Live teardown of Apple's iPad 2 currently underway

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Immediately after Apple's release of the iPad 2 on Friday, iFixit began a teardown of Apple's iPad 2, discovering a slight increase in battery capacity compared to the original iPad and confirming that the tablet has 512MB of RAM.



iFixit gave Apple's just-released iPad 2 a repairability score of 4 out of 10 after completing its teardown on Friday. According to the report, the touchscreen tablet contains only standard Phillips screws, while the battery is "very securely" stuck down to the rear case.



The Wi-Fi version of the iPad 2 sports a new model number: A1395, compared to a model number of A1219 for the original Wi-Fi iPad and A1337 for the original iPad 3G. iFixit confirmed via software that the tablet has 512MB of RAM.



Unlike the original iPad, which iFixit described as having "gorgeous symmetry," the iPad 2 requires a heat gun in order to remove the front panel, as Apple has opted to glue the panel in place this time around instead of using clips.







The iPad 2's Li-Ion Polymer battery, which is made up of three cells, is rated at 3.8 volts, 25 watt-hours, slightly more than the original iPad's rating of 3.75 volts, 24.8 watt-hours. As with the original iPad, Apple claims "up to 10 hours" of battery life on the iPad 2.







According to the teardown, the logic board of the tablet contains the Apple 1GHz A5 Processor (APL0498), Toshiba NAND Flash, and additional chips from Apple and Texas Instruments.



"The A5 processor has manufacture dates of late January and mid-February 2011," the report noted. "Production was clearly ramping up through the last minute."







iFixit discovered that Apple has again tapped Broadcom for several of the iPad 2's touch controller chips, as well as a "Wi-Fi/Bluetooth/FM tuner combo chip" that powers the Wi-Fi board. Also, the tablet's new gyroscope is labeled AGD8 2103.



The report also discovered that the iPad 2 LCD component is 2.4 mm thick, while the glass panel is 62 mm thick. By comparison, the original iPad employed a 3.2 mm thick LCD and .85 mm thick glass panel.



Apple's launch of the iPad 2 at 5 p.m. Friday drew long lines (1, 2), despite reports that increased distribution outlets could shorten wait times. Within hours of opening up online orders for the tablet early Friday morning, Apple began quoting shipping estimates of "2-3 weeks."



Analysts have predicted Apple could sell as many as 1 million iPad 2 units this weekend, though average estimates are closer to 500,000.



For more details, see the detailed step-by-step teardown at iFixit.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 68
    Wow that came quicker than I expected !
  • Reply 2 of 68
    irelandireland Posts: 17,800member
    That's how they made it so thin compared to the first. The spread the battery out over 3 segments, as opposed to two - as before. I prefer the outside of these products
  • Reply 3 of 68
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    I'm curious to find out if the CPU is Cortex-A9 based, or is just an old dual core Cortex-A8.
  • Reply 4 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    That's how they made it so thin compared to the first. The spread the battery out over 3 segments, as opposed to two - as before. I prefer the outside of these products



    We knew this from the event a week and a half ago.
  • Reply 5 of 68
    Has the RAM been finally confirmed? 512MB?
  • Reply 6 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sophace View Post


    Has the RAM been finally confirmed? 512MB?



    Yes, that was confirmed the day it was announced.
  • Reply 7 of 68
    ghostface147ghostface147 Posts: 1,629member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Market_Player View Post


    Wow that came quicker than I expected !



    blah blah blah...that's what she said....blah blah blah
  • Reply 8 of 68
    Man, I used to take everything I could apart when I was a kid. It just wouldn't be as much fun nowadays. Aside from so many things being glued together instead of screwed (although snapped is just as bad if you don't know where the snaps are), there's just nothing inside stuff any more!
  • Reply 9 of 68
    sheffsheff Posts: 1,407member
    Iapd managed to replace my MacBook 13 while I am at home. I still need the power for work and school, but at home I really don't need my MacBook anymore. With iMovie and iWork I think the iPad is well worth the money.
  • Reply 10 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    Man, I used to take everything I could apart when I was a kid. It just wouldn't be as much fun nowadays. Aside from so many things being glued together instead of screwed (although snapped is just as bad if you don't know where the snaps are), there's just nothing inside stuff any more!



    It's surely harder to see the stuff but there is a lot more inside with each new gadget evolution.
  • Reply 11 of 68
    a ya y Posts: 2member
    It's actually a tiny bit smaller:



    iPad 1: 24.8 Watt-hours/3.75V = 6.61 Amp-hours

    iPad 2: 25 Watt-hours/3.8V = 6.58 Amp-hours



    Edit: the 2nd Apple chip is in a power supply section, and may be a custom voltage regulator or some kind of system controller. The printed circuit board looks like it's been built to a price point. For example, it does not appear use the HDI technique that you see in their iPhones and Macbooks. It looks downright cheap, actually. This could mean many things (or none, since this is just speculation):



    - Apple really has to work hard to keep the cost down

    - Apple's preparing for a price war

    - It's going to be hard for non-Apple tablet makers to match Apple's prices
  • Reply 12 of 68
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by A Y View Post


    It's actually a tiny bit smaller:



    iPad 1: 24.8 Watt-hours/3.75V = 6.61 Amp-hours

    iPad 2: 25 Watt-hours/3.8V = 6.58 Amp-hours



    Total Power is less [barely] but are the physical dimensions of the iPad 2's batteries combined area and/or volume larger in the new set up?
  • Reply 13 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    Total Power is less [barely] but are the physical dimensions of the iPad 2's batteries combined area and/or volume larger in the new set up?



    The new battery holds 25 W-h?90,000 Joules?of energy. That's more than the old one (by a tiny bit). Who cares about amp-hours? The device will draw as much current as it needs. Drives me crazy on car batteries?so many "Amp-hours"?why are you telling me this? How much energy does it hold?
  • Reply 14 of 68
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    Man, I used to take everything I could apart when I was a kid. It just wouldn't be as much fun nowadays. Aside from so many things being glued together instead of screwed (although snapped is just as bad if you don't know where the snaps are), there's just nothing inside stuff any more!



    Please don't tell me you'll have to move up to small animals... then humans...
  • Reply 15 of 68
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post


    I'm curious to find out if the CPU is Cortex-A9 based, or is just an old dual core Cortex-A8.



    There is NO such thing as a dual core Cortex A8. ARM never designed a multi-core version of Cortex A8.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by A Y View Post


    It's actually a tiny bit smaller:



    iPad 1: 24.8 Watt-hours/3.75V = 6.61 Amp-hours

    iPad 2: 25 Watt-hours/3.8V = 6.58 Amp-hours




    Those are rounded-off numbers. The teardown showed that the battery is listed on the label as 6930mah, even though the "math" would have been 6579mah.



    http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-...eardown/5071/1



    It also mean that the "math" on the original ipad that came up with 6610mah may be understated.
  • Reply 16 of 68
    a ya y Posts: 2member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    The new battery holds 25 W-h?90,000 Joules?of energy. That's more than the old one (by a tiny bit). Who cares about amp-hours? The device will draw as much current as it needs. Drives me crazy on car batteries?so many "Amp-hours"?why are you telling me this? How much energy does it hold?



    Amp-hours is important because batteries are, in theory, constant voltage sources, so they need to supply the current necessary to maintain their output voltage. The Amp-hour rating gives you a way to compare that. The new battery may have more energy, but if it's run at a higher voltage, it has less runtime.
  • Reply 17 of 68
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    However it ought to make for a more rugged device. I suspect the day will quickly come when repairing stuff like this is impossible.
  • Reply 18 of 68
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by A Y View Post


    Amp-hours is important because batteries are, in theory, constant voltage sources, so they need to supply the current necessary to maintain their output voltage. The Amp-hour rating gives you a way to compare that. The new battery may have more energy, but if it's run at a higher voltage, it has less runtime.



    But they are all "rounded off" --- can't rely on them if the math said 6579mah and it's listed as 6930. That's a 5% difference.



    Usually it's listed the other way around. For example, the batteries may be spec'ed to be 1000mah +/- 5% --- and you list the battery as 950mah so that you don't get sued by consumers.
  • Reply 19 of 68
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,158member
    A whole 0.2 wH? iFixit also states this might just be rounding up.



    Quote:

    Also listed on the battery is a capacity of 6930 mAh. Since mAh = watt-hours / volts * 1000, converting using the above numbers yields 25 / 3.8 * 1000 = 6,579. It looks like there might be some rounding going on here



    In any case, not really article worthy...Or worthy of me writing this. Touché
  • Reply 20 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    There is NO such thing as a dual core Cortex A8. ARM never designed a multi-core version of Cortex A8.

    .



    Thanks for writing that, it has been the most ridiculous bit of FUD floating about the interwebs.
Sign In or Register to comment.