[deanrw1]

For the next upgrade, I don't care if the processor gets upgraded. What I would love to see is more ram, also something like a 128 gig ssd and a usb 3 bus to make transferring faster.

All tablets made are held back by slow file transfer speeds. We need that changed. Also for me. A slightly larger screen would not hurt. They could make it an 8 inch screen without affecting the external size of the unit much

[morrislee]

Oops, my bad, please replace all my previous instances of Cortex-A8 to Cortex-A9... Not sure why i kept on saying A8... Probably the headache i have now.

[TheScionicMan]

I'll have to stop playing Asphalt 6 multiplayer when the new PBs come out. Their cars will be much faster...

[JeffyPooh]

...how many people are going to be willing to sell their current 16gb PBs for around 175-225 ...

The real question is how many people would be willing to pay "175-225" for a used 16GB PB that currently sells for $200 brand new?

..

1.5GHz would allow 50% more juvenile fanboi arguments per unit time.

[adrenaline_x]

That is why in the computer world the processors don't really get any faster anymore, but they stick WAY more RAM in there now. My HP Pavilion from 2006 had a 2.6GHZ AMD dual core processor and I stuck 4GB of RAM in it back then. It's 2012 and it still runs everything you throw at it with ease. 4GB of RAM seems to ne the new minimum standard nowadays, but the processors haven't gotten that much faster, except more cores. I can run 1080p videos on it and any other program you can think of, even with XP still on it.

Heh.

It may not seem any slower, but your amd dual core is a turtle compared to the new CPUs.

I have a quad core i7-2720QM with 4 cores running at 2.2 GHZ and Hyper threading which leads to 8 Processors being shown in task manager. I also have 8 GB ram and a 220 GB ssd drive.

This thing smokes my old core 2 duo laptop with with the same amount of ram and 120 GB ssd drive. The increase in speed from sata II to sata III is large enough

I deal with this all the time as i manage all the computer infrastructure.. If you are running word, outlook and a web browser on your pc you wouldn't notice the increase, but if you are doing anything that uses the processor its easily noticeable.

Is 500 Mhz worth the upgrade to a new playbook? Maybe.. its 50% increase in CPU speed which is major. But until there are more apps that can take advantage of increase in speed its probably worth waiting a generation.

[missing_K-W]

Oops, my bad, please replace all my previous instances of Cortex-A8 to Cortex-A9... Not sure why i kept on saying A8... Probably the headache i have now.

Don't worry.....be happy it happens

[missing_K-W]

1.5GHz as opposed to the 1ghz 4430 will have a noticeable performance upgrade. Primarily on such things as checkerboarding etc.

Put it this way. If we reduced performance from 1.5ghz to 1ghz you would notice a difference. Faster is faster. This will be noticed in many instances

[morrislee]

Food for thought: Playbook just shy speedtest.net vs my laptop and my Atrix (look at the attachments)

Same host, network etc. Right next to the wireless router too.

[kennyliu]

Let me refresh memory of our debaters:

50% higher clock speed + 3G (who the f. needs 4G) + NFC + smaller battery = noticeable improvement

New architecture SoC with quad-core graphics and 4x performance of its closest rival + 4x resolution (which is an unprecedented resolution on tablets) + LTE + BT4 + 2x RAM (expected) + almost 2x battery capacity + greatly improved camera with decent characteristics = insignificant and not worth upgrading

Am I the only one who's noticed inconsistency in certain people's arguments?

[lebob23]

Let me refresh memory of our debaters:

50% higher clock speed + 3G (who the f. needs 4G) + NFC + smaller battery = noticeable improvement

New architecture SoC with quad-core graphics and 4x performance of its closest rival + 4x resolution (which is an unprecedented resolution on tablets) + LTE + BT4 + 2x RAM (expected) + almost 2x battery capacity + new software = insignificant and not worth upgrading

Am I the only one who's noticed inconsistency in certain people's arguments?

You are absolutely right, that is why I hate most people on this forum. It almost seems like they are paid by BB to praise the mediocre products they produce

[kennyliu]

^^^^ I wouldn't say PB is mediocre. It's quite a great tablet, but with poor implementation.

But I also find certain people here amusing. The interesting way of their thinking is just... well, interesting

And the irony is that they make fun of others for behaving the same way.

[wiggy1]

Ok, the whole 1.5 GHz on the 3g+ playbook is bothering me, I am a RIM fanboy and a hard core Blackberry addict, and I don't want to feel that my current playbook is going to be inferior to the newer one. So my question is would the 1.5 GHz processor operate the playbook faster than it already is, like would it make a difference if the RAM is still the same or is it just a for marketing purposes upgrade to numerically compete with the new ipad. Its just that my current pb runs really fast already and it is kind of hard to imagine one that actually runs faster.

Any thoughts?

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

The question you have to ask yourself, "did you get the PB to help you with your daily life, or did you get it to be the envy of your friends?" I can't answer that for you. When you know the true answer to that question, you will know if you should upgrade...

[TheScionicMan]

Although you will go from having the fastest PlayBook on the market to the slowest, virtually overnight, it won't change the actual speed of your PlayBook, which you are happy with... Wait, What's the problem again?

[rogeryen]

Let me refresh memory of our debaters:

New architecture SoC with quad-core graphics and 4x performance of its closest rival + 4x resolution (which is an unprecedented resolution on tablets) + LTE + BT4 + 2x RAM (expected) + almost 2x battery capacity = insignificant and not worth upgrading

Am I the only one who's noticed inconsistency in certain people's arguments?

this is what i think about your argument
who the f. needs 4x the resolution? I don't.
who the f. needs 2x RAM when 1x works well enough?
you already said who the f. needs 4G so who the f. needs LTE? I don't.

[kennyliu]

this is what i think about your argument
who the f. needs 4x the resolution? I don't.
who the f. needs 2x RAM when 1x works well enough?
you already said who the f. needs 4G so who the f. needs LTE? I don't.

If you read my argument more closely, it's not about who needs what, but about inconsistent/biased argumentation and reasoning of certain people.

But, well, thanks for being consistently inconsistent

[swyost]

I find it fascinating that people will have a debate about a real device and a (still) vapor ware device RIM has not announced for which no one has produced a single patent application or trademark registration and no carrier has acknowledged they will carry. Now continue on debating apples and virtual oranges....

[Rello]

If you read my argument more closely, it's not about who needs what, but about inconsistent/biased argumentation and reasoning of certain people.

But, well, thanks for being consistently inconsistent

Lol he totally missed your argument ha

It's not worth the upgrade to me. There are phones that have had them specs for months and the performance will not be that noticeable in my eyes.

I will upgrade to get he next gen PlayBook when it uses

1) a better/more efficient dual core chip. I'll take quad core if it does kill battery life
2) More RAM!!!...this would do the PlayBook much better than adding 500Mhz
3)bluetooth 4.0.....his would make bridging unbelievable
4) better camera (non edof)
5) better screen

I love my playbook but the specs of this next one don't justify an upgrade to me. My PlayBook at 1ghz dual core will do me just fine until a true next gen version comes out

[xsacha]

Let me refresh memory of our debaters:

50% higher clock speed + 3G (who the f. needs 4G) + NFC + smaller battery = noticeable improvement

I'm assuming this is Playbook 2?

New architecture SoC with quad-core graphics and 4x performance of its closest rival + 4x resolution (which is an unprecedented resolution on tablets) + LTE + BT4 + 2x RAM (expected) + almost 2x battery capacity + greatly improved camera with decent characteristics = insignificant and not worth upgrading

1. iPad 3 is NOT using a new architecture SoC. It's using the exact same CPU, Cortex-A9 clocked at 1GHz. Worse than Playbook and other tablets.
2. The quad-core graphics is an upgrade from their previous dual-core graphics. The upgrade is simply to compensate for the increased resolution which requires 4x fill rate. On all accounts, the graphics update may not be enough to compensate. Was already better in this area, maintenance bump.
3. The original iPad 2 only had 131 PPI which is less than my laptop! You could resolve the pixels from 70cm away!
The Playbook has 169 PPI. You can resolve the individual pixels from 50cm away.
The iPad 3 is simply catching up with other manufacturers who have 169-200 PPI. However, to keep app compatibility, they have quadrupled pixels to a level that our eyes can't even resolve without being ~25cm from the screen. That is, overkill. Other tablets have maximum resolve at 20/20 vision from 30-50cm. Why would you be any closer to the screen? Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.
4. LTE/BT4. Other tablets also have these features or have scheduled releases with these features in the next 3 months. Are you sure Playbook 2 won't also have? Catch up to tablets.
5. 2x RAM. Same 1GB as everyone else now. Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.
6. Almost 2x battery capacity. Yet battery life is unchanged. Otherwise battery life would be 5 hours! Maintenance bump.
7. 10% heavier and 10% thicker to compensate for the new battery. Downgrade.
8. Decent camera. Their last camera was less than 1MP. They now have a decent camera like everyone else. Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.

As you can see, Playbook and other tablets already had these 'NEW' features that iPad 3 got. The only area the iPad 3 excels is its GPU -- which was already good in iPad 2 and maintains performance for this release.

Am I the only one who's noticed inconsistency in certain people's arguments?

Seems you just fell for their marketing hype and it's not as you expected.

It's nice that Apple is closing the gap on hardware specs but the amount of changes just shows that there was a large gap to start with.

[lebob23]

I'm assuming this is Playbook 2?


1. iPad 3 is NOT using a new architecture SoC. It's using the exact same CPU, Cortex-A9 clocked at 1GHz. Worse than Playbook and other tablets.
2. The quad-core graphics is an upgrade from their previous dual-core graphics. The upgrade is simply to compensate for the increased resolution which requires 4x fill rate. On all accounts, the graphics update may not be enough to compensate. Was already better in this area, maintenance bump.
3. The original iPad 2 only had 131 PPI which is less than my laptop! You could resolve the pixels from 70cm away!
The Playbook has 169 PPI. You can resolve the individual pixels from 50cm away.
The iPad 3 is simply catching up with other manufacturers who have 169-200 PPI. However, to keep app compatibility, they have quadrupled pixels to a level that our eyes can't even resolve without being ~25cm from the screen. That is, overkill. Other tablets have maximum resolve at 20/20 vision from 30-50cm. Why would you be any closer to the screen? Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.
4. LTE/BT4. Other tablets also have these features or have scheduled releases with these features in the next 3 months. Are you sure Playbook 2 won't also have? Catch up to tablets.
5. 2x RAM. Same 1GB as everyone else now. Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.
6. Almost 2x battery capacity. Yet battery life is unchanged. Otherwise battery life would be 5 hours! Maintenance bump.
7. 56 grams heavier and a few millimetres thicker to compensate for the new battery. Downgrade.
8. Decent camera. Their last camera was less than 1MP. They now have a decent camera like everyone else. Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.

As you can see, Playbook and other tablets already had these 'NEW' features that iPad 3 got. The only area the iPad 3 excels is its GPU -- which was already good in iPad 2 and maintains performance for this release.


Seems you just fell for their marketing hype and it's not as you expected.

It's nice that Apple is closing the gap on hardware specs but the amount of changes just shows that there was a large gap to start with.

Ok, but did you consider that the new ipad will play games at 1024 768 and just make the effects better?

I don't like any of the tablets I am waiting for 3.0GHZ octo core and a gpu with 128 shaders and according to moores law we will have this in 3-4 years. battery life at 10hrs is good enough for me

[xsacha]

Ok, but did you consider that the new ipad will play games at 1024 768 and just make the effects better?

I don't like any of the tablets I am waiting for 3.0GHZ octo core and a gpu with 128 shaders and according to moores law we will have this in 3-4 years. battery life at 10hrs is good enough for me

I did consider this. However if you're playing the games at 1024x768, you're no better off than you were before and still worse off than any other tablet on the market. All to get some better effects on a GPU that is already market leading and that no games can yet take full advantage of? No one has even taken advantage of the GPU on Tegra 3.

The sweet spot is not 1024x768 or 2048x1536 but somewhere in between where people's eyesight hits a limit for viewing graphics at normal playing distances of 40-50cm: 1366x1024. I understand (from research and formulas) that for text reading, contrast is better, image is static and people will be able to see further and in such cases: 1600x1200.
Unfortunately Apple won't do this at the scaling isn't nice like 1:2.

Other manufacturers have no such reservations which is why you're going to see a tonne of 1920x1200 tablets this year (announced earlier and some have already released). I still believe 1920x1200 is also overkill but it is at least possible to discern the difference from 40cm.
You will notice a difference (compared to 1280x800 tablets) if you stick them side-by-side -- but is it actually worth having it?

[kennyliu]

@xsacha. You also failed to understand my point. I was talking upgrade-wise. The new iPad must be a significant upgrade if you think the rumored PB 3G is a significant upgrade. Otherwise, you are being inconsistent. Am I right?

As for your other points:

1. iPad 3 is NOT using a new architecture SoC. It's using the exact same CPU, Cortex-A9 clocked at 1GHz. Worse than Playbook and other tablets.

It's expected to be 32nm vs 45 it was before. It has a different GPU on the SoC. As for "Worse than Playbook and other tablets.", well, I think you are the only person who thinks so.

2. The quad-core graphics is an upgrade from their previous dual-core graphics. The upgrade is simply to compensate for the increased resolution which requires 4x fill rate. On all accounts, the graphics update may not be enough to compensate. Was already better in this area, maintenance bump.

Next time I upgrade my video card, I'll think it's just maintenance bump. And in general, using your reasoning EVERYTHING can be a maintenance bump.

3. The original iPad 2 only had 131 PPI which is less than my laptop! You could resolve the pixels from 70cm away!
The Playbook has 169 PPI. You can resolve the individual pixels from 50cm away.
The iPad 3 is simply catching up with other manufacturers who have 169-200 PPI. However, to keep app compatibility, they have quadrupled pixels to a level that our eyes can't even resolve without being ~25cm from the screen. That is, overkill. Other tablets have maximum resolve at 20/20 vision from 30-50cm. Why would you be any closer to the screen? Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.

Where did "other tablets" come from? Are we not talking about iPads and Playbook.

Anyway, yes, Apple is catching up, but doing it in an elegant way, don't you think?

4. LTE/BT4. Other tablets also have these features or have scheduled releases with these features in the next 3 months. Are you sure Playbook 2 won't also have? Catch up to tablets.

Again, "other tablets". I was saying that people who claim 3G is a significant upgrade seem to say LTE is meeh

5. 2x RAM. Same 1GB as everyone else now. Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.

To me, it's 2x increase. It was 512Mb before, now it's twice that. It ran great on 512Mb, btw, which the Playbook wouldn't be able to do.

6. Almost 2x battery capacity. Yet battery life is unchanged. Otherwise battery life would be 5 hours! Maintenance bump.

Of course, "maintenance bump". But reducing battery capacity is a maintenance... what?

7. 56 grams heavier and a few millimetres thicker to compensate for the new battery. Downgrade.

Agree, but there is a price you have to pay for increased resolution, etc. As for whether 56 grams is a huge price, that's up to the consumer to decide.

8. Decent camera. Their last camera was less than 1MP. They now have a decent camera like everyone else. Catch up to Playbook and other tablets.

Again, it's a significant upgrade over the camera on iPad 2. And it's not just a catch up with the Playbook. The camera is much better in every department other than megapixels.

Seems you just fell for their marketing hype and it's not as you expected.[/B]

No, I didn't fall for their marketing hype and I had no expectations. Never owned anything Apple except for an iPod a few years ago.

[morrislee]

Rule number 1, don't argue with Apple fans :P.

On the happier note, lets do something little more productive! I put together a post with some devices I have to compare webkit benchmark scores. The more results we have, the better. I will graph it eventually, then we can predict performances for future chipsets!

So help me out, run the sunspider benchmark in your browser, and copy the link, post it here

Thanks!

[Apelles123]

It's frustrating if there is an improved PlayBook and no corresponding improvement in App World, it may be" all dressed up and no where to go".

It would be great however to see a 10 inch model. The PlayBook is the best made tablet I've seen or used. I also think more RAM is more important than processing power,as others have said.

[xsacha]

@xsacha. You also failed to understand my point. I was talking upgrade-wise. The new iPad must be a significant upgrade if you think the rumored PB 3G is a significant upgrade. Otherwise, you are being inconsistent. Am I right?

Upgrade-wise it had a lot to catch up on in the first place which is why you see so many changes. Not specifically to the Playbook though. The Playbook isn't that great in terms of an update either -- all catch ups. It offers some things iPad doesn't and vice-versa though.

It's expected to be 32nm vs 45 it was before.

I can tell you right now that this is not correct. You have some misinformation here. If it was on a lower node, they wouldn't need the battery update by the way When iPad 4 is released, we'll probably see battery capacity drop back to iPad 2 as the node size is reduced.

It has a different GPU on the SoC. As for "Worse than Playbook and other tablets.", well, I think you are the only person who thinks so.

The GPU is the same one they used on the iPad 2. It's the PowerVR SGX543MP from ImgTec. They changed the core config from 2 to 4.

In terms of 'Worse than Playbook and other tablets', I was referring to the CPU on the SoC. This is indeed worse than the Playbook and other tablets. It's not an opinion. In fact, according to GeekBench, the Tegra 3 is 2.6x faster than the A5X. The TI chip on the Playbook is marginally faster than the A5(X).

Next time I upgrade my video card, I'll think it's just maintenance bump. And in general, using your reasoning EVERYTHING can be a maintenance bump.

I explained what I meant by a maintenance bump. If you quadruple the resolution of your monitor, then a double in core spec for your GPU will indeed be a maintenance update. You will have no performance increase by this.

To me, it's 2x increase. It was 512Mb before, now it's twice that. It ran great on 512Mb, btw, which the Playbook wouldn't be able to do.

Obviously you haven't owned an iPad 2. By OH has and it has many issues with running out of memory. My Playbook likely would too if it had that little RAM. Without Android running and excluding cache, iPad 2 and Playbook use the same amount of RAM on idle. This is in every way a catch up.

Of course, "maintenance bump". But reducing battery capacity is a maintenance... what?

If you lower battery life, I'd consider it a downgrade. Maintaining battery life would be considered maintenance.

Again, it's a significant upgrade over the camera on iPad 2. And it's not just a catch up with the Playbook. The camera is much better in every department other than megapixels.

Debatable. While it may be better than the Playbook's year old camera, it performs worse compared to other tablet cameras on the market -- which should be your real focus of comparison until official specs of Playbook 2 can be announced. It is indeed a catch up in this area.
This is actually a very weak area of comparison as most people probably won't use their rear camera at all. It's no wonder they didn't make it as good as the iPhone 4S camera.

No, I didn't fall for their marketing hype and I had no expectations. Never owned anything Apple except for an iPod a few years ago.

Which is probably why you didn't notice their resolution, RAM and camera lacking in the previous iteration. Lacking compared to even Playbook 1.
I currently own 4 tablets and 10 phones (but no Blackberry).

[smartie88]

hardware upgrade only is meaningless, in terms of hardware,they are tier one already. but overall experience,probably they are tier two. so I would rather they improve overall experience rather than just focus on speed