lot of things pointing to no..
source: iPad 2 Release Date and Specifications

Who knows for sure?
post #90 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

OpenCL gives any application access to the Graphics Processing Unit for non-graphical computing. I don't see how OpenCL helps games for example.

OpenGL offloads heavy lifting in parallel computing onto OpenCL. They are married to one another.
post #91 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

I am refraining from owning an iPad ever. I find it to be completely useless for my needs.

Stuck in mud.

Once you get one your needs will expand.
post #92 of 144
The point being missed here is that the "hardware" parity is a bit of a myth. Android gets occasional slowdowns on small devices just scrolling a list view because it doesn't have GPU acceleration across all devices.

A JVM is not an OS. Apparently the Galaxy S writes their own drivers ( hence it may be a contender). All the other cheap as chips manufacturers will not have the capability to do it - and I doubt anybody ( except MS, who are not really in the Tablet space) - has the same ability as Apple. For the most part the addition of a GPU is meaningless to Android. If you try and copy the Retina display and use the CPU to render, then it's curtains. The CPU will run hot, everything will stall if anything happens ( any background multi-tasking, or work on the main thread) and the battery life will be about 5 minutes.

For that reason it makes sense for Apple to do this now - and remain two years ahead of the competition.

You see the power of iOS - effectively a major subset of OS X - is not really shown on the iPhone where a lot of UI is click on a list and swipe to right. Android could copy that.

When they build Gingerbread in Goggle they will be building it on a Google tablet ( if any) and without hardware acceleration, since Google has to leave that to manufacturers who use their own chips. Good luck with that one.

Android users complain here:
http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=6914
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #93 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimsyswallows View Post

Where can one find further details of all these chips, though?

Frito-Lay
post #94 of 144
Boy, I'm just not enough of a techno-gadget geek to enter into this discussion. Sigh.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #95 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archos View Post

Apple could add a mini HMDI port like everyone else has.

I don't foresee Apple adding a mini-HDMI port on the iPad. There are unused pins in the 30-pin dock connector. If they add HDMI output, they'll most likely do it through the now ubiquitous dock connector... and charge $50 for the adapter cable.
post #96 of 144
I'd love to see Apple's next-gen iDevices get a chip with dual-core Cortex A9 and SGX543 engines, but I'll believe it when I see it. Apple has a history of writing great software that performs well on a given set of hardware - that hardware however, is typically 1 generation behind everyone else, and ironically, especially when it comes to graphics performance. Don't get me wrong, I own several iDevices cause I like what they do. I've just come to accept they're not on the cutting edge of performance.
post #97 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mytdave View Post

I'd love to see Apple's next-gen iDevices get a chip with dual-core Cortex A9 and SGX543 engines, but I'll believe it when I see it. Apple has a history of writing great software that performs well on a given set of hardware - that hardware however, is typically 1 generation behind everyone else, and ironically, especially when it comes to graphics performance. Don't get me wrong, I own several iDevices cause I like what they do. I've just come to accept they're not on the cutting edge of performance.

They generally are at the top when they are released ( at least with regards to iDevices, not Macs). However the release schedule is a year.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #98 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

Is anyone here going to refrain from upgrading unless the iPad 2 has a dual core GPU and doubles the screen resolution?

I definitely am not planning on upgrading my iPad at this time. About the only thing that might change that has nothing to do with the iPad2 features. If a little side project I'm starting on were to outpace my wildest dreams, I would need a 3G iPad for testing. I would also need an iOS developer, but I have a decent line on that already.
post #99 of 144
I guessed this would happen the first time I heard about iPhone 4's Retina Display.

The first time I heard about retina display resolution it was funny that iPhone Horizontal resolution was half of 1920x1280... and guess what, iPhone diagonal screen size is 3.6".

So, I have two theories:
  • Apple releases a 7.2" @ 1920x1280 iPad2 (which would have the same dot pitch as iPhone 4).
  • Apple releases a 9.7" @ 1920x1280 iPad2 (which would still be an outstanding resolution for a slate device and would make more sense for a device of that size, wich would not be held as close as a Phone).

Or maybe they do both! I would be happy either way.
post #100 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

And what CPU has to do with resolution?

The same thing that GPU does, particularly since they're the same now.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #101 of 144
I hope Apple puts a retina display in their notebooks and displays...
post #102 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Android systems can go dual-core and Apple can remain on a single-core chip and Apple will still provide a hugely superior OVERALL experience compared to the sloppiness of Android.

The only folks nowadays that care about what's under the hood are nerds and tech-heads that still to this day seem to think that it's the size and/or speed of the CPU that matters. At this point given the speeds of CPU's, it's irrelevant.

A tightly-written and optimized system like iOS will always provide a better experience on "slower" hardware than what Android can provide and bleeding-edge software. I've used Android enough to know that it's a joke in terms of user-experience, even though the Android hardware is technically "superior" to what Apple offers, and you very well know that.

People aren't stupid. Even with a great user experience, they'll know that the Apple device will run some applications not as fast as competitors. Not everything is smooth animation. There will be applications that take computational power. iMovie, games, audio, a whole host of stuff.

This is kind of funny. I'm not even saying that Apple must have higher specs, only parity. Ie, use what's available to competitors or have performance comparable to competitors. It's not as that's what they have been doing for basically 5 years now (post Intel switch) for all of the product lines.
post #103 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mytdave View Post

I'd love to see Apple's next-gen iDevices get a chip with dual-core Cortex A9 and SGX543 engines, but I'll believe it when I see it. Apple has a history of writing great software that performs well on a given set of hardware - that hardware however, is typically 1 generation behind everyone else, and ironically, especially when it comes to graphics performance. Don't get me wrong, I own several iDevices cause I like what they do. I've just come to accept they're not on the cutting edge of performance.

Since when has Apple's iDevices (iPod touch, iPhone, iPad) been a behind in hardware? I can't think of a time.

1 generation is not 3 months, or 6 months. It's really 12 to 18 months. Hardware makers can't move faster than 12 to 18 months. One could split hairs and say a half node (ie, 45nm to 40 nm instead of 45nm to 32nm) move or maybe a good voltage bin is a generation, but not in my book. You'll pay a penalty for that.
post #104 of 144
The whole point of ARM licensing is that it give the licensee the right to "cut and paste" various "modules" onto the production chip which provides a much quicker product development cycle at an advantageous cost. It avoids needlessly reinventing the wheel. It is what you do with the wheel that matters.

Although a company can put whatever custom "modules" they want into the design, the point is to use as much off-the-shelf tech as possible, at least as a beginning point. One might even call it Dim Sum chip design.
post #105 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post

Hey boys, how about a simple owner replaceable battery... My iPad Gen 1 is starting to not hold a charge as long. Just in time for the iPad 2.

So glad my Sammy Galaxy S can find a new battery at any starbase.

1) Apple has never had a battery bay door on an iDevice and moved away from it from their notebooks. There are just too many benefits.

2) If a device with a 1000 charge rating isn’t holding its charge after a maximum of 9 months then get it replaced. You can even do this out of warranty, yet you are still under warranty and think the answer is Apple scraping their long-standing designs to suit your faulty device? WTH!
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #106 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

Since when has Apple's iDevices (iPod touch, iPhone, iPad) been a behind in hardware? I can't think of a time.

1 generation is not 3 months, or 6 months. It's really 12 to 18 months. Hardware makers can't move faster than 12 to 18 months. One could split hairs and say a half node (ie, 45nm to 40 nm instead of 45nm to 32nm) move or maybe a good voltage bin is a generation, but not in my book. You'll pay a penalty for that.

A product generation is different than a generation of chip production and always will be. There will be different components that are incorporated into the product as they become available. There is also the matter of new products, such as the iPad, using "old stuff" to get something out the door when product introduction timing is more important than waiting for the supposed current generation of something to become available in quantity. There is also the learning curve of the design team which may want to work with components that are "mature", if not out of date, because of their familiarity with them and thus they can get it out the door sooner while they work on incorporating the newer things into the design and production process.

The iPad 2 (or whatever it will be called) should reflect what would have been expected of the first generation product, but was not done because of time constraints.

The shift of process node to a smaller one also has an impact on pricing of the product or margins. At some point the chip manufacturer is "selling silicon" and smaller is cheaper.
post #107 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I dont understand this request. Ive heard people wish for more storage capacity, but never wish for the option for a lower capacity to exist. Are you saying you want 32GB model to be at the $499 price point? If so, that is a very different thing to state, IMO.<snip>

More storage...micro-SD card slot.
post #108 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) Apple has never had a battery bay door on an iDevice and moved away from it from their notebooks. There are just too many benefits.

2) If a device with a 1000 charge rating isnt holding its charge after a maximum of 9 months then get it replaced. You can even do this out of warranty, yet you are still under warranty and think the answer is Apple scraping their long-standing designs to suit your faulty device? WTH!

You think people have the time and convenience of spending all those extra wait times to replace a battery? We are living in 2011, the era of instant gratification. Waiting a day is preposterous. We want thnigs NOW.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #109 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You think people have the time and convenience of spending all those extra wait times to replace a battery? We are living in 2011, the era of instant gratification. Waiting a day is preposterous. We want thnigs NOW.

Only a small segment of the population would even think of buying a replacement battery...

Given the choice, would I prefer a removable battery? Yes, most certainly, if the removable battery did not the impact size, weight, rigidity, and/or battery life of the device...
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #110 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

A product generation is different than a generation of chip production and always will be.

Sure. But those products aren't going to be that different because it's all trim without the generational improvement in performance.

Quote:
There will be different components that are incorporated into the product as they become available.

Like what?

Quote:
There is also the matter of new products, such as the iPad, using "old stuff" to get something out the door when product introduction timing is more important than waiting for the supposed current generation of something to become available in quantity.

The A4 in the iPad was the most modern SoC when it shipped in April 2010. 45 nm Cortex-A8 with a SGX535 GPU. And the IPS screen is the best kind of LCD screen available.

Quote:
The iPad 2 (or whatever it will be called) should reflect what would have been expected of the first generation product, but was not done because of time constraints.

If the iPad 2 is a dual-core A9 with an SGX543MP, it could not have been shipped in 2010 in any kind of performance, cost benefit trade. It was not achievable. However, on mature 45 nm fabs with a good voltage bin or a half node improvement at 40nm, it's achievable.

Why Apple chose not to ship the iPad 1 with 512 MB RAM, I don't know. It could be as simple as they wanted to make their margin at $499, even though it would have been a $5 to $10 difference in component costs. Maybe it was planned obsolescence.

Quote:
The shift of process node to a smaller one also has an impact on pricing of the product or margins. At some point the chip manufacturer is "selling silicon" and smaller is cheaper.

Well, yes, but it also makes higher performance chips possible: double the transistors, lower voltages, higher frequencies. It's a Highlander-ish competition really.
post #111 of 144
... where english came to die.

ten extra minutes to proof-read your "professionally" written article ... that's all it would take.
post #112 of 144
Two observations:

1) dual core Cortex A9 + dual code SGX543 pushes me even more into thinking the A9s will be 32nm.

2) 1920x1280 seems a more reasonable resolution than 2048x1536.
post #113 of 144
It has to be a multiple of 960x640 and 1024x768. So that apps can scale easily.

For all the things the iPad does there is no reason why Apple needs to follow video resolution standards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post


2) 1920x1280 seems a more reasonable resolution than 2048x1536.
post #114 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Two observations:

1) dual core Cortex A9 + dual code SGX543 pushes me even more into thinking the A9s will be 32nm.

2) 1920x1280 seems a more reasonable resolution than 2048x1536.

Not sure why you would expect Apple to change direction and go with a widescreen iPad. The 4:3 aspect ratio wasn't a whim, it's what Apple concluded had the best utility for the most applications.

Insofar that was true for Apple's design goals when the iPad was released it would still be true now. While 1920x1280 might be "reasonable" according to stock monitor resolutions, it clearly doesn't fit Apple's intention for the platform-- whereas 2048x1536 does.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #115 of 144
Does this mean the apple tv may be able to play 3D movies through the app store?
post #116 of 144
Not sure if this iLounge piece has already been linked to, but it does bring some much needed perspective (and reiterates some of the things Solipsism has been saying):

Quote:
In other words, a 2048 by 1536 second-generation iPad screen would not only be roughly on par with what’s in Apple’s most expensive computers and monitors, but it would also have to fit all those pixels into a roughly 10” diagonal display—a display that most likely doesn’t exist. A quick check of LCD screen maker Samsung’s website suggests that its 9.7” displays tap out at 1024x768, the iPad’s current resolution, and other reported iPad screen suppliers LG and Chimei Innolux don’t appear to sell sub-10” screens with anywhere near the pixels discussed above; the iPad’s screen is closer to the high end than the middle or bottom of its product class. Apple would need screens that it could reliably source in the tens of millions (reportedly 65-million) per year, so unless it has had secret factories working on QXGA iPad displays for a couple of years, finding such parts would be unlikely. Additionally, even if Apple did in fact include a supercharged video processor to power a super screen, the iPad’s notebook-besting battery life could be impacted considerably when apps demand four times the pixel changes of the prior iPad. It’s far more likely that a display similar to the current iPad’s would be given the optional ability to display better 3-D and 2-D graphics than an outright mandate to do so.

As one of the commenters on that article remarks, "rumors that Apple is going to be first to adopt a new technology tend to far outnumber actual instances of it doing so."
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #117 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Zero point and completely undermines the point of AirPlay and purchasing an Apple TV. Not happening.

Really? 'Cus almost every external display I would want to use has HDMI these days and exactly none support airplay. Are there any business projectors, portable or conference room models, that support airplay? Just about all recent models have HDMI. Same for the TV's in the homes of any friends or familly memebers I might visit. None have an Apple TV or a TV that supports airplay, all have HDMI.

I guess if you have no friends and never leave your house for work or play, and you have an Apple TV, you are right, "Zero point." For the other 99.999% of potential customers, HDMI has a pretty big point.

Same with SD card readers and USB ports. Most people use these things on their PC's, laptops and netbooks, and if the iPad is going to eat into more of the PC market it needs to expand its functionality and its ability to interface with a broader range of 3rd party devices.
post #118 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by AIaddict View Post

Really? 'Cus almost every external display I would want to use has HDMI these days and exactly none support airplay.

Try plugging an Apple TV into one. Oh, look! It works now!

Quote:
I guess if you have no friends and never leave your house for work or play, and you have an Apple TV, you are right, "Zero point." For the other 99.999% of potential customers, HDMI has a pretty big point.

So they'll buy Apple TVs or they won't use the feature.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #119 of 144
If I were doing presentations with an iPad and expected to encounter projectors with HDMI in, I'd definitely invest in an aTV. $99 is about the same price as for a few cables and adapters.

Whereas before I'd have to run an cable from my iPad to the projector or provided patch point, now I plug the aTV instead and can do untethered video. Much nicer to be able to walk around while I speak.

Same as pretty much anywhere. Plugging in an aTV is no more trouble than plugging in an iPad or iPhone or Mac, at which point you're not limited to the cable's length as to where you sit. Bringing my aTV with me is scarcely more hassle than bringing an adapter and cable.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #120 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So they'll buy Apple TVs or they won't use the feature.

HDMI will come to the iPhone. The composite/compent cables you can get for the iPhone already "undermine" Apple TV. If what you're saying were true, Apple would have already discontinued those cables. There is plenty of room for both video out and AirPlay on the iPhone.

The only reason HDMI isn't on the iPhone is the fact that the dock connector doesn't support digital video out. Interestingly enough, the dock connector is due for a revamp with LightPeak getting ready for launch. I'd expect HDMI to be supported once that update happens. The biggest question from my perspective is will it happen this year or next year?
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple expected to pack ultrafast, dual core SGX543 graphics into iPad 2, iPhone 5
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple expected to pack ultrafast, dual core SGX543 graphics into iPad 2, iPhone 5