Got a feeling that apple has some strategic plans for the A8X. There is so much processing power in iPad air 2 that one can imagine multi windows tasking and much more computing intensive applications will be on its way for power and corporate users.
It seems to be equal to a new model mid/high range i3 low power. That in itself is remarkable. Trying to compare it to a mid range i5 is stretching, unless that chip is perhaps three years old. Still a pretty good feat. This blows past all Atom SoC's.
Blowing passed an Atom is not a very hard thing to do, man I hate that chip. always have since the first incarnation. I have this little development board that constantly oerheaats, contains an Atom QuadCore Z3740, it will reboot every time I put a little load on the LAMP server. I even thought it was a defective product and returned it for a better one, same thing happened. Every single device I have ever owned with that chip has been complete garbage, almost as bad as Transmeta, though I did like my little Sony PIctureBook, still have the 933Mhz Japan only model in my display case of old but not forgotten tech.
Got a feeling that apple has some strategic plans for the A8X. There is so much processing power in iPad air 2 that one can imagine multi windows tasking and much more computing intensive applications will be on its way for power and corporate users.
Man I hope your right, I can't imagine all that power going to waste on a single app.
Safari lags for a second or so when you open it on the iPad 2 under iOS 8.1. However, after that it is much smoother than it was on 7. 8.02 was similar to 8.1, but since I kept losing my 3g connection I don't like to talk about it.
When did you order yours, I ordered mine that same day it went up for sale. I'm patient though, I would like to see my keyboard case come before the tablet does. I can't wait, though I think I am more excited about the Nexus 9, I'm going to install the same Ubuntu Linux image that they use for their Jetson development boards on it. and than see how well the GPU encodes video files and renders Blender projects.
QUOTE: Update: According to figures published by GSMArena, Nexus 9 ... single core performance is similar to iPad Air 2 but its multiple core CPU performance is beat by the A8X iPad Air 2 by 34.8 percent.
The last gain margin for Nexus 9 is when Google will release a 64-bit Android OS. As far as I know, current Android 5.0 Lollipop is still 32-bit, compatible with 64-bit cpu, but still 32-bit.
Man I hope your right, I can't imagine all that power going to waste on a single app.
I am glad apple decided to push the whole platform forward. Apple could have just put an A8 chip into the ipad air 2 and there won't be much difference to the iPad Air 2 sales in the near future. Computing power and hardware has to be around before apps and new uses can be implemented. App developers will come up with more powerful apps.
Am waiting for pixelmator for iPad.
Many of the graphic intensive games I am playing should run faster even though I don't feel they were slow on iPad air before. Now I can look forward to even more graphic intensive games.
Since the Nexus 9 with 16GB WiFi is $399 and a 16gb WiFi iPad Air 2 is $499, I would expect the performance of the Nexus 9 to be lower. The performance of the Nexus 9 seems to be fairly on par with the original iPad Air, which is the same $399 price.
Big farking deal.
What are the CPU specs of the Nexus 9 compared to the iPad Air 2? Better on paper? Same on paper? Worse on paper? Can a Nexus branded tablet actually be lesser spec'd than an iPad?
Assuming the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the original iPad Air and that the performances are comparable and that the prices are the same, are you saying that Apple does not make overpriced junk?
If the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the iPad Air 2, but is priced like the original iPad Air and performs like the iPad Air, would you still say the iPad Airs are overpriced, considering that for the price they are performing better?
If the Nexus 9 is spec'd less than the original iPad Air, performs on par and is priced the same, then I guess it is a better tablet for you. But you'd be crushed by the fact that the tablet is not spec'd out enough to have gloating rights over the iPad Air.
I like the benchmark performance charts because I can quickly scroll by them and note that the iPad bars are pretty and taller than the rest.
Benchmarks pretty much suck at stirring me up, emotionally. I used to love those live comparisons Steve did onstage using Photoshop or some other heavy-load app. Remember how everyone laughed as Photoshop finished the set of tasks far quicker on the latest Mac than the PC?
The latest keynote seemed a bit rushed but it would have been killer to see an iPad Air 2 vs. the leading android tablet in some heavy graphics app showdown. It would have been impressive because I don't think any one of us thought the A8X was going to be THAT much faster than its predecessor. I was pleasantly surprised by the increase in performance. I think Apple missed an opportunity to demonstrate just how impressive these new Airs are.
Benchmarks are for nerds. The rest of us want to see showdowns.
What are the CPU specs of the Nexus 9 compared to the iPad Air 2? Better on paper? Same on paper? Worse on paper? Can a Nexus branded tablet actually be lesser spec'd than an iPad?
Assuming the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the original iPad Air and that the performances are comparable and that the prices are the same, are you saying that Apple does not make overpriced junk?
If the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the iPad Air 2, but is priced like the original iPad Air and performs like the iPad Air, would you still say the iPad Airs are overpriced, considering that for the price they are performing better?
If the Nexus 9 is spec'd less than the original iPad Air, performs on par and is priced the same, then I guess it is a better tablet for you. But you'd be crushed by the fact that the tablet is not spec'd out enough to have gloating rights over the iPad Air.
But then again, BFD!
The iPad (as with all their iOS devices) has shows that specs are for the most part irrelevant to the regular-Joe-user. What is important is the experience.
I'm sure some Samcrap tablet will come out shortly, with "technically" better specs, maybe even a 12-core 128-bit ARM chip and 3TB of RAM in it, and it will still perform worse than a iPad1.
It's great that Apple continues to push the envelope with hardware, as well they should. However, lets not kid ourselves here. Apple is not competing with the Android crowd. They are only in competition with themselves, and continuously try out-doing what they did last time. The Samsungs/Nexus' of the world just continue to wait-and-see what comes out for their R&D department at 1 Infinity Loop because they are too stupid to know how to do it themselves.
I'm not sure what's funnier.. Having another "Crapple" iPad mop the floor AGAIN with the Android trash, or the bed-wetting Fandroids that will come out from their mommy's basements and whine about how these numbers MUST be wrong...
These kind of articles really get Android fans stirred up because it was their main argument just like it has been on the PC. They see value in the specs - more RAM, more cores, more GHz, more storage for less money. They are the IT guys that have that value metric right to their core. They freely admit Apple products are easier to use and setup but they use it as a negative as though tackling something needlessly complex makes you smarter.
Raw performance is the last thing they thought they had and now it's gone by a large margin. Apple gets 64-bit across the board, high benchmark numbers, smooth operation, great eco-system with great exclusive apps and up-to-date OS, they have high unit volume, they take most of the profit, they have better security (fingerprint id, custom chip enclave...), they have the mindshare, they are very competitive on price, they treat user privacy with respect, they have the highest customer satisfaction ratings, they have long battery life, they have the highest quality products and so on - they even have widgets.
So what do Android users have left? Filebrowser, task manager, split screen, 3rd party app stores. These are the things they'll suddenly make more important and absolutely essential before they'd even consider an inferior iOS device. Everyone else will just laugh at their insecurity.
It seems easy to get lost here, but does the Air 2 have three cores, and the Nexus 9 two? It that case, it looks like core-for-core the 64 bit Denver CPU matches the new iPad A8X; the Air 2 pulls ahead because it has an additional core. Which is evidence that the chipmakers are getting a boost from 64 bit, and evidence that the CPU advantage of Apple will significantly diminish as Android moves to 64 bit designs, which could be "good news" for Android battery life. Personally I consider battery life more significant once CPU performance is good enough, which it is in most of these products (otherwise why do we hold on to old tablets for so long?)
Probably the same people that will tell you they never have unjustified tab reloads in Safari.
This iPad rev so blows the competition out of the water that I'd rather see this iPad put up against Mac Book Airs and other laptops. Especially in the context of Intels integrated GPU's.
Late to the party and maybe someone above has already posted this.
"The Air 2 is noticeably faster than the iPhones 6 in single-core performance, but it’s simply in an altogether different ballpark in multi-core. I couldn’t get an answer from anyone at Apple regarding whether Geekbench is correct that it’s a three-core CPU,1 but the multi-core results certainly bear that out.
It is remarkable not only that the new iPad Air 2 is faster than the iPhones 6, but also that it’s faster than a three-year-old MacBook Air, and within shooting distance of a two-year-old MacBook Air. It’s more than half as fast as today’s top-of-the-line 13-inch MacBook Pro, especially in multi-core. "
"... I couldn’t get an answer from anyone at Apple regarding whether Geekbench is correct that it’s a three-core CPU,1 but the multi-core results certainly bear that out.
The only other possibility is that it's some kind of hyper threading equivalent, and one of the cores is virtual. But then you would expect 2 virtual cores, 1 for each real. The fact that it's an odd number of cores suggests 3 real cores to me.
The results for the A8x are stunning to say the least. Questions:
1) what could be achieved with 2 of these in one device... say a 12-13" iPad?
2) can Apple pull this kind of advancement going forward, say to A9x and A10x? Which would put it at parallel power to today's MB Airs?
3) now that they have made good use of their investments in the engineers and chip tech purchases, is it time to go all out and do the same with battery tech? Thy've got the money... who has the visionary tech that needs help developing it?
4) when will Samsung try to do Question 1 above and come out with a dual processor phone or tablet... both Octa-Cores? @Marvin - Just to keep the Fandroids happy...:smokey:
Comments
It seems to be equal to a new model mid/high range i3 low power. That in itself is remarkable. Trying to compare it to a mid range i5 is stretching, unless that chip is perhaps three years old. Still a pretty good feat. This blows past all Atom SoC's.
Blowing passed an Atom is not a very hard thing to do, man I hate that chip. always have since the first incarnation. I have this little development board that constantly oerheaats, contains an Atom QuadCore Z3740, it will reboot every time I put a little load on the LAMP server. I even thought it was a defective product and returned it for a better one, same thing happened. Every single device I have ever owned with that chip has been complete garbage, almost as bad as Transmeta, though I did like my little Sony PIctureBook, still have the 933Mhz Japan only model in my display case of old but not forgotten tech.
Got a feeling that apple has some strategic plans for the A8X. There is so much processing power in iPad air 2 that one can imagine multi windows tasking and much more computing intensive applications will be on its way for power and corporate users.
Man I hope your right, I can't imagine all that power going to waste on a single app.
Safari lags for a second or so when you open it on the iPad 2 under iOS 8.1. However, after that it is much smoother than it was on 7. 8.02 was similar to 8.1, but since I kept losing my 3g connection I don't like to talk about it.
When did you order yours, I ordered mine that same day it went up for sale. I'm patient though, I would like to see my keyboard case come before the tablet does. I can't wait, though I think I am more excited about the Nexus 9, I'm going to install the same Ubuntu Linux image that they use for their Jetson development boards on it. and than see how well the GPU encodes video files and renders Blender projects.
The last gain margin for Nexus 9 is when Google will release a 64-bit Android OS. As far as I know, current Android 5.0 Lollipop is still 32-bit, compatible with 64-bit cpu, but still 32-bit.
I am glad apple decided to push the whole platform forward. Apple could have just put an A8 chip into the ipad air 2 and there won't be much difference to the iPad Air 2 sales in the near future. Computing power and hardware has to be around before apps and new uses can be implemented. App developers will come up with more powerful apps.
Am waiting for pixelmator for iPad.
Many of the graphic intensive games I am playing should run faster even though I don't feel they were slow on iPad air before. Now I can look forward to even more graphic intensive games.
N.B. All of the A8X chips with 4 good cores are being saved for the 13" iPad for business in 2015.
It's in the updated article.
The iPad Air 2 is so fast, it’s shipped and delivered to your house FIVE TIMES faster than the previous model!
Brilliant!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Since the Nexus 9 with 16GB WiFi is $399 and a 16gb WiFi iPad Air 2 is $499, I would expect the performance of the Nexus 9 to be lower. The performance of the Nexus 9 seems to be fairly on par with the original iPad Air, which is the same $399 price.
Big farking deal.
What are the CPU specs of the Nexus 9 compared to the iPad Air 2? Better on paper? Same on paper? Worse on paper? Can a Nexus branded tablet actually be lesser spec'd than an iPad?
Assuming the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the original iPad Air and that the performances are comparable and that the prices are the same, are you saying that Apple does not make overpriced junk?
If the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the iPad Air 2, but is priced like the original iPad Air and performs like the iPad Air, would you still say the iPad Airs are overpriced, considering that for the price they are performing better?
If the Nexus 9 is spec'd less than the original iPad Air, performs on par and is priced the same, then I guess it is a better tablet for you. But you'd be crushed by the fact that the tablet is not spec'd out enough to have gloating rights over the iPad Air.
But then again, BFD!
First 64-bit, now an extra core and 2GB RAM. We are getting closer to the day when a Mac ships with one of these.
I like the benchmark performance charts because I can quickly scroll by them and note that the iPad bars are pretty and taller than the rest.
Benchmarks pretty much suck at stirring me up, emotionally. I used to love those live comparisons Steve did onstage using Photoshop or some other heavy-load app. Remember how everyone laughed as Photoshop finished the set of tasks far quicker on the latest Mac than the PC?
The latest keynote seemed a bit rushed but it would have been killer to see an iPad Air 2 vs. the leading android tablet in some heavy graphics app showdown. It would have been impressive because I don't think any one of us thought the A8X was going to be THAT much faster than its predecessor. I was pleasantly surprised by the increase in performance. I think Apple missed an opportunity to demonstrate just how impressive these new Airs are.
Benchmarks are for nerds. The rest of us want to see showdowns.
What are the CPU specs of the Nexus 9 compared to the iPad Air 2? Better on paper? Same on paper? Worse on paper? Can a Nexus branded tablet actually be lesser spec'd than an iPad?
Assuming the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the original iPad Air and that the performances are comparable and that the prices are the same, are you saying that Apple does not make overpriced junk?
If the Nexus 9 is similar in specs to the iPad Air 2, but is priced like the original iPad Air and performs like the iPad Air, would you still say the iPad Airs are overpriced, considering that for the price they are performing better?
If the Nexus 9 is spec'd less than the original iPad Air, performs on par and is priced the same, then I guess it is a better tablet for you. But you'd be crushed by the fact that the tablet is not spec'd out enough to have gloating rights over the iPad Air.
But then again, BFD!
The iPad (as with all their iOS devices) has shows that specs are for the most part irrelevant to the regular-Joe-user. What is important is the experience.
I'm sure some Samcrap tablet will come out shortly, with "technically" better specs, maybe even a 12-core 128-bit ARM chip and 3TB of RAM in it, and it will still perform worse than a iPad1.
It's great that Apple continues to push the envelope with hardware, as well they should. However, lets not kid ourselves here. Apple is not competing with the Android crowd. They are only in competition with themselves, and continuously try out-doing what they did last time. The Samsungs/Nexus' of the world just continue to wait-and-see what comes out for their R&D department at 1 Infinity Loop because they are too stupid to know how to do it themselves.
google is making their things look more like apple now. are we supposed to like them more? will it help up forget their data harvesting?
These kind of articles really get Android fans stirred up because it was their main argument just like it has been on the PC. They see value in the specs - more RAM, more cores, more GHz, more storage for less money. They are the IT guys that have that value metric right to their core. They freely admit Apple products are easier to use and setup but they use it as a negative as though tackling something needlessly complex makes you smarter.
Raw performance is the last thing they thought they had and now it's gone by a large margin. Apple gets 64-bit across the board, high benchmark numbers, smooth operation, great eco-system with great exclusive apps and up-to-date OS, they have high unit volume, they take most of the profit, they have better security (fingerprint id, custom chip enclave...), they have the mindshare, they are very competitive on price, they treat user privacy with respect, they have the highest customer satisfaction ratings, they have long battery life, they have the highest quality products and so on - they even have widgets.
So what do Android users have left? Filebrowser, task manager, split screen, 3rd party app stores. These are the things they'll suddenly make more important and absolutely essential before they'd even consider an inferior iOS device. Everyone else will just laugh at their insecurity.
It that case, it looks like core-for-core the 64 bit Denver CPU matches the new iPad A8X; the Air 2 pulls ahead because it has an additional core. Which is evidence that the chipmakers are getting a boost from 64 bit, and evidence that the CPU advantage of Apple will significantly diminish as Android moves to 64 bit designs, which could be "good news" for Android battery life. Personally I consider battery life more significant once CPU performance is good enough, which it is in most of these products (otherwise why do we hold on to old tablets for so long?)
Late to the party and maybe someone above has already posted this.
From Daring Fireball:
"The Air 2 is noticeably faster than the iPhones 6 in single-core performance, but it’s simply in an altogether different ballpark in multi-core. I couldn’t get an answer from anyone at Apple regarding whether Geekbench is correct that it’s a three-core CPU,1 but the multi-core results certainly bear that out.
It is remarkable not only that the new iPad Air 2 is faster than the iPhones 6, but also that it’s faster than a three-year-old MacBook Air, and within shooting distance of a two-year-old MacBook Air. It’s more than half as fast as today’s top-of-the-line 13-inch MacBook Pro, especially in multi-core. "
From Daring Fireball:
"... I couldn’t get an answer from anyone at Apple regarding whether Geekbench is correct that it’s a three-core CPU,1 but the multi-core results certainly bear that out.
The only other possibility is that it's some kind of hyper threading equivalent, and one of the cores is virtual. But then you would expect 2 virtual cores, 1 for each real. The fact that it's an odd number of cores suggests 3 real cores to me.
1) what could be achieved with 2 of these in one device... say a 12-13" iPad?
2) can Apple pull this kind of advancement going forward, say to A9x and A10x? Which would put it at parallel power to today's MB Airs?
3) now that they have made good use of their investments in the engineers and chip tech purchases, is it time to go all out and do the same with battery tech? Thy've got the money... who has the visionary tech that needs help developing it?
4) when will Samsung try to do Question 1 above and come out with a dual processor phone or tablet... both Octa-Cores? @Marvin - Just to keep the Fandroids happy...:smokey:
I would reckon it would fit in as an entry level in terms of performance. I can't find the A8X on Geekbench browser, but the fastest Macbook Airs are still faster than the iPad 2. http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/1029290?baseline=604439
So 70% CPU performance compared to the Macbook Air.
A GPU comparison would be interesting.