The Apple iPad Pro Review
by Ryan Smith, Joshua Ho & Brandon Chester on January 22, 2016 8:10 AM ESTSystem Performance Cont'd
Continuing on with our more game-like benchmarks, tests like 3DMark and GFXBench are supposed to replicate gaming workloads to help determine relative performance in most common 3D games. In the case of the iPad Pro, the GPU is a 12 cluster variant of the PowerVR Series7XT GPU architecture. This is double the number of clusters relative to the A9’s GPU, which should prove to be quite impressive judging by the GPU performance that we saw in the iPhone 6s.
The iPad Pro manages to maintain superiority in 3DMark, but we're really starting to see the limitations of this test. The physics test generates non-sequential data structures with memory dependencies, which can penalize devices with lower core count and clock speed, but the workload is able to be spread across multiple cores to exploit TLP, which benefits devices with more real cores, or virtual ones (hyperthreading). We also see that the graphics test isn't really scaling well at this point as it's just too light to take advantage of the full potential of the A9X GPU. This likely also explains why the iPad Pro isn't closer to the Surface Pro 4 in performance on this benchmark, given what we know about A9X's GPU.
In GFXBench we can see the major benefits that really come with the larger GPU. It's pretty obvious here that clock speeds are basically identical when comparing the A9 GPU and A9X GPU as the scaling is almost perfectly double. In this benchmark the iPad Pro quite handily beats the Surface Pro 4, but it's important to keep in mind that the Surface Pro 4 is running a higher level of precision and that the iPad Pro is running OpenGL ES rather than OpenGL in this test, so it isn't strictly apples-to-apples (nor is such a thing truly possible at this time). Overall though the GPU of the iPad Pro is incredibly impressive, and I doubt that anyone will really have issues with gaming performance on this device.
NAND Performance
At this point it’s pretty well understood that storage performance can often be a gating factor in performance. Although caching is an amazingly effective method of hiding memory latency, for the first hit it’s mandatory to miss the cache unless you’ve managed to prefetch the data in question. The other issue where storage performance becomes obvious are cases where it’s necessary to commit data to storage first. Some cases where this is going to be obvious is app installation or iCloud restores, especially when network performance is at the point where installation can actually be gated by writing to disk rather than downloading from the network.
In the case of the iPad Pro, Apple claims that they’ve implemented a storage controller comparable to some desktop SSDs. It turns out that this controller is a familiar one, as the storage controller identifies itself as the APPLE SSD AP0128K in the case of this review unit. It turns out that everything about this SSD is identical to what we saw in the iPhone 6s as well, down the use of Hynix for at least one of the NAND vendors and the hybrid SLC/TLC architecture discussed in previous articles. In order to test how this storage solution performs we once again use Eric Patno’s StorageBench, which provides a rough analogue to AndroBench 3.6.
It turns out that in this test, performance is basically identical to the iPhone 6s. This isn’t quite the equal of something like the Surface Pro 4’s PM951 SSD, which has the advantage of more NAND dies working in parallel, but given that the iPad Pro PCB size isn’t going to be anywhere near that of the Surface Pro 4 it’s likely that this is a concession to gain better battery life. I definitely wonder what performance would be like relative to a Surface Pro 4 if the iPad Pro had a 512GB SKU, but given that the iPad Pro tops out at 128GB this isn’t really a question with a relevant answer.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
408 Comments
View All Comments
tim851 - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
"Pro" is just a marketing moniker. There are smartphones that carry it.Apple wants iOS to succeed. People wonder if OSX will come to the iPad, I think Apple would rather consider bringing iOS to Macs. They are fanatical about simplicity and an iPad with iOS got that in spades.
And that's why they are taking the opposite approach of Microsoft.
Microsoft is trying to make their desktop OS touch-friendly enough. Apple is trying to make their touch OS productive enough.
Windows devs are by and large ignoring Metro, the tough UI, and just deploy desktop apps. Apple wants to force devs to find ways to bring professional grade software to iOS.
I'm quite happy that the two companies are exploring different avenues instead of racing into the same direction.
ddriver - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
"I'm quite happy"People should really have higher standards of expectations, because otherwise, the industry will take its sweet time milking them and barely making any increments in the value and capabilities of their products. They won't make it better until people demand better, the industry is currently in a sweet spot where it gets to dictate demand, by lowering people's expectations to the point they don't know and can't even imagine any better than what the industry makes.
People should stop following the trends dictated by the industry, and really should look beyond that, which the industry is willing to do at this point, towards what is now possible to do and has been for a while really. Because otherwise, no matter how much technology progresses, this will not be reflected by the capabilities of people, if it is up to the industry, it will keep putting that into almost useless shiny toys rather than the productivity tools they could be.
exanimo - Monday, January 25, 2016 - link
ddriver, I want to start out by commending you on your writing and ideas. Top notch, really.I also really enjoy your idealist approach to saying that people should be dictating the industry, rather than vice versa (seriously). My only question is how can one do that as a consumer? Is seems to me that we have little or no choice but to follow trends because Google, Apple, and Microsoft are becoming too big to fail.
A perfect anecdote would be BlackBerry's OS10. They came late to the show (after they realized you can be too big to fail when you become stagnant) and released a technically superior mobile OS that had the consistency and reliability of iOS, with the control and versatility of Android. On top of that was the use of gestures and an amalgamated hub for messages. I wish I had a choice to use this operating system, but the writing on the wall says that it will collapse within the next 2 years. This is because they're still losing market shares and people are not supporting applications.
There is innovation, but it's stomped out by these huge companies and THE PEOPLE that dictate which OS to develop for.
The Hardcard - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
What software do you use that came out in 1981 when the PC launched. Probably none. Virtually guaranteed none. It is surprising the lack of forward vision sometimes. In five years there will be plenty of professional software on iOS, to run on the significantly more powerful iPad Pro Whatever. The writing is on the wall.ddriver - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
There were barely any software development tools back then, and barely any software developers for that matter. Today there is plenty of software development tools, and plenty of software developers, plus mobile devices have been around for a while. Yet none of those seems to produce any professional software, despite all the time and the fact the hardware is good enough. As I said earlier, this is entirely due to the philosophy, advocated for mobile devices - those should not be tools for consumers to use, but tools through which the consumers are being used. This market was inventing for milking people, not for making them more capable and productive.andrewaggb - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
I think it really goes back to what a person needs to be productive. For some people that is just a web browser (eg chromebook). I have no doubt that the iPad pro may be productive for some people/uses and be everything they need in a computing device.In my case, as a windows/linux/web software developer I need a windows machine (or vm), with visual studio, sql server, eclipse, postgres, ms office, and various supporting apps. For me a chromebook or ipad is not a pro device or really even useful. I have various co-workers with SP3/4's + dock that drive dual screens and peripherals and get by ok. I like to run vm's and various other things that cause 16gb of ram to not be enough, so I'm stuck in desktop/premium laptop territory. I really don't mind that.
Personally - I barely use my ipad air and ended up installing crouton (ubuntu) on the chromebook. I'm sure other people are different.
Different devices for different kinds of professionals.
lilmoe - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
Your point?$1000 laptops (even from Apple) are MUCH more powerful already, and they will get even more powerful. Same can be said about $1000 Windows 10 tablets. Technology will always progress, this isn't restricted to iPads.
Why is everyone trying to make iOS for professional productivity a thing? Why torture ourselves? Do you guys really believe it's only about computing power, which by the way isn't nearly close to being adequate? Good luck moving that 200GB RAW 4K video clip on that thing, let alone edit it. Good luck using it for 3D modelling and engineering. Good luck writing and compiling software...
As pointless as the new Macbook was, it sure as heck is a lot better than this thing for what it's advertised for...
This is an accessory, NOT a pro product. "The writing is on the wall"...................
ddriver - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
"Why is everyone trying to make iOS for professional productivity a thing?"You ENTIRELY miss the point, which is "why is NOBODY doing it". It is a computer, REDUCED to an accessory, which COULD be THAT MUCH MORE USEFUL.
Actually, using OpenCL even mobile hardware can process high resolution video faster than a good video workstation was capable not 5 years ago. The hardware is perfectly capable of audio, video editing, 3d modelling, graphics, engineering, software development and whatnot. It is not as fast as the fastest desktop workstation, but it is fast enough to do the job, while still being very portable. All it lacks is the software to do it.
lilmoe - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
Cool story, nice mood swings, you're amazing. lolBut still. Why torture yourself with iOS running on crippled "hardware", when there are devices that do iPad stuff better than iPads, run desktop class OSs and already have the software you need for the engineering and productivity stuff.
Because buying multiple devices to accomplish one task is a better thing to do?
ddriver - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
What a touching attempt at condescending cynicism. Alas, as always you get things the wrongest way possible. Those capitalized words were not the product of mood, but motivated by your poor cognitive abilities, a last resort attempt at making the painfully obvious a tad more obvious, so that hopefully, you could finally get it. Unfortunately, you seem to be entirely hopeless."Because buying multiple devices to accomplish one task is a better thing to do?"
It is you who advocates such things. My point is exactly that - given the proper software, an ipad would be all that is needed, no need to buy an ipad AND a laptop to get your work done.
And that would be the last set of keystrokes I waste on you. Seriously dude, invest some time in improving yourself.