Dual core SGX543 dramatically boosts iPad 2 graphics - Page 3

Originally Posted by bigpics

Costs more, runs slower.

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

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Don't forget the "ES" part of Open GL ES 1/2/3/4/whatever...!!!

But, like I said, we'll see the gaming gurus push this iPad 2 hardware to the max. We'll definitely be seeing some interesting stuff in the next 6 months. I'm surprised Steve didn't feature a top-tier game developer in his keynote as usual. But I'm sure things were quite tight up to that point.

Now why the iPhone 5 would need the GPU horsepower of the iPad 2 is quite beyond me. But then, I've never been a big phone or apps guy. Ah, whatevs. I'm running around in circles now trying to digest all the info.

BTW the 320M is brilliant compared to the 9400M, in case anyone is wondering, in my personal testing (picked up a price-dropped MBP 13" 2010 model a few weeks ago). Twice as good, at least, in Valve Source-driven games. So if you're into any kind of PC or Mac gaming, the new MacBook Pros (13") with Intel graphics that are sub-320M performance (plus other issues) is NOT YOUR OPTION.

But if you're talking raw CPU power then the new MBPs can't be beat.

The best MBP for those that actually would harness that power would be IMO the
$3,649.00
2.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7
8GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
512GB Solid State Drive
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
MacBook Pro 15-inch Hi-Res Antiglare Widescreen Display

But... we are now in a "post-PC" era

Originally Posted by Sevenfeet

You guys deal in the rumor business on a day-by-day basis but I'm going by my memory at the time that the Wall Street Journal was the one who went with that rumor at the time. The WSJ isn't known for publishing rumors unless they come from high end sources at companies. In Apple's case, they have been known to get tips straight from the top before when Apple wants them to know something. I still might be wrong, but how do you remember it?

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

[...]

BTW the 320M is brilliant compared to the 9400M, in case anyone is wondering, in my personal testing (picked up a price-dropped MBP 13" 2010 model a few weeks ago). Twice as good, at least, in Valve Source-driven games. So if you're into any kind of PC or Mac gaming, the new MacBook Pros (13") with Intel graphics that are sub-320M performance (plus other issues) is NOT YOUR OPTION.

But if you're talking raw CPU power then the new MBPs can't be beat.

[...]

Originally Posted by brlawyer

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.

Originally Posted by Sevenfeet

You guys deal in the rumor business on a day-by-day basis but I'm going by my memory at the time that the Wall Street Journal was the one who went with that rumor at the time. The WSJ isn't known for publishing rumors unless they come from high end sources at companies. In Apple's case, they have been known to get tips straight from the top before when Apple wants them to know something. I still might be wrong, but how do you remember it?

Originally Posted by solipsism

First of all, ugh! Using my iPad 2 and repliying to multiple users. I had written quite a bit but then switched to a new Safari window to look something up. I thought about copying the text in the reply box but then remembered this is the iPad 2 with 2x the RAM. I No longer need to do that. I came back to the page about about 60 seconds with only 3 Safari pages in play and it reloaded everything. So nit happy about that. Anyway...

AnandTech's review of the new MBPs showed some interesting results in gaming. With a lower resolution the Intel HD Graphics 3000 beat the Nvidia 320M, but with higher resolution the 320M clearly trounced the Intel HD. I'm not a gamer but that plus the increased CPU performance sound like a good tradeoff to me.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

The iPad 3 will definitely run what we consider PS3 and Xbox360 AAA "hardcore gamer" titles. There is very little reason for Apple NOT to release a gaming console with the A6.

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum

I read that the new Galaxy Tab 10.1 inch uses a Tegra 2 CPU -- not a Samsung CPU:

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 official: Tegra 2, Honeycomb, dual cameras

Isn't it odd that Sammy would a competitive CPU rather than make its own -- Sammy makes the A4 for Apple and the Hummingbird for sale, and for its own phones and the Galaxy Tab 7".

Originally Posted by melgross

For some things it might work. But even for browsing, it would be slower. Remember that the gpu would have to render four times the pixels. That still requires more power. I'm noticing on my iPad2 that most things are faster. Browsing is faster, and so is quickly scrolling down a long page. Where before I would always get the checkerboard for a second or two, now I either don't get it at all, or I get it for a fraction of a second. That's due to faster hardware.
Put a four times the pixel display in there, and that will all slow down again.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Atomic Web Browser. The only way to surf the web on an iPad. Trust me. I haven't used Safari for many months now.

Originally Posted by SSquirrel

Ponder this. Next year Apple doubles the res on the iPad3 and maintains similar speeds to the iPad2 w/no reduction in battery life. No huge jumps in benchmarks like the iPad2 had, but not moving backwards w/that kind of graphics increase will be great.

Now look at the iPhone 6 next summer. They put the A6 in there as well, drive their volume pricing. Then we get an update to the AppleTV and iPod Touch which also receive the A6. I expect something similar will occur this year with the A5 processor, but next year w/the A6 the graphics will be even more nuts and that would be the time to announce open development for the AppleTV as a gaming console. The 3 console makers aren't releasing new home units this year, but I expect they will next year. Imagine Sony and Microsoft trying to sell their new systems for $400-$600 while Apple announces a new $100 AppleTV w/graphics that are close enough to not matter. Saving at least $300 lets you spend a lot more money on games

Originally Posted by extremeskater

My guess is another big factor for Apple when it comes to a higher res display is battery life.

Originally Posted by Sevenfeet

You guys deal in the rumor business on a day-by-day basis but I'm going by my memory at the time that the Wall Street Journal was the one who went with that rumor at the time. The WSJ isn't known for publishing rumors unless they come from high end sources at companies. In Apple's case, they have been known to get tips straight from the top before when Apple wants them to know something. I still might be wrong, but how do you remember it?

Originally Posted by melgross

They don't.

Originally Posted by sprockkets

Who is they? Anand is an actual person. Read the review.

The Windows Phone 7 Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Brian Klug

Originally Posted by melgross

I remember reading the rumors all over the place. I don't specifically remember the WSJ giving that price as something they were stating that Apple would be doing. I subscribe and didn't read that as far as I can remember. But the WSj does report on what others say, and plenty of others were saying that, and they did report on it.

Originally Posted by Apple ][

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.

Originally Posted by solipsism

they |ðā|
pronoun [third person plural]
1) used to refer to two or more people.



In fact, Brian Klug has written more about WP7 on AnandTech than Anand, but you would know that if you actually "read the review."

Originally Posted by extremeskater

My guess is another big factor for Apple when it comes to a higher res display is battery life.

Originally Posted by sprockkets

Who is they? Anand is an actual person. Read the review.

Originally Posted by sprockkets

The article itself has "I" in the review, not "we". It's obvious that Brian helped but isn't the one talking there. Brian Klug did the reviews of the later phones.

Or do you think me, a reader of that site for the past 12 years can't tell when Anand writes or not?

Originally Posted by melgross

I'd like to see that because all the games I've seen so far use less demanding graphics when running on the iPad 1. That includes RR 2 HD, which has no problem on my iPad 1, but looks great on my iPad 2. That is, now, my wife's iPad 1.

Originally Posted by melgross

The thing I wish they did with the cover was to have magnets hold it against the back when folded over. It's annoying having it flap back and forth.

Originally Posted by Galbi

Finally, I think game makers are going to be making some interesting, very near console-quality titles with these graphics.

The iPad 3 will definitely run what we consider PS3 and Xbox360 AAA "hardcore gamer" titles. There is very little reason for Apple NOT to release a gaming console with the A6.

Originally Posted by Sevenfeet

OK Mel, I went back to see if I could find the original WSJ article and here it is from Jan. 5, 2010:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...Tabs%3Darticle

I don't subscribe so I can't read past the first two paragraphs which don't mention the price. But I can read the comments section and many on the first page react to the thought of paying $1000 for it. Since you subscribe, can you confirm the contents of the article?

A key factor for the tablet's success will be price. Yair Reiner, an analyst for Oppenheimer & Co., said in a research note last month that the tablet would be priced at about $1,000, citing sources. One challenge: Apple's MacBook laptops start at $999.

Originally Posted by drobforever

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.

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum

If you bought a SmartCover... you just think the iPad 2 belongs to you

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Atomic Web Browser. The only way to surf the web on an iPad. Trust me. I haven't used Safari for many months now.

Originally Posted by melgross

Honestly, I'm beginning to get confused over all the standards and compatibility questions.

Supposedly, OpenGL 3 is OpenCL compatible. Plus, it adds a number of efficiencies that 2 doesn't have, in addition to having more abilities. We can always use newer standards developers will take advantage of.

I remember reviewers saying that the IBM PC with a 286 could do all that businesses required. Later, it was said that a 1HGz Pentium was as fast as would be needed. There are a lot more statements like that. Software follows hardware. When the hardware can work the math quickly enough, we'll see the software be upgraded. So we should see OpenGL 3 at some point. Do we want it? Sure we do!

Originally Posted by artificialintel

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying, but so far as I can tell, it works exactly the way you want it to. The blue cover attaches to the back using the same magnet (I think) as it uses to control the on/off function of the front. The cover doesn't lay 100% flat against the back, but it does stick. That said, rolling into a triangle and using it as a grip against the back seem more comfortable.

Originally Posted by artificialintel

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying, but so far as I can tell, it works exactly the way you want it to. The blue cover attaches to the back using the same magnet (I think) as it uses to control the on/off function of the front. The cover doesn't lay 100% flat against the back, but it does stick. That said, rolling into a triangle and using it as a grip against the back seem more comfortable.

Originally Posted by Lukeskymac

24 FPS is used in movies, AFAIK, and the real "human eye can't see the difference beyond taht" number is 60 FPS.

And no, I don't have a hefty graphics card on my 13" MBP... it's not even dedicated

Actually, graphics card options seem to be one of the top "features" of the mythical xMac... probably because few people can afford a Mac Pro for for gaming

Frame rate is also a term used in real-time computing. In a fashion somewhat comparable to the moving-picture definition presented above, a real-time frame is the time it takes to complete a full round of the system's processing tasks. If the frame rate of a real-time system is 60 hertz, the system reevaluates all necessary inputs and updates the necessary outputs 60 times per second under all circumstances.

The designed frame rates of real-time systems vary depending on the equipment. For a real-time system that is steering an oil tanker, a frame rate of 1 Hz may be sufficient, while a rate of even 100 Hz may not be adequate for steering a guided missile. The designer must choose a frame rate appropriate to the application's requirements.

There is a large difference in framerate between film, which runs at 24.0 frames per second, and the NTSC standard, which runs at approximately 29.97 frames per second.

30p is a progressive format and produces video at 30 frames per second. Progressive (noninterlaced) scanning mimics a film camera's frame-by-frame image capture. The effects of inter-frame judder are less noticeable than 24p yet retains a cinematic-like appearance. Shooting Video in 30p mode gives no interlace artifacts but can introduce judder on image movement and on some camera pans. The widescreen film process Todd-AO used this frame rate in 19541956.

Frame rates in video games refer to the speed at which the image is refreshed (typically in frames per second, or FPS). Many underlying processes, such as collision detection and network processing, run at different or inconsistent frequencies or in different physical components of a computer. FPS affect the experience in two ways: low FPS does not give the illusion of motion effectively and affects the user's capacity to interact with the game, while FPS that vary substantially from one second to the next depending on computational load produce uneven, choppy animation. Many games lock their frame rate at lower but more sustainable levels to give consistently smooth motion.

The first 3D first-person shooter game for a personal computer, 3D Monster Maze, had a frame rate of approximately 6 frame/s, and was still a success. In modern action-oriented games where players must visually track animated objects and react quickly, frame rates of between 30 to 100+ FPS are considered acceptable by most, though this can vary significantly from game to game. Modern action games, including popular console shooters such as Halo 3, are locked at 30 frame/s maximum, while others, such as Unreal Tournament 3, can run well in excess of 100 frame/s on sufficient hardware. The frame rate within games varies considerably depending upon what is currently happening at a given moment, or with the hardware configuration (especially in PC games.) When the computation of a frame consumes more time than is alloted between frames, the frame rate decreases.

A culture of competition has arisen among game enthusiasts with regard to frame rates, with players striving to obtain the highest FPS possible, due to their utility in demonstrating a system's power and efficiency. Indeed, many benchmarks (such as 3DMark) released by the marketing departments of hardware manufacturers and published in hardware reviews focus on the FPS measurement. Even though the typical LCD monitors of today are locked at 60 frame/s, making extremely high frame rates impossible to see in realtime, playthroughs of game timedemos at hundreds or thousands of FPS for benchmarking purposes are still common.

Originally Posted by melgross

It doesn't stick to the rear when flat. The hinge attaches the cover to the side. When closed, the magnets hold the cover closed. Those are not the same magnets holding it onto the case. I don't know why you would think the magnets in the hinge control the on and off, unless you've not seen, or used this, and don't know how it works. Watch Apple's video on the case and you'll learn that.

The hinge magnets aren't strong enough to allow you to use the folded up cover as a handle. It will pop off. It wasn't intended to be used that way.

When you turn the cover flat against the back, there is nothing to prevent the free edge from flapping back and forth. It's annoying because when using it for reading (as an example), you don't know whether to hold it by the case alone, and let the cover flap. Or to remove the cover. Or to hold it by the cover with your fingers in the rear, and your thumb over the front bezel. The problem with the first, is that's it's very annoying to have the cover flapping against your hand. The second is annoying because you then have to get the cover and replace it. the third is annoying because the cover, being foldable, wants to move away from your fingers holding it, and you're constantly, as a result, changing your grip.

Originally Posted by melgross

I just read it. The WSJ didn't say that as something from their sources. Here's a quote from the article. its where the pricing comes from. As I said, this pricing was all over at the time, and the WSJ was just reporting on what others were saying.

Originally Posted by solipsism

The Smart Cover does magnetically adhere to the back, but its a weak magnetic attraction compared to the other magnetics making me think this may not be intentioned. They do have worry about the electronics so its possible they just couldnt work it into the design.

Even though I wish the attraction was as good as the topside I dont think its an issue as my hand on either side holds it in place nicely.

Originally Posted by solipsism

1) I don’t think he was implying the hinge magnets control the display/touch panel on/off.

2) My hinge magnet is strong enough to hold it in that way, though I think it’s an unnatural feel. I can swing mine and rotate in any direction by the cover, so long as I don’t use too much force to swing it around.

3) I’m not getting a flapping at all. I have one hand on the device at all times. Whether that is on the left or right at least half is flat against the back and the weak attraction to the distal end of cover still holds it in place when I’m holding it at the hinge side so long as my fingers are on the two medial segments of the cover. If I am holding it by the first medial segment the magnet will be insufficient to hold it in place.

Originally Posted by Neruda

This is 100% right (Google being the old Microsoft in the sense that all it is doing is copying everybody else in all areas outside of its search engine business). If Google's search results weren't so good (the best) I would use something else (Bing sucks).

It amazes me how people deride the iPad for various reasons but don't acknowledge just how influential that product was in the tablet market. If the iPad was not that revolutionary, then (1) how come no one released anything remotely like it before it was introduced and (2) how come everyone is now essentially copying it (most of the hardware form factors are almost exact replicas of the ipad).

What was in the market before the iPad and how well were those devices selling?

Originally Posted by solipsism

I’ll repeat this again, just for you.

Brian Klug did more WP7 articles by himself than with Anand, yet you claimed there is only Anand writing the reviews.



The big WP7 review has "Anand Lal Shimpi & Brian Klug" as the writers. That is two people doing the review, hence the used of ‘they’.

& is a logogram known as an ampersand. It means ‘and’. It comes the Latin et, which is a ligature derived from a capital ‘E' and lowercase ’t' when written in cursive.

Originally Posted by melgross

They like some things about WP7, but if you actually read the site, as I do, you'll see they don't like it more.