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
AirunJae - Wednesday, February 10, 2016 - link
Notice he said nothing about the iPad being better than the Surface, just that "...stop being a Fanboy" and "Surface Pro 4 wins" is ironic because you're following you plea for the reviewers (I assume) to stop being fanboys with some fanboyism of your own.MaxIT - Saturday, February 13, 2016 - link
Not running Windows make it better by definition....Delton Esteves - Wednesday, February 17, 2016 - link
Are you out of your mind? Not running full OS makes it worstdarwiniandude - Monday, February 29, 2016 - link
"Full OS"Drivers. Malware. Compatibility issues (install old piece of software, have it break new software). No low latency audio, audio not a priority. Any decent software is designed for mouse and keyboard, not tablet interface. For my purposes Surface is a waste of space. In fact we recently bought used a Surface 2 256GB for $100. Owner thought it was faulty. Wifi didn't work. Touch screen didn't work. Trackpad didn't work. Everything looked fine with the software config except there was malware. Wiped and reset up, works fine. But I can't use it for anything because the software I want to run isn't on Windows. The tablet ecosystem is elsewhere. Windows store is a joke. So it sits gathering dust.
Alecgold - Friday, February 12, 2016 - link
You've written a lot of BS.There is lighting to USB, so what is your point?
Lighting to hdmi adapter is available as well..
Lighting to memory card (with usb-3 speeds) is available
Kickstand is build in in the keyboard or smartcover.
Not everybody needs a pen, so why include it?
I don't need USB, HDMI, SD-cards or kick stands.
So why include it if you don't need it?
Keyboard is expensive indeed, but it's really good...
Who needs backlit, at night you need to sleep
I'm really annoyed by the trackpad on the surface, doesn't work when I want to, does work when I don't want to
Function keys are on the screen if needed or can be swiped up, not as convenient, but I prefer the small depth of the keyboard.
Why would I need to rest my hand? It rests on the table I'm writing on.
Setup was really fast an easy, what is complicated?
The iPad is a tablet so therefore it runs a mobile os, it has great battery life, I can do everything I need to. I just can't OCR PDF's, that is the only thing I still miss.
I'm a professional a consultant, I can do everything I need to, so there it is, it's used by a professional and therefore an iPad Pro. Just as good reasoning as yours, I guess.
Is the iPad Pro for anybody? Absolutely not. It's expensive, others need more processing power or bigger/better/more complete software. But if you can get by with it, I t's really a good device and a really good experience!
Delton Esteves - Wednesday, February 17, 2016 - link
Lighting to USB, lighting to hdmi adapter and lighting to memory card will cost you extra.The Kickstand which was built in the keyboard is very difficult to set up and has limited positions.
"Not everybody needs a pen". This is not a reason to charge for extra money.
Despite you do not need usb, hdmi, it does not mean they cannot include it. Because a device is made having in mind the general needs and not a single person needs.
You call yourself a Professional and yet you say "Who needs backlit". It seems like everybody has a definition of a Pro device this days.
So you always write on a table?
Writting and tapping on the screen is tiresome, function keys make you more productive.
Constructor - Saturday, February 20, 2016 - link
It is an illusion to believe that "included" items were in any way "free". In fact, for most people they would only pay more for stuff that they'd never use.On the bottom line everybody would have to pay more and there would be more electronic waste. Only the few people who actually used those add-ons might(!) get away slightly cheaper. That's it.
Delton Esteves - Tuesday, February 23, 2016 - link
But at least, they are not charging extra. If you consider Ipad Pro price you will notice that it is already expensive for what it is and what the majority of its Users will use it for. They are charging a lot for zero extra functionality.Constructor - Tuesday, February 23, 2016 - link
I have paid a little more for my iPad Pro than for my iPad 3 four years ago, and the iPad Pro is again a much better tablet than the iPad 3 had been (and it was already a very good one!).And I have paid extra for the Pencil which I actually wanted to use. Other users left the Penicl out and didn't have to pay for it. It's that simple and the way it should be.
So what exactly is the problem supposed to be with me paying for what I want to use, and others not paying for what they don't want to use? That's a really weird mindset from my point of view.
Delton Esteves - Wednesday, March 9, 2016 - link
They should lower Ipad pro price because Apple Pen does not come with it