or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › CES: GPU candidates for Apple's next iPad, iPhone are 20 times more powerful
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CES: GPU candidates for Apple's next iPad, iPhone are 20 times more powerful - Page 2

post #41 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Possibly in twelve months. The first chips won't be this fast, but the second generation will be. Look at how much faster the current one is from the one the 4 and the iPad 1 used. My devices are much faster. It's very noticeable.

You might be pretty interested in this article concerning Medfield, Intel, smartphones, Motorolla and Lenovo. The guys at Anandtech sound impressed. Perhaps Intel may have a winning mobile plan after-all.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365/i...or-smartphones
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #42 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You might be pretty interested in this article concerning Medfield, Intel, smartphones, Motorolla and Lenovo. The guys at Anandtech sound impressed. Perhaps Intel may have a winning mobile plan after-all.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365/i...or-smartphones

Thanks for the link. AnandTech always has good info.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #43 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You might be pretty interested in this article concerning Medfield, Intel, smartphones, Motorolla and Lenovo. The guys at Anandtech sound impressed. Perhaps Intel may have a winning mobile plan after-all.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365/i...or-smartphones

I read it earlier. Intel has a long way to go. Maybe they will be successful with this, and maybe not. I originally thought, and hoped that Apple would be using an Intel chip for the phone, as Intel was, just as they are now, pushing their Atom for this purpose. But the Atom back then was useless for this. These look better, but we'll have to see if they can break through the wall. If they can't quickly, they may not be able to do it at all.
post #44 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I do a lot of reading on my iPad 2. Despite what some people think, it's great for that. But, there are times where the type isn't sharp. One area is in magazines. Mostly, they're quite readable without expanding the page size. But on some, it's more difficult. That's true for the web as well. Quadrupling the number of pixels in a character will allow 6 point text to be as sharp as 12 point text.

My 4S is vastly sharper than my old 3G. The difference is astonishing. Things that were barely readable before are easy to read now. I expect the same thing to happen on an iPad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimitris View Post

If your iPad will start feeling sluggish I'm sure you will notice and also care.
Infinity blade 2 while being impressive is basically smoke and mirrors. That's why it looks so much better than every other game. By that I mean that there are a lot of tricks involved in the background to make it look good. And sometimes there is a slight slow down. And that is on 1024x768. Now imagine having that with 4 times the resolution. Suddenly the GPU will be bogged down. Things will be even worse for open world games. I think the quality of the new games will be either at the same level or below the ones of this generation meaning no improvements in polygon counts and textures etc. Which will be a bummer.
And while what you say is true that mobile GPUs are at least as powerful as a few years ago you will also remember that a few years ago we weren't also driving resolutions as high as what the new iPad might have.
I sure hope so everything will run smoothly and we will have a similar or better experience with the new iPad but I'm still a bit wary.

PS: What could be done is maybe force the program to run on a lower resolution (1024x768) than the rest of the os. But I'm guessing this hasn't been built on the iOS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimitris View Post

The only sure thing is that the next iPad will need as much cpu and particularly gpu power as possible if it's going to drive a 2048x1536 display.
I hope Apple doesn't go there because I think we will see a performance hit. Especially in 3d gaming.
We're talking about desktop resolutions being driven by mobile GPUs.

It is interesting, most mid-range graphics cards from 2010 can easily do 1920x1200 pixel graphics. And that's just with 256MB VRAM, and you can still push it to 2xAA and 4xAF. This is say for Unreal Engine 3 and Valve's Source.

The PS3 and Xbox360 hardware is ancient and they handle 1920x1080 pixels with no qualms. Yes, there are numerous "tricks" involved but remember, it is driving 2 megapixels of resolution. 2048x1536 is 3 megapixels which is only ~1.5x the pixel count.

Given what we can see for ARM and PowerVR, 2048x1536 should be achievable for 2D, and would really make the iPad a fabulous post-PC device. For OpenGL games, they might cap the iPad3 3D mode to about 1680x1260, then blow that wide open to 2048x1536 by iPad4.
post #45 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

It is interesting, most mid-range graphics cards from 2010 can easily do 1920x1200 pixel graphics. And that's just with 256MB VRAM, and you can still push it to 2xAA and 4xAF. This is say for Unreal Engine 3 and Valve's Source.

The PS3 and Xbox360 hardware is ancient and they handle 1920x1080 pixels with no qualms. Yes, there are numerous "tricks" involved but remember, it is driving 2 megapixels of resolution. 2048x1536 is 3 megapixels which is only ~1.5x the pixel count.

Given what we can see for ARM and PowerVR, 2048x1536 should be achievable for 2D, and would really make the iPad a fabulous post-PC device. For OpenGL games, they might cap the iPad3 3D mode to about 1680x1260, then blow that wide open to 2048x1536 by iPad4.

Of course those cards use between 50 and 150 watts. I don't think an iPad could get to those numbers.

But it's pretty amazing what technology can do. An advantage of very high resolution, particularly on a small screen, is that antialising becomes much less important. That makes the load on the GPU less. So there are some positives in this.

The problem with using a mid resolution has been discussed to death. We all know the negatives, and I can think of enough reason to believe there are more positives. Apple has already had the experience of doubling the Rez on the phone, so they know what's going on. That's the simplest solution.

For the iPad 3, they would just need to keep the graphics even in performance. That would mean four times the gpu performance and memory. A much faster memory bus is needed as well. Right now, games are limited to 60 fps because of bus limitations. That would need to be quadrupled. There's no reason to think that can't be done. Apple made some design decisions that aren't in stone. From what I'm reading on Anandtech, it looks to me that CPU power would need to be increased by less than twice for this, as not all of that power from the A5 is being utilized because of that GDI bus limitation.

It's doable!
post #46 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Of course those cards use between 50 and 150 watts. I don't think an iPad could get to those numbers.

That's an interesting one. I wrote a long post and lost it but basically, it's easier to scale up from an A5 to 4x, 10x, 20x the performance and still maintain decent performance envelopes, particularly with 25nm on the horizon. GPUs over 100Watts are horrendous because they don't need to be... Nvidia's 260/280 architecture was just too hot and too whatever to ever scale down to laptops and that crippled them big time. The 9400M is just 12Watts and that's based on their years-old masterpiece, the G92 (8600GT ~ the architecture was great, manufacturing not so great).

The ATI Mobility Radeon 5850 at 40nm now does about 40Watts. The A5 supposedly 0.5Watts, max 1.5Watts or something like that (we don't really know the figures). AMD's Fusion and Intel's Sandy Bridge will be impressive, but again, if you were to bet on ARM+PowerVR scaling up 10x vs Intel scaling down 10x, I know who I'd back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

But it's pretty amazing what technology can do. An advantage of very high resolution, particularly on a small screen, is that antialising becomes much less important. That makes the load on the GPU less. So there are some positives in this.

That's a good point. Apple's advantage is that it's 2D compositing engine (Quartz etc) is very, very impressive. Adobe never really improved the Flash render engine for five years. They sat back and just threw more CPU at it until you have a a Flash website with some animation and transitions pegging an Intel Core 2 Duo to 100%. I made a little app that slides and navigates PNG (that's lossless compression!) images of about 768x1500 pixels... On my iPad 2 it loads fast and scrolls fast. A Flash version of such big bitmaps doing movement and transparency would challenge an Intel Core 2 Duo. Scaling can be an issue as well on Flash because it has different render settings when resampling bitmap sizes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The problem with using a mid resolution has been discussed to death. We all know the negatives, and I can think of enough reason to believe there are more positives. Apple has already had the experience of doubling the Rez on the phone, so they know what's going on. That's the simplest solution.

I can't see it not happening in the iPad 3, I really can't. They will delay the iPad 3 to June if they have to if they can't get the screens happening. But I think by mid-year 2012 iPad 3 with at least 1680x1200 should be out. 1024x768 is nice, but it's time to move up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

For the iPad 3, they would just need to keep the graphics even in performance. That would mean four times the gpu performance and memory. A much faster memory bus is needed as well. Right now, games are limited to 60 fps because of bus limitations. That would need to be quadrupled. There's no reason to think that can't be done. Apple made some design decisions that aren't in stone. From what I'm reading on Anandtech, it looks to me that CPU power would need to be increased by less than twice for this, as not all of that power from the A5 is being utilized because of that GDI bus limitation.

Well, as I mentioned 1680x1200 3D game resolution is achievable for the A6. With graphics about say, 60% to 80% of PS3 quality. iPad 4 could blow it wide open with full 3 megapixel res and beyond-Xbox360 res running Unreal Engine 4. Interesting about the bus limitation, I didn't know about that. As for frame rates, anything about 40fps minimum is enough, developers can optimise for the platform to make sure of that. Anything beyond 50fps means you're not pushing the hardware hard enough, you don't need anything beyond 50fps, really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It's doable!

Yes!

OK. Done editing.
post #47 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

For anyone who thinks there will be a 20x increase in gpu power in the next 12 months, I have a bridge to sell you.

a 20X improvement in one metric is not so unbelievable. but that does not translate into a 20X improvement in user experience since the GPU is only one component of an overall system.

I suspect the 20X improvement may be a theoretical design point and that the first implementation may only see 5X or 10X depending on CPU and bus speed etc.

also - it would seem that the "news" here is not that there is a GPU with 20X the performance of the shipping iOS devices - but that such a GPU might be made to fit inside the form factor and power limitations of a hand held device.

for ethernet is it was not so long ago that 10 Mbps was the best you could get - then 100 Mbps then 1 Gbps (1000 Mbps) - not 10 Gbps (10,000 Mbps) - and soon 100 Gbps (100,000 Mbps) - a 10X increase each time (and yes it took longer than 12 months between each generation) - but that is a 10,000 X increase in performance over a span of about 25 years. That works out to an average of 400 X increase every year (of course the actual deployment wasn't linear).
post #48 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Interesting ideas and no offence, but this seems like all pie-in-the-sky futurist stuff to me.

There's "lack of willingness to imagine" and there is "my imagination is working so hard I have no clue what's real anymore."

The extra graphic power touted here is basically all about games.
This other stuff won't arrive until iPhone version 15 or so.

I know folks already working on all of those. While they may be in academia today, that's where a lot of the hot fast hitting silicon valley and MIT corridor startups come from -- groups of grad students and a professor.

I personally happen to be working on the stuff that would allow the AR MMOGs, I'm guesstimating my stuff will be sharable with the development world in 2-3 years.

Maybe if you aren't actually working in a sub-discipline you shouldn't be judging the timelines of what those of us in it are trying to do -- with an eye to making money at it in a few years. The promised power of these 2012 GPUs can make possible things we thought we were going to have to wait 5+ years to get the mobile processing power to handle. If anything the world is accelerating faster than we though it would, exactly the opposite of not having a clue of what's real anymore. (And actually, that's partly a goal of mine! But in a totally different context )
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #49 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Missapplications of Moore's law are fast becoming the grossest understatement of the last few decades.

tftfy

For correctness, Moore's Law is only about number of transistors per square unit area at roughly constant cost. All the processing power statements are bogus applications of it since number of transistors and processing power are decidedly non-linear relationships. Too much popular press sloppiness.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #50 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

For anyone who thinks there will be a 20x increase in gpu power in the next 12 months, I have a bridge to sell you.

Your statement is true in the context of high end desktop GPU, but not mobile GPUs. Why? We already know how high end GPUs do their thing, but it is very hard to totally reengineer the flagship product line of an entire company to be a completely different beast. The engineers tend to stick with what they are comfortable with, and managers hire new engineers that will get along with the "company culture" tending to make radical change hard.


But the low power GPU folks can build a separate product line, based on all that published knowledge from previous years, but decide to implement it in a far different manner, one that has power efficiency as a primary goal rather than performance and new never before seen features at all costs. In the beginning these new GPUs were being built to work, but have designed in expansion capability. Now we are starting to see the fruits of those expansion capabilities getting filled in, all still with the extreme low power bias.

In other words a whole extreme low power GPU was architected, but it took awhile to build the proper central core functionality KNOWING what they would put on where for the next number of years. So we see ridiculously fast performance catch-up in the mobile area compared to how fast the new bleeding edge performance progresses. [I'm even surprised by the soonness of the claims, but not that they were coming eventually.] It will eventually slow down and match traditional GPU performance increase rates when they get close, then the traditional guys had better have drunk the Kool-aid and fixed their power dissipation or they will become just like the Dodo.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #51 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimitris View Post

If your iPad will start feeling sluggish I'm sure you will notice and also care.
Infinity blade 2 while being impressive is basically smoke and mirrors. That's why it looks so much better than every other game. By that I mean that there are a lot of tricks involved in the background to make it look good. And sometimes there is a slight slow down. And that is on 1024x768. Now imagine having that with 4 times the resolution. Suddenly the GPU will be bogged down. Things will be even worse for open world games. I think the quality of the new games will be either at the same level or below the ones of this generation meaning no improvements in polygon counts and textures etc. Which will be a bummer.
And while what you say is true that mobile GPUs are at least as powerful as a few years ago you will also remember that a few years ago we weren't also driving resolutions as high as what the new iPad might have.
I sure hope so everything will run smoothly and we will have a similar or better experience with the new iPad but I'm still a bit wary.

PS: What could be done is maybe force the program to run on a lower resolution (1024x768) than the rest of the os. But I'm guessing this hasn't been built on the iOS.

Fill rates of standard iPad/iPhone GUI elements is not hard to handle. The touted GPU increases are for dynamic 3D content, essentially the worst case and needing the most processing. The additional GPU power necessary to support 4x more pixels in the standard iOS GUIs is trivially small compared to what is needed for the 3D stuff, and concentrated in just a couple very specific parts of the overall GPU pipeline.

The GPUs are even plenty good for Android GUIs, the performance issues some folks criticize in Android GUIs are from different issues altogether.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #52 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Fill rates of standard iPad/iPhone GUI elements is not hard to handle. The touted GPU increases are for dynamic 3D content, essentially the worst case and needing the most processing. The additional GPU power necessary to support 4x more pixels in the standard iOS GUIs is trivially small compared to what is needed for the 3D stuff, and concentrated in just a couple very specific parts of the overall GPU pipeline.

The GPUs are even plenty good for Android GUIs, the performance issues some folks criticize in Android GUIs are from different issues altogether.

Supposedly, Google fixed at least some of that in ICS. We'll have to see once credible devices come out.
post #53 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

It is interesting, most mid-range graphics cards from 2010 can easily do 1920x1200 pixel graphics. And that's just with 256MB VRAM, and you can still push it to 2xAA and 4xAF. This is say for Unreal Engine 3 and Valve's Source.

The PS3 and Xbox360 hardware is ancient and they handle 1920x1080 pixels with no qualms. Yes, there are numerous "tricks" involved but remember, it is driving 2 megapixels of resolution. 2048x1536 is 3 megapixels which is only ~1.5x the pixel count.

You should check the resolution thread at beyond3d because most current gen console games are 720p. The number of games that run at native 1080p could probably be counted on one hand and these usually exhibit simpler lighting and shaders. In fact there are more games that are subHD than 1080p.

Another factor to take into account is that mobile hardware is still significantly outclassed by consoles and probably will remain so for another two years. Enough time for Moore's law to take effect. When the iPad does eventually have comparable hardware to current gen consoles, OpenGL will still leave a lot of performance on the table compared to consoles, where optimization can double performance. Native 2048x1536 is an awfully high bar to set for something that runs on battery and weighs just 600 grams.
post #54 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Fill rates of standard iPad/iPhone GUI elements is not hard to handle. The touted GPU increases are for dynamic 3D content, essentially the worst case and needing the most processing. The additional GPU power necessary to support 4x more pixels in the standard iOS GUIs is trivially small compared to what is needed for the 3D stuff, and concentrated in just a couple very specific parts of the overall GPU pipeline.

The GPUs are even plenty good for Android GUIs, the performance issues some folks criticize in Android GUIs are from different issues altogether.


My main point is on 3d gaming. With such monstrous resolutions we won't be able to see a leap in graphics or some other cool stuff like multiple IKs and real physics . The quality and speed will probably stay the same.

and yes the slowness will probably not come from standard GUI elements. But if you need to keep the game alive in the background and also switch to a couple of programs (like you can do now) I can easily see the iPad slowing down really badly.

Also the performance and real time effects we could see in editing programs like iMovie will probably be scaled down since the gpu will be busy doing other stuff.

Not to mention the fact that a 64gb iPad will be filled quite easily. Every single element will have probably twice the size.

I really want this to work and I hope I'm not right. The wait will be over real soon....
post #55 of 62
PowerVR6 is ready for mass producing. ST-Ericsson showed a PowerVR SoC last summer. Since it usually takes 6-12 month before trial chips are manufactured to real manufacturing: PowerVR6 is ready.

PowerVR graphics are by far the best mobile graphic platform today. It's therefore a bit strange that almost only Apple/Intel uses it. Most other use Qualcomms and Nvidias.

2012 will see ST Ericssons SoCs with PowerVR6 on Nokia's windows phones. These phones is the first one that can give Apple a graphic match. 1) because of PowerVR 2) Because MSFT controls its hardware they can optimize Windows for it.

But MSFT have never been good at optimizing Windows for hardware. Apple have a long tradition in this since Quartz Extreme and accelerating most of its software with AltiVec. The same philosophy is used in A5 with NOVA SIMD that accelerates video encoding, picture quality and more. Apple calls it "visual engine".

Since Apple controls the graphical layer in the OS + manufacture its own SoC they can do stuff that is impossible for Google/MSFT today. That is why an 800 mhz A5 beats almost all other SoCs in the market even if they are clocked 50% higher.

Its called elegance...
post #56 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

2012 will see ST Ericssons SoCs with PowerVR6 on Nokia's windows phones. These phones is the first one that can give Apple a graphic match.

AnandTech lists the ST Ericsson with the PowerVR 6 with a 2013 release date:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4940/q...t-architecture

They are using a quad-core PowerVR series 5 in late 2012.

Right now, Apple uses a dual-core series 5 chip so they could easily use a 4-16 core PowerVR 5-series (the SGX554).

20x is far more than they need to jump in a single year. If they go to 8-core this year, they can get over a 4x increase in graphics and go beyond the PS Vita. They can add Siri to it but have the same design and brand it the iPad 2S. Then the iPad 3 can come next year with the PowerVR 6 where it will be another 4-5x speedup and an updated design and given that the graphics approach laptop performance, reach more of a convergence between the Mac and iOS.
post #57 of 62
Are we forgetting that there are other newer chips in the pipelines from competitors?

"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 #58 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Are we forgetting that there are other newer chips in the pipelines from competitors?

Yeah, slower ones, unfortunate for them. PowerVR is on the top of the heap in the mobile space, bar none.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #59 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by spish View Post

You should check the resolution thread at beyond3d because most current gen console games are 720p. The number of games that run at native 1080p could probably be counted on one hand and these usually exhibit simpler lighting and shaders. In fact there are more games that are subHD than 1080p.

Another factor to take into account is that mobile hardware is still significantly outclassed by consoles and probably will remain so for another two years. Enough time for Moore's law to take effect. When the iPad does eventually have comparable hardware to current gen consoles, OpenGL will still leave a lot of performance on the table compared to consoles, where optimization can double performance. Native 2048x1536 is an awfully high bar to set for something that runs on battery and weighs just 600 grams.

Wow. You are right. This truly makes consoles even more ancient than they already are.

Most console games only do 1280x720 and use something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanczos_resampling ~ this probably gives it that "console look", which I simply thought was the hacky "Antialiasing" they were using. But it looks alright on my 1080p screen, because the HDTV is displaying native pixels as it is sent a genuine 1920x1080p (yes, upscaled, but the Xbox360 upscaler is decent and seems to "trick" the eye)... There are few true 720p HDTVs (They are that weird 1300something x 768 resolution) so I don't like the idea of the TV doing scaling, even downscaling, because the TV isn't displaying "native pixels".

Wow I'm learning a lot thanks for the info.

That said, if you look at Mobility Radeon at 40nm and around the 15W mark, it can do 1920x1080 resolution for Unreal Engine 3 quite well. So consoles are not a good comparison because the GPU is truly, truly ancient and especially the PS3, I just do not like that look. Somehow the Xbox360 graphics and perhaps the upscaler gives a reasonable look.

A mobile GPU for iPad 3/4 doing, as I mentioned, 1.5x 1024x768 (1536x1152) should yield, along with OpenGL ES updates, a DX10 look at that resolution by iPad 4.

Obviously I'm mixing a lot of terms here, but from a consumer perspective the iPad 4 should easily hit a "DX 10" look doing true 1536x1152 pixels for 3D and 2048x1536 for 2D. iPad 3 could cap 1024x768 for 3D so that you do see graphics improvements but still handle 2048x1536 for 2D.
post #60 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

20x is far more than they need to jump in a single year. If they go to 8-core this year, they can get over a 4x increase in graphics and go beyond the PS Vita. They can add Siri to it but have the same design and brand it the iPad 2S. Then the iPad 3 can come next year with the PowerVR 6 where it will be another 4-5x speedup and an updated design and given that the graphics approach laptop performance, reach more of a convergence between the Mac and iOS.

Yes, good theory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimitris View Post

My main point is on 3d gaming. With such monstrous resolutions we won't be able to see a leap in graphics or some other cool stuff like multiple IKs and real physics . The quality and speed will probably stay the same.

That's why I think the iPad 3 (or 2S) will cap the 3D at 1024x768 so you get DX9-like graphics. There is no point upping the resolution beyond 1280 width for 3D if the end result is similar basic OpenGL ES graphics we have now on the iPad 2. iPad 4 (or 3, if this year we have the iPad 2S) then can take it to the next level with DX10-like graphics at capped 1536x1152.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dimitris View Post

and yes the slowness will probably not come from standard GUI elements. But if you need to keep the game alive in the background and also switch to a couple of programs (like you can do now) I can easily see the iPad slowing down really badly.

Also the performance and real time effects we could see in editing programs like iMovie will probably be scaled down since the gpu will be busy doing other stuff.

Not to mention the fact that a 64gb iPad will be filled quite easily. Every single element will have probably twice the size.

I really want this to work and I hope I'm not right. The wait will be over real soon....

For 2D and app switching, Apple has done some very impressive stuff. Quartz can handle compositing of *lossless* PNGs of 1200x1500 pixel bitmaps ~ 2 to 5 layers at a time or more, I haven't pushed it, I just made a simple app that uses 1200x1500 images with a maximum composite level of 3 layers with alpha. With 3D games and 2D apps being switched out, SSD, RAM, buffer (video, OS, whatever) and A6/A7 chip technology will give a seamless experience. The iPad 2 literally doubled performance compared to the iPad 1 with virtually no battery life hit. Improvements in SSD (especially with the major Anobit purchase) means you can dump, say, 512MB of RAM to SSD an swap it out within seconds. As for space, again there continues to be good improvements in SSD ~ 240GB costs what 100GB cost 2 years ago. So iPad 2S/3 should be bumped to 32, 64, 128 GB as the standard SKUs. iPad 16GB serves not much purpose at the current usage rate... It would only be the "cheap" iPad if Apple wanted to compete in that space, but they don't need to and it's just another SKU to deal with.

So again, iPad 2S/3 with 2048x1536 2D and 1024x768 DX9-like 3D graphics if very, very possible. iPad 2S/3 with capped 1024x768 3D can give much better physics because the ARM side will be improved, the GPU is usually never used for physics in gaming today, despite OpenCL and so on ~ but Apple could optimise the GPU to do some GPGPU tasks.
post #61 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

So again, iPad 2S/3 with 2048x1536 2D and 1024x768 DX9-like 3D graphics if very, very possible.

See, this is why people get unjustly disappointed at Apple; crazy rumors that could never possibly be true.

Who in the world makes autostereoscopic screens of that SIZE, much less that resolution?
post #62 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

See, this is why people get unjustly disappointed at Apple; crazy rumors that could never possibly be true.

Who in the world makes autostereoscopic screens of that SIZE, much less that resolution?

Apple will. If it's just 1024x768, well, I might pass on the iPad 2S/3 then.

But yeah, wild expectations and then crushing bitter dissapointment.

It's all part of the Apple game!

An old Malay proverb says, "Ants die in sugar" ~ We'll have to trust Apple so as to not overdose ourselves on gadget goodness. As much as the speculation goes wild, Apple will deliver what's just nice... Usually.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • CES: GPU candidates for Apple's next iPad, iPhone are 20 times more powerful
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › CES: GPU candidates for Apple's next iPad, iPhone are 20 times more powerful