Macworld Forums: Apple's new A5X chip may be for iPad only, analysts say - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for Apple's new A5X chip may be for iPad only, analysts say here

Why not designed for the 4 cores CPU? There doesn't seem to be any problem with them.

DlBetty, on 08 March 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

Apple had to cut a few corners now. Even though the iPhone finally caught up with other smartphone when it went to a 8 MP camera they chose to only inclue a 5 MP camera with the iPad.

At the current time the lack of a 4 core model may have come from the timing of this last iPad version 3. Or it may be that they are spending too much ime counting their money. After all they will need to have an easy upgrade.

Chip speed sometimes is deceptive.
I'm one to play around with computers, tablets, and smartphones on the store shelves. The salespeople occasionally make remarks, such as, "this so-and-so tablet has a much faster chip than the iPad, so it has much better performance." I nod my head and go ahead playing with the various devices. Nine times out of ten I find that what the salesperson said might be accurate on paper but in the real world, other factors play-in which nullifies the stats.
Faster chips don't always make for a better overall experience. There's too many other important variables to take into account.

Apple is building a "device funnel" consisting of the Mac Book Air, iPad, iPhone and iPod nano. Chips appearing in the larger devices filter down via Moore's Law.

5 megapixels? Why so stingy on camera megapixels when Nokia could come up with 41 mega pixel cameras equipped smartphones? I mean there are sub $100 digital cameras that sport 16megapixels easy. I just don't understand this.

SangHan, on 09 March 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

You are right that there is no purely engineering reason and very little cost reason why the pixel count couldn’t have been increased — that is if maximizing pixel count were to be an objective unto itself.

But it is the physics of the size of the micro-miniature optics and imager that can be intelligently crammed into these ultra-thin, non-camera devices that actually limit image quality here. Don’t be taken in by the marketeers who love pixel count only because they love the one-liner oversimplified deception of quantifiable bragging rights. Only in their corrupt, reality distorted world would pixel count itself be the actual objective.

On the other hand, image stabilization (IS)—which I think is a new innovation here—can seriously improve low light image quality on even the tiniest image system. Image stbilization is even more beneficial when holding an un-ergonomic maxiPad at arm’s length than when holding an almost as un-ergonomic phone at arms length.