Why is iPad 3 behind in specs?

[Skull One]

You forgot 0.3 mpix earth shattering front camera and 5 mpix (OMG) back camera.

Yes, because you need more than .3 mpix for FaceTime or Skype. And how many people use a tablet as a camera? Seriously, thought the 5MP camera on the back was overkill.

Dual core 1Ghz CPU, Quad core GPU --> state of the "ark" (as Noah ark) technology since Tegra 3 was introduced last year.

Actually had to stop reading and allow myself to stop laughing before continuing. Going to guess you never bothered to read ANY tech articles on that specific subject matter much less ran tests for yourself.

If you compare the Quad Core GPU to the Tegra's Twelve Core GPU and you remove all variables, IE you just do internal code processing only, the A5X GPU is 3 times faster than the Tegra 3.

Let that SINK in for a bit.

3 TIMES as much processing power from a quad core GPU vs a 12 core GPU. And there are NO Tegra 3 tablets that power a 2048 x 1536 display. Which is a good thing considering how anemic they are considering it has 3 times more cores.

Now if you want to compare raw CPU to raw CPU power, then yes the dual core A5X is half the processing power of the quad core CPU in the Tegra 3. No argument there. But then again if you start comparing real world tasks, then the comparison gets really cloudy. Because the Android OS has so much overhead and background processes running that the iPad (3rd Gen) AND iPad 2 both seem to keep up with it quite well. But the problem is that benchmark is subjective because you are comparing a native code application against a Java application running inside of a Dalvik Virtual Machine that is running inside of Linux.

Truly a shame we can't get each of the OSes on the other tablet to see who things would fair.

I do have both iPad3, original Transformer and Transformer Prime and after 5 months with Prime and 1 year with original Transformer with docking station (keyboard) my "go to" device is Prime. My wife likes iPad, but she is not much of a computer user, so her not having acces to filing system on iPad is just a blessing. For me, I like to have control over device I had purchased.

Glad you feel you have control. To some people that seems to be very important.

 

[Seadog]

Let's calm down before we get too heated here. This is what I was talking about. The advertising types make much too much about the things that really do not matter. Especially when dealing with the reality of how we need a computer to act. Dollar for dollar, Apple will give as good value as any comparable PC. In many cases, you can find a better price on an Apple computer, over a high quality PC. The difference boils down to issues of what we use our computers for. If you never use anything but Microsoft programs, then you might be better of with a PC. The reality is that most people who do the research, will eventually try Apple products. Most can make the transition, some will not. Those that make the transition, are almost always converts to the OS. It is like going from a Hyundai to a Lexus. Some people are happy with a bare bones device, while others appreciate the style and comfort of a top end value.

I have a 2006 iMac that still works great. I ran Win 7 on it for awhile when I could not port some Amazon videos to OSX. I do not bother with it since that has changed. How many 2006 PCs do you know that are still around? How many can make the transition to Win 7?

 

[andrzejls]

Yes, because you need more than .3 mpix for FaceTime or Skype. And how many people use a tablet as a camera? Seriously, thought the 5MP camera on the back was overkill.




Actually had to stop reading and allow myself to stop laughing before continuing. Going to guess you never bothered to read ANY tech articles on that specific subject matter much less ran tests for yourself.

If you compare the Quad Core GPU to the Tegra's Twelve Core GPU and you remove all variables, IE you just do internal code processing only, the A5X GPU is 3 times faster than the Tegra 3.

Let that SINK in for a bit.

3 TIMES as much processing power from a quad core GPU vs a 12 core GPU. And there are NO Tegra 3 tablets that power a 2048 x 1536 display. Which is a good thing considering how anemic they are considering it has 3 times more cores.

Now if you want to compare raw CPU to raw CPU power, then yes the dual core A5X is half the processing power of the quad core CPU in the Tegra 3. No argument there. But then again if you start comparing real world tasks, then the comparison gets really cloudy. Because the Android OS has so much overhead and background processes running that the iPad (3rd Gen) AND iPad 2 both seem to keep up with it quite well. But the problem is that benchmark is subjective because you are comparing a native code application against a Java application running inside of a Dalvik Virtual Machine that is running inside of Linux.

Truly a shame we can't get each of the OSes on the other tablet to see who things would fair.




Glad you feel you have control. To some people that seems to be very important.

Well, I was sarcastic when I talk about iPad cameras, they are pitiful. As far as reading technical articles, you should read this "http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/03/apple-a5x-not-quad-core/". You know some facts but insist on presenting only half of them. From your statement " Going to guess you never bothered to read ANY tech articles on that specific subject matter much less ran tests for yourself." i would presume that you did run tests (I did not, nor I said I did). If that is the case, could you provide us with YOUR test results?.

 

[Skull One]

Well, I was sarcastic when I talk about iPad cameras, they are pitiful. As far as reading technical articles, you should read this "http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/03/apple-a5x-not-quad-core/". You know some facts but insist on presenting only half of them. From your statement " Going to guess you never bothered to read ANY tech articles on that specific subject matter much less ran tests for yourself." i would presume that you did run tests (I did not, nor I said I did). If that is the case, could you provide us with YOUR test results?.

I 100% agree with your sarcasm on the camera's. I don't think the back camera should have ever been added.

Sorry, never claimed to own the hardware needed to run the test independently. You on the other hand do own the hardware and yet you didn't even know that the A5X GPU was 3 times faster than the Tegra 3 GPU.

And I didn't present half the fact, I presented the facts based on your statement. If I were to go into a full detailed analysis, it would require me to do more research and simply put, I don't have the time nor the inclination to spend 12 hours to write a 30 minute essay on the subject. My off the top of my head analysis was spot on.

But I will save you some time, there are only a FEW benchmarks that can be run on each device that allows a direct comparison.

1) CPU thru simple "work load" simulations with no screen, disk or network I/O.
2) GPU using standard internal only 3D and 2D frame generation.
3) Memory read/write speeds.

Anything beyond that is automatically subjective because there are major differences that CAN NOT be removed scientifically from the test. Heck until there is a Tegra 3 with a 2048 x 1536 display, you can't even do external frame rate tests.

My background in benchmarking is actually pretty extensive due to my research in overclocking Android devices. This was version two of my article on overclocking Droids (OverClocking 101) and that version only had 10 months of my work. The first version with six months of my work was lost when a huge blow happened between ROM makers. A real shame in my opinion.

Android has to have the "bigger" hardware because it is working with a disadvantage. 95% of all apps are Java based instead of NDK based. That means the Dalvik VM is used 95% of the time. The overhead of the Dalvik VM is a lot bigger than most people know. Especially when you are dealing with multiple apps running at the same time.

BTW, the second Android switches to 100% NDK apps, is the day I reevaluate my usage of iOS based devices.

 

[andrzejls]

I 100% agree with your sarcasm on the camera's. I don't think the back camera should have ever been added.

Sorry, never claimed to own the hardware needed to run the test independently. You on the other hand do own the hardware and yet you didn't even know that the A5X GPU was 3 times faster than the Tegra 3 GPU.

And I didn't present half the fact, I presented the facts based on your statement. If I were to go into a full detailed analysis, it would require me to do more research and simply put, I don't have the time nor the inclination to spend 12 hours to write a 30 minute essay on the subject. My off the top of my head analysis was spot on.

But I will save you some time, there are only a FEW benchmarks that can be run on each device that allows a direct comparison.

1) CPU thru simple "work load" simulations with no screen, disk or network I/O.
2) GPU using standard internal only 3D and 2D frame generation.
3) Memory read/write speeds.

Anything beyond that is automatically subjective because there are major differences that CAN NOT be removed scientifically from the test. Heck until there is a Tegra 3 with a 2048 x 1536 display, you can't even do external frame rate tests.

My background in benchmarking is actually pretty extensive due to my research in overclocking Android devices. This was version two of my article on overclocking Droids (OverClocking 101) and that version only had 10 months of my work. The first version with six months of my work was lost when a huge blow happened between ROM makers. A real shame in my opinion.

Android has to have the "bigger" hardware because it is working with a disadvantage. 95% of all apps are Java based instead of NDK based. That means the Dalvik VM is used 95% of the time. The overhead of the Dalvik VM is a lot bigger than most people know. Especially when you are dealing with multiple apps running at the same time.

BTW, the second Android switches to 100% NDK apps, is the day I reevaluate my usage of iOS based devices.

Well, there you go again. I did NOT say that I did not know of A5X GPU being 3x faster than Tegra3. I am saying that this is not a absolute conclusion. I think that I will end this pointless conversation and move on.

 

[Wolfpuppies3]

It is not.

That was easy.

 

[Gabriel1]

Ok guys and girls.....we pride ourselves on the friendliness of these forums, so let's keep it that way and we can ensure that this informative thread remains open.

The Archangel

 

[Skull One]

Well, there you go again. I did NOT say that I did not know of A5X GPU being 3x faster than Tegra3.

You typed the following:

Dual core 1Ghz CPU, Quad core GPU --> state of the "ark" (as Noah ark) technology since Tegra 3 was introduced last year.

I believe that states your opinion rather clearly and that you didn't know the factual data at hand.

I am saying that this is not a absolute conclusion.

The benchmarks are ABSOLUTE. They were conducted using the same benchmark code on both devices and they removed anything that could "cloud" the data. IE they removed the screen I/O since they are not of the same resolution. This testing was done by more than one web forum and tech blog. And they all concluded the same thing. The A5X GPU is faster than the Tegra 3.

I think that I will end this pointless conversation and move on.

How is getting the correct facts out pointless?

 

[seneca18]

Hey Skull, I think you can put all the facts in the world on the table but it will not matter if they selectively read them. I for one found your article on droid forums very interesting, I can't even imagine how long it took you to test all that.

 

[ipadetheridge]

Skull, you may can defeat an arguement with me on ipad but you can not defeat me when it comes to DAW's. Rather it be PC or Mac..the specs count. If you are saying that i can buy a $700 Mac tower with the maximume requirements of my DAW, then i would like to see this Apple tower. I have no research beause i have experience with older Apple towers that would be around the $700 range. For $700 i can get a beafy PC tower with "my" requirements for the DAW. My DAW which is Reaper, requires more than 8GB of RAM, 7,200rpm Harddrive or faster, and def more than a Duo Core. 4 years ago i could have got by with less specs but with todays hungry CPU ad RAM demanding VST and VSTi's..those older machine suffer. Even your stock $1300 iMac does not reach half those requirements.

Maybe you have better resources on Apple product. At the end of the day, i see many build a more than enough studio PC towers under $700 that will run circles around a $1200 Mac on the market now or older ones. When it comes to DAW's....the specs is what counts.

All i am stating is, i wish Apple would give you more than 4gb of RAM and def something faster than 5400rpm harddrive. At $1300 you think you would get that.

That is my only issue with Apple. I do not understand your arguement.

 

[Skull One]

Hey Skull, I think you can put all the facts in the world on the table but it will not matter if they selectively read them. I for one found your article on droid forums very interesting, I can't even imagine how long it took you to test all that.

I had about 160 hours of research in total and another 20 hours of typing it up for presentation. It was my baby

The best part of about that article was working directly with the ROM developers and Kernel builders. The Android community has some of the very brightest minds working on custom firmware. They can be truly amazing.

Of course the kicker was when I had reached a level of knowledge about governors, multiple CPU implementation and multitasking (read 100K+ lines of AOSP code and built my own ROMs) and then they started consulting with me because of my research.

 

[skaterboarder]

The iPad could easily do with an SD card slot.

 

[Seadog]

Ipadetheridge, How does disk speed means everything? If you want speed, an SSD is faster and more reliable. A hybrid drive combines the best of both. Apple uses slower spinning drives because they are more reliable. And towers are not necessarily the best format. I am using a Mac Mini with a 32 inch HD TV for a monitor as my current main unit. RAM is cheap and so easy to install.with ThunderBolt, a add-on hard drive can be as fast as internal drive. I doubt if your digital audio workstation requires that much raw power. If it does, I doubt any $700 machine will cut it. So you need 7200 rpm. That is a factor that should be considered, but more people are better served by more reliable drives. Apple builds devices to fit consumers. What you are talking about is a specialty machine.

Hardware specs can be argued until the cows come home, but in the end,it all boils down to a tired old argument used by those trying to justify a non Apple purchase. If you want to buy PC or Android, that is fine. Just do not think that we are going to have an epiphany and sell our macs or iPads. Too many here have probably more years dealing with computers than you have being alive. I do not want to come across as being harsh, but I feel you are not being honest with us at times.

 

[biobunny]

My main computer is a dual-core 1.6GHz Mac Mini running Linux, and honestly I don't care about specs. It can't even run the latest version of Mac OS X. (I forced it in to prevent boot without password).

Sent from K48

 

[rushmore69]

You typed the following:



I believe that states your opinion rather clearly and that you didn't know the factual data at hand.




The benchmarks are ABSOLUTE. They were conducted using the same benchmark code on both devices and they removed anything that could "cloud" the data. IE they removed the screen I/O since they are not of the same resolution. This testing was done by more than one web forum and tech blog. And they all concluded the same thing. The A5X GPU is faster than the Tegra 3.




How is getting the correct facts out pointless?

The words benchmark and absolute are an absolute contradiction in terms

I have an iPad 3 and the Acer A510. Both are great devices and have the chips being compared. That said, I am very skeptical the Tegra 3 will be able to handle a 1080p display with computational tasks without choking.

There is a reason Apple put a big a$$ gpu in the chipset. Something the Tegra 3 does not have, BTW. Both are same micron process, so not a case of the Tegra 3 being more efficient.