10.5" iPad Pro teardown finds Apple's 120Hz ProMotion display requires four connecting cab...

Posted:
in iPad
Pushing the pixels of the 10.5-inch iPad Pro Retina display at a blazing 120Hz refresh rate requires more bandwidth, which led Apple to double the number of connecting cables for the new iPad's LCD screen, a teardown of the device has discovered.


Source: iFixit.


As is custom for new Apple hardware, iFixit disassembled the 10.5-inch iPad Pro after it debuted this week, and discovered that it includes four connecting cables between the ProMotion display and the internal hardware. Previous iPad Pro models, including the larger 12.9-inch model, required only two such cables.

The solutions provider assumed that the data throughput needed to power a 120Hz display with fluid refresh rate explains the need for twice as many connectors.




Aside from that change, the insides of the 10.5-inch iPad Pro are largely as expected, taking design cues from the original 12.9-inch iPad Pro that launched back in 2015. That means it's a complete internal redesign when compared to last year's 9.7-inch iPad Pro.

"An open-faced 10.5-inch iPad Pro is essentially a scaled-down, streamlined version of its 12.9-inch predecessor," iFixit said.

With a larger 10.5-inch display and slightly increased dimensions, Apple was able to include a 30.8-watt-hour battery inside of the new model, an increase from the 27.91-watt-hour battery found in its predecessor.




The teardown also discovered that, on the Wi-Fi-only 10.5-inch iPad Pro, Apple has placed small plastic blocks in the empty space where the LTE radio model is found in capable models.

And in a slight change from the 12.9-inch model, the new flagship iPad Pro's battery is pinned underneath the logic board. Previously, the jumbo-sized iPad featured removal tabs that made replacing the battery slightly easier.

In all, iFixit gave the 10.5-inch 2017 iPad Pro a repairability score of 2 out of 10.

AppleInsider provided its own hands-on look at the new iPad Pro on Tuesday, noting that the vibrant 120Hz ProMotion display is a standout improvement right out of the box. We'll have much more on the new iPad Pro, including our full review, in the coming days.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 22
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,051member
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. I always find it amazing Apple can pack so much power into so little space. Using iFixit's photos, I'm estimating the logic board is all of 9" long. I go back to my historical questions about building a blade-type of Mac using these logic boards. There obviously would be unnecessary duplication of components, e.g., WiFi, TouchID circuitry, etc., but packing several of these in a narrow enclosure might make a really fast A10X-based cluster. Keep the GPUs and you could drive a large, multi-screen wall. Just a thought.
  • Reply 2 of 22
    nhughesnhughes Posts: 750editor
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.





    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    magman1979
  • Reply 3 of 22
    mike1mike1 Posts: 1,899member
    nhughes said:
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.





    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    Thank you.
    What's this like compared to the results to the 9.7" Pro?
  • Reply 4 of 22
    nhughesnhughes Posts: 750editor
    mike1 said:
    nhughes said:
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.





    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    Thank you.
    What's this like compared to the results to the 9.7" Pro?
    I don't have a 9.7" Pro on hand to test. I'll get benchmarks from someone else on staff before our full review is published.
  • Reply 5 of 22
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,135member
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
  • Reply 6 of 22
    seankillseankill Posts: 477member
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.

    Same here. Ordered one yesterday. I have an iPad 2 I bought within a month of it coming out, over 6 years ago if I am not mistaking. Needless to say, the upgrade is due. Tablets are extremely useful in college.
  • Reply 7 of 22
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,975member
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
    seankill said:
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
    Same here. Ordered one yesterday. I have an iPad 2 I bought within a month of it coming out, over 6 years ago if I am not mistaking. Needless to say, the upgrade is due. Tablets are extremely useful in college.
    You two have held onto your iPads a long time. Out of curiosity, how old are your iPhones and/or Macs, by comparison.

    PS: People say that the dropping iPad sales mean the product is a dud, but your comment reflect what I mostly see—people love their iPads but the iPad is also so well designed that it remains incredibly useful much longer than the typical handheld CE product. 
    StrangeDaysmagman1979Bluntspheric
  • Reply 8 of 22
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,154member
    Played with this in the Apple Store yesterday, plan to purchase soon. Truly a stunning device. Screen is gorgeous and refresh rate makes a difference. 
    magman1979
  • Reply 9 of 22
    gumashowgumashow Posts: 54member
    Ask and you shall receive. 9.7 Pro. 

    nhughesZooMigomagman1979
  • Reply 10 of 22
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,051member
    nhughes said:
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.





    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    I finally upgraded my iMac to a rebuilt late 2015 3.3GHz Quad i5 with 2T Fusion drive (one of several OWC had for sale) and my scores are better than the latest iPad but not by that much. This is why I would really be interested in an ARM implementation of macOS along with at least a two-A10x-blade with Thunderbolt, etc., to see if the multi-CPU and GPU tests would provide a faster compute box than what's in the iMacs (not comparing with iMac Pro but what about four blades or eight blades?).



    nhughes
  • Reply 11 of 22
    Soli said:
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
    seankill said:
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
    Same here. Ordered one yesterday. I have an iPad 2 I bought within a month of it coming out, over 6 years ago if I am not mistaking. Needless to say, the upgrade is due. Tablets are extremely useful in college.
    You two have held onto your iPads a long time. Out of curiosity, how old are your iPhones and/or Macs, by comparison.

    PS: People say that the dropping iPad sales mean the product is a dud, but your comment reflect what I mostly see—people love their iPads but the iPad is also so well designed that it remains incredibly useful much longer than the typical handheld CE product. 
    I have been running with an iPad Air since release. Got my wife a 12.9" iPad Pro last year - she was on an iPad2... I WILL be getting (or ordering) the new 12.9" tomorrow (payday). Hopefully, she won't start slobbering on it as a $2k hit is a bit much...

    We both have the iPhone 7+ via the AT&T Next program (annually upgrading since the 4). This year may be the first time we do not upgrade our phones.

    Also, I have the 2011 17" MBP - and good luck getting me to part with it. My wife sold her Dell 17" laptop when she got the 12.9" iPad Pro. And to finish it off, I have the Series 2 42mm Apple Watch - gave her my original 42mm when I bought it (she loves it - hadn't been wearing watches for decades).
    edited June 2017 Solimagman1979
  • Reply 12 of 22
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,975member
    rob53 said:
    nhughes said:
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.





    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    I finally upgraded my iMac to a rebuilt late 2015 3.3GHz Quad i5 with 2T Fusion drive (one of several OWC had for sale) and my scores are better than the latest iPad but not by that much. This is why I would really be interested in an ARM implementation of macOS along with at least a two-A10x-blade with Thunderbolt, etc., to see if the multi-CPU and GPU tests would provide a faster compute box than what's in the iMacs (not comparing with iMac Pro but what about four blades or eight blades?).



    Keep in mind that the iPad has no fans. If they clocked those processors to use as much power and disperse as much heat as your iMac's CPU I'm pretty sure the Geekbench results would be higher. But do most people really need faster CPUs over more efficient code? I'd argue that entry-level users certainly don't.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 13 of 22
    BluntBlunt Posts: 224member
    Soli said:
    PS: People say that the dropping iPad sales mean the product is a dud, but your comment reflect what I mostly see—people love their iPads but the iPad is also so well designed that it remains incredibly useful much longer than the typical handheld CE product. 
    Thats right. We own three iPads (The first edition and 2x iPad2). The iPad2 is still a great tablet although the battery is not so good anymore after years of heavy use. I think about upgrading to the new Pro.
  • Reply 14 of 22
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,051member
    Soli said:
    rob53 said:
    nhughes said:
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.


    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    I finally upgraded my iMac to a rebuilt late 2015 3.3GHz Quad i5 with 2T Fusion drive (one of several OWC had for sale) and my scores are better than the latest iPad but not by that much. This is why I would really be interested in an ARM implementation of macOS along with at least a two-A10x-blade with Thunderbolt, etc., to see if the multi-CPU and GPU tests would provide a faster compute box than what's in the iMacs (not comparing with iMac Pro but what about four blades or eight blades?).

    Keep in mind that the iPad has no fans. If they clocked those processors to use as much power and disperse as much heat as your iMac's CPU I'm pretty sure the Geekbench results would be higher. But do most people really need faster CPUs over more efficient code? I'd argue that entry-level users certainly don't.
    Don't understand where you're going with this comment. I know the iPads don't have fans and I'm not worried about them being pushed too far. What I am saying is I'd like to see Apple try using a few iPad logic boards in a cluster to see how fast they could go. Entry-level people who only surf the web and text don't need a "Pro" version of anything but that doesn't mean Apple couldn't or shouldn't try and take what they have, repurpose it, and see how fast they could go. Efficient code is fine but it's even better on faster CPUs.
  • Reply 15 of 22
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,975member
    rob53 said:
    Soli said:
    rob53 said:
    nhughes said:
    rob53 said:
    I'd like to see some Geekbench (and other types of) scores on this iPad. 
    Ask and you shall receive.


    For what it's worth, my 12.9" 2015 iPad Pro (running iOS 11) clocked in with CPU benchmarks of 2944 single-core and 5008 multi-core, and a Metal compute score of 15009. Hardly an apples-to-apples comparison (2015 model is loaded with apps and running a completely new OS), but it puts the numbers in context.
    I finally upgraded my iMac to a rebuilt late 2015 3.3GHz Quad i5 with 2T Fusion drive (one of several OWC had for sale) and my scores are better than the latest iPad but not by that much. This is why I would really be interested in an ARM implementation of macOS along with at least a two-A10x-blade with Thunderbolt, etc., to see if the multi-CPU and GPU tests would provide a faster compute box than what's in the iMacs (not comparing with iMac Pro but what about four blades or eight blades?).

    Keep in mind that the iPad has no fans. If they clocked those processors to use as much power and disperse as much heat as your iMac's CPU I'm pretty sure the Geekbench results would be higher. But do most people really need faster CPUs over more efficient code? I'd argue that entry-level users certainly don't.
    Don't understand where you're going with this comment. I know the iPads don't have fans and I'm not worried about them being pushed too far. What I am saying is I'd like to see Apple try using a few iPad logic boards in a cluster to see how fast they could go. Entry-level people who only surf the web and text don't need a "Pro" version of anything but that doesn't mean Apple couldn't or shouldn't try and take what they have, repurpose it, and see how fast they could go. Efficient code is fine but it's even better on faster CPUs.
    I was building off your statement regarding Apple's prowess with their ARM designs. My statement was focused on increasing the performance of Apple's ARM chips in relation to Mac thermals so I'm confused by your last sentence.
  • Reply 16 of 22
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 140member
    rob53 said:
    Soli said:

    Keep in mind that the iPad has no fans. If they clocked those processors to use as much power and disperse as much heat as your iMac's CPU I'm pretty sure the Geekbench results would be higher. But do most people really need faster CPUs over more efficient code? I'd argue that entry-level users certainly don't.
    Don't understand where you're going with this comment. I know the iPads don't have fans and I'm not worried about them being pushed too far. What I am saying is I'd like to see Apple try using a few iPad logic boards in a cluster to see how fast they could go. Entry-level people who only surf the web and text don't need a "Pro" version of anything but that doesn't mean Apple couldn't or shouldn't try and take what they have, repurpose it, and see how fast they could go. Efficient code is fine but it's even better on faster CPUs.
    One thing to keep in mind is that Apple designs these chips specifically for iOS devices. The are essentially tuned for the iPhone and the iPad. If Apple were to make server or workstation chips, they certainly wouldn't use the design meant for the iPad. For server/desktop use, they would have more cores and probably fewer low-power ones (or maybe none.)
  • Reply 17 of 22
    Yes!!! They have the 512gb 12.9" available at a local store.. So I don't have to wait for the 30th delivery... preferred the 256gb, but double the storage vs. 15 days given my "must have now" personality makes it a no-brainer....
  • Reply 18 of 22
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,044member
    Mine has been ordered online and will be delivered within a week. Can't wait to get my hand on this. Mind you, I update my iPad every year and I found the re-selling for previous year model is usually fast and highly valued (providing the item is still in good condition). Only Apple products can command such good price for reselling. Of course I am keeping my pencil, since it's still compatible with 10.5.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 19 of 22
    512GB is so tempting! iOS 11 makes it even more tempting. The improved display is the icing on the cake. If I didn't have to buy a new MBP I'd pick up the 12.9" in a heartbeat.
  • Reply 20 of 22
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    Soli said:
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
    seankill said:
    jbdragon said:
    I plan to get this tablet as a replacement for my old iPad 3. It's really time for a upgrade and this looks like the one to get.
    Same here. Ordered one yesterday. I have an iPad 2 I bought within a month of it coming out, over 6 years ago if I am not mistaking. Needless to say, the upgrade is due. Tablets are extremely useful in college.
    You two have held onto your iPads a long time. Out of curiosity, how old are your iPhones and/or Macs, by comparison.

    PS: People say that the dropping iPad sales mean the product is a dud, but your comment reflect what I mostly see—people love their iPads but the iPad is also so well designed that it remains incredibly useful much longer than the typical handheld CE product. 
    I still use my iPad 3. and I have a 2012 Mac Mini and a 2006 MacMini. Mac replacement isn't due until 2018. The iPad I waited for Retina and LTE before jumping on that ship. Apple hasn't updated the Mini in any significant way from 2012 so there was never a need to upgrade it, since it's primarily a dev machine not my main work/play machine.

Sign In or Register to comment.