im still shocked at the power of the 2018 iPad pros cpu. My fav desktop I ever built had a amd Fx 8120. It was so crazy fast for its time. But it had a super crazy loud cooler.and this iPad cpu is way faster.so do we really need faster?
I think we need a better GPU.im still shocked at the power of the 2018 iPad pros cpu. My fav desktop I ever built had a amd Fx 8120. It was so crazy fast for its time. But it had a super crazy loud cooler.and this iPad cpu is way faster.so do we really need faster?
So was the 286 when released, the came the 486, app became more heavy and could do more, then the Pentium came and boy we never tought we needed more.... then Pentium II showed more demanding app required the power, but sure again Pentium 4 came along, and we could do thing we ever dreamed the 286 could ever achieve.i can see going more eficent but this ipad is so crazy fast
mine was at 5ghzSorry but calling the FX 8120 crazy fast makes the premise flawed. It had about half the per-thread performance of its competition and couldn’t beat its own predecessor. Clearly you haven’t seen crazy fast![]()
This comment, on top of your opening comment, is said in a different way but carried the same mindset: Who needs more than four computers in this world?.i can see going more eficent but this ipad is so crazy fast
But in the end there is always a need for better chips, so bring on the A13X/A14X![]()
I always thought the GPU was sufficient.I think we need a better GPU.
How can you check how many cores are used by apps?... Not just desktop caliber apps but software that is properly threaded to take advantage of the 3-4 performance cores.
If the CPU improves I hope it is single-core performance. My iPad never hits all the cores—rarely uses more than two. Improving the multi-core speeds, unless such a benchmark comes from improved RAM and/or threading, is marketing at the expense of experience.
Have you worked with files with many objects in Affinity Designer? If you had (just try the sample lion file that comes with the program for example) you would realize there is still plenty of room for faster processing.I think the nuanced response is that we don't really need faster mobile CPUs for our needs today, but we need development of CPUs to continue on its inconsistent trajectory of progress so that we will have the CPUs that we will need for tomorrow. We might end up stagnating for a number of years like we've seen with desktop CPUs where every new release was a modest bump after years of torrid improvement that made 2 year old computers feel old. Eventually, those years of bump ups got us to the point of seeing notable gains again in recent years.
Have you worked with files with many objects in Affinity Designer?
I use an app called "Status" which works a lot like activity manager on a Mac.How can you check how many cores are used by apps?
But how much of that is caused by other bottlenecks like RAM (shuffling memory pages on and off the SSD) or poor threading (not fully utilizing the speed of the current processors)? Not saying that is 100% to blame but with a closed system there should be more room to optimize—and if poor threading is already a problem, better multi-core performance won't do a thing.Have you worked with files with many objects in Affinity Designer? If you had (just try the sample lion file that comes with the program for example) you would realize there is still plenty of room for faster processing.
Until applying video effects are instantaneous, CPUs are too slow. There are still tons of processes that take real time to complete (minutes, not seconds).