or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics

post #1 of 161
Thread Starter 
The multiple core SGX graphics built into the iPad 2 A5 System on a Chip processor deliver benchmarks from 3 to 7 times faster than the original iPad, and smoke competing mobile chips such as Nvidia's Tegra 2.

According to a report by AnandTech, the new A5's SGX543 "shader pipeline can execute twice the number of instructions per clock as the SGX 535 [in A4], and then there are four times as many pipes in an SGX 543MP2 as there are in a 535.

"There are also efficiency improvements as well. Hidden surface removal works at twice the rate in the 543MP2 as it did in the 535. There's also a big boost in texture filtering performance."

In synthetic benchmarks that draw textured and fragment lit triangles and fetch textures, iPad 2 delivered results 3 to 5 times faster than last years' iPad a from 2 to nearly 7 times faster than Motorola's new Xoom.

In GLBenchmark 2.0 tests that more closely match the tasks of a real 3D game, iPad 2 outperformed last year's iPad by 5.4x, and was 3.7x the performance of the Tegra 2 powered Xoom.



Turning on anti-aliasing to smooth play black, the iPad 2's performance lead reached 7x. Apple claimed a boost in graphics performance by as much as 9x, but the report states "I'm not sure that you'll ever see 9x running real game code."

Epic's Infinity Blade game is already taking advantage of the new graphics processing power to enhance its gameplay on the iPad 2 using higher resolution textures and anti-aliasing for more detailed, smoother graphics.

Apple has been working with Imagination Technologies to build ever faster mobile chips that pair ARM GPU cores with Imaginations' SGX graphics processor cores, part of a secret licensing deal that AppleInsider repeatedly broke news of since 2008.

The same SGX543 graphics processor cores that AppleInsider was first to report being incorporated in the A5 will also be used in the upcoming iPhone 5, as it too will also use the same A5 chip at iPod 2.

Apple's new A5 pairs dual ARM Cortex A9 cores clocked at 1GHz, which dynamically scales down in speed to save battery life.
post #2 of 161










post #3 of 161
Wow. DED linking to anandtech.com.

Shhhhh... don't tell him Anand likes WP7 over iOS!
post #4 of 161
While I think the iPad 2 is still faster (and better in most ways) the Motorola Xoom, it must be mentioned that the iPad is running at a lower resolution then the Xoom. The Xoom is dealing with 1,024,000 pixels at a time and the iPad is dealing with 786,432 pixels. That is quite a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I've checked out the Xoom, briefly, twice... I'm not impressed. I am just discussing pure graphics performance and unless the two units were running at the some resolution it is not really a fair comparison.
post #5 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteric View Post

While I think the iPad 2 is still faster (and better in most ways) the Motorola Xoom, it must be mentioned that the iPad is running at a lower resolution then the Xoom. The Xoom is dealing with 1,024,000 pixels at a time and the iPad is dealing with 786,432 pixels. That is quite a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I've checked out the Xoom, briefly, twice... I'm not impressed. I am just discussing pure graphics performance and unless the two units were running at the some resolution it is not really a fair comparison.

You're right, it isn't fair, the iPad should be compared to a netbook or something along those lines.
post #6 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteric View Post

While I think the iPad 2 is still faster (and better in most ways) the Motorola Xoom, it must be mentioned that the iPad is running at a lower resolution then the Xoom. The Xoom is dealing with 1,024,000 pixels at a time and the iPad is dealing with 786,432 pixels. That is quite a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I've checked out the Xoom, briefly, twice... I'm not impressed. I am just discussing pure graphics performance and unless the two units were running at the some resolution it is not really a fair comparison.

The best ratio the Xoom gets in comparison to iPad 2 is in triangles-per-second, which has nothing to do with resolution. Among those, only GLBenchmark could potentially have a pixel-count dependency, but due to many other factors (such as triangles per second and texturing, etc) it's not going to be nearly in the ratio of pixels.
post #7 of 161
It's funny how so many people claim there's not much new to the iPad 2. 9x video graphics sold me the second I seen it. It's going to be another year of ads from the competitors trying to say how their tablet is better. In the long run it's really only giving apple free advertisement.

The moment I played Infiniti blade I noticed a huge difference in the graphics. I'd even go as far to call it "Infiniti Blade HD2" cause of the difference over the iPad 1.
post #8 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteric View Post

While I think the iPad 2 is still faster (and better in most ways) the Motorola Xoom, it must be mentioned that the iPad is running at a lower resolution then the Xoom. The Xoom is dealing with 1,024,000 pixels at a time and the iPad is dealing with 786,432 pixels. That is quite a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I've checked out the Xoom, briefly, twice... I'm not impressed. I am just discussing pure graphics performance and unless the two units were running at the some resolution it is not really a fair comparison.

Who cares, other than geeks. That was Motorola's tradeoff to make.

It is a fair comparison from the p.o.v. of the user of one versus the other, in the real world. Not in your hypothetical world of 'what would it be like if Apple had higher pixel density and Motorola had lower.'

At the end of the day, that's pretty much all that matters. In any event, the users seem to have spoken in volumes.....
post #9 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteric View Post

That is quite a difference.

It's also worth noting that the xoom screen looks like crap compared to the ipad screen. So why even bother with a slightly higher resolution if it's worse than another screen which is lower?
post #10 of 161
I'm surprised people even care to compare iPad 2 with the Xoom. Besides those fancy ads, the Xoom has shown nothing, there's no lines during release, there's only mediocre reviews, and there's only 100 apps specifically made for it so far. To me it's not even worth a comparison.
post #11 of 161
Costs more, runs slower.

Now there's a great ad slogan.....

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #12 of 161
The performance and graphics are amazing. I have some of the new games that were updated for the iPad 2 and you can really notice the graphics difference between the iPad and iPad 2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever View Post

I'm surprised people even care to compare iPad 2 with the Xoom. Besides those fancy ads, the Xoom has shown nothing, there's no lines during release, there's only mediocre reviews, and there's only 100 apps specifically made for it so far. To me it's not even worth a comparison.

Like someone else said, Motorola wants you to send the Xoom back in three months so they can finish building it
post #13 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

I was looking at the new games for the iPad 2 today and I noticed the comment section and there were alot of people pissed because they loaded the game for the iPad 1 and it really couldn't run the game. They wanted there money back...LOL.

Real Racing 2 HD appears to be a bit too much for the first iPad. Dead Space plays really nice on my iPad 2.

The updated Infinity Blade game worked fine on my iPad 1 and the same version worked beautifully on my iPad 2. I think those developers will improve both devices support now that they have the iPad 2 in hand.
post #14 of 161
The iPad 2 resolves every issue I had with the iPad 1. Love the aptly named Smart Cover, though it should be noted the iPad 2 was designed in tandem with the Smart Cover and it’s not as simple as putting a couple magnets in the cover. Bought the nav blue leather cover and completely worth the $69.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Like someone else said, Motorola wants you to send the Xoom back in three months so they can finish building it

LOL I wonder how long that will take and if you have to pay for shipping there and back.


Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

How your battery life? So far I think its about the same as the first iPad.

The reviews show it’s about the same, though most I’ve read have it lasting slightly more than before.

I look forward to AnandTech’s battery review and comparison of the iPad 2. They’ve apparently had 4 units in testing since yesterday so hopefully we’ll see an article tomorrow.



PS: Install Xcode, enable Dev Mode and get Four-Finger Gestures enabled on your iPad 1 or 2 running iOS 4.3. Completely changes the experience for the better.
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 #15 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

How your battery life? So far I think its about the same as the first iPad.

Yes. A little bit better since it is new. After the official 4.3 update my battery life went back to normal. On the beta it used to get drained much faster since it was a beta OS.
post #16 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteric View Post

While I think the iPad 2 is still faster (and better in most ways) the Motorola Xoom, it must be mentioned that the iPad is running at a lower resolution then the Xoom. The Xoom is dealing with 1,024,000 pixels at a time and the iPad is dealing with 786,432 pixels. That is quite a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I've checked out the Xoom, briefly, twice... I'm not impressed. I am just discussing pure graphics performance and unless the two units were running at the some resolution it is not really a fair comparison.

That's 23% less pixels for the iPad - but its performance is 115% better (in the frame rate test). The resolution difference doesn't explain the performance difference.
post #17 of 161
Its hilarious now looking back at the haters who were convinced that xoom's tegra chip performance alone would kill the ipad 1 and 2. I find they are increasingly running on delusional wishful thinking than substantial facts.
-----
Reply
-----
Reply
post #18 of 161
So people bought Xoom because of spec and now what?

Oh, yeah I remember... FLASH!!!



(People who want Android tablet should hold off until the later part of this year)
post #19 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by pofo View Post

Its hilarious now looking back at the haters who were convinced that xoom's tegra chip performance alone would kill the ipad 1 and 2. I find they are increasingly running on delusional wishful thinking than substantial facts.

So what will be the argument now? Before it was because of all the better HW and how Honeycomb was designed for a tablet when all Apple did for iOS for iPad was nothing at all (as noted by making it was similar to iOS for iPhone/Touch as they could for obvious reasons).

We already know one one argument, which is it has 23% more pixels but I assume well also see some excuses about how Honeycomb is so new and how the Xoom is just the first Android tablets, which I presume means all the others will be this fabled iPad killer that is always talked about but never seems to come to pass.
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 #20 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

So people bought Xoom because of spec and now what?

Oh, yeah I remember... FLASH!!!

No Flash, No SD card, No USB, No 4G.

The SW and driver updates are coming and the 4G will happen later this year when they finally compete it at your own expense and loss of device usage, of course. I wonder how they would react if Apple promised features but said they were coming later?
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 #21 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

No Flash, No SD card, No USB, No ‘4G’.

I read some delusions in Android forum (linked through Mac Rumors) and you wouldn't believe this excuse. Drum rolls please...

NO WIDGETS!!!!
post #22 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

I read some delusions in Android forum (linked through Mac Rumors) and you wouldn't believe this excuse. Drum rolls please...

NO WIDGETS!!!!

It’s certainly a feature iOS doesn’t currently offer from Apple, but I don’t think any are calling them a make-or-break feature of Android without coming it with a strong anti-Apple bias. It’s as silly as saying that Mac OS X is better than Windows because of Dashboard widgets. Sure, I run about 10 that I access many times a day via a Hot Corner but it’s not a "killer app”. Plus, you can install a whole bunch of things with a jailbroken iOS-based iDevice and still get the great OS and driver integration with the HW.

These little excuses are usually just a way to validate a prejudice. Personally, I think the Xoom’s TN panel is the key factor as to why it won’t make many customers happy. The 16:9 display (if used for reading), the lesser performance with the UI and games, and other such aspects I think are easily dealt with, but not that panel type. I think Apple was smart to wait for a panel 178° panel that would be feasible in terms of cost and power, and mass produceable before releasing the iPad. Without that keystone component I think the tablet revolution would have never happened.
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 #23 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It’s certainly a feature iOS doesn’t currently offer from Apple, but I don’t think any are calling them a make-or-break feature of Android without coming it with a strong anti-Apple bias. It’s as silly as saying that Mac OS X is better than Windows because of Dashboard widgets. Sure, I run about 10 that I access many times a day via a Hot Corner but it’s not a "killer app”. Plus, you can install a whole bunch of things with a jailbroken iOS-based iDevice and still get the great OS and driver integration with the HW.

These little excuses are usually just a way to validate a prejudice. Personally, I think the Xoom’s TN panel is the key factor as to why it won’t make many customers happy. The 16:9 display (if used for reading), the lesser performance with the UI and games, and other such aspects I think are easily dealt with, but not that panel type. I think Apple was smart to wait for a panel 178° panel that would be feasible in terms of cost and power, and mass produceable before releasing the iPad. Without that keystone component I think the tablet revolution would have never happened.

Yes, $500 price point shoot iPad to stardom. And I don't see anyone can match this at the same panel size this year (unless of course they'd choose last year tech). No one just have the volume. Funny people still try to compare tablet with PC vs MAC market. If Apple play the game right it'll be iPod all over again, but in a much larger scale.
I'm most impressed.
post #24 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics View Post

Costs more, runs slower.

Now there's a great ad slogan.....

I've checked the Galaxy Tab and can easily confirm that it's pure CRAP compared even to the original iPad. As for the Xoom, it's simply XOOMED in the light of the above benchmarks (not to mention screen quality et al). So let's face it, folks...ANDROID IS DEAD.

There is simply no competition against the iPad, quality-, design- and price-wise. Apple has achieved a unique market advantage here.
iMac Intel 27" Core i7 3.4, 16GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 1TB HD + 4TB RAID 1+0, Nuforce Icon HDP, OS X 10.9.1; iPad Air 64GB; iPhone 5 32GB; iPod Classic; iPod Nano 4G; Apple TV 2.
Reply
iMac Intel 27" Core i7 3.4, 16GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 1TB HD + 4TB RAID 1+0, Nuforce Icon HDP, OS X 10.9.1; iPad Air 64GB; iPhone 5 32GB; iPod Classic; iPod Nano 4G; Apple TV 2.
Reply
post #25 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Who cares, other than geeks. That was Motorola's tradeoff to make.

It is a fair comparison from the p.o.v. of the user of one versus the other, in the real world. Not in your hypothetical world of 'what would it be like if Apple had higher pixel density and Motorola had lower.'

At the end of the day, that's pretty much all that matters. In any event, the users seem to have spoken in volumes.....

I agree, I don't have much interest in comparisons to Xoom--it is only half baked and probably only mentioned by Anand to have another graphics processing data point.

But, my question is this: What does this all mean for the mythical Retina Display summer update? If Apple was able to produce (in quantity) the double resolution/quadruple pixel count screen and add an HD line to the iPod2 without any other internal changes, how will it affect performance? I don't know enough about these things to speculate myself, but I am curious. Would it drag the iPad2's graphics performance back down or would it only affect certain functions?
I understand drawing triangles is drawing triangles no regardless of pixel count, but the contention that Xoom should get a break because of its pixel count has me wondering...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #26 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever View Post

I'm surprised people even care to compare iPad 2 with the Xoom. Besides those fancy ads, the Xoom has shown nothing, there's no lines during release, there's only mediocre reviews, and there's only 100 apps specifically made for it so far. To me it's not even worth a comparison.

I think the Xoom gets airtime because it's seen as the best of the rest, as poor as it may be in comparison to the top dog atm.
post #27 of 161
Not to sound like an android fan, using iPad to write this btw, but I hope android stays around a little longer. My reasoning is if there is no competition then the innovation my start to lag. Point in case the iPod touch, other than the back cover and some cameras (which it could have had from the start) and new sceen, there are no real innovations. Don't get me wrong the retina screen is nice, but that tech isn't from apple. So I don't want apple slipping into that lethargical mode with the iPad. Just my two cents and I know not all will agree.
post #28 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

I read some delusions in Android forum

I'm a truly evil and sadistic person who takes great delight in the misery and suffering of others and I actually spent about 30-45 minutes last night at a few different android and xoom forums just browsing, reading and thoroughly enjoying myself. It was pure comedy gold, much better than any tv sitcom. Some of those people are truly delusional, bordering on mentally ill, with a few of them being truly psychotic.

I learned that it's not necessary for any game to have more than 25 FPS, as the human eye can't detect more than that anyway.

I also learned that the smoothness and better response of iOS is an over hyped feature since people don't coat their floors with wax and slide around on it. Hence, smoothness and having no lag is a useless feature.

I also learned that engadget, anandtech and a bunch of other sites are really paid shills for Apple and that there is a huge conspiracy taking place against Android.

I could go on, but if anybody is interested in a few laughs and LOLs, then head on over to any of those android and xoom forums and read for yourself. There's also massive infighting taking place, with a few people there recognizing reality and admitting that the iPad is superior VS those who refuse to accept that fact. If I had just spent $800 on a buggy piece of junk, I might be upset too.
post #29 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The iPad 2 resolves every issue I had with the iPad 1. Love the aptly named Smart Cover, though it should be noted the iPad 2 was designed in tandem with the Smart Cover and its not as simple as putting a couple magnets in the cover. Bought the nav blue leather cover and completely worth the $69.



LOL I wonder how long that will take and if you have to pay for shipping there and back.



The reviews show its about the same, though most Ive read have it lasting slightly more than before.

I look forward to AnandTechs battery review and comparison of the iPad 2. Theyve apparently had 4 units in testing since yesterday so hopefully well see an article tomorrow.



PS: Install Xcode, enable Dev Mode and get Four-Finger Gestures enabled on your iPad 1 or 2 running iOS 4.3. Completely changes the experience for the better.


Hey dude
congrads o your new ipad2 !!

enjoy !!!!


9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #30 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by megasmitty View Post

Not to sound like an android fan, using iPad to write this btw, but I hope android stays around a little longer. My reasoning is if there is no competition then the innovation my start to lag. Point in case the iPod touch, other than the back cover and some cameras (which it could have had from the start) and new sceen, there are no real innovations. Don't get me wrong the retina screen is nice, but that tech isn't from apple. So I don't want apple slipping into that lethargical mode with the iPad. Just my two cents and I know not all will agree.

Lack of competition on the iPod area certainly didn't stop Apple from making great strides: the new shuffle, the repurposed nano and the iPod Touch certainly aren't lagging in any aspect.

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #31 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by pofo View Post

Its hilarious now looking back at the haters who were convinced that xoom's tegra chip performance alone would kill the ipad 1 and 2. I find they are increasingly running on delusional wishful thinking than substantial facts.

This happens every year. Other companies start bragging about their future products long before apple, and everyone compares these unreleased devices to the year old device of apple's, saying, clearly, now is the time that the mobile space follows the lore of PC world and apple's products will be way underpowered to devices from other vendors which will somehow cost less.

And then every year Apple, surprise!, updates their hardware (I know, crazy right?) and it becomes obvious all the other vendors are playing catchup, and their not in it to win it.
32G iPhone 4, 32G iPad 2, late 2009 15" mbp
Reply
32G iPhone 4, 32G iPad 2, late 2009 15" mbp
Reply
post #32 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I learned that it's not necessary for any game to have more than 25 FPS, as the human eye can't detect more than that anyway.

I think you mean 30 fps. Besides, the ideal thing is that the average frame rate should be around 40fps, that way you know that when you get to a very action-packed part of a game (in other words, lots of explosions), the frame rate won't drop below 24fps.

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #33 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by megasmitty View Post

Not to sound like an android fan, using iPad to write this btw, but I hope android stays around a little longer. My reasoning is if there is no competition then the innovation my start to lag. .

I don't think that Android is going anywhere. There's so many android devices available with more coming out all of the time. Android appeals to cheap people who don't like to spend any money for apps, it appeals to extreme Apple haters and it appeals to people who like to spend most of their time tinkering with their desktop and rooting the system.

It's like a hobby for them. Some people like to download a movie and watch it immediately. Other people apparently don't mind having to spend hours encoding a movie and going through 17 loopholes to make it work.

As for competition, I don't think that matters at all to Apple. They are going to do what they do, competition or no competition. They came out with the iPad1 and there was no competition at all, there wasn't even a market, they created it. Apple releases things on their own schedule. That's the way that they've always done things, and I don't see them changing that. If Apple has 90% of the marketplace, that's fine and if they have 25% of the marketplace, that's fine too. They will continue to create the best devices that they can regardless.
post #34 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

I think you mean 30 fps. Besides, the ideal thing is that the average frame rate should be around 40fps, that way you know that when you get to a very action-packed part of a game (in other words, lots of explosions), the frame rate won't drop below 24fps.

No, I mean 25 FPS, because I was just quoting what some super genius wrote on that forum.

As for what I believe the best frame rate to be, the answer is obviously, the higher, the better!

For gaming, I don't mind 100 FPS and above. Try it out for yourself (if you have a hefty graphics card), and you'll see that there's a huge difference.
post #35 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by brlawyer View Post

So let's face it, folks...ANDROID IS DEAD.

Tell that to the iPhone...
post #36 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'm a truly evil and sadistic person who takes great delight in the misery and suffering of others and I actually spent about 30-45 minutes last night at a few different android and xoom forums just browsing, reading and thoroughly enjoying myself. It was pure comedy gold, much better than any tv sitcom. Some of those people are truly delusional, bordering on mentally ill, with a few of them being truly psychotic.

I learned that it's not necessary for any game to have more than 25 FPS, as the human eye can't detect more than that anyway.

I also learned that the smoothness and better response of iOS is an over hyped feature since people don't coat their floors with wax and slide around on it. Hence, smoothness and having no lag is a useless feature.

I also learned that engadget, anandtech and a bunch of other sites are really paid shills for Apple and that there is a huge conspiracy taking place against Android.

I could go on, but if anybody is interested in a few laughs and LOLs, then head on over to any of those android and xoom forums and read for yourself. There's also massive infighting taking place, with a few people there recognizing reality and admitting that the iPad is superior VS those who refuse to accept that fact. If I had just spent $800 on a buggy piece of junk, I might be upset too.

Sounds like a fun, quiet Sunday to me...links, please?
iMac Intel 27" Core i7 3.4, 16GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 1TB HD + 4TB RAID 1+0, Nuforce Icon HDP, OS X 10.9.1; iPad Air 64GB; iPhone 5 32GB; iPod Classic; iPod Nano 4G; Apple TV 2.
Reply
iMac Intel 27" Core i7 3.4, 16GB RAM, 120GB SSD + 1TB HD + 4TB RAID 1+0, Nuforce Icon HDP, OS X 10.9.1; iPad Air 64GB; iPhone 5 32GB; iPod Classic; iPod Nano 4G; Apple TV 2.
Reply
post #37 of 161
Don't root for Android. Root for HP. WebOS is better then Android. Google really sucks because it is becoming the old Microsoft. It has to copy generally for free and without permission everything a potential competitor does. Much of its stuff lacks polish.


Further, Apple might not have invented the technology behind the retina screen, but it had the insight to develop the technology to be used on the iPhone. Most of what Apple brings to market isn't invented there, but Apple makes a decision when others don't to use the technology. Also Apple is doing some cutting edge stuff with materials used to build the outside of hardware. Innovation does't require Apple to invent something, it only requires Apple to use innovative technology when others don't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by megasmitty View Post

Not to sound like an android fan, using iPad to write this btw, but I hope android stays around a little longer. My reasoning is if there is no competition then the innovation my start to lag. Point in case the iPod touch, other than the back cover and some cameras (which it could have had from the start) and new sceen, there are no real innovations. Don't get me wrong the retina screen is nice, but that tech isn't from apple. So I don't want apple slipping into that lethargical mode with the iPad. Just my two cents and I know not all will agree.
post #38 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Wow. DED linking to anandtech.com.

Shhhhh... don't tell him Anand likes WP7 over iOS!

They don't.
post #39 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Its certainly a feature (widgets) iOS doesnt currently offer from Apple, but I dont think any are calling them a make-or-break feature of Android without coming it with a strong anti-Apple bias. Its as silly as saying that Mac OS X is better than Windows because of Dashboard widgets. Sure, I run about 10 that I access many times a day via a Hot Corner but its not a "killer app. Plus, you can install a whole bunch of things with a jailbroken iOS-based iDevice and still get the great OS and driver integration with the HW.

These little excuses are usually just a way to validate a prejudice. Personally, I think the Xooms TN panel is the key factor as to why it wont make many customers happy. The 16:9 display (if used for reading), the lesser performance with the UI and games, and other such aspects I think are easily dealt with, but not that panel type. I think Apple was smart to wait for a panel 178° panel that would be feasible in terms of cost and power, and mass produceable before releasing the iPad. Without that keystone component I think the tablet revolution would have never happened.

These are insightful observations.

I especially like the one about widgets because it's hugely ironic that Android lovers are touting the power of widgets as one of their chief differentiators when it's one of the least popular parts of OS-X. I too use a few dashboard widgets and access them once every day or two at least, but most use them far less than that and many don't use them at all.

How funny is it that a feature introduced by Apple 6 years ago, copied by Windows a year later and now on the verge of being removed by Apple because of lack of interest from consumers, is the same feature being touted by Android that makes them "superior" to iOS which is itself a variation of OS-X, which is where the concept was introduced to people in the first place? It's kind of hilarious if you think about it.
post #40 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteric View Post

While I think the iPad 2 is still faster (and better in most ways) the Motorola Xoom, it must be mentioned that the iPad is running at a lower resolution then the Xoom. The Xoom is dealing with 1,024,000 pixels at a time and the iPad is dealing with 786,432 pixels. That is quite a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I've checked out the Xoom, briefly, twice... I'm not impressed. I am just discussing pure graphics performance and unless the two units were running at the some resolution it is not really a fair comparison.

It's only 25% more pixels. Check out the numbers of the tests. Usually, it's well over 100% faster, sometimes 300% or more.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics