Notebookcheck

Apple iPad 6 2018 Tablet Review

Klaus Hinum, J. Simon Leitner (translated by Andreas Osthoff), 04/01/2018

Now with Pencil support. Apple refreshes its iPad and equips the tablet with a new chip (SoC), and the Apple Pencil is now supported as well. This was reserved for the Pro models until now. Otherwise, there are not many new features, as you can see in our review of the 2018 iPad.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here
Italian Translator
 - Details here

Apple's new iPad comes with Apple Pencil support
Apple's new iPad comes with Apple Pencil support

The new 2018 iPad is supposed to be an iPad for education purposes. However, Apple does not change a lot. A new processor promises marginal performance improvement (which we will see below), but it does not really expand the functionality of the Apple iPad. This means the support for the Apple Pencil is the big seller for the education sector. Apple also grants discounts for schools. How much is Apple's latest iPad? Instead of $329, schools will get the iPad 6 for $299, but the Apple Pencil is still not included. It retails for $99, and it costs $89 for schools.

Apple iPad 6 2018 (iPad Series)
Memory
2048 MB 
Display
9.7 inch 4:3, 2048 x 1536 pixel 264 PPI, Multi-touch, native pen support, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB NVMe, 32 GB 
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 1 HDMI, Audio Connections: headset, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 3-axis gyroscope, accelerometer, barometer, Strom, USB and HDMI combined in Lightning Port
Networking
Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.5 x 240 x 169.5 ( = 0.3 x 9.45 x 6.67 in)
Battery
32.4 Wh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Apple iOS 11
Camera
Webcam: f2.4, 1080p Video, no OIS
Primary Camera: 8 MPix
Secondary Camera: 1.2 MPix FaceTime f2.2 720p Video
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo at the bottom, 12 Months Warranty, fanless
Released
03/29/2018
Weight
469 g ( = 16.54 oz / 1.03 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
349 Euro

 

Case - new iPad is similar to the iPad Air

A look at the size comparison confirms the suspicion: The new iPad 6 uses the case from the previous model or its predecessor, respectively. The Apple iPad Air already used this chassis as well. This is not a big surprise since the familiar case with a height of 7.5 mm and a weight of around 470 grams is still a very good base for a tablet. The weight is more important for a tablet than one millimeter more or less anyway. For comparison: Samsung's Galaxy Tab S3 tips the scale at 434 grams, the Pixel C weighs 517 grams, and the Huawei MediaPad M2 is about 500 grams.

A quick reminder about the familiar case: The aluminum chassis (240 x 169.5 mm) supports Apple's Touch-ID fingerprint scanner inside the Home button. The build quality is very good, just like the stability of the case. More information about the case is available in our reviews of the 2017 Apple iPad or the Apple iPad Air 2, respectively. We also recommend a look at our review of the original Apple iPad for nostalgic reasons. Steve Jobs' first iPad from 2010 with a 25 Wh battery tipped the scale at about 700 grams and was almost twice as thick as the new iPad at 13.4 mm.

Size Comparison

Connectivity - iPad 2018 with Pencil, but for a price...

Except for the update from the Apple A9 processor to the A10 Fusion chip, the internals are pretty much the same. You still get the Lightning port for charging and data exchange at the bottom, and there is still a 3.5 mm stereo jack on the upper left. A switch for wireless audio transmission would have probably been too expensive in this price-sensitive education market.

The support for the Apple Pencil is a new feature. This means the active stylus from Apple not only works with the iPad Pro 10.5 (review) and the iPad Pro 12.9 (review), but it also now works with Apple's cheapest tablet. The price of $99 is high, but (less expensive) solutions from other manufacturers work as well. A compatible stylus from Logitech, for example, retails for 49 Euros (~$60).

A quick look at the different SKUs: The base model is equipped with Wi-Fi and 32 GB storage and is available in the colors Space Gray, Silver and Gold. The model with 128 GB storage retails for $429 and there will also be a 4G model for $459 or $559, respectively (with 32 or 128 GB storage). The optional Apple Care+ package costs $69 and also covers two "accidental repairs" within two years, each subject to a $49 service fee each. This means the repair of a broken display will "cost" $118. When and where is the new iPad available? You can order it right now from Apple (online and stores) and retailers should have it in stock soon. We do not expect any special iPad offerings soon, and retailers are usually not much cheaper than Apple.

Lightning Connector for charging and data exchange
Lightning Connector for charging and data exchange
Still available: 3.5 mm stereo jack for headphones
Still available: 3.5 mm stereo jack for headphones

Software

The iPad is shipped with the current iOS 11.3 which was still brand-new at the time of the review, and we noticed some stability issues. Some games and benchmarks just crashed without an error message.

iOS still runs very well on the inexpensive iPad in general. Stutters on the UI are very rare (see linked video below).

Communication and GPS - Improvements for Wi-Fi and 4G

The communication modules appear to be identical at first, but we can determine improvements compared to last year's model in our Wi-Fi test (reference router Linksys EA8500). The iPad 6 with dual-band Wi-Fi and MIMO support manages 20 - 30% higher maximum transfer rates (send and receive), so the affordable iPad can close the gap and reaches the very good level of the iPad Pro siblings.

Apple increases the number of LTE bands from 21 to 23. The bands 27 and 30 are new, and the latter is particularly important for the U.S. Bluetooth is still supported in version 4.2.

Our test model is the Wi-Fi-only version, which does not support GPS location. You will have to get a model with 4G support if you plan on using the iPad for navigation purposes.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
915 MBit/s ∼100% +61%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
914 MBit/s ∼100% +60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
615 MBit/s ∼67% +8%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
570 MBit/s ∼62%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
530 MBit/s ∼58% -7%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
528 MBit/s ∼58% -7%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
465 MBit/s ∼51% -18%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
214 MBit/s ∼23% -62%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
569 MBit/s ∼100% +14%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
514 MBit/s ∼90% +3%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
500 MBit/s ∼88%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
497 MBit/s ∼87% -1%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
389 MBit/s ∼68% -22%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
374 MBit/s ∼66% -25%
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
354 MBit/s ∼62% -29%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
237 MBit/s ∼42% -53%

Cameras - Technology from the iPad Air or iPhone 5s, respectively

There is nothing new in terms of cameras, either. The hardware is identical to the previous models with an 8 MP sensor at the rear (f/2.4). It should still be the same sensor we know from the iPhone 5s. The front cam is a 1.2 MP sensor for selfies and video conferences or FaceTime HD, respectively, as Apple calls it.

The rather outdated camera hardware still provides very good picture quality, at least in good lighting conditions. The main camera in particular can take sharp and high-contrast images. You will only start to notice drawbacks in terms of details and sharpness when you start to analyze picture details.

Front camera - good lighting conditions
Front camera - good lighting conditions
Rear camera HDR
Rear camera HDR
Rear camera
Rear camera
Rear camera
Rear camera

The analysis of the color accuracy of the main camera reveals slightly exaggerated colors, especially for yellow, red, and green. The same is true for the front camera, where we can also see problems for the presentation of white colors.

Contrast and sharpness main camera
Contrast and sharpness main camera
Color accuracy main camera, reference colors in the lower half
Color accuracy main camera, reference colors in the lower half
Contrast and sharpness front camera
Contrast and sharpness front camera
Color accuracy front camera, reference colors in the lower half
Color accuracy front camera, reference colors in the lower half

Input Devices & Handling

It is hard or basically impossible to find any new insights about the handling for a tablet, where the basic features did not change for years. Similar to its predecessors and the Apple smartphones, the 2018 iPad executes inputs quickly and reliably without noticeable or visible delays. This is also true for the login process via Touch ID fingerprint scanner inside the Home button.

The support for the Apple Pencil is a new feature. However, the latter is familiar and is already supported by the Pro models. The range of applications is greatly extended thanks to the Pencil, at least when you use the right applications. Among others, the Apple Pencil is supported by the apps Pages, Numbers, Keynote, and also Microsoft's Office app for iOS.

Retina Display - iPad 6 with proven technology

RGB sub pixel array of the IPS panel with smooth (glossy) surface
RGB sub pixel array of the IPS panel with smooth (glossy) surface

The Retina panel should be identical to the previous models. It features a resolution of 2048x1536 pixels (264 PPI) on a 9.7-inch screen. Apple still uses the 4:3 aspect ratio, which is a key difference compared to most Android tablet, which usually use widescreen panels. They have an advantage when it comes to watching videos or movies, but the 4:3 aspect ratio is usually a better choice for productive tasks like working with text documents, for example. 

Our measurements show a small advantage for the 2018 iPad compared to the direct predecessor. Apple improved the luminance slightly and the grayscale performance is a little bit better as well. However, our test model has a slightly higher black value (0.61 cd/m²) than last year's iPad, which results in a lower contrast ratio of 869:1.

534
cd/m²
538
cd/m²
510
cd/m²
498
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
493
cd/m²
498
cd/m²
515
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 538 cd/m² Average: 513.1 cd/m² Minimum: 4.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 530 cd/m²
Contrast: 869:1 (Black: 0.61 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.2 | 0.8-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 1 | 0.64-98 Ø6.6
97.5% sRGB (Calman)
Gamma: 2.28
ColorChecker - Color Accuracy
The Delta E 2000 (ΔE) result is a metric for the difference of two colors, the measured one and the real color. The smaller the value, the better the result (Wikipedia). The average ΔE result of 1.2 for the is very good and visual color differences between the real color and the displayed are very small. In comparison, the device class Tablet scored results ranging from 0.8 (minimum) to 29.43 (maximum). The category average of 6.3 ΔE is 81 % worse than the tested display. The maximum ΔE value of 3.2 of all tested colors is in line (average of 11.3 ΔE).
Grayscale
The grayscale values should be evently distributed and without any color tint. The difference between the measured and intended gray level are again measured using the Delta E 2000 (ΔE) formula. The average ΔE result of 1 for the is outstanding and differences between the real gray level and the displayed are only perceivable by trained experts. In comparison, the device class Tablet scored grayscale results ranging from 0.64 (minumum) to 98 (maximum). The category average of 6.6 ΔE is 84.8 % worse than the tested display.
Black Level
The black level measures the brightness of the display when displaying a black color. Ideally the measured brightness in cd/m² is as low as possible (0 cd/m² would be ideal, as OLED displays can achieve). The measured black level of 0.61 cd/m² is good. In comparison, the device class Tablet scored grayscale results ranging from 0.01 (minimum) to 275 (maximum). The category average of 0.8 cd/m² is 23.8 % worse than the tested display.
min
Minimum Brightness
We measured the minimal brightness of a white area at very low 4.1 cd/m² and therefore well suited even for dark environments. In comparison, the device class Tablet scored grayscale results ranging from 0.01 (minimum) to 204 (maximum). The category average of 13.5 cd/m² is 69.6 % worse than the tested display.
Gamma
The ideal Gamma value is 2.2 in Windows and OS X. The higher the distance to 2.2, the worse the image representation. We measured a gamma of 2.28 and therefore a distance of 0.08 to the ideal. In comparison, the device class Tablet scored grayscale results ranging from 0.72 (minimum) to 5.51 (maximum). The category average of 2.36 cd/m² is 3.39 % worse.
Apple iPad 6 2018
IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7
Apple iPad (2017)
IPS, 2048x1536, 9.7
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
IPS, 2224x1668, 10.5
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
IPS, 2732x2048, 12.9
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Super AMOLED, 2048x1526, 9.7
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
IPS, 2560x1600, 10.8
Screen
-10%
-13%
20%
-22%
-48%
Brightness middle
530
514
-3%
634
20%
650
23%
452
-15%
382
-28%
Brightness
513
485
-5%
625
22%
614
20%
468
-9%
378
-26%
Brightness Distribution
92
88
-4%
87
-5%
90
-2%
82
-11%
92
0%
Black Level *
0.61
0.46
25%
0.39
36%
0.42
31%
0.24
61%
Contrast
869
1117
29%
1626
87%
1548
78%
1592
83%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.2
1.4
-17%
1.9
-58%
1
17%
1.8
-50%
2.8
-133%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
3.2
2.9
9%
3.9
-22%
1.9
41%
4
-25%
6
-88%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1
2.1
-110%
2.8
-180%
1.5
-50%
1.2
-20%
3.5
-250%
Gamma
2.28 105%
2.22 108%
2.26 106%
2.25 107%
2.11 114%
2.33 103%
CCT
6588 99%
6647 98%
7027 93%
6734 97%
6500 100%
6903 94%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
82.32
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.06

* ... smaller is better

We did not detect PWM regulation of the background illumination. However, the display flickered at a very high frequency of 23.4 kHz at the lowest luminance. This might also be caused by external factors during the measurement. Even sensitive users should not have any problems with the iPad.

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 10750 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 588200) Hz was measured.

The new iPad shows slightly more accurate colors in the ColorChecker test, but the improvement is bigger for the grayscale. The DeltaE drops from 2.1 to 1.0 for the latest iPad model. However, this is not a visible advantage, because it is very hard to see any differences with the naked eye when the DeltaE value is below 3.0.

 

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
25.9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14.4 ms rise
↘ 11.5 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 44 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (26.1 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
26.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17.7 ms rise
↘ 18.7 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 10 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.7 ms).

You can also see the display content very well under sunlight (in this case spring, clear sky) thanks to the high maximum luminance. The reflections can be annoying depending on the viewing angle, but you should not have any problems in the shade. Apple products used in the sun also have the problem with darker displays once the device gets too warm. We did not test it with the iPad but noticed it quite often with the iPhone 7 (same SoC) at the beach.

Performance - Improvement thanks to Apple A10 Fusion chip

GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 shows 8% performance deficit over 30 runs
GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 shows 8% performance deficit over 30 runs
No deficit in T-Rex test (0.02% for the weakest run, note scaling!)
No deficit in T-Rex test (0.02% for the weakest run, note scaling!)
No performance degradation in Geekbench loop
No performance degradation in Geekbench loop

We are finally in a section where we can talk about news, at least when it comes to the latest iPad. Apple removes the old Apple A9 SoC and uses a new chip for the current iPad. It is an Apple A10 Fusion, a quad-core SoC that debuted in the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus. But wait, they launched almost two years ago, so the iPad is still a recycling product for the chip. 

Well, actually things aren't that bad, as is shown by our benchmarks. Apple scores good results across the board with the Apple A10 CPU. The single-core result in Geekbench 4.1/4.2 is 3499 points and therefore just 10% behind the Pro models with the A10X Fusion CPU. The difference is bigger in the multi-core test, where the Pro models are more than 50% faster. It seems the Apple A10 CPU cannot utilize all of its four cores in the current iPad; it can only use two. It is about 20 - 40% slower than the Pro models in the 3DMarks, and the Apple iPhone 7 with the same SoC is on a similar level in the benchmarks.

We can only see performance deficits caused by the passive cooling solution in demanding applications. The Manhattan 3.1 test results drop by about 8% over the course of 30 iterations with a big drop after the fifth run. The less challenging T-Rex test on the other hand does not lose any performance over 30 runs.

Geekbench 4.1/4.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
9358 Points ∼32% +57%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
9293 Points ∼32% +56%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
5952 Points ∼21%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (5922 - 5952, n=2)
5937 Points ∼21% 0%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
5922 Points ∼21% -1%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
5809 Points ∼20% -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
4187 Points ∼14% -30%
Average of class Tablet
  (1216 - 9358, n=25)
3728 Points ∼13% -37%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3710 Points ∼13% -38%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
3933 Points ∼66% +12%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
3924 Points ∼66% +12%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
3527 Points ∼59% +1%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (3499 - 3527, n=2)
3513 Points ∼59% 0%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
3499 Points ∼59%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1745 Points ∼29% -50%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1634 Points ∼28% -53%
Average of class Tablet
  (448 - 3933, n=25)
1418 Points ∼24% -59%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
726 Points ∼12% -79%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
1628 Points ∼96%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (1531 - 1628, n=3)
1567 Points ∼92% -4%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1531 Points ∼90% -6%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1213 Points ∼72% -25%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1007 Points ∼59% -38%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
811 Points ∼48% -50%
Average of class Tablet
  (9 - 1628, n=88)
721 Points ∼43% -56%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
699 Points ∼41% -57%
Graphics
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
6896 Points ∼75% +2%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (6760 - 6896, n=3)
6844 Points ∼74% +1%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
6760 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
4941 Points ∼53% -27%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
4569 Points ∼49% -32%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1602 Points ∼17% -76%
Average of class Tablet
  (98 - 8602, n=88)
1519 Points ∼16% -78%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
530 Points ∼6% -92%
Memory
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2654 Points ∼60% +99%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1931 Points ∼44% +45%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1341 Points ∼30% +1%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
1334 Points ∼30%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (1257 - 1334, n=3)
1303 Points ∼29% -2%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1257 Points ∼28% -6%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1176 Points ∼27% -12%
Average of class Tablet
  (56 - 3985, n=88)
902 Points ∼20% -32%
System
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
6820 Points ∼66%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (6097 - 6820, n=3)
6500 Points ∼63% -5%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
6097 Points ∼59% -11%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
4680 Points ∼46% -31%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3505 Points ∼34% -49%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2838 Points ∼28% -58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2337 Points ∼23% -66%
Average of class Tablet
  (482 - 6820, n=88)
1855 Points ∼18% -73%
Overall
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
3163 Points ∼73%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (2999 - 3163, n=3)
3086 Points ∼72% -2%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
2999 Points ∼70% -5%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
2441 Points ∼57% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2409 Points ∼56% -24%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1769 Points ∼41% -44%
Average of class Tablet
  (167 - 3282, n=88)
1039 Points ∼24% -67%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1005 Points ∼23% -68%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2419 Points ∼66% +68%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
2027 Points ∼55% +41%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
1988 Points ∼54% +38%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1798 Points ∼49% +25%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1721 Points ∼47% +20%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
1439 Points ∼39%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
 
1439 Points ∼39% 0%
Average of class Tablet
  (793 - 2653, n=42)
1336 Points ∼36% -7%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1098 Points ∼30% -24%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
4695 Points ∼87% +28%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
4537 Points ∼84% +23%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
3682 Points ∼68%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
 
3682 Points ∼68% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2943 Points ∼55% -20%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
2519 Points ∼47% -32%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1504 Points ∼28% -59%
Average of class Tablet
  (102 - 5384, n=42)
1195 Points ∼22% -68%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
239 Points ∼4% -94%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
3605 Points ∼76% +32%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
3558 Points ∼75% +30%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
2735 Points ∼58%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
 
2735 Points ∼58% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2578 Points ∼54% -6%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1957 Points ∼41% -28%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1642 Points ∼35% -40%
Average of class Tablet
  (134 - 3806, n=47)
1022 Points ∼22% -63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
296 Points ∼6% -89%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2445 Points ∼67% +59%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
1960 Points ∼54% +28%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
1960 Points ∼54% +28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1811 Points ∼50% +18%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
1535 Points ∼42%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (1522 - 1535, n=3)
1527 Points ∼42% -1%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1525 Points ∼42% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
1522 Points ∼42% -1%
Average of class Tablet
  (810 - 2555, n=45)
1268 Points ∼35% -17%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1074 Points ∼29% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
7434 Points ∼90% +22%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
7212 Points ∼87% +18%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
6095 Points ∼74%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (4057 - 6095, n=3)
4796 Points ∼58% -21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
4626 Points ∼56% -24%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
4320 Points ∼52% -29%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
4057 Points ∼49% -33%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1719 Points ∼21% -72%
Average of class Tablet
  (42 - 7525, n=45)
1649 Points ∼20% -73%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
399 Points ∼5% -93%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
4588 Points ∼72% +25%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
4521 Points ∼71% +23%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
3672 Points ∼58%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3438 Points ∼54% -6%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (2964 - 3672, n=3)
3223 Points ∼51% -12%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
2964 Points ∼46% -19%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
2584 Points ∼41% -30%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1840 Points ∼29% -50%
Average of class Tablet
  (53 - 4588, n=49)
1261 Points ∼20% -66%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
477 Points ∼7% -87%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
21886 Points ∼28% +41%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
19567 Points ∼25% +26%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
19534 Points ∼25% +26%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (15450 - 15626, n=3)
15525 Points ∼20% 0%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
15499 Points ∼20%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
15450 Points ∼20% 0%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
14698 Points ∼19% -5%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
13324 Points ∼17% -14%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
12947 Points ∼16% -16%
Average of class Tablet
  (3675 - 27021, n=127)
12577 Points ∼16% -19%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
110971 Points ∼24% +77%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
110148 Points ∼23% +76%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
63974 Points ∼14% +2%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (62626 - 63974, n=3)
63329 Points ∼13% +1%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
62626 Points ∼13%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
44645 Points ∼9% -29%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
35210 Points ∼7% -44%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
34002 Points ∼7% -46%
Average of class Tablet
  (2109 - 110971, n=127)
16233 Points ∼3% -74%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
7720 Points ∼2% -88%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
54449 Points ∼26% +46%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
54237 Points ∼26% +45%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
37676 Points ∼18% +1%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (37372 - 37746, n=3)
37598 Points ∼18% +1%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
37372 Points ∼18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
30277 Points ∼14% -19%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
29326 Points ∼14% -22%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
26875 Points ∼13% -28%
Average of class Tablet
  (2411 - 54449, n=128)
13800 Points ∼7% -63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
8481 Points ∼4% -77%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
225 fps ∼13% +80%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
224 fps ∼13% +79%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
125 fps ∼7%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
118 fps ∼7% -6%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (92 - 125, n=4)
111 fps ∼6% -11%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
110.3 fps ∼6% -12%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
96 fps ∼6% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
92 fps ∼5% -26%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
80.8 fps ∼5% -35%
Average of class Tablet
  (4.2 - 225, n=154)
23.9 fps ∼1% -81%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
12 fps ∼1% -90%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
59.7 fps ∼13%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
59 fps ∼13% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
59 fps ∼13% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
59 fps ∼13% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
59 fps ∼13% -1%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (57.7 - 59.7, n=4)
58.5 fps ∼13% -2%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
57.7 fps ∼13% -3%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
56 fps ∼12% -6%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
40 fps ∼9% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
19 fps ∼4% -68%
Average of class Tablet
  (3.7 - 59.7, n=158)
18.6 fps ∼4% -69%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
110 fps ∼20% +76%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
109 fps ∼20% +74%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
62.6 fps ∼11%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
58.9 fps ∼11% -6%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
60.7 fps ∼11% -3%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (58.7 - 62.6, n=4)
60.2 fps ∼11% -4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
48 fps ∼9% -23%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
44 fps ∼8% -30%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
40.6 fps ∼7% -35%
Average of class Tablet
  (1.8 - 110, n=93)
15.6 fps ∼3% -75%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
5.1 fps ∼1% -92%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
58.5 fps ∼16% +43%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
58 fps ∼16% +42%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (40.3 - 58.5, n=4)
48.7 fps ∼13% +19%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
46 fps ∼13% +12%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
40.9 fps ∼11%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
40.3 fps ∼11% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
34 fps ∼9% -17%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
28.7 fps ∼8% -30%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
26 fps ∼7% -36%
Average of class Tablet
  (2.9 - 58, n=96)
12.2 fps ∼3% -70%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
9.2 fps ∼3% -78%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
76 fps ∼14% +78%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
63 fps ∼12% +48%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
42.7 fps ∼8%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
42.2 fps ∼8% -1%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (41.3 - 42.7, n=3)
42.1 fps ∼8% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
32 fps ∼6% -25%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
28.5 fps ∼5% -33%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
18 fps ∼3% -58%
Average of class Tablet
  (2 - 83, n=43)
15.2 fps ∼3% -64%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3.2 fps ∼1% -93%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
59.4 fps ∼34% +118%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
43 fps ∼24% +58%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (27.3 - 59.4, n=3)
42.7 fps ∼24% +56%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
27.3 fps ∼16%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
27 fps ∼15% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
19 fps ∼11% -30%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
18.5 fps ∼11% -32%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
15 fps ∼9% -45%
Average of class Tablet
  (4.3 - 54.3, n=43)
10.4 fps ∼6% -62%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
6.7 fps ∼4% -75%
GFXBench 4.0
off screen Car Chase Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
19 fps ∼5%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
18 fps ∼5%
Average of class Tablet
  (2 - 24, n=21)
7.17 fps ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
2 fps ∼1%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
13 fps ∼11%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
10 fps ∼9%
Average of class Tablet
  (2 - 13, n=21)
5.08 fps ∼4%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
3.7 fps ∼3%
Basemark X 1.1
High Quality
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
21420 Points ∼49%
Average of class Tablet
  (1400 - 38721, n=33)
11178 Points ∼25%
Medium Quality
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
38353 Points ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
38353 Points ∼85%
Average of class Tablet
  (4017 - 42460, n=40)
18210 Points ∼40%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
1693 Points ∼90%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1322 Points ∼71% -22%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1059 Points ∼57% -37%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (1059 - 1693, n=4)
1313 Points ∼70% -22%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1061 Points ∼57% -37%
Average of class Tablet
  (426 - 1871, n=11)
823 Points ∼44% -51%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
615 Points ∼33% -64%
AnTuTu v7
MEM
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
12895 Points ∼74%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (12783 - 12895, n=2)
12839 Points ∼74% 0%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
12783 Points ∼73% -1%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
8364 Points ∼48% -35%
Average of class Tablet
  (4344 - 12895, n=6)
7962 Points ∼46% -38%
UX
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
54510 Points ∼93%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (51357 - 54510, n=2)
52934 Points ∼90% -3%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
51357 Points ∼88% -6%
Average of class Tablet
  (16170 - 54510, n=6)
31725 Points ∼54% -42%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
28103 Points ∼48% -48%
GPU
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
49141 Points ∼46%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (45772 - 49141, n=2)
47457 Points ∼44% -3%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
45772 Points ∼43% -7%
Average of class Tablet
  (9129 - 73621, n=6)
40386 Points ∼38% -18%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
33870 Points ∼32% -31%
CPU
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
54375 Points ∼54%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (50770 - 54375, n=2)
52573 Points ∼53% -3%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
50770 Points ∼51% -7%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
43350 Points ∼43% -20%
Average of class Tablet
  (14989 - 62327, n=6)
42886 Points ∼43% -21%
Total Score
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe
170921 Points ∼64%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (160682 - 170921, n=2)
165802 Points ∼62% -3%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
160682 Points ∼60% -6%
Average of class Tablet
  (44992 - 181614, n=6)
122959 Points ∼46% -28%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash
113687 Points ∼43% -33%

The iPad 6 is usually slightly ahead of the iPhone 7 in the browser benchmarks, but it is still significantly slower than the Pro models, even though the difference is smaller compared to the CPU and GPU benchmarks. The best devices in this ranking are Apple's latest iPhones with the new Apple A11 Bionic SoC.

Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone X
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash (IOS 11.1.2)
35255 Points ∼100% +26%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
35209 Points ∼100% +26%
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
34163 Points ∼97% +22%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
31188 Points ∼88% +12%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
30333 Points ∼86% +8%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 11.3)
27967 Points ∼79%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (24875 - 27967, n=3)
26298 Points ∼75% -6%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
24875 Points ∼71% -11%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
18148 Points ∼51% -35%
Apple iPad Mini 4
PowerVR GX6450, A8, 64 GB SSD (Safari iOS 9)
9962 Points ∼28% -64%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Samsung Browser 5.2)
9531 Points ∼27% -66%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 65)
6802 Points ∼19% -76%
Average of class Tablet
  (1238 - 31188, n=143)
5732 Points ∼16% -80%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
4768 Points ∼14% -83%
Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 49)
4682 Points ∼13% -83%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
362 Points ∼100% +81%
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
359 Points ∼99% +80%
Apple iPhone X
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash (Safari Mobile 11.0)
354 Points ∼98% +77%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
257 Points ∼71% +29%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
244 Points ∼67% +22%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
205 Points ∼57% +3%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
202 Points ∼56% +1%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (200 - 204, n=3)
202 Points ∼56% +1%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 11.3)
200 Points ∼55%
Apple iPad Mini 4
PowerVR GX6450, A8, 64 GB SSD (Safari iOS 9)
144 Points ∼40% -28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Samsung Browser 5.2)
132 Points ∼36% -34%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 65)
116 Points ∼32% -42%
Average of class Tablet
  (36 - 257, n=62)
97.3 Points ∼27% -51%
Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 49)
74 Points ∼20% -63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
67 Points ∼19% -66%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone X
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash (IOS 11.1.1)
224 Points ∼100% +34%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
223.5 Points ∼100% +34%
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
206.7 Points ∼92% +24%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
202.1 Points ∼90% +21%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
200.59 Points ∼90% +20%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 11.3)
167.2 Points ∼75%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (166 - 168, n=3)
167 Points ∼75% 0%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
165.86 Points ∼74% -1%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
128.6 Points ∼57% -23%
Average of class Tablet
  (12 - 202, n=57)
50.1 Points ∼22% -70%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Samsung Browser 5.2)
42.73 Points ∼19% -74%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 65)
36.127 Points ∼16% -78%
Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 49)
28.27 Points ∼13% -83%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
26.099 Points ∼12% -84%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch
Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 49)
9903 ms * ∼100% -866%
Average of class Tablet
  (969 - 43092, n=154)
9537 ms * ∼96% -830%
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
Mali-T830 MP2, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
6785.6 ms * ∼69% -562%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960s, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 65)
5947 ms * ∼60% -480%
Apple iPad Mini 4
PowerVR GX6450, A8, 64 GB SSD (Safari iOS 9)
2557 ms * ∼26% -149%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Samsung Browser 5.2)
2244.4 ms * ∼23% -119%
Apple iPad (2017)
A9 / PowerVR GT7600, A9, 128 GB NVMe
1457.7 ms * ∼15% -42%
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
1113.4 ms * ∼11% -9%
Average Apple A10 Fusion
  (1026 - 1113, n=3)
1081 ms * ∼11% -5%
Apple iPad 6 2018
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 11.3)
1025.5 ms * ∼10%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
972.7 ms * ∼10% +5%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND (Safari Mobile 10)
968.8 ms * ∼10% +6%
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
730.8 ms * ∼7% +29%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
719.7 ms * ∼7% +30%
Apple iPhone X
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash (IOS 11.1.2)
718 ms * ∼7% +30%

* ... smaller is better

Gaming – latest iPad also handles modern games

Modern games are no problem for the iPad, despite the slightly outdated SoC. Our tests with Gamebench showed that the current title Arena of Valor ran at a steady 60 FPS at the maximum settings in a 3-vs-3 multiplayer battle. World of Tanks Blitz also ran at 60 FPS with high settings. Only the demanding PUBG Mobile occasionally suffers from frame rate drops. The presentation is a bit jerky at 8x zoom. The iPhone X is much smoother in extreme situations, here. Still, the mobile version of the shooter is well playable with the iPad (tested with high details).

low med. high ultra
Asphalt 8: Airborne (2013) 29fps
Battle Bay (2018) 59fps
World of Tanks Blitz (2018) 59fps
Arena of Valor (2018) 59fps
Shadow Fight 3 (2018) 29fps
PUBG Mobile (2018) 292929fps
0102030405060Tooltip
Apple iPad 6 2018 A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 32 GB NVMe Arena of Valor high HD: Ø58.4 (47-60)
Apple iPhone X A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash Arena of Valor high HD: Ø59.3 (55-60)
Apple iPhone 7 A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe Arena of Valor high HD: Ø58.2 (53-60)

Quality journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible. We intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers.

Emissions

Temperature

The temperature development of the 2018 iPad is moderate. We can measure up to 39 °C at a hot spot (upper right edge in portrait mode) after one hour of 3D load, which is warm but not critical. The rest of the chassis stays pretty cool at 33 - 34 °C.

The temperatures were much lower during our WLAN test, where we just measured an uncritical 25 °C at the rear.

WLAN test front
WLAN test front
WLAN test rear (measured 25 °C with Type-K probe)
WLAN test rear (measured 25 °C with Type-K probe)
Relative Benchmark (high 3D load) front
Relative Benchmark (high 3D load) front
Relative Benchmark (high 3D load) rear (Type-K probe 39 °C)
Relative Benchmark (high 3D load) rear (Type-K probe 39 °C)
Max. Load
 34 °C32 °C30 °C 
 34 °C33 °C32 °C 
 36 °C38 °C35 °C 
Maximum: 38 °C
Average: 33.8 °C
33 °C33 °C34 °C
33 °C36 °C35 °C
35 °C39 °C37 °C
Maximum: 39 °C
Average: 35 °C
Power Supply (max.)  50 °C | Room Temperature 21 °C | Fluke 62 Mini, TMD-50

Speakers

The stereo speakers at the bottom of the tablet still provide a very linear sound, but they were much quieter than the 2017 iPad. The sound profile, however, is otherwise very similar. It is still comparatively easy to cover the speakers with the hand.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.7342530.830.33131.132.5403435.85032.432.16329.2308033.931.110028.338.312526.351.816026.148.620024.351.925022.955.1315225540022.363.350020.962.46302060.580019.363.2100018.959.9125018.562.3160017.962.2200017.862.8250017.669.3315017.864.7400017.761.7500017.659.3630017.666.2800017.861.31000017.856.71250017.759.21600017.862.1SPL30.875.7N1.537.2median 18.5Apple iPad 6 2018median 61.3Delta2.33.831.641.125.436.925.335.832.934.533.630.731.632.128.429.92742.520.850.12253.221.357.520.863.921.265.219.465.819.567.217.769.117.967.317.872.617.375.717.477.916.777.717.274.418.275.117.970.717.667.917.763.917.855.917.956.418.158.818.260.93084.61.359.1median 17.9Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017median 65.81.37.531.636.225.430.625.33132.931.533.634.231.634.628.437.42750.120.858.32261.321.367.520.868.521.267.819.465.519.565.217.767.317.967.517.865.217.372.617.467.516.768.117.268.718.272.517.970.617.66717.76117.858.217.96018.167.618.267.53081.21.351.3median 17.9Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017median 67.51.33.127.428.327.429.428.329.429.931.129.939.329.439.327.427.227.42625.72626.724.726.735.324.835.344.828.544.850.221.850.253.22253.252.222.452.256.422.756.460.323.360.365.924.465.966.219.666.265.51865.565.617.665.666.118.466.171.216.771.275.716.375.777.915.677.976.615.876.676.515.376.574.315.374.375.815.375.871.515.171.569.915.269.97515.27577.715.177.786.129.886.162.31.362.3median 66.2Apple iPad (2017)median 17.6median 66.2103.71039.432.336.737.632.439.433.729.835.128.731.333.730.631.425.928.431.730.631.829.739.639.12631.840.437.636.43739.440.433.335.529.331.536.233.328.436.131.129.228.628.428.826.833.430.225.428.831.125.63625.721.331.14133.546.841.623.3415447.857.148.822.55457.647.263.655.622.457.663.956.473.260.921.363.969.859.274.862.118.469.868.756.176.862.917.568.77058.379.665.817.57069.95478.462.517.269.965.248.576.358.216.865.266.949.175.956.917.366.977.456.978.76217.477.477.359.580.261.916.677.373.154.7806217.373.17555.780.862.717.67574.955.380.76317.674.97858.28263.617.77873.955.180.663.117.473.967.348.777.860.317.767.357.239.271.453.817.957.250.831.561.943.218.150.840.623.75233.918.140.68667.791.27429.88664.522.994.234.91.364.5median 67.3Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inchmedian 54median 76.3median 60.9median 17.7median 67.311.18.410.67.51.611.1hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Apple iPad 6 2018 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (75.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 3% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 17% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 5.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPad (2017) audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.23 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 33%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management - Apple A10 SoC in the new iPad consumes more power

Power Consumption

The entry-level iPad cannot score when it comes to power consumption. The measurements are higher, both in comparison to the class average and the other iPads. The provided 10-Watt power adapter is fully utilized under load, but the battery did not lose any capacity during a 10-minute test with maximum load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 2.2 / 7.8 / 7.9 Watt
Load midlight 12.6 / 12.8 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Apple iPad 6 2018
 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
8134 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
10875 mAh
Apple iPad (2017)
8.827 mAh
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2691 mAh
Apple iPhone X
2716 mAh
Apple iPhone 8
1821 mAh
Apple iPad Mini 4
 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
6000 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8
7500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
4450 mAh
Apple iPhone 7
1960 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch
6660 mAh
Average of class Tablet
 
Power Consumption
26%
10%
9%
61%
63%
70%
52%
40%
23%
61%
74%
41%
28%
Idle Minimum *
2.2
1.44
35%
1.55
30%
2.06
6%
0.72
67%
1.03
53%
0.54
75%
0.8
64%
2.08
5%
2.01
9%
0.89
60%
0.54
75%
1.6
27%
2.26 (0.4 - 13.6, n=289)
-3%
Idle Average *
7.8
6.12
22%
8.58
-10%
7.42
5%
2.45
69%
2.4
69%
1.63
79%
3.6
54%
3.5
55%
5.4
31%
3.13
60%
1.51
81%
4.13
47%
4.48 (0.5 - 33.3, n=290)
43%
Idle Maximum *
7.9
6.14
22%
8.59
-9%
7.47
5%
2.52
68%
2.6
67%
1.67
79%
3.9
51%
3.58
55%
5.44
31%
3.36
57%
1.54
81%
4.22
47%
4.93 (0.6 - 34.6, n=290)
38%
Load Average *
12.6
8.55
32%
10.09
20%
9.45
25%
3.84
70%
2.96
77%
2.74
78%
6.1
52%
6.97
45%
8.55
32%
3.93
69%
3.75
70%
6.57
48%
8.12 (1.5 - 72.4, n=274)
36%
Load Maximum *
12.8
10.62
17%
10.61
17%
12.31
4%
9.02
30%
6.6
48%
7.78
39%
8
37%
7.4
42%
11.53
10%
5.45
57%
5.01
61%
8.32
35%
9.53 (2 - 70.3, n=281)
26%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

The battery runtime in our web-browsing script via Wi-Fi at an adjusted luminance of 150 cd/m² is a bit shorter compared to the predecessor in a first attempt. Still, a runtime of almost 12 hours is pretty decent. Apple advertises a browsing time of 10 hours on its website for video and music playback, respectively. Also our results from the previous model are from our launch review with an older IOS version. Other reviews report similar run times with both devices running the same IOS version.

Our test model is also a bit worse under load compared to the previous model. We determine a little more than 3 hours with the app Relative Benchmark, and the GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 benchmark determines a comparable 196 minutes at the highest luminance.

Charging the iPad takes quite a while. Our model had already been charging for 6 hours and had only reached 88% battery level while we used demanding benchmarks with the display turned on. To be fair, the device was occasionally off the charger, but it is still pretty far away from a quick-charge device.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 54min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 05min
Apple iPad 6 2018
 mAh
Apple iPad (2017)
8.827 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
8134 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2017
10875 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825
6000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 2
4450 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M2 10 inch
6660 mAh
Battery Runtime
15%
3%
21%
55%
70%
21%
Reader / Idle
1496
2036
2919
1903
1357
988
WiFi v1.3
714
764
7%
693
-3%
736
3%
760
6%
895
25%
698
-2%
Load
185
225
22%
199
8%
257
39%
375
103%
396
114%
266
44%
H.264
845
629
676
551
493
602

Pros

+ Pencil support
+ lower price for schools and students
+ excellent build quality and choice of materials
+ good display

Cons

- non-laminated display with significant gap to the glass (but easier to repair in return)
- camera not improved for years
- no current SoC

Verdict

In review: Apple iPad 2018
In review: Apple iPad 2018

The 2018 iPad (sixth-generation) is the small update the spec sheet promises. It is faster, but a still outdated SoC and Apple Pencil support are the most important new features. Both the battery runtime and the power consumption suffered due to these updates but are still good in general.

The temperature development does not worry us and the display is still very good. The gap between the front glass and the display panel is not perfect, but the device is easier to repair if the display is broken in return. Whether the iPad can rival Chromebooks in schools, however, is questionable. The price with the Pencil and keyboard is much higher. This means the software has to make the difference, and Apple can usually score with high-quality apps.

Is the new iPad affordable? The new iPad is about $80 less expensive than its smaller sibling iPad Mini, and the Pro models start at $649 in Apple's online store. Good Android tablets with comparable displays are already available for less than $350.

Apple iPad 6 2018 - 04/10/2018 v6
Klaus Hinum, J. Simon Leitner

Chassis
89%
Keyboard
74 / 80 → 92%
Pointing Device
93%
Connectivity
37 / 65 → 56%
Weight
84 / 40-88 → 91%
Battery
95%
Display
90%
Games Performance
62 / 68 → 91%
Application Performance
70 / 76 → 92%
Temperature
88%
Noise
100%
Audio
69 / 91 → 76%
Camera
62 / 85 → 73%
Average
78%
90%
Tablet - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Apple iPad 6 2018 Tablet Review
Klaus Hinum, J. Simon Leitner, 2018-04- 1 (Update: 2018-05- 3)
Andreas Osthoff
Andreas Osthoff - Senior Editor Business
I grew up with computers and modern consumer electronics. I am interested in the technology since I had my first computer, a Commodore C64, and started building my own PCs after that. My focus here at Notebookcheck is the business segment including mobile workstations, but I also like to test new mobile devices. It is always a great experience to review and compare new products. My free time is filled with a lot of sports, in the summer mainly on my bike.