Apple introduced a plethora of new and upgraded hardware yesterday, including enhancements to several traditional computer products: the iMac (thinner screen), 13" MacBook Pro ("Retina" display) and Mac mini (Intel "Ivy Bridge" CPUs). But the bulk of analysts' attention was rightly focused on the company's tablets. As expected, the company unveiled a "mini" version of the iPad (shown above), with a 7.9" (diagonal) "Retina" display that delivers equivalent resolution to the 9.7" LCD in the second-generation iPad. And, like the iPad 2, the iPad mini is based on the ARM Cortex-A9 derived dual-core "A5" SoC with companion PowerVR graphics capabilities.
But the iPad mini's front- and rear-view cameras both represent substantial upgrades to those in the iPad 2; 1.2 Mpixels (versus 0.3 Mpixels) and 5 Mpixels (versus 0.7 Mpixels). In this all-important embedded vision respect, the iPad mini's rear-view camera matches the resolution of the "new iPad" (i.e. iPad 3) while the front-view camera is comparable in resolution to that of the newer iPhone 5. More directly, the iPod mini's cameras' resolutions are exact matches to those in the latest-generation iPod touch. And, falling in-between the iPod touch and 9.7" iPad in both price and form factor, the iPad mini will likely further expand the market for Apple's iOS devices (and for developers of both embedded vision software and peripherals for those devices).
Apple's other tablet news yesterday was more unexpected. Less than eight months after releasing the iPad 3, the company rolled out a fourth-generation tablet design. The "ipad 4" front-and rear-view camera specifications match those of the iPad mini, again (as I mentioned above) representing a notable front-camera resolution upgrade over the VGA-only front sensor in the iPad 3. But more curious to me (and likely to embedded vision software developers as well) is the "A6X" SoC, with claimed 2x up-ticks of both CPU and graphics performance over those in the iPad 3's A5X.
The A5X, as you may recall from my writeup back in March, achieved its doubled graphics performance versus the A5 by doubling up the number of PowerVR-sourced cores (from two to four). And the A6, as I discussed last month, achieved its doubled CPU performance versus the A5 by migrating to an Apple-designed next-generation ARM core. Note, too, that Apple claimed at the time that the A6 (three graphics cores) offered equivalent performance to the A5X (four graphics cores), implying that the GPUs in the A6 ran at a higher clock speed than their A5 precursors. I think it's safe to say that the CPUs in the A6 and A6X are identical.
But while it might be tempting by extrapolation to conclude that the A6X further doubles the graphics core count over the A6, from three to six, such a move would be die size-prohibitive even on Samsung's latest-generation 32 nm foundry process lithography. More likely, I suspect, is that a further clock speed boost is behind the A6X graphics performance increase, potentially done in partnership with a more modest core count increment (from three to four, for example).
p.s…for the past several years, I've been toting around a camera-less first-generation iPad. Earlier today, in the latest iteration of my longstanding pattern of exploiting the enthusiasm of upgraders, I bought a (claimed) gently used iPad 3 plus accessories off Ebay. As such, I'll finally be able to test software such as Vital Signs Camera on an iOS tablet. I do it all for you, dear readers 😉
