The iPad Pro starts at $799 and features an ARM A9X processor. The entry level Surface Pro 4 is $899 and comes with an Intel Core M3 processor. That seems a fair comparison.
Apple Insider ran Primate Labs’ Geekbench 3.3.2 benchmarks on a number of machines, including the entry level Surface Pro 4 and the iPad Pro. In a nutshell, the iPad Pro smoked the Surface Pro 4.
From the article:
Even Apple’s $499 iPad Air 2 beats the $899 Surface Pro 4 in multicore tests, while scoring slightly lower in single core performance, and delivers that compairable performance with a price tag that’s $400 lower.
To get a Surface Pro 4 that has more CPU power than iPad Pro, you have to upgrade to the $1299 version powered by an Intel Core i5, which costs as much as Apple’s 13 inch MacBook Pro. However, the i5-powered Surface Pro 4 costs $500 more than an iPad Pro.
As has been widely discussed, Apple is packing a lot of muscle in the iPad lineup. Use cases aside, the iPad Pro certainly has a laptop class processor.
The Apple Insider article is flawed and mis-leading.
The Surface Pro 5 with an i5 processor starts at $999, not $1299. The $1299 version adds 8gb of RAM and 256GB of storage.
Note, they are comparing an iPad Pro with just 32GB on NON-EXPANDABLE memory!!!
So, really, again NOT A FAIR COMPARISON.
The iPad Pro is $799 with no pen and 32GB of RAM.
The i5 Surface Pro 4 is $999 WITH A PEN AND 128GB of RAM.
So, the FASTER Surface Pro 4 is LESS money than the iPad Pro if you were to add the pencil and extra storage.
It’s like all of these Apple sites are trying their best to put lipstick on a pig.
You forgot to capitalize LIPSTICK ON A PIG.
Actually, they are doing the Surface a favour. Do you think the model with less memory would have faired better? They are looking at benchmarks – strictly. They chose that model to illustrate a “ceiling” for the Surface brand as the Core M3 model was being used as a “floor”. Expandability, storage size, pen – none of these things have any bearing on benchmark speed of the processor.
You are trying an argument on two fronts – one of cost and one of features – and yet none have anything to do with the topic at hand: processing power. Not perceived value, not customizations. I’m not saying you aren’t making valid points, you are just applying them to the wrong argument.
“Do you think the model with less memory would have faired better?”
As you said: “Expandability, storage size, pen – none of these things have any bearing on benchmark speed of the processor.”
So, why would they not have chosen to include the $999 model of the i5 Surface 4? Both models have the same processor!
“They are looking at benchmarks – strictly.”
No, they were not! They were comparing the PRICE quite boldly in the article stating that to get better performance on the Surface Pro 4, you would need to spend $500 more than the iPad Pro!!! (They did not mention that you would actually also be getting 2x the Ram, 8x the storage, and the pen!)
“…the Core M3 model was being used as a “floor”.”
About that, they incorrectly listed the storage of the Core i3 model as 64GB… There is no such model. The base i3 Surface Pro 4 has 128GB of storage.
“ou are trying an argument on two fronts – one of cost and one of
features – and yet none have anything to do with the topic at hand:
processing power.”
You need to actually read the Apple Insider article, because they were the ones who were throwing around the cost and the value proposition of the iPad Pro! (Never mentioning the shortcomings of the device. 32GB, no pen, no way to run desktop class applications, etc.)
OK, i’m not really going for a whole back and forth but here goes…
––––––––––––––––––––––––
Memory speed was being measured in the benchmark. As I indicated, they were doing a bench comparison including a lower and higher powered version of the Surface. The iPad Pro doesn’t differ model to model for what they were measuring as both ship with one processor/memory configuration that they don’t even advertise. I don’t know why they used those particular configurations however I wager they used what they had access too and didn’t go out an buy 8k worth of hardware just for this article.
Price plays into any comparison of hardware list – even on apple’s site comparing devices and models. It’s par for the course. It wasn’t what the article was about though, it was about the benchmarks. Yes actually, in that chart it mentions that you get more ram and you get more drive space, right above the price. Also, I’d like to take this opportunity to point out you have already used 5 exclamation marks. This may be a bit too important to you.
What does that matter? They aren’t selling the tablets. Anyone interested in a Surface would a) be offered ones with correct specs before purchase and b) wouldn’t be getting their make-or-break purchase info from Apple Insider, would they? Again, they probably used machines they had access to.
I did read the article. it was bad, however – the point of the article was the benchmarks and the numbers wouldn’t change regardless of the issue you bring up. If they used the base model of the Pro, yes – the price would be lower but because it had less ram the memory marks would be lower too, would that also be unfair.
The point of all of this is you are putting way too much importance in something you don’t seem to care about anyway – a Mac news site. It doesn’t matter. It’s all trivial.
I acknowledge the Buddha within.
I don’t think Microsoft has any intention of selling this device except as a step up to their SurfaceBook.