The Apple iPad Pro Review
by Ryan Smith, Joshua Ho & Brandon Chester on January 22, 2016 8:10 AM ESTSystem Performance
While the iPad Pro is important for some of its tertiary features, without the performance to back it up the user experience will inevitably suffer. In order to try and get an idea for how the iPad Pro performs as a whole we turn to our suite of performance benchmarks that stress a number of different areas including the CPU, GPU, memory, and internal storage.
In the browser benchmarks, it's quite evident that the iPad Pro is far and away superior for browser performance compared to almost anything else on the market today, save the latest Surface Pros. This can be attributed to a few factors. One factor is that Safari has a number of optimizations that most Android browsers don't. The other factor is that the Twister CPU in A9X is just better suited for dealing with intense JavaScript, which is heavily reliant on single-thread performance. As the A9X only has two CPU cores that mostly rely on ILP to get acceptable levels of performance, the iPad Pro ends up doing impressively well in these benchmarks. I've found that this is also reflected in real world browsing performance, as the iPad Pro is less likely to choke on some popular JS-heavy tech websites than other devices with Chrome or an OEM-optimized browser. Quickly checking EmberJS performance tells pretty much the same story here as well.
In Basemark OS II 2.0, the iPad Pro pretty handily sets the record for performance by virtue of its GPU and CPU performance. For whatever reason there's some sort of hang-up in web browsing performance, which could be due to some sort of code path that doesn't respond very well to additional ILP. Whatever the case, performance isn't too far behind the iPad Air 2 here by virtue of higher IPC and clock speeds. Overall, the iPad Pro seems to be quite performant for everyday tasks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
408 Comments
View All Comments
HammerStrike - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
"I beg your pardon, Miss Taggart," he had said, offended. "I don't know what you mean when you say that I haven't made use of the metal. This design is an adaptation of the best bridges on record.What else did you expect?”
"A new method of construction."
"What do you mean, a new method?"
"I mean that when men got structural steel, they did not use it to build steel copies of wooden bridges."
Ann Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
The question around the iPad Pro is not is it a close enough copy of a workstation to do workstation work, but does it enable new work streams that were previously unexplored. As has been previously noted, the Surface Pro 4 is an extremely capable piece of hardware that checks all the same boxes as the iPad Pro, but no software had been designed to take advantage of it's unique form factor - it's still using a wooden design on a steel bridge.
The real differentiation for the iPad Pro is iOS, and the touch first / mobility first design mentality it brings to the table - software has to be written specifically for that environment and usage case. There are some notable hardware and input difference between the iPad Pro and previous iOS devices - time will tell if they can be combined to provide real productivity improvements vs previous designs or if they are merely novelties that will be quickly forgotten. Jury is still out on that, but if anyone can build the "critical mass" to jump start that exploration it's Apple. Hopefully some apps come out and wow us - to channel Asimov, there is a single light usage case advancement, and to progress it anywhere is to progress it everywhere.
name99 - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
I simply cannot figure your complaint: "It is a computer, REDUCED to an accessory, which COULD be THAT MUCH MORE USEFUL."So what do you want? You want the iPad Pro form factor running OSX? You want the ability to plug in a second screen? You want to be able to install Windows?
Your complaint seems to be "this is not a Surface Pro 4". It isn't MEANT to be.
It's meant to be a larger screen version of an iPad, for those for whom an iPad is an appropriate device. If you're not one of those people, WTF does it matter to you? Do you hang around bicycle tracks telling everyone there they should be using a motorbike or a car or a truck because those are more powerful?
You are stuck in a certain vision of what a computer is "supposed" to be, every bit as much as IBM confronted by DEC couldn't imagine a computer that wasn't a mainframe, then DEC confronted by Apple, Atari, etc couldn't imagine a computer that wasn't a mini, then in 2007 people couldn't imagine a pocket computer.
If you want to think of this as an "accessory" to a Mac, go ahead. I don't see what the value of that analogy, or why it's supposed to be an insult (Apple grew to the company it is today on the back of that accessory, the iPod...). People loved their iPods, they love their iPhones (especially the way they work together seamlessly with their Macs), and I expect they will love their iPad Pros.
Jumangi - Saturday, January 23, 2016 - link
Actually it is being touted as surface competition. Apple PR pushes this as a laptop replacement and its pricing is right with the Surface. Totally valid to compare the two.Constructor - Saturday, January 23, 2016 - link
You can do that. And Apple does indeed propose it as such – among very many other things, quite a few of which are actually better served by an iPad than by a conventional notebook.Just one example among many: The ability to simply use it in portrait mode already makes a huge difference for anything document-related, for which the narrow widescreens on computers are woefully inadequate.
MaxIT - Saturday, February 13, 2016 - link
Indeed it is. And it's way better than a Surface Pro, because it runs an OS that is actually designed to be used with a touch interface, while the Surface doesn't....Relic74 - Saturday, February 27, 2016 - link
Windows 10 was designed to be used with touch as well, it's silly to even think otherwise. People who such things have never used one before, simple as that.The Hardcard - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
It's not about now. Yes now I have a laptop for things my device can't do, and a desktop for things my laptop can't do timely.But I am excited that soon devices that can be carried and pocketed will soon be powerful enough and have the software to do every thing I want to do in a timely fashion.
The iPad Pro marks the beginning of the final stage of the mobile transition, being THE computer for all mainstream activities.
There will still be larger form factors, just as there will still be mainframes. But most homes and many business won't have them.
In fact, that is what IBMs new angle is. The occasional or particular high-power computation you need done elsewhere, results served to your device. Most people won't even need that
RafaelHerschel - Saturday, January 23, 2016 - link
Conditioning I guess. Some people can't imagine that using the right tool for the job is more important than using a form factor that was originally designed for media consumption.Ananke - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
Pros use Oracle, SAP, Cytrix for 98% of hardware, and some other exotic stuff amounts for the 2% left...Hence, nobody will approve capital expense of $1000+ on software unsupported device, when a $329 workstation can just do it. Software companies don't bother to bring the huge databases to exotic silicon either, when there are already CHEAPER well developed alternatives.Tablets are great for POS terminals, some apps that require mobile high quality visual content, and that's it pretty much. There is just no functionality need for something else, especially an expensive one.
mrcaffeinex - Friday, January 22, 2016 - link
In the office where I work, the iPad Pro may be the device people have been looking for. All of our remote application access goes through Citrix, with the most-used applications being Outlook for e-mail, Word for document review/minor editing, and Adobe Reader for PDF viewing. The experience on the iPad currently is not great, because the desktop versions of these applications do not translate well to the touch-first environment. The stylus and keyboard cover, coupled with the enhanced resolution, could make a difference.It is not a solution for everyone, but I have been fielding calls from our users already about wanting these, so there is potentially some kind of market to cater to here. I realize that from a technology standpoint there are more powerful alternatives and that there are other ways to approach the software situation, but at the end of the day, this is the kind of device that our users want: an iPad with a slightly bigger screen, responsive stylus input, and a keyboard cover in a convenient package, not to mention the implied prestige of Apple product ownership (in some circles the image is considered very important).
Time will tell if this is a fad or a long-term product line strategy. If Apple can turn a profit with these (and they do have a history of turning a profit on their devices), even in spite of a limited market appeal, they will probably keep marketing them.