Mostrando postagens com marcador microsoft. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador microsoft. Mostrar todas as postagens

terça-feira, 1 de julho de 2014

Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Review


Microsoft's Surface range of tablets were never successful enough to make a big impression in the tablet market, and this is mostly attributed to the fact that the Surface tablets tried to replace both your tablet and your laptop, and thus ended up failing at replacing either properly. Now Microsoft is upping its game with the recently announced Surface Pro 3, by choosing to make it much closer to a work-oriented PC. But by doing so, Microsoft sacrificed the portability factor which benefited the previous Surface tablets' use as a tablet for entertainment. Whether Microsoft's decision to make the Surface Pro 3 more laptop than tablet was a good one or a bad one isn't yet clear, but with a higher resolution screen, better cameras, and a considerably slimmer body, the Surface Pro 3 is definitely a better device overall than its predecessor. 

Since it boasts a much larger screen than previous Surface tablets (12" compared to 10.6"), the Surface Pro 3's dimensions are inevitably larger, even though the size difference was slightly compensated with slimmer bezels on the Pro 3. Measuring 292.1 x 201.4 x 9.1mm, it's far from an ultra portable tablet. In fact, it's about the same size as Samsung's Galaxy Note Pro 12.2 tablet (295.6 x 203.9 x 8mm), which evidently has a slightly larger 12.2" screen. The Note Pro 12.2 is significantly thinner, but then again, the Note Pro 12.2 doesn't have an Intel Core CPU, and nor does it run full Windows 8.1. In fact, the Surface Pro 3 is a very thin tablet considering the hardware it packs. It also weighs 800g, which, again, is pretty light for a 12-inch tablet with an Intel Core processor. In comparison, the Galaxy Note Pro 12.2 weighs 750g.

The back of the Surface Pro 3 is made from the same VaporMg magnesium alloy construction seen in all other Surface tablets, but like with the Surface 2 it has a light-silver colored finish. This makes the tablet very sturdy, and it also looks very premium. The kickstand which has always been unique to the Surface line is back, but it's much improved. The first-gen surface's kickstand had a single 22-degree angle, which didn't make it ideal for many usage cases. The second generation had two angles, 22-degree and 45-degree. Now with the Surface Pro 3, the kickstand can open to any degree between the initial 22-degree stage and the 150-degree limit, making it far more versatile than its predecessors.

The Surface Pro 3 also features improved cameras: two 5MP units on the front and back of the device. the high-res front-facing camera makes the Pro 3 a very good device for video conferencing. As for the rear-facing camera: given that a 10-inch tablet is already very awkward for taking pictures, imagine how doing that with a 12-inch tablet would look like! In any case, it's there, and it's decent enough for a tablet.

The Surface Pro 3 marks the first upgrade in the display department since the original Surface Pro. It's bigger, has a higher resolution and a much more interesting aspect ratio. The 12-inch size offers much more screen real estate than the previous Surface Pros' 10.6" displays, with the only trade-off that the tablet becomes a bit too large to be considered a portable tablet. The resolution has been upgraded from 1920 x 1080 to 2160 x 1440, and the screen aspect ratio is now 3:2, which makes the screen less wide and taller (in other words, squarer) than the usual 16:9 Windows tablets, including the Surface Pro and Pro 2. As with the other Surface tablets, the Pro 3 uses Microsoft's ClearType technology, which fuses the display layers into a single layer, the benefit of that being less screen reflectivity and therefore better sunlight contrast ratio.

Microsoft has made the right choices with the Pro 3's display. The larger size makes its use as a productivity machine as well as a fully-fledged laptop replacement much more feasible, and the increased resolution is also a great improvement. Like I said before, increasing the screen size makes it more suitable for a laptop replacement than a proper media consumption tablet, but this compromise is probably the right one to make. 

The Surface Pro 3 may not look like it, due to its thin chassis, but it packs some very powerful hardware inside it. Like its predecessors, it's equipped with Intel Core processors, in this case, the highly power-efficient 4th-gen parts. You can buy the Pro 3 with a Core i3, a Core i5 or even a Core i7 processor inside, depending on how much you're willing to pay. The following table shows the different processor/RAM configurations and their respective price

 Price   $799   $999   $1,299  $1,549   $1,949 
 CPU   Intel Core-i3 4020Y
(2 Cores/4 Threads @ 1.5GHz)
 Intel Core-i5 4300U
(2 Cores/4 Threads @ 1.9GHz base/2.9GHz Turbo)
 Intel Core-i5 4300U
(2 Cores/4 Threads @ 1.9GHz base/2.9GHz Turbo) 
 Intel Core-i7 4650U
(2 Cores/4 Threads @ 2.7GHz base/3.3GHz Turbo)
 Intel Core-i7 4650U
(2 Cores/4 Threads @ 2.7GHz base/3.3GHz Turbo)
 GPU   Intel HD 4200 @ 200MHz base/850MHZ Turbo  Intel HD 4400 @ 200MHz base/1.1GHz Turbo  Intel HD 4400 @ 200MHz base/1.1GHz Turbo  Intel HD 5000 @ 200MHz base/1.1GHz Turbo  Intel HD 5000 @ 200MHz base/1.1GHz Turbo
 Max TDP  11.5W  15W  15W  15W  15W
 RAM   4 GB  4 GB  8 GB  8 GB  8 GB


For the tablet form factor even the Core i3 is already a very good processor and should be fine for most basic tasks. I'd say that the Core i7 model is a bit overkill for a tablet unless you want to use it for gaming or for more intense tasks. All Surface Pro 3 variants have an internal fan for cooling, but they're generally quiet and therefore shouldn't be an inconvenience. However, logically the higher CPU bins, especially the Core i7 model, are more likely to make the fan run faster and noisier, as well as use up battery faster, as all Surface Pro 3 models have the same 42Wh battery. Taking heat dissipation, fan noise, battery life and performance in consideration, I consider the Core-i5 model the ideal compromise between these variables, since it's fast and at the same time not too power hungry. 

By the way, Microsoft claims 9 hours of continuous web browsing for the Surface Pro 3, which is very good for a tablet with this hardware, although I'm not sure how the different CPU bins will vary in terms of battery life.

As with other Surface Pros, the Pro 3 comes with a digital pen stylus. This time however, it's not a Wacom digitizer, which means there are less pressure sensitivity levels (256 in the Pro 3 vs 1024 in the previous Surface Pros), but the new NTrig technology allows for some nifty software features. As usual, there's no place on the tablet's body to store the Surface Pen inside. The Surface Pro 3's new 3:2 screen aspect ratio combines very well with the stylus, as in portrait mode, the screen's proportions make it look rather like a 12" drawing pad.

Pricing and Conclusion

Microsoft is offering the Surface Pro 3 in a variety of different processor/RAM/storage options. The entry-level model has a Core-i3 CPU, 4 GB of RAM and a 64 GB SSD drive and costs $799. Then there's a Core-i5 model with 4 GB of RAM and 128 GB SSD storage, which goes for $999 and another Core-i5 model, but with 8 GB of RAM and a 256 GB SSD, costing $1,299. Then there's a Core-i7 model with 8 GB of RAM and a 256 GB SSD which costs $1,549 and finally there's the most expensive Core-i7 model with 8 GB of RAM and 512 GB of SSD storage, which costs $1,949. The Touch Cover for the Surface Pro 3 is sold separately, and costs $129. Microsoft should really have this keyboard bundled with the tablet, as the tablet itself is already very expensive, and like I said before, the Pro 3 is more of a work-oriented laptop replacement than a media consumption tablet, and in order for it to do what it does best, that is, replace your laptop, it needs the keyboard cover.

The first two Surface Pros tried to be both a laptop and a tablet, but failed at being any of the two. Now with the Surface Pro 3, it's a device that excels in productivity tasks, therefore making itself a worthy laptop replacement, and is at least usable as a tablet, but sacrifices the portability factor that is why people usually buy tablets in the first place. So while it is a compromise, it's the best one Microsoft could've made.

So what is the verdict on the Surface Pro 3? Well, it has the screen real estate, the hardware, software, and a keyboard cover to fully replace your laptop, and at the same time it's also more portable than any ultrabook out there, probably has more battery life than most of them, and can still double as a tablet, albeit a very large one. Wrap that up with a versatile kickstand, a high-res screen, a chassis that may just the the thinnest to sport an Intel Core CPU and an improved stylus and you have just about one of the best tablet-laptop hybrid devices so far, and most certainly the best Surface tablet ever released.

sexta-feira, 27 de dezembro de 2013

Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) vs Microsoft Surface 2: Tablet Comparison


The holiday season is almost upon us, and so the biggest players in the tablet market finally have their latest flagships already available. The Surface 2, from Microsoft, and 
the Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition, by Samsung, are some of the most interesting tablet 
flagships this holiday season. Both of them have very high-end specs, including high-resolution displays and powerful processors, along with a (perhaps too) high price tag. But which one is worth your money the most?

Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Microsoft Surface 2
 Body   243 x 171 x 7.9mm, 540g (Wi-Fi)/547g (LTE)   275 x 172.5 x 8.9mm, 676g 
 Display   10.1" TFT LCD 2560 x 1600 (299ppi)  10.6" ClearType 1920 x 1080 (208ppi)
 Connectivity   Wi-Fi, GSM (2G), HSDPA (3G), LTE (4G)  Wi-Fi
 Storage  16/32 GB, 3 GB RAM  32/64 GB, 2 GB RAM
 Camera (Rear)  8 MP with LED flash, Dual-camera, dual-recording and HDR and 1080p video  5 MP with LED flash and 1080p video
 Camera (Front)  2 MP with 1080p video  3.5 MP with 1080p video
 OS  Android 4.3 Jelly Bean  Windows 8.1 RT
 Processor  Wi-Fi: Exynos 5420 (Quad-core Cortex-A15 @ 1.9GHz + Quad-core Cortex-A7 @ 1.3GHz + Mali-T628 GPU)
 LTE: Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 MSM8974 (Quad-core Krait @ 2.3GHz + Adreno 330 GPU)
 NVIDIA Tegra 4 (Quad-core Cortex-A15 @ 1.7GHz + 72-core ULP GeForce)
 Battery  Non-removable 8,220 mAh
 Up to 10 hours of use
 Non-removable ~8,500 mAh (31.5 Wh)
 Up to 10 hours of use
 Accessories  - S Pen stylus  - Touch Cover 2 ($119)
 - Type Cover 2 ($129)
 - Power Cover ($199)
 Price  $549 (16 GB, Wi-Fi)  $449 (32 GB)


The two tablets, despite both being flagships, compete at different price points, which explains partially why the Surface 2's specs aren't as impressive as the Galaxy Note 10.1's.

Design

These two flagship tablets feature some very nice designs to go with the powerful hardware inside them and their high prices. In terms of materials the Surface 2 has the upper hand, because while the Galaxy Note 10.1 has a plastic back with a special texture that makes it look like leather (aka faux leather), the Surface 2's internals are protected by a durable magnesium alloy the Microsoft calls VaporMg. That gives the Surface 2 a premium look over the Note 10.1, and it's more durable too. The faux leather on the Note 10.1 might be appealing to some, but to others, including me, the leather imitation is not attractive. 

Despite its high-quality materials, the Surface 2 just falls short of its competitors when it comes to its size and weight. It's inevitably larger, since the screen is 1/2" larger than its Android rivals and is 0.9" larger than the iPad's screen, so we can't blame Microsoft for that. Not only that, but it's also thicker than most recent flagship tablets (the Galaxy Note 10.1 measures 7.9mm thick, and the iPad Air is 7.5mm thick) and much heavier, weighing 676g versus the Galaxy Note 10.1's 540g and the iPad Air's 469g. Of course some of that extra weight comes from the larger dimensions due to the larger screen, but that doesn't excuse the Surface 2 for being that heavy. It's still quite comfortable to hold, but the Galaxy Note 10.1 will definitely tire your arms less when holding the tablet for an extended period of time. The Surface 2 also has considerably larger bezels than its rivals. Considering the size of the screen, however, the bezel size is quite appreciable.

Of course, the Surface 2's built-in kickstand distinguishes it from all of its competitors. The new 2-stage kickstand is very useful, and is something you'd only be able to achieve on other tablets with covers like the iPad's Smart Cover, and considering the Surface 2's weight, you might find yourself using the kickstand more than you imagine. Also, one unique feature of the Surface 2 is its keyboard covers, which attach to the amazingly strong magnetic connector on the bottom side of the tablet and can also double as a cover for the screen. There are three options of keyboard covers, starting with the Touch Cover 2, which sells for $119 and this one features capacitive keys, which are now backlit, the Type Cover 2, which sells for $129, is thicker than the Touch Cover 2 with the benefit of having physical keys, which are also backlit. Finally there's the Power Cover, which will be available as of early 2014 for $199, and will be basically a Type Cover 2 with a built-in battery. Along with Microsoft Office RT 2013, the keyboard covers make the Surface 2 just about the most productive ARM tablet on the planet. 

The Galaxy Note 10.1 also has some productivity-oriented tricks up its sleeve with its S Pen digitizer, which comes included with the tablet and offers precise pen input for taking notes and other related tasks. 

Display

Of these two tablets, it's the Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition that has the better display. While the display is smaller, measuring 10.1" diagonally, it packs much more pixels than the Surface 2, with a stunning 2560 x 1600 resolution and a top-notch 299ppi pixel density. Samsung's display also has excellent viewing angles and reproduces colors vibrantly and accurately. 

The Surface 2 packs a slightly larger 10.6" screen with a resolution of 1920 x 1080, resulting in a pixel density of 208ppi. Microsoft uses its so-called ClearType technology in the Surface 2, which means that the touch panel and the glass are laminated to the display, reducing reflections and thus making the tablet's screen more comfortable to use in direct light or outdoors. The display also has wide viewing angles, and like the Note 10.1 also reproduces accurate and saturated colors, although the Note 10.1 is still slightly more vivid. The difference in the two displays' pixel densities is quite easily noticeable when viewing text. The Note 10.1 is just completely devoid of any pixellation, while the Surface 2, while still very crisp, does show some pixellation in text if you look closely. 

The two displays have slightly different aspect ratios. While the Note 10.1 is 16:10, the Surface 2 is even wider with a 16:9 aspect ratio. So while the Note 10.1 is noticeably less wide, both screen share the same benefits and problems, for instance, they're excellent for watching videos, but while the Note 10.1 would show a very small amount of letterboxing, the Surface 2 should be devoid of any letterboxing. Both are also quite awkward to use in portrait mode, but the Note 10.1 is arguably a bit less awkward to use in portrait. In any case, both displays are excellent, but the Note 10.1 certainly outclasses the Surface 2 in every way, even if by a little. 

Processor

As flagship tablets, both of them are equipped with the latest and greatest silicon. The Surface 2 has a Tegra 4 processor, while the Galaxy Note 10.1 goes with a Snapdragon 800 beast for the LTE variant or Samsung's own Exynos 5420 processor for the Wi-Fi only version.

The Tegra 4 is NVIDIA's latest system-on-chip, and utilizes the 4-PLUS-1 architecture originally introduced in the Tegra 3, what that means is that there is one main CPU cluster, which is composed of four Cortex-A15 cores clocked at up to 1.9GHz with one core active (and 1.7GHz with more than one core active) and one additional shadow A15 core targeted for low frequency (up to ~825MHz) and low power consumption. When the CPU workload is very light, for example, when the device is idling, all processing transfers to the shadow core and the quad-core A15 cluster is power-gated, so that the shadow core can process these light tasks while consuming very low power, enhancing battery life. Performance-wise, the Cortex-A15 is one of the best performing mobile CPUs in existence, so CPU performance on the Surface 2 should be on par with the industry's greatest. 

The GPU in the Tegra 4 is a bit more disappointing. The shader architecture is the only one in the current mobile industry that is discrete rather than unified, and mind you, that's the architecture that most similarly resembles the Geforce 6000 series (which is very old indeed). Basically this means that, instead of each shader in the GPU being able to process pixel or vertex instructions based on the workload, there are separate pixel and vertex shader units. With a total of 72 shader cores (48 shader, 24 vertex) with a pretty high clock speed of 672MHz, the Tegra 4 actually packs a lot of processing power, despite its old architecture. As benchmarks will show, Tegra 4's GPU performance is somewhat behind the Snapdragon 800 and the Exynos 5420 processors used in the Galaxy Note 10.1, but considering that the Surface 2's GPU needs to push roughly half the amount of pixels compared to the Note 10.1, they're actually well-balanced performance-wise.

The Galaxy Note 10.1's Wi-Fi version is packed with an Exynos 5420 processor, more commonly known as Exynos 5 Octa. This processor uses ARM's big.LITTLE CPU architecture which, similarly to NVIDIA's 4-PLUS-1, has one high-performance CPU cluster and a second power-saving CPU cluster. The main cluster is very similar to the Tegra 4, containing four Cortex-A15 cores with a clock speed of 1.9GHz. Unlike the Tegra 4 though, which uses only one core in the power-saving cluster, Samsung went rather overkill and crammed in four low-power Cortex-A7 cores running at up to 1.3GHz. I'm not sure rather the Quad-core A7 @ 1.3GHz is more or less efficient in saving power than a single A15 @ 825MHz, but both solutions should have a similar effect on power consumption. In benchmarks, however, the Exynos 5420 is certainly very close to the Tegra 4, since their high-performing CPU clusters are practically identical. 

On the GPU side, the Exynos 5420 packs ARM's Mali-T628 GPU, which benchmarks prove to be a very powerful GPU and adequate for the Galaxy Note 10.1's high-resolution duties. Unlike the Tegra 4, the Mali-T628 is as modern as mobile GPUs go, as the shader architecture is unified and the GPU boasts full support of OpenGL ES 3.0.

The LTE Galaxy Note 10.1 is equipped with the industry leading Snapdragon 800 processor. This CPU in the Snapdragon 800 is a Quad-core configuration of Qualcomm's own Krait 400 CPU core, running at a max clock speed of 2.3GHz. The CPU is power-efficient enough so that an extra low-power CPU cluster isn't necessary here. In fact, one interesting ability of the Krait 400 core is that each core can run at a different clock speed depending on the workload put on each core, unlike the Cortex-A15, which has the same clock speed on all active cores. What's the advantage of that? For example, if the current workload requires two cores active, using one at full power but only processing light tasks on the second core, a Cortex-A15 CPU would put both cores on their highest clock speed, say, 1.9GHz, even though the second core is processing a light task and doesn't need the full 1.9GHz, while a Krait core, with the same workload, would put the first core on full power, in this case, 2.3GHz, and the second core at a lower clock speed adequate for its current task, say, 1.0GHz. This unique feature really helps increase power efficiency, and renders extra low-power CPU cores unnecessary. In terms of performance, its high clock speed and its strong core architecture make the Snapdragon 800 one of the fastest CPUs around, if not the fastest. 

The GPU in the Snapdragon 800 is the company's own Adreno 330. Since Qualcomm never discloses information about its GPU architectures, I'm left with very little to say about it, however, we do know that, like the Mali-T628, it has a modern architecture, with a unified shader architecture and full OpenGL ES 3.0 support. In general, the Adreno 330 does perform a bit better than the Mali-T628, but its performance is still pretty close to the Mali-T628. 

Now, with all that technical babble about architectures out of the way, let's get to actually testing these processors' performance in benchmarks, starting with Geekbench 3, which measures CPU and memory performance.

Note: The Galaxy Note 10.1's LTE edition isn't commercially available, so I had to take Snapdragon 800 benchmark results from the Note III, which runs the same software as the Note 10.1 and should therefore have almost identical results to the actual S800-powered Note 10.1. However, the difference in resolution (1080p vs 1600p) between the Note III and the Note 10.1 means I can't include onscreen GPU benchmark results for the Snapdragon 800.

Note (2): Unfortunately Geekbench 3 isn't available for Windows RT, so I can't include results for the Surface 2, so I took the performance results from an Android tablet whose processor most closely resembles the Surface 2's, the ASUS Transformer Pad TF701T, which is powered by a slightly higher-clocked Tegra 4.


The main current SoC flagships all have surprisingly similar CPU performance. The Tegra 4, Snapdragon 800 and Exynos 5420 offer very similar single-threaded performance, despite the architectural differences between the Krait 400 core and the Cortex-A15. The only clearly distinguished competitor here is the 64-bit Apple A7, but this is out of the scope of this comparison. When it comes to heavily-threaded tasks the Tegra 4 and the Exynos 5420 are practically identical (seeing as their CPUs ARE identical), along with the Apple A7, while the Snapdragon 800 takes the lead, though not by a big margin.

Evidently, the Galaxy Note 10.1's and the Surface 2's respective processors perform very similarly when it comes to CPU performance, so now let's check out some performance scores regarding the GPU performance with the popular cross-platform application, GFXBench. The two following tests are Offscreen test. That means that the GPU renders at a non-native, fixed 1080p resolution, so that differences between the devices' resolutions don't impact their performance.
In this test the Apple A7 takes the lead, followed closely by the Snapdragon 800. The Exynos 5420-toting Note 10.1 falls a bit behind, and the Tegra 4 in the Surface 2 receives a mediocre score compared to its competitors. Thankfully, the Surface 2 has less pixels to push than the Note 10.1, which will give it a performance advantage in the onscreen tests. 

In this test the Snapdragon 800 and the Exynos 5420 take the lead, with the A7 hot on its heels and the Tegra 4, again, yielding a rather mediocre score. 

Since the Note 10.1 has to push about a couple million pixels more than the Surface 2, it was the Tegra 4 that was faster in the Onscreen T-Rex HD test, but not by as much of a huge margin as two million less pixels would otherwise imply. In fact, I expect the Snapdragon 800-powered Note 10.1 will be able to match or even outperform the Surface 2 in this test, despite having twice the resolution. 

For the Egypt HD Onscreen test, not even the Surface 2's lower resolution helped it outperform the Note 10.1. Even with double the resolution, the Note 10.1 managed a much higher score than the Surface 2. In comparing the Surface 2's GPU performance to other Tegra 4 devices, I realized that the Surface 2 is in fact one of the worst performing Tegra 4 devices. That is probably because Microsoft chose one of the slower Tegra 4 SKUs for the Surface 2, and the CPU clock speed reduction from 1.9GHz to 1.7GHz might have come along with a GPU clock speed reduction from the full 672MHz, perhaps to 600MHz like on the 1.8GHz Tegra 4 in the Tegra Note tablet. At any rate, it's clear that the GPU performance in the Surface 2 isn't as good as the Galaxy Note 10.1

Power Consumption

From these two devices being compared, it's probably the Galaxy Note 10.1 that draws the most power. The first and most obvious cause is that it has much higher resolution screen to power. Also, while the SoC should be very power efficient due to its 28nm process (the Exynos 5420 is built on a 28nm High-K Metal Gate process, while the Snapdragon 800 uses a 28nm HPM process), but given the heavy duties that the GPU will be in charge of due to the high pixel count, it could become quite a power hog, especially when playing games. But the battery is very decently sized, which leads to Samsung's 10 hours of usage claim. 

The Surface 2 has, obviously, much less pixels to power, so the power consumption of the display is significantly lower. The Tegra 4 processor is also built on a 28nm process, so it won't get too hot or consume too much power when processing heavy tasks, like gaming. And while I can't compare the Surface 2's and the Galaxy Note 10.1's battery sizes directly, since Microsoft gives the battery size in watt-hours, and Samsung uses mAh, I can only compare them by estimating the Surface 2's capacity in mAh. Assuming that it's a 3.7V battery, the Surface 2 has around an 8,500 mAh capacity, which is actually slightly larger than the Samsung's 8,220 mAh battery. Then again, the battery voltage in the Surface 2 could easily not be 3.7V, which would lead to a different value altogether, but the safest bet (and that in itself isn't very safe) is 3.7V. Well, the extra thickness of the Surface 2 had to offer some advantage aside from the kickstand. Anyways, despite the lower display resolution and the (maybe) larger battery, Microsoft claims the same 10 hours of usage for the Surface 2, but in practice I'd expect the Surface 2 to outlast the Galaxy Note 10.1, even if only by a little. 

Pricing and Conclusion

Of course, the Surface 2's slightly weaker specs compared to the Galaxy Note 10.1 is justified by their different prices. The entry-level 32 GB Surface 2 sells for $449, while the 16 GB Wi-Fi only Galaxy Note 10.1 has a hefty $549 price tag. That's a $100 dollar difference for the same user-available storage capacity (as the Surface 2's OS leaves it only with about 17.5 GB of free disk space). The 64 GB Surface 2 (that has about 47 GB of free space initially) matches the 16 GB Note 10.1 at $549, while the 32 GB Note 10.1 will cost you $599. So clearly these tablets are competing at different price points. 

The Surface 2 is hands down the best tablet for productivity. With its handy two-stage kickstand and the new backlit Touch and Type covers, which act as much as keyboards as screen covers, as well as the Windows 8.1 RT operating system and the inclusion of Microsoft Office 2013 Home and Student make it by far the most productive tablet available. However, the relatively new Windows Store has many important apps available, but is still missing some key apps, like Instagram, and has nowhere near the amount of apps that the Google Play Store and the Apple App Store offer.

The Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition is the polar opposite of the Surface 2. With a higher-resolution display and a very useful S-Pen stylus, as well as the vast app and media ecosystem offered by the Android OS and its associated app store, the Note 10.1 is up there with the iPad Air as one of the best tablets available for entertainment.

So it really comes down to whether you want a tablet that is geared towards productivity, i.e. a laptop replacement, or a tablet that offers the best for entertainment purposes. The difference in pricing is also a factor, as many will probably find the Galaxy Note 10.1 too expensive.

sábado, 14 de dezembro de 2013

Apple iPad Air vs Microsoft Surface 2: Tablet Comparison


The holiday season is almost upon us, and so the biggest players in the tablet market finally have their latest flagships already available. The iPad Air, from Apple, and Microsoft's Surface 2 are some of the most interesting tablet flagships this holiday season. Considering how Windows RT and the original Surface have both failed to gain significant market share in the tablet market, it'll be interesting to see how the second generation Surface fares. Both tablets have very high-end specs, including high-resolution displays and very powerful processors, along with a high price tag. But which one is worth your money the most?

Apple iPad Air Microsoft Surface 2
 Body    240 x 169.5 x 7.5mm, 469g (Wi-Fi)/478 (LTE)  275 x 172.5 x 8.9mm, 676g 
 Display   9.7" IPS LCD 2048 x 1536 (264ppi)  10.6" ClearType TFT LCD 1920 x 1080 (208ppi)
 Storage   16/32/64 GB, 1 GB RAM  32/64 GB (microSD expandable), 2 GB RAM
 Connectivity   Wi-Fi, GSM (2G), HSDPA (3G), LTE (4G)  Wi-Fi
 Camera (Rear)  5 MP with face detection, F/2.4 lens aperture, HDR and 1080p@30fps video  5 MP with LED flash and 1080p@30fps video
 Camera (Front)  1.2 MP with face detection and 720p@30fps video  3.5 MP with 1080p@30fps video
 OS  iOS 7  Windows 8.1 RT 
 Processor  Apple A7 (Dual-core Cyclone @ 1.4GHz + PowerVR G6430)  NVIDIA Tegra 4 (Quad-core Cortex-A15 @ 1.7GHz + 72-core ULP GeForce) 
 Battery  Non-removable Li-Ion 32.4Wh
 Usage time: Up to 10hrs
 Non-removable Li-Po 31.5Wh
 Usage time: Up to 10hrs 
 Accessories --  Optional keyboard covers:
 - Touch Cover 2 ($119)
 - Type Cover 2 ($129)
 - Power Cover ($199)
 Price
 $499 (16 GB, Wi-Fi only)
 $449 (32GB)


Design




Build and material quality is absolutely top-notch with these two tablets. The iPad Air has an aluminium unibody frame that's available in either "space" gray or silver. The Surface 2 is encased by silver-colored magnesium, or as Microsoft calls it, VaporMg. But what really sets the Surface 2 apart from all of its competitors is the built-in kickstand at the back, which this time around, stops at two different angles. It's also not very hard to notice that the iPad has some very thin bezels compared to the Surface 2, but that shouldn't really matter that much for most users, unless the looks of your tablet matter a lot to you.  

While in terms of materials the Surface 2 is on par with the iPad, and the kickstand is a very delightful feature, the Surface 2 falls behind severely in terms of dimensions and weight. It's actually not that thick, really. Measuring 8.9mm, it's on par with the ASUS Transformer Pad TF701T and the Lumia 2520, but it's still significantly thicker than the Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) and the iPad Air. The weight is what really bothers me. At 676g, not only is the Surface 2 not significantly lighter than its predecessor, it's also the heaviest tablet we've seen this year. In fact, it's almost as heavy as the first-generation iPad, and is about 200g heavier than the iPad Air. The fact that the Surface 2 has a larger display than its competitors partially justifies the below average weight, and the larger area of the device also means that, due to the weight distribution, the Surface 2 might not feel as heavy as its weight suggests. 

We must, of course consider that the iPad Air and the Surface 2 have completely different purposes. While the iPad air is a device geared towards entertainment, the Surface 2 has productivity written all over it, considering that the official keyboard covers are an essential part of the Surface experience. There are three different keyboard covers available for the Surface 2, all of which attach to the magnetic connector on the tablet's bottom and double as a cover for the tablet's screen. There's the Touch Cover 2, which is 2.75mm thin and whose keyboard has capacitive buttons, not physical ones, and the keys are backlit. I'm not sure how Microsoft managed to put backlighting on such a thin keyboard, but it's very impressive. Then there's the Type Cover 2, which swaps the capacitive buttons for physical ones, thus providing a much better typing experience, but with the trade-off that the thickness increases to 5.4mm. Finally, there's the Power Cover, which is yet to be released, and is just like the Type Cover 2, but adds an integrated battery that extends the tablet's battery life, but it should be considerably thicker than the Type Cover 2. All of the covers provide an excellent typing experience and, together with the inclusion of Microsoft Office 2013 Home and Student, puts the Surface's productivity potential way ahead of the iPad Air. 

Display

The Surface 2 and the iPad Air both feature excellent displays. With the iPad Air it's the usual 9.7" 2048 x 1536 "Retina" display, which is very crisp thanks to its 264ppi pixel density. The use of IPS technology attributes wide viewing angles to the display, and colors are both bright and accurate. The 4:3 aspect ratio of the iPad is great for browsing the web and reading e-books, but is known for causing letterboxing when viewing videos and movies. 

The Surface 2 has a much larger 10.6" display, but unlike its predecessor is suited with a good screen resolution. 1920 x 1080 pixels give the Surface 2 a pixel density of 208ppi, which is obviously less than the iPad Air's 264ppi. Both displays are very sharp, though, and the iPad Air's higher ppi is only significant enough to be slightly noticeable, and is likely to only make a difference when viewing very small text. The display also presents us with wide viewing angles and good color reproduction. The 16:9 aspect ratio of the Surface 2 is great for watching videos, but it does make use in portrait mode almost unbearable, because the screen is too long and too narrow, so keep in mind that you'll want to use the Surface 2 in landscape mode most of the time. 

In terms of sharpness and color reproduction, the two displays are quite close, even though the iPad Air is a tad sharper, but it all comes down to display size and aspect ratio. The Surface 2 displays might be a bit too large for you, and the choice in aspect ratio will depend on what you'll use your tablet for the most. 

Performance

These two tablets are powered by some of the best silicon available currently. With the Surface 2 it's an NVIDIA Tegra 4 processor, which consists of four Cortex-A15 CPU cores with a 1.7GHz clock speed plus a low-power shadow A15 core designed to help keep power consumption low. The Surface 2's high-resolution display is fitted with a large 72-core ULP GeForce GPU. While the Tegra 4's GPU's benchmark scores are decent, the actual architecture the GPU is built on might disappoint you, especially considering it's an NVIDIA GPU. You get 72 discrete shader cores, which separate into 48 pixel shader units and 24 vertex shader units. This discrete pixel and vertex shader architecture was abandoned many years ago in favor of the more efficient unified shader architecture, which all current mobile and PC GPUs use, save for the Tegra 4. But as long as the benchmark scores are good enough, the older architecture won't really affect the user's experience. But, even though it's based on old architecture, the Tegra 4 has a very good GPU and yields some great gaming experience out of the small (but increasing) number of 3D intensive games on the Microsoft Store. Just know that the iPad Air will be a bit smoother most of the time. 

The iPad Air is powered by Apple's latest A7 processor. The A7's CPU consists of two Cyclone cores clocked at 1.4GHz. The Cyclone CPU is a custom ARM CPU designed by Apple, which is the first commercially available mobile CPU based on the ARMv8 64-bit architecture. While 64-bit's benefits lie mostly on larger RAM capacity, which isn't a concern for Apple devices, which are still on the 1 GB range, the architecture's larger memory registers does improve the overall efficiency of the CPU. Not only that, but the Cyclone core is just about the widest mobile CPU ever created, so we can expect to see single-threaded performance that's far ahead of any of its competitors, and is probably why Apple didn't need to go quad-core to keep its SoC offering competitive. The A7 is also fitted with a beefy PowerVR G6430 GPU, which, unlike the Tegra 4, is the pinnacle of contemporary mobile GPU architecture, with OpenGL ES 3.0 support and a unified shader architecture. So aside from the A7's higher benchmark scores compared to the Tegra 4, the A7 also has more potential for future-proofing.

But since babbling about architectures probably doesn't matter to you, let's get to the benchmarks. First up is Geekbench 3, which measures CPU and memory speed. Note that since the Geekbench 3 app isn't available for Windows RT, I had to use the results from the closest match to the Surface 2 I could find running Android: The 1.9GHz Tegra 4-powered ASUS Transformer Pad. Since the clock speed here is 200MHz higher than on the Surface 2, keep in mind that the Surface 2's performance should be lower, however, since I'm comparing devices from completely different OSes, the difference between the Surface 2 and the Transformer Pad results I used here might account for more than just the 200MHz clock speed difference. Don't expect a huge performance gap between the two Tegra 4 devices, though.
This chart illustrates how the A7 has much better single-threaded performance compared to its rivals, and how that allows the SoC to offer competitive multi-threaded performance with half the core count of its competitors and a much lower clock speed. The A7 actually even beats the Transformer Pad (and probably beats the Surface 2 by a slightly larger margin) in multi-threaded performance, but not by much. It's a bit more complex than that though. It's still true that the Surface 2 has double the thread count compared to the A7, so it should be noted that, while having strong single-threaded performance is more important for overall performance, having more threads is better for things like multi-tasking, something that, coincidentally, is an important aspect of the Surface 2's productivity potential. 

 Moving on to graphics tests, the Surface 2's results don't look so good. The Surface 2 is actually one of the slowest Tegra 4 implementations available, maybe because of the OS it runs on, or maybe because the graphics clock is reduced along with the CPU core. The iPad Air, along with Samsung and Qualcomm's latest offerings, trumps the Surface 2 in this test. In fact, the Surface 2's performance in this specific test is almost identical to the iPad 4.
Moving on to the Onscreen T-Rex HD test, which is run on the devices' native resolutions, we see the iPad Air's higher pixel count holding it back, so that the 1080p Samsung Galaxy Note III outperforms it. Even though it has to power approximately 700 thousand more pixels than the Surface 2, the iPad Air still manages to beat it by a moderately large margin.
The lighter Egypt HD test now causes the Surface 2 to fall way behind all of its competitors, while the iPad Air sits comfortably between the Snapdragon 800 and the Exynos 5420.
Finally, the Egypt HD test run on native resolution shows the iPad Air once again falling behind the Note IIIs slightly, but still far ahead of the Surface 2.

Microsoft clearly doesn't care as much about gaming performance as Apple, otherwise they would've worked on optimizing the OS for its processor a bit better to at least yield benchmark scores that are close to other Tegra 4 implementations on Android. Then again, given that the Surface 2 is more of a working device than a playing device, I can understand why Microsoft wasn't too concerned about the GPU. 


Power Consumption

It's a bit strange that the iPad Air is so much thinner and lighter than the Surface 2 and yet has a bigger battery. The latest iPad comes with a 32.4Wh battery, which is slightly larger than Surface 2's 31.5Wh battery. Both are very large batteries, and should keep these devices running for quite some time on a single charge. However, the iPad Air does have more pixels to power, which increases overall power consumption compared to the Surface 2. As for how much power the SoC draws, both tablets have processors built on 28nm circuitry. The A7 has less CPU cores to power versus the Tegra 4, but the T4's shadow A15 core saves it in that regard. When running intensive tasks, however, the Dual-core Cyclones are likely to draw less power than the Quad-core A15s. Anyways, both Microsoft and Apple claim the same 10 hour battery life.

Conclusion

It's actually very easy to choose whether the Surface 2 or the iPad Air is better for you. If you want a tablet that offers the best productivity in the tablet market, pick the Surface 2. On the entertainment side Microsoft is making strides with Windows RT, as the 8.1 update improves the OS significantly and the Windows Store is improving on a daily basis, and with decent gaming performance and a bright, sharp display, the Surface 2 is not bad at all for entertainment, but the iPad Air is certainly better on this front. With almost unmatched gaming performance and one of the best displays in the mobile market, as well as what is just about the best app selection in existence, the iPad Air tackles your entertainment needs with near perfection. Of course, if you're fine with third-party bluetooth keyboards, the iPad Air, with its iWork app suite, also can also be used for productivity. While not as good as Microsoft's keyboard Covers, the third-party iPad keyboards are decent alternatives.

There's also the pricing factor. The Surface 2 undercuts the iPad Air with a starting price of $449 for 32 GB of storage, compared to the iPad Air, which sells for $499 with 16 GB of storage (Note: Windows 8.1 RT takes quite a lot of space out of the Surface 2's 32 GB capacity, and with Office included you'll only have about 15/16 GB available). The pricing is still similar though, and it'll almost definitely come down to whether you want a device for work or for entertainment.

sábado, 28 de setembro de 2013

Microsoft Surface Pro 2: Haswell CPU, still $899

The first generation of Surface tablets didn't sell nearly as well as Microsoft expected, so now Microsoft is trying to save its tablet platform with a new line of Surface tablets. The new Surface Pro 2 tablet brings an Intel Haswell Core i5 CPU, better battery life, and various changes to the innovative keyboard covers. Here's hoping that these changes are enough to bring Microsoft into relevance in the tablet market.













The chassis of the Surface Pro 2 is almost identical to its predecessor, except for the built-in kickstand now supporting the tablet at two different angles, and an upgrade from a full-sized USB 2.0 port to USB 3.0. The kickstand's two angles make it much more convenient to use, and is an appreciable improvement.

Under the hood, the only improvement the Surface 2 Pro brings is a Haswell-based Intel Core-i5 CPU, which means a lot of processing power for a tablet. Haswell's power efficient architecture means the tablet can last much longer on a single charge. The Surface Pro 2 also keeps the Pro Pen digitizer used in its previous model.

The Surface Pro 2 will run on Windows 8.1, so unlike the Surface 2, which runs on Windows 8.1 RT, it can run any legacy Windows application and isn't limited to the somewhat empty Windows Store. 


Last but not least, the new Surface tablets bring exciting new changes to their keyboard covers. There's the updated Touch Cover 2, which is now even thinner than last year's model, and has more accurate capacitive keys and has even backlit keys. There's also the Type Cover 2 (this one has physical keys), also lighter than its predecessor and also backlit. Finally, Microsoft is adding the Power Cover, which is like the Type Cover 2, but adds a secondary battery at the expense of extra thickness, giving the Surface tablets extra battery life.

The new Surface tablets are expected to be available during October. If you want a portable yet powerful and productive tablet, and you don't need to use any legacy Windows programs, the Surface 2 could suit you very well. It'll sell for $449 for the 32 GB version (although there'll be only about 16 GB of user-available storage) or $549 for 64 GB, without the keyboard included. If, however, you have (many) extra bucks to spend, and are willing to sacrifice thinness for more powerful internals and access to any legacy Windows app, go with the Surface Pro, which sells for $899 for 64 GB of storage and goes all the way to $1,799 for 512 GB storage, keyboard covers not included. In any case, the keyboard covers work for both tablets, and the Touch Cover 2 sells for $120, the Type Cover 2, for $130, and the Power Cover still has no pricing and will only be available next year. 

Microsoft Surface 2: Tegra 4 and 1080p display


The first-generation Surface RT didn't have nearly as many sales as Microsoft expected, and the Windows-on-ARM platform, Windows RT, was abandoned by pretty much every OEM that had invested on it. Now Microsoft is trying to save its tablet platform with a new line of Surface tablets. The Surface RT successor, the Surface 2, adds a high resolution display and a powerful SoC in a thinner, slightly lighter chassis. Here's hoping that these changes are enough to bring Microsoft into relevance in the tablet market.


The new Surface 2 is appreciably thinner than its predecessor. At 8.9mm, it's just as thin as the Google Nexus 10. The back casing is reminiscent of the original Surface RT, as it is still made of durable "VaporMg" magnesium, this time, however, the metal back has a much lighter gray color, as opposed to the Surface RT's dark gray. The back camera has gone from 1.2MP on the original Surface RT to 5MP on the new model, with 1080p video capability. The built-in kickstand makes an appearance again, but this time it can support the tablet at two different angles, making it way more convenient to use. The ports on the tablet include a full-sized USB 3.0 port, a microSD card slot, and on the bottom, magnetic pins for the keyboard covers. The front is pretty much identical to the original Surface RT. The 10.6" ClearType 1080p display is surrounded by large enough, though not too large bezels, and above the display is the 3.5 MP rear camera which also features 1080p video recording. Below the display is the usual capacitive Windows button. 

The Surface 2's display, like the Surface RT's, is pretty large for a tablet. At 10.6 inches, it's slightly larger than the usual Android tablet. For that reason, it's pretty hefty, weighing 675g, even more than the iPad 4. The display features ClearType technology, also used in last-year's Surface tablets, and that means that the display's various layers are laminated into a single layer, reducing glare. This should be very appreciable, especially when trying to use the tablet outdoors. The 1080p resolution isn't the highest resolution on a tablet, since the latest iPads and Android tablets have considerably higher resolutions, and the larger-than-usual display results in an ok pixel density of 208 ppi. It may not be the highest pixel density on a tablet, but it's still very crisp. 

Under the hood is the powerful NVIDIA Tegra 4 processor. That means the Surface 2 is powered by four Cortex-A15 cores clocked at 1.7GHz and a beastly 72-core GeForce GPU. The powerful SoC is fitted with 2 GB of RAM. Though the SoC is very powerful, Microsoft still claims up to 10 hours of video playback for the Surface 2.

The ARM-based SoC means the Surface 2 runs on the Windows 8.1 RT operating system, which unfortunately didn't see much success last year. Windows 8.1 RT is essentially just like Windows 8.1, except it can only run apps from the Windows Store, and cannot run legacy Windows Apps. Unfortunately, the Windows Store has still not matured very well, and is missing some essential apps, like Instagram, which might make the operating system a deal-breaker for people who want to do more than web browsing and working with Office 2013. 

Last but not least, the new Surface tablets bring exciting new changes to their keyboard covers. There's the updated Touch Cover 2, which is now even thinner than last year's model, and has more accurate capacitive keys and has even backlit keys. There's also the Type Cover 2 (this one has physical keys), also lighter than its predecessor and also backlit. Finally, Microsoft is adding the Power Cover, which is like the Type Cover 2, but adds a secondary battery at the expense of extra thickness, giving the Surface tablets extra battery life.

The new Surface tablets are expected to be available during October. If you want a portable yet powerful and productive tablet, and you don't need to use any legacy Windows programs, the Surface 2 could suit you very well. It'll sell for $449 for the 32 GB version (although there'll be only about 16 GB of user-available storage) or $549 for 64 GB, without the keyboard included. If, however, you have (many) extra bucks to spend, and are willing to sacrifice thinness for more powerful internals and access to any legacy Windows app, go with the Surface Pro, which sells for $899 for 64 GB of storage and goes all the way to $1,799 for 512 GB storage, keyboard covers not included. In any case, the keyboard covers work for both tablets, and the Touch Cover 2 sells for $120, the Type Cover 2, for $130, and the Power Cover still has no pricing and will only be available next year. 

sábado, 21 de setembro de 2013

PlayStation 4 vs Xbox One: Which Is Better?


It's been eight years since a new generation of game consoles arose, and now we see the two companies that dominated the console industry during the last 8 years at it again. Sony's next-gen PlayStation 4 and Microsoft's Xbox One are both excellent consoles, each with their advantages and disadvantages. Despite the fact that the Xbox One initially received very negative reactions due to certain policies, among other things, many of these are no longer concerns since Microsoft addressed the issues. 

Design



The Xbox One's is a big departure from its predecessor. While the Xbox 360 had a more curved structure, the One's much more...rectangular. In my opinion, the One looks very futuristic. Its all black design is very stylish, and the white Xbox logo contrasts nicely with the black body. The One doesn't appear to have any buttons on the front, and since the front now apparently only houses the slot for the Blu-ray/DVD player, it gives the console a very, very clean look. The included Kinect 2.0 sensor follows the same design language: and all-black design with a white Xbox logo on the right side. So does the controller, whose paintjob is also back, and the Xbox button, also white. The physical dimensions and ergonomics of the controller are very reminiscent of the Xbox 360's controller. The button setup is also the same. Basically, a beautiful, uniform, clean and futuristic design.



While the Xbox One's design is an overhaul from its predecessors, Sony has somewhat kept the design language of the PS4 similar to its PS3 parent. I've even heard people joking that the PS4 looks like two PS3s (Slim version) sticked together. The PS4 maintains the stylish jet black paintjob that dates back to the PS2. The console follows a very rectangular look, but has a recess across the console's length (vertically) on the middle, making it somewhat reminiscent of a double-tower building. Another thinner line running across the console horizontally emanates a blueish light on one of the sides when the console is on. Very stylish!



The DualShock 4 controller is ergonomically similar to its predecessors, and also presents a black design and the very same button configuration. The big changes here are a touchpad located at the top center of the controller and a six-axis gyro-sensor built into the console. I believe the touchpad won't be very useful, and it looks like it's a bit awkward to reach while holding the controller, but the gyro sensor could prove to be a very welcome addition.

Performance

Since 2005 graphics processors have made astounding progress (Moore's Law, anyone?), so the Xbox One obviously gets an equally large leap from its predecessor. Microsoft, as well as Sony, have decided not to use extremely powerful CPUs in their consoles' SoCs. The Xbox One is powered by eight AMD Jaguar x86-64 cores @ 1.6GHz. If you follow AMD's APU roadmap, you should be asking yourself "Wait, Jaguar?", and that is because Jaguar is an APU aimed at being ultra-mobile and power efficient, the kind that ends up in tablets. So it suffices to say it doesn't offer a lot of performance, so why use it in a gaming console? Well, virtually no games require a lot of CPU performance, and the smaller cores also help drive the product's price down. But the CPU isn't that weak anyways. Think of it like this: its performance should be similar to an octa-core Cortex-A15. But still, it could limit developers' abilities to produce more complex AI.

The GPU, unlike the CPU, is very powerful. It's a derivative from AMD's GCN architecture, and it features 768 unified shader cores, 48 Texture Mapping Units and 16 Render Output Units at a clock speed that originally was 800 MHz, but Microsoft has changed it to 853 MHz. At this clock rate, the GPU should give 1.31 TFLOPS of compute power. For comparison, this GPU should yield performance similar to a desktop GeForce GTX 650 Ti or a notebook GTX 765M. 

Microsoft did a rather unusual thing with the Xbox One's memory subsystem. Instead of simply throwing the fastest bus type/width (256-bit GDDR5 in this case), and frequency available for its time, Microsoft opted for a rather weak 256-bit wide DDR3 @ 2133 MHz memory controller. This results in 68.2 GB/s peak memory bandwidth, and that is really not much for today's standards. But, like I said, Microsoft did something unusual. They included a 32 MB large eSRAM memory into the SoC. In a properly optimized game, the eSRAM would unload tasks from the main memory controller, thus extending the effective memory bandwidth an extra (theoretical) 102 GB/s. So, despite having a much weaker memory subsystem than the PS4, the Xbox One will still offer similar memory bandwidth.

Sony also has a very similar approach for its internals. The SoC that powers the PS4 is also based on eight AMD x86-64 Jaguar CPU cores clocked at 1.6 GHz. Sony also uses an AMD GCN-derived GPU to drive its graphics. While architecturally, the PS4's GPU is identical to the Xbox One's, the spec sheet clearly reveals that Sony's GPU solution packs more power, and that is because the PS4's GPU packs 1152 shader cores, 72 Texture Mapping Units and 32 Render Output Units. At its max 800 MHz clock rate, this GPU has 1.84 TFLOPS of peak compute power, and that is significantly more than the Xbox One's 1.31 TFLOPS. Also, the PS4 has a much more developer-friendly approach to delivering its peak memory bandwidth capability. Sony simply opted for a powerful 256-bit wide GDDR5 @ 5.5 GHz solution, resulting in 176 GB/s peak memory bandwidth. Basically, Sony's GPU architecture choice is exactly the same as the Xbox One's, but simply has more execution resources at its disposal, and the PS4's memory subsystem doesn't require code optimizations to be fully utilized, which isn't quite the case with the Xbox One.

While the PS4 has significantly more GPU compute power than the Xbox One, the fact that both consoles use SoCs that are architectually almost identical means it is very easy for developers to port games from one platform to the other. Also, the fact that both consoles moved to an x86 CPU architecture means there's no chance of backwards compatibility with Xbox 360 and PS3 games, but it also means that porting a game to PCs won't be hard at all.

Software Features

This generation of game consoles isn't investing as much in hardware (there are many high-end PC GPUs that are much more powerful than the PS4's and the Xbox One's GPUs), but is emphasizing software a lot. Specifically, Microsoft and Sony tried hard to make their new consoles not only for video-games, but also for entertainment in general. The Xbox One, for instance, uses something Microsoft calls HDMI Pass-thru, which basically means you can connect your cable or satellite box to your Xbox One and watch TV on it. Microsoft made the Xbox One a sort of Dual OS machine. It contains the OS in which the games are run, and along with it a custom Windows OS, both running simultaneously. While the two OSes running simultaneously means there may be less CPU/Memory resources for games, it opens many doors for entertainment in these systems. For instance, the Xbox One allows you to video chat on Skype while you play a game. In this case, the screen will be split between the two applications (Much like in Windows 8), so that the bigger part of the screen is occupied by the game and a small portion of screen estate beside it will display the Skype app.

The Kinect 2.0 sensor is also a nifty addition that comes included with the console. It's now considerably more precise than the 1st-gen Kinect, and Microsoft claims it's now able to detect even the slightest wrist movements. 

Sony is also trying to move the capabilities of the PS4 beyond just gaming. For instance, there's a Share button located on the PS4's controller which allows you to seamlessly record a video of some of your gameplay and then upload it to any social network, all this without interrupting your game. 

Conclusion

We can observe a clear path that each of the consoles are taking. The Xbox One is more focused in delivering much more than just gaming. It's trying to be your video game console, and well as your TV receiver and your social networking machine, and Microsoft's choice for a lighter GPU and memory subsystem reflect that. Sony, while making some effort to deliver entertainment beyond just gaming, is still investing a lot on its gaming capabilities, with their choice for a more powerful GPU and memory bandwidth. So ultimately, the choice of which console is better will depend on what you want from the console. If you want an entertainment center, and think that a console should do more than just running games, go with the Xbox One, but if you'll use your console mainly for just gaming, the PS4 appears to be the better option. There's the difference in pricing, too. While the Xbox One, which will be available in November 22, will sell for $499 (Kinect 2.0 included), the PS4 will be available as of November 15, for a more affordable $399. 

quarta-feira, 4 de setembro de 2013

Microsoft Surface 2 Powered By Tegra 4 Benchmarks Leak

Another unannounced device has just popped up on GFXBench's online database, and this time it's Microsoft's Surface 2 tablet. 


Looks like Microsoft hasn't given up on Windows RT after all, but it doesn't seem like they're putting much effort into it either, as the leaked device has a screen resolution of 1360 x 768 in plain 2013. The device, named Microsoft Surface 2, boasts a very powerful Tegra 4 processor, at least. (Recap: The Tegra 4 consists of four Cortex-A15 cores clocked at up to 1.9GHz and a 72-core GeForce GPU)


There are only two results on the database. One is for the T-Rex HD Offscreen test, which gets a score of 10.6 fps. I certainly hope the performance is being affected by unfinished software, because this score is mediocre compared to other Tegra 4 devices. For comparison, the iPad 4 scores 19.1 fps on the same test, and it's 10 months old!
The other benchmark score is for the Onscreen T-Rex HD test, and that gets a score of 24.4 fps, which is considerably above the iPad 4's 12.7 fps score, but that's just because of the Surface 2's mediocre resolution. 

Take this all with a grain of salt, of course, but if this is really the Surface 2 I can almost guarantee it'll be another flop. 1360 x 768 resolution for a 10.6-inch display (the size of the last-gen Surface, and most probably the Surface 2 too) was acceptable for a high-end device in 2011, but not today. And unless these benchmark scores are justified by unfinished software, then the Surface 2 will be far behind in terms of performance, even compared to other devices powered by the very same SoC. 

Update: The Surface 2 has been officially announced, and the resolution of the device, unlike what the benchmark leak reports, is 1920 x 1080. Also, the Tegra 4 SoC is now officially confirmed, though clocked at a lower 1.7GHz.