[kennyliu]

Im not super into computers at the moment because i havent had time to keep up with the rapid changes. But, would it be better to have an increase in processor with the same graphic resolution or to have a super high resolution pulling from 1gb of ram and a 1ghz processor?

I know that may be a bit loaded as the 'processor' type matters, but what im trying to say is that I think because the PB is having the same graphics being displayed, which it does VERY WELL, right now... would it not mean that the only option would be that this new model will be faster (even in the slightest bit)? Where as with the new ipad the doubling in RAM has A LOT of work to go with it now that the amount of data being displayed will be increased A LOT.

Im not trying to make a debate on which device is better, i just want to know the difference in effects that the 'upgrades' in the two devices will have. For example if both went to 1.5ghz but the ipad ONLY changed the screen and not the RAM what would happen? That sort of stuff.

I am not sure how it works on SoCs, but on PCs, if your dedicated GPU is capable of handling a high resolution rendering, your RAM doesn't get taxed much, if at all. At least for the task in question.

[FSeverino]

Yea, i thought that was how it worked. So i guess that was the reason for the 4x gpu.
And maybe why the PB isnt getting a gpu update (no 'need' for it)

It will be interesting to see the 'buzz' difference with the two releases.

[kennyliu]

Yea, i thought that was how it worked. So i guess that was the reason for the 4x gpu.
And maybe why the PB isnt getting a gpu update (no 'need' for it)

It will be interesting to see the 'buzz' difference with the two releases.

According to Wikipedia, the GPU in 4460 is the same but actually has a little higher clock - 384 Mhz vs 304 Mhz. So, it is a slight increase in GPU performance.

[Vindicators]

Yea, i thought that was how it worked. So i guess that was the reason for the 4x gpu.
And maybe why the PB isnt getting a gpu update (no 'need' for it)

It will be interesting to see the 'buzz' difference with the two releases.

It is 2x GPU from iPad 2 to iPad 3.
4x GPU performance is what difference between iPad 2 and Playbook.

Hmm, it will be interesting to see how the CPU clockrate pump affect to the performance of browser.
Given that from iOS 4 and Playbook OS 1 to iOS 5 and Playbook 2.0, browsermark and javascript score of the Playbook always much lower than the iPad 2 (about 1/2)

[NFLPLAYBOOK]

Im not super into computers at the moment because i havent had time to keep up with the rapid changes. But, would it be better to have an increase in processor with the same graphic resolution or to have a super high resolution pulling from 1gb of ram and a 1ghz processor?

I know that may be a bit loaded as the 'processor' type matters, but what im trying to say is that I think because the PB is having the same graphics being displayed, which it does VERY WELL, right now... would it not mean that the only option would be that this new model will be faster (even in the slightest bit)? Where as with the new ipad the doubling in RAM has A LOT of work to go with it now that the amount of data being displayed will be increased A LOT.

Im not trying to make a debate on which device is better, i just want to know the difference in effects that the 'upgrades' in the two devices will have. For example if both went to 1.5ghz but the ipad ONLY changed the screen and not the RAM what would happen? That sort of stuff.

The new boards for mobile devices have dedicated GPUs now. This means they have their own ram. A good GPU will take care of graphic needs of the device. If it's not up to the task the device will bog down while it tries to accomplish the task it's suppose to do. It will also steal part of the system ram to accomplish its task and slow down other system operations. The reason Apple went with a quad core GPU is to increase its graphics without disturbing the rest of the system. So in this case they end up with higher graphics at a faster speed without effecting the system ram. The processor has to be up to the task speed wise to drive the GPU. This is the reason for the higher ghz rating. Having a higher ghz CPU means nothing if the other components aren't able to keep pace with the information that is being sent to them.

[conix67]

Im not super into computers at the moment because i havent had time to keep up with the rapid changes. But, would it be better to have an increase in processor with the same graphic resolution or to have a super high resolution pulling from 1gb of ram and a 1ghz processor?

I know that may be a bit loaded as the 'processor' type matters, but what im trying to say is that I think because the PB is having the same graphics being displayed, which it does VERY WELL, right now... would it not mean that the only option would be that this new model will be faster (even in the slightest bit)? Where as with the new ipad the doubling in RAM has A LOT of work to go with it now that the amount of data being displayed will be increased A LOT.

Im not trying to make a debate on which device is better, i just want to know the difference in effects that the 'upgrades' in the two devices will have. For example if both went to 1.5ghz but the ipad ONLY changed the screen and not the RAM what would happen? That sort of stuff.

Actually, to support new resolution of iPad HD, you need 12MBytes of RAM, which is puny compared to the size of RAM available in the system, but it is still 4 times as much as before.

As far as graphics is concerned, the speed increase in CPU will not have direct performance impact on graphics. GPU is there for a good reason.

A lot of graphics processors, judging from games I've seen, are well behind desktop counter parts today. There's a lot of room for improvement, for higher quality and better effects, in GPUs on mobile devices. We can look forward to those in the future, and could be the big part of enhancements we may see, more so than improvements coming from CPUs.

[JamesDax3]

Actually, to support new resolution of iPad HD, you need 12MBytes of RAM, which is puny compared to the size of RAM available in the system, but it is still 4 times as much as before.

As far as graphics is concerned, the speed increase in CPU will not have direct performance impact on graphics. GPU is there for a good reason.

A lot of graphics processors, judging from games I've seen, are well behind desktop counter parts today. There's a lot of room for improvement, for higher quality and better effects, in GPUs on mobile devices. We can look forward to those in the future, and could be the big part of enhancements we may see, more so than improvements coming from CPUs.

[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rp-TTtpU0I[/YT]

Here's what the new quad core gpu can do on the new iPad as far as games go.

[xsacha]

Actually, to support new resolution of iPad HD, you need 12MBytes of RAM, which is puny compared to the size of RAM available in the system, but it is still 4 times as much as before.

Try factoring in the textures that these high resolution games will have. The RAM use is astronomical.

The new boards for mobile devices have dedicated GPUs now. This means they have their own ram.

They always had. Having VRAM was always optional. Phones/tablets tend not to do this (see: iPad 3). Whereas, PS Vita with the same GPU, does have 128MB dedicated VRAM.

[Darlaten]

Here's what the new quad core gpu can do on the new iPad as far as games go.

Would that be impossible to implement on the current Playbook or the upcoming "new" Playbook?

[conix67]

Try factoring in the textures that these high resolution games will have. The RAM use is astronomical.

Well, yes and no. High resolution fundamentally comes from the number of pixels you can use to express visuals. Textures are part of the sources that the visual elements are created from, but not all. Most essential components are the 3D models, which are expressed by vertices. The vertex data, regardless of target resolution, stays the same.

So, if the game maker chooses to use higher resolution textures, it would definitely consume a little more memory (hardly astronomical), but even without higher resolution textures the games will look much nicer, as various filtering methods can enhance textures at higher resolution especially when the display size remains the same.

[xsacha]

Well, yes and no. High resolution fundamentally ...

Thanks for the recap of what I already know.

So, if the game maker chooses to use higher resolution textures, it would definitely consume a little more memory (hardly astronomical), but even without higher resolution textures the games will look much nicer, as various filtering methods can enhance textures at higher resolution especially when the display size remains the same.

If the textures are not high resolution, a high resolution output will not enhance the quality of the textures. A filtering method would *already* have been applied at the lower resolution of 1024x768 to get it looking good there. Remembering that the textures will have to be 4x the size to get the same quality of refinement for 2048x1536. No doubt developers will skimp on this.

RAM usage can be astronomical for 2048x1536 output if you have the high-res textures to match. That is, you can easily get to 256MB of RAM usage just for the video component in a game such as that shown above. The only reason it isn't more is because it uses tile-based rendering.

You can tell quite easily if something has low-res textures: http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/6...1031004341.png. I think the developers are going to go with the premise that the users can't see all the pixels anyway, though. Probably going to see low-res textures on 1536p gaming but with people who don't have a clue.

[conix67]

Thanks for the recap of what I already know.


If the textures are not high resolution, a high resolution output will not enhance the quality of the textures.

RAM usage can be astronomical for 2048x1536 output if you have the high-res textures to match.

Textures are used in places where polygon models are too complex. With more detailed polygon models, you don't even need the textures as they are simply approximation of real models. At most, you're expected to see x4 increase in text data size just to match x4 resolution, which is hardly astronomical.

And this is about texture heavy games. The real everyday benefits of the high resolution display is not about games, but more about text quality that will lesson eye strain caused by aliasing. Certainly I've been appreciating iPhone4's retina display based on this, not based on texture heavy games.

[conix67]

Here's what the new quad core gpu can do on the new iPad as far as games go.

It looks pretty good, but it doesn't seem to use high resolution texture or polygon models. Is this supposed to showcase new capability of iPad HD? I guess I haven't tried enough 3D games on tablets to be able to compare the quality difference.

[xsacha]

So you agree you'll only use the high-res for reading text?

Infinity Blade will likely look the same on iPad 2 and iPad 3.

Graphics should be better than on Playbook. Though, as the screen is 4x smaller, you're less likely to notice this.

[conix67]

So you agree you'll only use the high-res for reading text?

Infinity Blade will likely look the same on iPad 2 and iPad 3.

If you ask me what I would use a better display for, yes the primary reason would be the better text - books, web pages, emails, magazines. Also for magazines the higher resolution combined with 10" screen would be almost enough for full screen reading.

High resolution photos would be another good use for it.

Anyway, I will probably wait and see how good it really is in person. I'm more interested in the new mini keyboard and turning this little device into a tiny laptop.

[conix67]

PB screen being x4 smaller is over exaggeration. 7" 16:9 screen is about half the size of 9.6" 4:3 screen.

[JamesDax3]

So you agree you'll only use the high-res for reading text?

Infinity Blade will likely look the same on iPad 2 and iPad 3.

Graphics should be better than on Playbook. Though, as the screen is 4x smaller, you're less likely to notice this.

The first infinity blade could likely run fine on the Playbook. Not sure about this new one though. I don't think it will be running on the iPad2 either.

[q649]

I like how everyone is an arm chair technological benchmarking genius on these boards.

Like I said before - I could stick 2 tablets in front of you one with a 1 ghz and one with a 1.5 ghz processor and you would not be able to perceive the difference. To say that you can is ridiculous.

I guess we'll find out soon enough if anyone can tell the difference.

[howarmat]

watching some vids the 1.5 ghz makes a little difference when side by side. but if i gave you one to test for a few minutes and then give you the slower one i am guessing it would be tough

[narci]

I would wait for 2 things before upgrading....

1) Wait until BB10 is release for the PB.
2) Wait for a the next generation unit. Personally, I skip a generation and then decide if it's feasible to upgrade especially the PB since the wifi and 4G isn't much of an upgrade.

[kwm1337]

watching some vids the 1.5 ghz makes a little difference when side by side. but if i gave you one to test for a few minutes and then give you the slower one i am guessing it would be tough

I have read through some of this conversation because I am going to buy one of the PB4G's and I can tell you it certainly is not for any reason in the difference of specs.

Throughout this thread I have read howarmat is basically dead spot on though in theory and what I have experience in practice with devices like these, and really most all information processing platforms for that matter.

Although, I will note I must beg to differ on one occasion where I believe a 150% increase in processing power made a difference. When I purchased one of my Win95 machines [X-mas 1995 for the family] that Intel Pentium Pro blew me and the family away compared to the IntelDX4 inside the PC I had previously bought just a year earlier!!