Notebookcheck

Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018, WiFi, 64 GB) Tablet Review

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Alex Alderson), 11/08/2018

Mighty, but still a tablet - The new iPad Pro is here with a fresh redesign, and it wants to prove that it can handle a full workday. This promise comes with caveats though. We will be covering the smaller 11-inch version in this review.

Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)

The iPad Pro was a gamble for Apple. The success that Microsoft eventually achieved with the Surface Pro indicated that people may adopt a larger iPad, but would creatives, office workers and photographers adopt the tablet as their work device? Apple first released the iPad Pro two years ago with a huge display, quad-speakers and professional accessories that persuaded many people to part with a lot of money. The series is now in its third iteration and remains focussed on being a laptop replacement for professionals. Apple has redesigned the iPad Pro with strikingly slimmer bezels and has equipped the device with the same Face ID technology that we have seen in the iPhone X, XR and XS to remove the need for a fingerprint sensor.

The smaller version of the new iPad Pro has an 11-inch display with an almost 3:2 aspect ratio. The release of the third generation has coincided with a price increase too, which is now almost a feature of all new Apple devices. The 11-inch iPad Pro starts at $799 (£769) for the 64 GB Wi-Fi version, which rises to $1,828 (£1,798) for the 1 TB LTE model with AppleCare+. Apple continues to sell the last-generation 10.5-inch iPad Pro too, which starts at $649 (£619) for the 64 GB Wi-Fi model.

The iPad Pro has few real competitors besides the Microsoft Surface Pro 6. We have also chosen to compare our test device against the Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy Tab S4. These Android tablets are significantly cheaper than the iPad Pro 11 but also have fewer features too.

Changelog:

  • 11.09.2018: Communication and Games sections added, list of benchmarks updated.
  • 11.14.2018: Display values and Speaker sections added.
  • 11.16.2018: Battery life values adjusted, Heat maps added.
  • 11.19.2018: GPS tests, Input Devices & Operation and Accessories sections added.
  • 11.20.2018: Review completed.
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 (iPad Pro Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
11 inch 2.86:2, 2388 x 1668 pixel 265 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, Liquid Retina Display, IPS, ProMotion technology, DCI-P3 colour space, True Tone display, oleophobic coating, fully laminated display, anti-reflective coating, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: Audio output over USB Type-C, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Barometer, Compass, Smart connector
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 5.9 x 248 x 179 ( = 0.23 x 9.76 x 7.05 in)
Battery
29.4 Wh, 7736 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Apple iOS 12
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix LED flash, Autofocus, OIS
Secondary Camera: 7 MPix LED flash, IR, True Depth
Additional features
Speakers: Four speakers, Keyboard: Virtual keyboard, Smart keyboard Folio Cover sold separately, Charger, USB Type-C cable, Swift Playgrounds, Clips, Siri, Photo Booth, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
468 g ( = 16.51 oz / 1.03 pounds), Power Supply: 74 g ( = 2.61 oz / 0.16 pounds)
Price
879 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Apple has given the iPad Pro a new look. The new model looks more elegant than its predecessor, although Apple has reduced the colour options to just silver and space grey with a black front; gold and rose gold are passé. The third-generation iPad Pro has noticeably smaller bezels too, while Apple markets the device as having a Liquid Retina display, which essentially means that it has rounded corners. The case has sharper edges too that remind us of the Surface design language.

The bezels are significantly narrower than any other iPad, but they remain large enough to hold the device with our thick editorial fingers without obscuring the display. The craftsmanship of our test device is impeccable; we cannot feel any uneven gaps or sharp edges between materials. Moreover, our space grey test device with its shiny, black Apple logo looks stylish. Apple has also made the new iPad Pro just 5.9 mm thick, which is around 1 mm thinner than its predecessor. The rear-camera protrudes more as a result though.

Our test device is relatively robust too, although we can distort the display by applying pressure to either the front or the back of the device. We can also easily twist the case, although it does not creak or emit a noise when we try to do so. Torture tests have demonstrated how weak the iPad Pro 11’s case is.

Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)
Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018)

Size Comparison

Connectivity

Apple has added a new storage option to this year’s iPad Pro release. The iPad Pro 11 is available with up to 1 TB of storage. Incidentally, the 1 TB version has 6 GB of RAM while all other models have 4 GB of RAM. Apple has increased the cost of the iPad Pro across all storage options too, the permutations of which we have included in a table below.

Model Connectivity Storage RAM Price – US Price - UK
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi 64 GB 4 GB $799 £769
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi & LTE 64 GB 4 GB $949 £919
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi 256 GB 4 GB $949 £919
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi & LTE 256 GB 4 GB $1,099 £1,069
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi 512 GB 4 GB $1,149 £1,119
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi & LTE 512 GB 4 GB $1,299 £1,269
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi 1 TB 6 GB $1,549 £1,519
iPad Pro 11 Wi-Fi & LTE 1 TB 6 GB $1,699 £1,669

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

All LTE models have a nano-SIM slot and an eSIM that is soldered to the Logic Board, which brings dual-SIM functionality to an iPad for the first time. Apple has also equipped all-new iPad Pros with a USB Type-C port rather than the Lightning Port to which we have grown accustomed with all recent iPad and iPhone devices. There is a magnetic docking port on the underside of the new iPad Pro too for connecting keyboards and other accessories.

The inclusion of a USB Type-C port has its advantages though. Existing USB Type-C chargers work with our test device as do HDMI adapters, although 16:9 external monitors maintain the iPad Pro’s 3:2 aspect ratio, so the outputted image is flanked by black bars. Unfortunately, iOS currently limits the functionality of the USB Type-C port to the extent that we could only import image files. There is no file manager, so manually transferring files is out of the question. Moreover, iOS does not recognise USB flash storage, which is disappointing.

The iPad Pro 11 also has a magnetic docking port for the Apple Pencil 2, which charges inductively when it is docked. There are POGO pins on the back of the device too for connecting accessories like the new Smart Keyboard Folio. Apple has removed the headphone jack though, which is frustrating as the case looks large enough to accommodate a 3.5 mm jack.

Left-hand side: microphone
Left-hand side: microphone
Right-hand side: magnetic port, volume buttons
Right-hand side: magnetic port, volume buttons
Top side: power button, speaker, microphone, speaker
Top side: power button, speaker, microphone, speaker
Underside: speaker, USB Type-C port, speaker
Underside: speaker, USB Type-C port, speaker

Software

Our test device arrived running iOS 12, which feels significantly faster than its predecessors. Moreover, Apple has integrated new camera effects and support for multi-user augmented reality (AR) that allows several people to simultaneously play in one AR world across multiple devices. The technology should be easy to set up and allows for real-time synchronisation between devices, as demonstrated by Apple in a recent demo at their office in Munich. In short, the demo left us sufficiently impressed that we are excited to see how developers utilise the new technology.

Apple has added more advanced account management controls too. Parents can now set how long their children can play games per day, while there is also a new screen time function that informs users of how long they have spent using certain apps. iOS 12 better summarises Messages in the notification shade too and has introduced more intelligent search features to Photos.

Apple continues to call the iPad Pro a laptop replacement and has upped the ante this year by stating that its A12X Bionic SoC is faster than 92% of x86 processors that power laptops released in 2018. We will explore the validity of these claims in the Performance section.

Setting Apple’s marketing aside, iOS still has some serious shortcomings, particularly when running large displays. Some apps lack the scaling for an 11-inch display, and essentially iOS scales everything up, which makes app icons look too large for our liking. As mentioned earlier, iOS 12 has no functioning file manager, which makes transferring files difficult. In short, the iPad Pro 11 is suitable as a secondary or a creative device, but iOS still has too many shortcomings that would prevent us from using the new iPad Pro as our sole work machine. Apple has promised that Adobe will release a full version of Photoshop in 2019 though, about which we are excited because it could represent the start of iOS bridging its gap in functionality to Linux, Mac OS or Windows. Watch this space.

iOS 12 home screen
iOS 12 home screen
An example of an app with poor scaling
An example of an app with poor scaling
iOS 12 settings on the iPad Pro 11
iOS 12 settings on the iPad Pro 11
iOS 12 Control Center
iOS 12 Control Center

Communication & GPS

The iPad Pro 11 supports all modern Wi-Fi standards up to IEEE 802.11 ac, which we would have expected from such an expensive tablet. Our test device achieved similar transmission speeds as its predecessor did when tested using our Linksys EA8500 router, although the Microsoft Surface Pro 6 tends to average a few MB/s higher than both devices. The iPad Pro 11 generally loads web pages quickly, particularly when we used the device close to a router. The Wi-Fi signal dropped to two-thirds when we tested it 10 metres and three walls away from our router, but this is only a minor criticism as websites still loaded quickly.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Toshiba KBG30ZPZ512G
593 (min: 560, max: 611) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
A12X Bionic GPU, A12X Bionic, 256 GB NVMe
590 (min: 549, max: 608) MBit/s ∼99% +10%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
A12X Bionic GPU, A12X Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
537 (min: 397, max: 559) MBit/s ∼91%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
528 MBit/s ∼89% -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
290 MBit/s ∼49% -46%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB eMMC Flash
236 MBit/s ∼40% -56%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
A12X Bionic GPU, A12X Bionic, 256 GB NVMe
643 (min: 596, max: 662) MBit/s ∼100% +32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
580 MBit/s ∼90% +19%
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
UHD Graphics 620, 8650U, Toshiba KBG30ZPZ512G
559 (min: 519, max: 577) MBit/s ∼87% +15%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
A10X Fusion GPU, A10X Fusion, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
497 MBit/s ∼77% +2%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
A12X Bionic GPU, A12X Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
488 (min: 262, max: 543) MBit/s ∼76%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB eMMC Flash
238 MBit/s ∼37% -51%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø537 (397-559)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø488 (262-543)

The iPad Pro 11 uses Galileo, GLONASS, and GPS including AGPS and QZSS for location services. Apple continues to not use BeiDou, the Chinese location service. Apple Maps located us quickly and precisely throughout testing.

We also took our test device on a bike ride to compare its navigation accuracy against a professional navigation device, the Garmin Edge 520. The iPad Pro 11 plotted a 1.76 km (1.09 miles) longer route than the 5.49 km (3.41 miles) route that the Garmin recorded us having cycled. Looking closer at the data reveals that our test device got out of kilter and plotted wild routes that we did not cycle. The iPad Pro 11 is generally an accurate device, but it regularly plotted us next to the road on which we were cycling. We cannot ignore our practical tests though, so we would advise caution when using the iPad Pro 11 for navigating. The device is probably too large for general use anyway. 

GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Overview
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 – Cycling through a grove
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 – Cycling through a grove
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS Test: Garmin Edge 520 - Bridge
GPS Test: Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) - Overview
GPS Test: Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) - Overview
GPS Test: Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) – Cycling through a grove
GPS Test: Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) – Cycling through a grove
GPS Test: Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) - Bridge
GPS Test: Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) - Bridge

Cameras

Photo taken with the front-facing camera
Photo taken with the front-facing camera

The cameras in the iPad Pro 11 have remained largely unchanged from last year’s iPad Pro 10.5 and are the same as the ones in the third-generation iPad Pro 12.9. The rear-facing camera is still a 12 MP sensor and a True Tone flash that combines four differently coloured LEDs to create the most natural-looking light for a scene.

Photos taken with our test device look great when compared to those shot with other tablets, although we suspect that Apple continues to use the same optics that it first used on the iPhone 7. This probably says more about how poor most tablet cameras are though because the sensors in the iPad Pro 11 are several steps down from those that Apple uses in its latest iPhones.

The rear-facing camera in our test device produces photos that have strong colours and a generally warm tone to them thanks to dynamic HDR. However, the equivalent camera in the iPhone XS Max captures more details and better exposes low-light scenes than its larger sibling. The differences between the photos produced by the two devices are not huge as demonstrated by our comparison photos below, but they are noticeable. Overall, there is no better rear-facing camera in a tablet than the one in the new iPad Pro, but it does not take better photos than its predecessor.

This year’s model can record 4K videos in up to 60 FPS, which is an improvement over the iPad Pro 10.5. The rear-facing camera can track moving objects smoothly while also producing colour-rich and sharp videos. The sensor adjusted exposure accurately and almost automatically to changing ambient light too. Moreover, the rear-facing camera can record video at 240 FPS in up to 1080p for slow-motion effects.

As for the front-facing camera, it is still a 7 MP sensor that takes decent photos. Selfies are detailed, and objects do not get overwhelmed by bright backlighting as shown in the above photo. The front-facing camera also supports iOS’ portrait mode should you wish to take selfies with your tablet. 

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images

We also subjected the iPad Pro 11 to camera tests under controlled lighting conditions. The results echo what we found during our other camera tests. Our test device cannot render colours as brilliantly as current flagship smartphones, but the rear-facing camera captured out test chart sharply. The camera struggles to reproduce black text against red backgrounds though.

A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
Our test chart in detail
Our test chart in detail
ColorChecker: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
ColorChecker: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour

Accessories & Warranty

Smart Keyboard Folio
Smart Keyboard Folio
Apple Pencil 2
Apple Pencil 2

The iPad Pro 11 comes with a one metre (~ 3.3 feet) USB Type-C cable, an 18 W charger (5 V/3 A, 9 V/2 A), the usual Apple paperwork and two Apple stickers.

The device comes with 12 months manufacturer’s warranty, which is separate from any third-party supplier warranty. Apple continues to sell its AppleCare+, which extends the warranty coverage to two years. The warranty extension now costs $129 (£129) and provides two total loss repairs for a $49 (£39) excess fee. Users must pay a $29 (£25) fee if they break their Apple Pencil too.

However, if you own accessories for older iPad Pros then you can sell them now as they will not work with any third-generation model. The iPad Pro 11 is not only smaller than its predecessors but also Apple has moved the Pogo pins to the back and replaced the Lighting connector with a USB Type-C, rendering all previous accessories obsolete.

The company has developed an Apple Pencil 2 and a new Smart Keyboard Folio, which cost $129 (£119) and $199 (£199), respectively. The former has an integrated touch-sensitive area that allows users to swipe between tools by just swiping twice. The Smart Keyboard Folio protects the entire rear of the tablet and can be set in two different positions. We should point out though that the Keyboard Folio did not always connect as securely to our test device as we would have liked during our tests.

Input Devices & Operation

The iPad Pro should act as a magical window to the rest of the world, according to Apple. Like other tablets, the iPad Pro 11’s main input method is its capacitive touchscreen, which effectively brings the world to people’s fingertips. The touchscreen in our device worked well in our tests, reacting reliably and accurately to our inputs even at the corners of the display.

Apple has replaced Touch ID with Face ID, a switch that we have seen the company make with iPhones since the iPhone X. In theory, moving the iPad Pro to Face ID makes more sense to us than it did for iPhones, but its execution is currently lacking. Face ID is great for unlocking the device when it is connected to the Smart Keyboard Folio or when it is lying on a table because we no longer need to touch the device multiple times to unlock it. Moreover, even the smaller iPad Pro has always felt huge in the hand, which invariably meant that we had to shift our grip to unlock any previous model if we were holding it.

However, we find it more difficult to unlock our test device than its predecessors when we have it in our hands. Holding the device in landscape mode with two hands regularly obscures the camera and causes the ‘camera hidden’ message to appear, which effectively forces us to unlock our test device in portrait mode. Having the power button on the same side as the Face ID system makes it difficult to unlock the device one-handed too. We appreciate that this is a minor gripe, but one which could be frustrating to some people. It is worth noting that Face ID can store up to two faces.

The iPad Pro 11 works well as a tablet, but its potential as a creative device is only realised with the Apple Pencil 2. Unfortunately, the first Apple Pencil will not even pair with any third-generation iPad Pro. The Pencil 2 worked well during testing and is a great tool for creatives. Apple has added a touch-sensitive area to the Pencil too, which allows users to switch between tools by quickly swiping twice with a finger. Overall, Apple has improved the convenience of using its Pencil, especially now that it attaches magnetically to the iPad Pro and charges inductively when it is attached. This is a much better solution than the farcical experience of plugging the original Apple Pencil into a lightning port to charge it. However, the finger is still generally a better tool than the Pencil for everyone but creatives in our opinion.

The default virtual keyboard remains unchanged and continues to work well. Apple has updated the Smart Folio Keyboard. The keyboard now magnetically attaches to the iPad and communicates with the device via its Pogo pins. The keyboard case is also thick enough to allow the iPad Pro 11 to lie flat on a table. The cover has a rubberised texture that feels good to the touch. Most keys measure 1.5 cm², while they all have a slightly concave design and emit a faint click when pressed. In short, the keyboard is easy to type on.

Pressing any key wakes up our test device, which then quickly unlocks using Face ID. This is a slick experience, although Face ID did occasionally fail to register our face. The only drawback of the Smart Keyboard Folio is that some of its keys are rather small, but we have this issue with compact notebooks too. Overall, the typing experience is close to matching Apple’s claims of the iPad Pro being a laptop replacement, but those who write a lot may find it easier to type on a full-sized Bluetooth keyboard instead.

Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

Undoubtedly, one of the iPad Pro 11’s most important features is its display; it is the main method of interacting with the device after all. Apple continues to include its TrueTone sensor that automatically adjusts the display’s colour temperature to suit ambient lighting, and various anti-reflective coatings, which are both welcome additions.

The iPad Pro 11 has a 2.86:2 aspect ratio, which is essentially the 3:2 aspect ratio that we have seen on Surface devices among others. By contrast, the iPad Pro 12.9 has a 4:3 aspect ratio, the difference between which is minimal. 3:2 is a common format in photography, but most people should have no issues with editing photos on a 4:3 display. Both aspect ratios will letterbox 16:9 content though, which is why most laptops have 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratios.

Apple markets its third-generation iPad Pros as having Liquid Retina displays, which is essentially a marketing term for the display’s rounded corners. Incidentally, the iPad Pro 11 has the same 265 PPI pixel density as its larger 12.9 sibling and one which puts both devices on par with other current flagship tablets. Our test device gets brighter than our non-Apple comparison devices, but it falls just short of the average maximum brightness that both the iPad Pro 12.9 and iPad Pro 10.5 achieve.  

581
cd/m²
604
cd/m²
576
cd/m²
611
cd/m²
639
cd/m²
621
cd/m²
557
cd/m²
572
cd/m²
560
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 639 cd/m² Average: 591.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2.94 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 639 cd/m²
Contrast: 1420:1 (Black: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.92 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
99.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
IPS, 2388x1668, 11
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
IPS, 2736x1824, 12.3
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
IPS, 2224x1668, 10.5
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
IPS, 2732x2048, 12.9
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
Super AMOLED, 2560x1600, 10.5
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
IPS, 2560x1600, 10.8
Screen
-94%
-30%
4%
-66%
-217%
Brightness middle
639
484
-24%
634
-1%
632
-1%
474
-26%
384
-40%
Brightness
591
473
-20%
625
6%
605
2%
477
-19%
360
-39%
Brightness Distribution
87
91
5%
87
0%
91
5%
91
5%
84
-3%
Black Level *
0.45
0.33
27%
0.39
13%
0.32
29%
0.8
-78%
Contrast
1420
1467
3%
1626
15%
1975
39%
480
-66%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
0.92
4.29
-366%
1.9
-107%
1.1
-20%
2.5
-172%
6.83
-642%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.59
6.46
-149%
3.9
-51%
2.4
7%
5.8
-124%
12.7
-390%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.3
4.3
-231%
2.8
-115%
1.7
-31%
2.1
-62%
7.5
-477%
Gamma
2.22 99%
2.51 88%
2.26 97%
2.21 100%
2.08 106%
2.199 100%
CCT
6656 98%
7315 89%
7027 93%
6794 96%
6281 103%
8544 76%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.34
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
62
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
95

* ... smaller is better

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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8929 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We also tested the iPad Pro 11’s colour accuracy with a spectrophotometer and CalMAN analysis software. Our test device has impressively low DeltaE deviations, which are lower than its predecessor and mostly better than its larger sibling. However, our test device has a comparatively high 0.45 cd/m² black value that results in a 1,420:1 contrast ratio, which is 15% and 39% lower than last year’s iPad Pro 10.5 and the new iPad Pro 12.9, respectively. Moreover, black tones look more like dark grey when the display is at maximum brightness; reducing this eliminates that effect though.

Unfortunately, we cannot currently measure colour-space coverage with CalMAN. Our test device approximately covers almost the entire sRGB colour space, and Apple claims that the device has a large DCI P3 colour-space coverage. We wish that we could put the company’s claims to the test. 

CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Greyscale
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Accuracy
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: sRGB Colour Space
CalMAN: sRGB Colour Space

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
36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 ms rise
↘ 17 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 91 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
54 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 25 ms rise
↘ 29 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 89 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

Our test device has strong viewing angles thanks to its IPS display. We noticed no brightness or colour distortions even at acute viewing angles.

The iPad Pro 11 is easy to use outdoors too. We would recommend maximising screen brightness when using the device outside on a sunny day, as the display is reflective. Using the device in these conditions at medium brightness or lower becomes frustrating quickly, as demonstrated by our photos below. 

Viewing angles
Viewing angles
Using the Apple iPad Pro (2018) outside at maximum brightness
Using the Apple iPad Pro (2018) outside at maximum brightness
Using the Apple iPad Pro (2018) outside at medium brightness
Using the Apple iPad Pro (2018) outside at medium brightness
Using the Apple iPad Pro (2018) outside at minimum brightness
Using the Apple iPad Pro (2018) outside at minimum brightness

Performance

Apple has equipped its third-generation iPad Pro with Apple A12X Bionic SoCs. The A12X Bionic may differ slightly from the A12 Bionic in name, but the new SoC powering our test device is considerably more powerful than its similarly named sibling. The A12X Bionic SoC has two more processor cores and countless more transistors, which makes the SoC not only physically larger than the A12 Bionic but also much more powerful.

Moreover, our performance benchmarks demonstrate that the A12X Bionic SoC is a huge step up from the A10X Fusion that Apple used in last year’s iPad Pro 10.5. Our Android comparison devices are not even close to challenging the new iPad Pro 11 in these benchmarks.

Please note: We could not include the Surface Pro 6 in our comparison table as it runs on an x86 architecture, while the iPad Pro and our Android comparison devices are powered by ARM processors. Hence, we could not run the same benchmarks on the Surface Pro 6 as we could on the iPad Pro 11.

The A12X Bionic SoC integrates an A12X Bionic GPU, which has seven cores. The A12X GPU delivers outstanding performance in GPU benchmarks, particularly so in GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 in which our test device scored almost three times the FPS that its predecessor did in a comparable off-screen test.

Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
43802 Points ∼100%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (41735 - 43802, n=2)
42769 Points ∼98% -2%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
41735 Points ∼95% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
7930 Points ∼18% -82%
Average of class Tablet (862 - 43802, n=25)
7609 Points ∼17% -83%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
18041 Points ∼50%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (17691 - 18041, n=2)
17866 Points ∼49% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
17691 Points ∼49% -2%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
9358 Points ∼26% -48%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
6477 Points ∼18% -64%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
6173 Points ∼17% -66%
Average of class Tablet (1106 - 18041, n=38)
4647 Points ∼13% -74%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
5002 Points ∼79% 0%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (4984 - 5002, n=2)
4993 Points ∼79% 0%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
4984 Points ∼79%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
3933 Points ∼62% -21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
1893 Points ∼30% -62%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
1892 Points ∼30% -62%
Average of class Tablet (429 - 5002, n=38)
1606 Points ∼25% -68%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
6315 Points ∼61%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
6039 Points ∼59%
Average of class Tablet (2345 - 6315, n=27)
4253 Points ∼41%
Work performance score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
6954 Points ∼51%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
6830 Points ∼50%
Average of class Tablet (2529 - 7053, n=69)
4489 Points ∼33%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
2919 Points ∼66%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
2405 Points ∼54%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
2036 Points ∼46%
Average of class Tablet (650 - 2919, n=32)
1601 Points ∼36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
5459 Points ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
4086 Points ∼50%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
1885 Points ∼23%
Average of class Tablet (99 - 6993, n=32)
1658 Points ∼20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
3975 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
3753 Points ∼72%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
1980 Points ∼38%
Average of class Tablet (129 - 5093, n=33)
1387 Points ∼27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
2952 Points ∼70%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
2416 Points ∼57%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
2027 Points ∼48%
Average of class Tablet (793 - 2952, n=50)
1439 Points ∼34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
4537 Points ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
3682 Points ∼68%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
1646 Points ∼31%
Average of class Tablet (102 - 5384, n=50)
1163 Points ∼22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
3558 Points ∼75%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
3490 Points ∼74%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
1771 Points ∼37%
Average of class Tablet (134 - 3806, n=55)
1025 Points ∼22%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
451 fps ∼4%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (438 - 451, n=2)
445 fps ∼4% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
438.4 fps ∼3% -3%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
225 fps ∼2% -50%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
93 fps ∼1% -79%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
69 fps ∼1% -85%
Average of class Tablet (4.2 - 451, n=165)
29.7 fps ∼0% -93%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
120 fps ∼4%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (120 - 120, n=2)
120 fps ∼4% 0%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
119.9 fps ∼4% 0%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
59 fps ∼2% -51%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
58 fps ∼2% -52%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
57 fps ∼2% -52%
Average of class Tablet (3.7 - 120, n=169)
20.4 fps ∼1% -83%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
220.1 fps ∼3% +9%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (202 - 220, n=2)
211 fps ∼3% +4%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
202 fps ∼3%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
109 fps ∼2% -46%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
60 fps ∼1% -70%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
41 fps ∼1% -80%
Average of class Tablet (1.8 - 220, n=103)
19.9 fps ∼0% -90%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
110 fps ∼3%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (95.6 - 110, n=2)
103 fps ∼3% -6%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
95.6 fps ∼3% -13%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
58 fps ∼2% -47%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
36 fps ∼1% -67%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
27 fps ∼1% -75%
Average of class Tablet (2.9 - 110, n=106)
14.2 fps ∼0% -87%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
173 fps ∼4% +2%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (169 - 173, n=2)
171 fps ∼4% +1%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
169 fps ∼4%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
63 fps ∼1% -63%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
41 fps ∼1% -76%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
28 fps ∼1% -83%
Average of class Tablet (2 - 173, n=53)
21 fps ∼0% -88%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
95 fps ∼3%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (59.3 - 95, n=2)
77.2 fps ∼2% -19%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
59.3 fps ∼2% -38%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
43 fps ∼1% -55%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
22 fps ∼1% -77%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
16 fps ∼0% -83%
Average of class Tablet (4.3 - 95, n=53)
12.9 fps ∼0% -86%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
49 fps ∼82%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (31.8 - 49, n=2)
40.4 fps ∼67% -18%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
31.8 fps ∼53% -35%
Average of class Tablet (1.7 - 49, n=9)
13.5 fps ∼23% -72%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
8.9 fps ∼15% -82%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
51.1 fps ∼100% +6%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (48 - 51.1, n=2)
49.6 fps ∼97% +3%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
48 fps ∼94%
Average of class Tablet (1 - 51.1, n=9)
15.7 fps ∼31% -67%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
9.3 fps ∼18% -81%
Normal Tier Onscreen
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
58 fps ∼97%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (47.2 - 58, n=2)
52.6 fps ∼88% -9%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
47.2 fps ∼79% -19%
Average of class Tablet (2.7 - 58, n=9)
19.1 fps ∼32% -67%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
14 fps ∼23% -76%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
134.3 fps ∼100% +6%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (127 - 134, n=2)
131 fps ∼98% +3%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
127 fps ∼95%
Average of class Tablet (2.8 - 134, n=9)
42.1 fps ∼31% -67%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
25 fps ∼19% -80%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
107 fps ∼3% +6%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (101 - 107, n=2)
104 fps ∼3% +3%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
101 fps ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
25 fps ∼1% -75%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
16 fps ∼0% -84%
Average of class Tablet (7.2 - 107, n=33)
14.7 fps ∼0% -85%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
47 fps ∼2%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (39.2 - 47, n=2)
43.1 fps ∼2% -8%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
39.2 fps ∼1% -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
13 fps ∼0% -72%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
9.3 fps ∼0% -80%
Average of class Tablet (4 - 47, n=33)
8.12 fps ∼0% -83%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
566378 Points ∼100%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (552676 - 566378, n=2)
559527 Points ∼99% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
552676 Points ∼98% -2%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
201881 Points ∼36% -64%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
175581 Points ∼31% -69%
Average of class Tablet (20856 - 566378, n=18)
167271 Points ∼30% -70%
BaseMark OS II
Web
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
2034 Points ∼100%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (1979 - 2034, n=2)
2007 Points ∼99% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
1979 Points ∼97% -3%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
1218 Points ∼60% -40%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
913 Points ∼45% -55%
Average of class Tablet (9 - 2034, n=99)
743 Points ∼37% -63%
Graphics
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
28853 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (28547 - 28853, n=2)
28700 Points ∼99% +1%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
28547 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
6080 Points ∼21% -79%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
2284 Points ∼8% -92%
Average of class Tablet (98 - 28853, n=99)
2089 Points ∼7% -93%
Memory
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
5423 Points ∼86% +60%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (3390 - 5423, n=2)
4407 Points ∼70% +30%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
3390 Points ∼54%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
3108 Points ∼49% -8%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
2900 Points ∼46% -14%
Average of class Tablet (56 - 5423, n=99)
1044 Points ∼17% -69%
System
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
16467 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (16298 - 16467, n=2)
16383 Points ∼99% +1%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
16298 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
5537 Points ∼34% -66%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
3639 Points ∼22% -78%
Average of class Tablet (482 - 16467, n=99)
2270 Points ∼14% -86%
Overall
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
8450 Points ∼100% +12%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (7526 - 8450, n=2)
7988 Points ∼95% +6%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
7526 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
3302 Points ∼39% -56%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
2204 Points ∼26% -71%
Average of class Tablet (150 - 8450, n=99)
1219 Points ∼14% -84%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
5300 Points ∼100% +2%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (5216 - 5300, n=2)
5258 Points ∼99% +1%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
5216 Points ∼98%
Average of class Tablet (426 - 5300, n=13)
1505 Points ∼28% -71%
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1
3D Graphics Tests
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
1187 Points ∼21%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
1186 Points ∼21% 0%
Average of class Tablet (453 - 3320, n=104)
1107 Points ∼20% -7%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (847 - 1187, n=2)
1017 Points ∼18% -14%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
847 Points ∼15% -29%
2D Graphics Tests
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
14847 Points ∼80%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (13777 - 14847, n=2)
14312 Points ∼77% -4%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
13777 Points ∼74% -7%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
5203 Points ∼28% -65%
Average of class Tablet (249 - 14847, n=106)
3119 Points ∼17% -79%
Memory Tests
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
31708000 Points ∼100% +99812%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (31736 - 31708000, n=2)
15869868 Points ∼50% +49906%
Average of class Tablet (776 - 31708000, n=106)
303148 Points ∼1% +855%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
31736 Points ∼0%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
27749 Points ∼0% -13%
Disk Tests
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
179053 Points ∼100% +28%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (140131 - 179053, n=2)
159592 Points ∼89% +14%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
140131 Points ∼78%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
44272 Points ∼25% -68%
Average of class Tablet (1193 - 179053, n=106)
19995 Points ∼11% -86%
CPU Tests
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
759975 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (756889 - 759975, n=2)
758432 Points ∼100% 0%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
756889 Points ∼100%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
82859 Points ∼11% -89%
Average of class Tablet (1376 - 759975, n=106)
33273 Points ∼4% -96%
System
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
7242 Points ∼34%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (5279 - 7242, n=2)
6261 Points ∼29% -14%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
5920 Points ∼28% -18%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
5279 Points ∼25% -27%
Average of class Tablet (1015 - 8868, n=105)
3409 Points ∼16% -53%

Legend

 
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 Apple A12X Bionic, Apple A12X Bionic GPU, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB Intel Core i7-8650U, Intel UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba KBG30ZPZ512G
 
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017 Apple A10X Fusion, Apple A10X Fusion GPU / PowerVR, Toshiba THGBX669D4LLDXG 64 GB NAND
 
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018 Apple A12X Bionic, Apple A12X Bionic GPU, 256 GB NVMe
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 960, ARM Mali-G71 MP8, 64 GB eMMC Flash

Our test device outclasses our comparison devices in browser benchmarks too. The iPad Pro 11 is around 30% faster than its predecessor, which is a decent performance boost in a year. Better optimised software plays a role here too, and Apple only develops Safari for a few iOS devices, so the browser may be better optimised as it is developed for fewer devices than browsers that run on Android or Windows 10.

Web-browsing on the iPad Pro 11 is a pleasure in daily use. Websites generally load quickly, and we did not notice any content reloading on pages that we already loaded. Scrolling remained smooth throughout testing too. Moreover, HTML 5 applications like Google Interland ran smoothly and without issue.

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018 (Safari Mobile 12)
279.13 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (278 - 279, n=2)
278 Points ∼100% 0%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 (Safari 13)
277.69 Points ∼99%
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
234 Points ∼84% -16%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017 (Safari Mobile 10)
200.59 Points ∼72% -28%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 (Samsung Browser 8.0)
65.07 Points ∼23% -77%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro (Chrome 68.0.3440.91)
57.007 Points ∼20% -79%
Average of class Tablet (10.9 - 279, n=71)
55.4 Points ∼20% -80%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018 (Safari Mobile 12)
45734 Points ∼100% +3%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (44425 - 45734, n=2)
45080 Points ∼99% +1%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 (Safari 13)
44425 Points ∼97%
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
32487 Points ∼71% -27%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017 (Safari Mobile 10)
30333 Points ∼66% -32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 (Samsung Browser 8.0)
12897 Points ∼28% -71%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro (Chrome 68.0.3440.91)
11854 Points ∼26% -73%
Average of class Tablet (1238 - 45734, n=156)
6343 Points ∼14% -86%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet (603 - 43092, n=167)
9338 ms * ∼100% -1449%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro (Chrome 68.0.3440.91)
3575.4 ms * ∼38% -493%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 (Samsung Browser 8.0)
2644.7 ms * ∼28% -339%
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
1177 ms * ∼13% -95%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017 (Safari Mobile 10)
972.7 ms * ∼10% -61%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018 (Safari Mobile 12)
614 ms * ∼7% -2%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (603 - 614, n=2)
609 ms * ∼7% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 (Safari 13)
603 ms * ∼6%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018 (Safari Mobile 12)
182 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (172 - 182, n=2)
177 Points ∼97% +3%
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 (Safari 13)
172 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 (Samsung Browser 8.0)
77 Points ∼42% -55%
Average of class Tablet (24 - 182, n=12)
76.3 Points ∼42% -56%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro (Chrome 68.0.3440.91)
68 Points ∼37% -60%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 (Safari 13)
386 Points ∼100%
Average Apple A12X Bionic (380 - 386, n=2)
383 Points ∼99% -1%
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018 (Safari Mobile 12)
380 Points ∼98% -2%
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017 (Safari Mobile 10)
257 Points ∼67% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 (Samsung Browser 8.0)
187 Points ∼48% -52%
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro (Chrome 68.0.3440.91)
178 Points ∼46% -54%
Average of class Tablet (36 - 386, n=71)
109 Points ∼28% -72%

* ... smaller is better

PassMark memory test
PassMark memory test

We used PassMark to determine storage transfer speeds, which demonstrated that the iPad Pro 11 has slightly faster read speeds than the XS Max. Our test device achieved up to three times higher write speeds though. We typically use AndroBench to measure storage access speeds, but unfortunately, the app has not been developed for iOS, which limits our comparison table. Loading times felt snappy and data loaded quickly throughout testing.

Games

We initially thought that the iPad Pro 11 would be a great device for working and gaming. Our tests largely proved this, with our test device rendering most games at 60 FPS. Oddly, Asphalt 9: Legends would only run at 30 FPS, the reason for which we could not determine. We measured frame rates with GameBench, for reference.

We expect that the new iPad Pro series will handle all modern games comfortably for the next few years as all models are powered by the powerful A12X Bionic SoC. The touchscreen and positional sensor worked perfectly throughout testing too.

Shadow Fight 3
Shadow Fight 3
Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends
Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 9: Legends
 SettingsValue
 High Quality29 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Shadow Fight 3
 SettingsValue
 high59 fps
 minimal59 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Arena of Valor
 SettingsValue
 min60 fps
 high HD59 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!

Emissions

Temperature

GFXBench Battery Test: Manhattan OpenGL ES 3.1
GFXBench Battery Test: Manhattan OpenGL ES 3.1

The iPad Pro 11 manages its surface temperatures relatively well, although the centre of the back of the device reaches a noticeably warm 33.3 °C at idle, which is probably where the SoC sits. Surface temperatures on our test device average around 27 °C at idle though, which felt cool to the touch. Predictably, temperatures increase when the device operates under sustained load, but only a few areas on our test device reach above 35 °C and there was one that reached 37.9 °C, both of which are acceptable.

We also subjected the iPad Pro 11 to looped GFXBench Battery Test benchmarks to determine how well it manages performance under load. Disappointingly, performance dropped by around a third after 30 loops of the benchmark, which represents considerable thermal throttling. By contrast, the iPad Pro 12.9 maintained around 80% of its peak performance in the same benchmark.

Max. Load
 32 °C
90 F
33.4 °C
92 F
31.7 °C
89 F
 
 32.9 °C
91 F
37.9 °C
100 F
31.7 °C
89 F
 
 33.2 °C
92 F
34.5 °C
94 F
32.8 °C
91 F
 
Maximum: 37.9 °C = 100 F
Average: 33.3 °C = 92 F
33.2 °C
92 F
36.9 °C
98 F
33.9 °C
93 F
34.5 °C
94 F
34.3 °C
94 F
35.1 °C
95 F
33.4 °C
92 F
35.5 °C
96 F
33.6 °C
92 F
Maximum: 36.9 °C = 98 F
Average: 34.5 °C = 94 F
Power Supply (max.)  39.9 °C = 104 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.3 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 30.8 °C / 87 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.9 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 34.8 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22.3 to 51.8 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.9 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 34.4 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.9 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the front of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load
Heat map of the back of the device under load

Speakers

Pink Noise speaker test
Pink Noise speaker test

The iPad Pro 11 has four speakers that sound warm and are loud enough for audio playback in most environments. The speakers also have decent bass reproduction compared to other tablets. Occasionally the speakers sounded rather shrill during testing at high volumes, but this is a minor gripe. Moreover, the sound reproduction is even more linear than the quad-speakers in last year’s iPad Pro 10.5. Apple does not include a system-wide equaliser, but there are audio profiles in apps like Apple Music that adjust the sound of what is being played. The iPad Pro 11 will never replace a premium audio system, but it gets loud enough to fill a medium-sized room and gives cheap Bluetooth speakers a run for their money.

The device also supports audio output over Bluetooth or USB Type-C. External speakers and headphones pair quickly with our test device, while the sound quality over Bluetooth is good. The USB Type-C port works well too and even with third-party 3.5 mm jack adapters, which is a surprise. We have been so used to seeing Apple restrict its mobile devices to within its ecosystem that it is pleasant to see the company changing that, albeit probably unintentionally and only because it has adopted a universal standard.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.633.52537.537.43135.837.84037.935.65039.134.76330.232.58030.231.810028.4411252451.916023.756.220022.662.225021.666.531519.866.540019.468.550019.96963018.368.880019.466.5100018.56712501866.2160018.468.1200018.167.1250018.367.4315017.964.4400017.965.3500017.662630017.965.8800017.770.11000017.864.31250017.958.91600017.957.1SPL60.830.578.7N15.91.448.7median 18.3median 66.2Delta2.13.131.641.125.436.925.335.832.934.533.630.731.632.128.429.92742.520.850.12253.221.357.520.863.921.265.219.465.819.567.217.769.117.967.317.872.617.375.717.477.916.777.717.274.418.275.117.970.717.667.917.763.917.855.917.956.418.158.818.260.93084.61.359.1median 17.9median 65.81.37.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseApple iPad Pro 11 2018Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (8.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 36%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% 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
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 36%
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%

Power Management

Power Consumption

The iPad Pro 11 consumes more power than its predecessor, particularly when operating under sustained load. Our test device consumes a maximum of 15.2 W, which is more than most of our comparison devices except the power-hungry Surface Pro 6 with its Core i7 processor. However, the iPad Pro 11 is comparatively economical when idling, which helps it finish third overall in our comparison table.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.3 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.2 / 4.1 / 7.5 Watt
Load midlight 13.6 / 15.2 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
7736 mAh
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
8134 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
7300 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
7500 mAh
Power Consumption
-120%
3%
-33%
22%
-27%
Idle Minimum *
1.2
3.2
-167%
1.44
-20%
1.42
-18%
1.76
-47%
3.3
-175%
Idle Average *
4.1
8.7
-112%
6.12
-49%
9.35
-128%
4.22
-3%
4.2
-2%
Idle Maximum *
7.5
10.4
-39%
6.14
18%
9.38
-25%
4.25
43%
7
7%
Load Average *
13.6
29.2
-115%
8.55
37%
12.75
6%
4.52
67%
10.4
24%
Load Maximum *
15.2
40.8
-168%
10.62
30%
14.96
2%
7.35
52%
13.8
9%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Our test device lasted for 15 h 20 m in our Wi-Fi battery life test, which is a record-breaking runtime. By contrast, last year’s model could only manage around two-thirds as long, while our other comparison devices lack our test device’s endurance. Impressively, the iPad Pro 11 has a smaller battery than its predecessor too. We also achieved even longer runtimes with the brightness sensor activated.

The included 18 W charger recharges our test device quickly. However, the charging rate slows down considerably when the iPad is nearing full charge like many other modern devices. Hence, it takes just under three hours to recharge the iPad Pro 11 fully with the included charger. 

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
34h 16min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 20min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 22min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 28min
Apple iPad Pro 11 2018
7736 mAh
Microsoft Surface Pro 6, Core i7, 512 GB
 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 10.5 2017
8134 mAh
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 2018
 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S4
7300 mAh
Huawei MediaPad M5 10.8 Pro
7500 mAh
Battery Runtime
-43%
-17%
-10%
-23%
-24%
Reader / Idle
2056
1083
-47%
2036
-1%
1888
-8%
1227
-40%
1254
-39%
H.264
982
629
-36%
899
-8%
735
-25%
629
-36%
WiFi v1.3
920
509
-45%
693
-25%
796
-13%
495
-46%
670
-27%
Load
208
131
-37%
199
-4%
184
-12%
245
18%
220
6%

Pros

+ long battery life
+ colour accurate display
+ impressive cameras for a tablet
+ surface temperatures remain cool even under load
+ good sound reproduction
+ decent accessories
+ powerful
+ stylish design
+ fast Wi-Fi

Cons

- weak case
- older accessories are incompatible
- expensive
- throttling under sustained load
- limited USB Type-C port
- Face ID not as good as on iPhones

Verdict

The Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) tablet review.
The Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018) tablet review.

The third-generation iPad Pro marks a fresh start for the series. Apple has overhauled its design but has kept the colour options more subdued than in previous years. The iPad Pro 11 more closely represents Apple’s design philosophy of being a “magical glass surface” in our opinion than previous generations thanks to its significantly higher screen-to-body ratio.

Battery life and performance have also been significantly improved, but these improvements come at a price. The iPad Pro 11 costs almost $2,000 for the most expensive model, which is eye-wateringly expensive for a tablet. Its larger sibling gets even closer to the $2,000 mark too.

The new smaller iPad Pro is a fascinating tablet for those who can afford it, especially as few competitors can match it on performance. 

The device has its downsides though. The case is weaker than we would have liked, which is particularly annoying for such an expensive device. Moreover, its applicability as a laptop replacement remains limited. The iPad Pro 11 could replace a laptop if you do a lot of creative work on the move and you need a stylus or if you mainly do light office work. It may even suit those who mainly work from the cloud. However, iOS currently holds back what is otherwise an incredibly powerful and compact device.

Apple iPad Pro 11 2018 - 11/20/2018 v6
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
71 / 80 → 89%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
53 / 65 → 82%
Weight
84 / 40-88 → 91%
Battery
98%
Display
92%
Games Performance
74 / 68 → 100%
Application Performance
90 / 76 → 100%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
74 / 91 → 81%
Camera
75 / 85 → 88%
Average
83%
93%
Tablet - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 4 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Apple iPad Pro 11 (2018, WiFi, 64 GB) Tablet Review
Florian Schmitt, 2018-11- 8 (Update: 2018-11-26)