The same point can be made in favor of an A17 Max - A17 Pro already has a much more performant neural engine. It wouldn't be impossible to add a pair of GPU cores.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will the New iPad Pro Really Have the M4 Chip?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The same point can be made in favor of an A17 Max - A17 Pro already has a much more performant neural engine. It wouldn't be impossible to add a pair of GPU cores.
And an additional CPU core to make it faster than M2 in multicore performance. So it would be an M3 with the improved NPU from A17 minus one CPU core to keep yield up and price down 😁
If Apple requires 16GB RAM in order to hot-swap between OSes then the added margins from upgraded iPads could cover any losses from Mac sales.
I don’t see Apple releasing a product with such big feature divergence only depending on whether you buy the 1TB or 2TB version.
Yeah, I know Apple restricted the recording of some type of video format to iPhone Pro with at least 256GB of storage, but that’s anecdotal. Apple wouldn’t launch such different products depending on storage alone. Or even RAM if Apple lets you upgrade only the RAM on the next iPad Pro.
I wonder what the gains would be if they gave the CPU clusters a clock bump instead? iPads have more space for batteries and heat dissipation, so they don't need to be as conservative with voltage.
Who actually needs iPads, people without computers? What function will the M4 facilitate that makes it a must have in an iPad? I can see if they want to run Mac OS as an app on it on top of iOS. That would be cool. But if not for that, what is the compelling reason to spend over $1,000 on an iPad these days?
The M3 doesn't share much with the A16 yet still shares a similar string. So it's not that Apple thinks it's important to have some strict logical rule here.
Why then spend resources re-making essentially the M3 with a different NPU only? I mean they supposedly want to market AI, but why waste engineering resources into what would really come off as a stop-gap chip? It would be underwhelming as an M4 I think, if it benchmarks about the same outside some AI function, and confusing to customers if the IPP drops having the "M-series" for an A17 with a suffix.
The only way I would see it then is would be as some sort of new iPad only variant of "M3 Pro"? oh f*dge now I'm saying it.
I predict the new Ipad Pro will have an Intel i9. Final answer. Bring on Rosetta 3!
For a lot of people, like myself and my Mother, an iPad can fully replace a laptop. They are more convenient to bring with you than a full-size Macbook, and do 99.9% of what I need it to do.
Yes, the MacBook is a better laptop for people that, you know, need a traditional laptop. That's why Apple still makes them. For very many people, an iPad is functionally identical.
The 64GB iPads don't get swap memory, you need at least 128GB for that. If apple has a 16GB restriction for dual OS, they may allow you to upgrade the RAM separately from the SSD, just like on the Macs. Of course you would need to upgrade to 512GB minimum.
From financial news today
- iPad revenue: $5.6 billion vs. $5.91billion estimated
Last edited:
Yes, I was looking at the graph, and if they dramatically increased the iPad revenue, they could rise their total benefits significantly. This is the perfect time for a disruptive iPad innovation. I’m eager to see what’s coming in less than a week!
Tim Cooks comment during the 2nd quarter earning was extremely vague against May 7th and WWDC event as you can see.
Last fall, notable insiders like Ross Young, Mark Gurman, and Majin Bu were buzzing about Apple's development of a 14.1 inch mini-LED iPad Pro, a project reportedly in the works for over two years. However, it's been pretty quiet on their end recently regarding this device. I'm wondering if this silence could indicate that we might see a launch with some big surprises, such as an M4 chip and possibly even a desktop OS integrated. What do you all think? Could Apple be planning a major shake-up with this new iPad Pro? Fingers crossed for something big!
I think Apple likes to have us to go fish between all those red herrings. That way there isn't anything that is predicted that one can be disappointed about.
Yeah we fondly remember the larger and larger iPad conversations.
Calculator powered by ai. I hope we can find one on launch day. Expect insane lines.
How are you determining that Safari isn’t using 120Hz?
If you go to Settings > Accessibility > Motion > Limit Frame Rate you can limit the screen refresh to 60Hz and you will see a definite difference in scrolling in Safari. Turning that setting off and the scrolling is definitely smoother.
Last edited:
Yes, the OLED panels will be more expensive, but your post implied it was a double whammy that would make the next iPad Pro far more expensive. I was saying that cost savings on the M4 may offset the price increase on the OLED panel. It is quite possible the M3 costs more due to N3B being a process with significantly poorer yields.There are other factors then just the M something SoC pricing, the OLED panels for example will cost more.
=====
The Elec reports that Apple is expected to pay two to three times more than competitors, for equivalent-sized panels.
We don't even know the cost involved with the camera optics/sensors if that is improved upon also with the iPad Pro? Slightly more than 5 days to go.
So is everyone now ready to dump on Apple if it isn’t an M4 chip?
No one who ever used a phone with an A..X chip complained it wasnt different and better.
This could be an M3X or M3AI. Is that a fail in anyone’s eyes?
Whatever, it will be up to the task it’s being given as even M2 chips are good.
No one who ever used a phone with an A..X chip complained it wasnt different and better.
This could be an M3X or M3AI. Is that a fail in anyone’s eyes?
Whatever, it will be up to the task it’s being given as even M2 chips are good.
Apple always plays the long game. I think they see iPads (and Vision Pro, and who knows what else) as “new ways of computing”. A way of looking at it is that the Macs are traditional computers with you in control, where iPads are “self-driving” computers. I think the vision is that people shouldn't know about computers to use computers. Which is also why the pipe dream of running MacOS on iPads will never happen - they are meant for different paradigms. Touchscreen Macs are much more likely, and even that is very, very unlikely...
I see it similarly as combustion vs electric cars. It's not about having "the same plus more" in the new version, it's about changing the paradigms, which may mean there are things you can do with the old technology that you can't do with the new, so the new is not for everyone. And the old will stick around longer than the manufacturers would like.
All this to say, I don't think iPads are too powerful for their intended use. I think they are not yet powerful enough, not just in hardware but also in terms of software. And this is where AI comes in, in a big way, although it is likely that the "first" generation of truly AI powered iPad will be lacking in all sorts of ways. But, consider the long game. Surely, Apple is envisioning that at some point in the future, a computer is not a device that enables you to balance your checkbook. It is a device that balances your checkbook. It is not a device that lets you edit your photos. It is a device that edits your photos.
You may or may not like that future, but I am convinced that is the vision Apple has, and they will move forward along those lines, however long it may take for the world to reach that point. I don't think we are there yet, and I also don't think these new iPads will be it. But I do think that is the trajectory.
Now, this is all from the viewpoint of Apple. How about the consumer - why buy these products then, if they aren't really useful yet? Aside from buying into the dream, a lot of it is simply down to user experience. Sure, an iPad is not "worth" 1000 dollars, if you gauge that buy whether you can do the tasks for less money. But, there are some very simple tasks, that could be done with much simpler and cheaper hardware, that are just nicer to do on a fast iPad with a nice screen. I see iPads being used for "work" all the time. For instance, my real estate agent using it to show pictures of houses, or the undertaker using it to design the obituary when my dad died. Sure, this could be done on a 300 dollar iPad, but it's just nicer to do it on an iPad Pro. I think that some people underestimate other people's willingness to pay extra for performing the same tasks in a nicer way. To me, wanting nicer ways of doing the same things are why we don't live in caves.
In other words, products don't need to do anything that couldn't be done cheaper. They just need to be nice products, that feels good to use. A cheap Windows laptop is a simple way to do advanced tasks. An iPad is an advanced way to do simple tasks. And let's face it, most people use their computers for simple tasks. My work computer is 40% email, 40% webbrowser, 15% Excel and 5% Powerpoint. Why do I need a 2000 dollar laptop for that?
This 100%.
Computers will be for tinkerers and will not go away completely. It's the Jobs' "Trucks vs. cars" thing.
Computers are trucks. Most people don't need them and drive cars.
Most people who use computers have no interest in computers, they're just a means to an end. If they can get the end result with less computer janitor time, great! things like advanced AI, fast computation, great battery life (for wearables, etc.) will result in less people needing "computers".
Being able to talk to (or gesture at) say, an Apple Watch (or your AirPods, or some regular looking glasses) to accurately store and retrieve information is going to be killer. We're some way away from that yet, but on the path.
Last edited: