Maybe its a part of the new google pixel rumor.

Tegra 4 is A Piece OF SHIT!!!! Everything else in the current generation of ARM SoC’s completely blows it out of the water.

I think you’re confusing the Tegra 3 with the Tegra 4… The Tegra 4 is the next gen version with Cortex A15 processors, which is the newest high end Cortex being offered by ARM!

The only question if the graphical performance, which is suppose to be much better than the Tegra 3 but it remains to be seen if it’s good enough to beat the other next gen graphic cores being offered by others…

That’s a very biased comparison! The A6X uses a massive quad gpu, most ARM devices never go beyond one!

The trade off is much higher power consumption, though they managed to reduce that compared to how much it used in the A5X version but few companies could afford the engineering required to not cause the tablet design to become much more bloated and heavy… Even though they significantly had to increase the battery size compared to previous iPads in order to provide enough run time.

Mind, also that most of the performance gains of those quad gpus is taken up just supporting the higher resolution of the retina display. Meaning it may look great but gaming, etc isn’t that much improved compared to previous iPads… it mainly just looks better!

So that’s a extreme example at best to be comparing the Tegra series to and ignores that earlier versions of the Apple A-Series processor also started behind on performance!

While you’re still in the past because it was the Tegra 2 with terrible power consumption. The Tegra 3 significantly improved upon this and was one of the first to use a secondary fifth low power processor to help save power and scale performance as needed for the quad cores.

Along with pointing out that if you’re going to compare power consumption then you should compare same number of processors because the Tegra 3 is quad core and the Apple processor is only dual core… more cores consume more power, but that’s a trade off for performance!

In terms of CPU performance the quad core Tegra 3 was better than the A5X, while the A6X raised the bar it is also Apple’s latest. Pointing out another difference in that the Tegra 3 is basically 2 year old tech now because it’s still a Cortex A9 based processor and was released later than originally intended.

So when the Tegra 4 comes out it will use the much more efficient, and more powerful Cortex A15 architecture and they’re stating they’re boosting graphical performance by 3x compared to the Tegra 3. Never mind the Tegra 3 started out on the older 40nm FAB but the Tegra 4 will be made using the latest 28nm FAB, meaning a lot of improvements all around!

The A6X may be a good custom made processor but base Cortex A15 is still a better architecture and unlike the A6X, which is a dual core processor, the Tegra 4 will, like the Tegra 3, be a quad core. So at the very least it will have better CPU performance than the A6X and we’ll see if the graphical improvement is enough to break even with the A6X.

It’s also not like anyone is standing still either, Nvidia is coming out with a new version of the Tegra pretty much every year now and each version will be significantly improved compared to the previous one. While it remains to be seen if Apple can still provide a significant improvement to whatever comes after the A6X… especially, since they’re already pushing the limits of what the technology presently allows!

Going custom has its advantages but also can be a hindrance if they can’t significantly improve the architecture. While this mainly applies to the CPU because Apple licenses the GPU technology from Imagination’s PowerVR GPU… similar to what Intel is doing presently with the Medfield and Clover Trail ATOM series… and thus have less control there…

Key word is “almost”!

While you have no idea how the Nvidia Tegra 4 GPU compares to the A6X yet! It hasn’t been reviewed yet and if you knew anything about GPU’s you’d know performance isn’t determined by any one test!

The actual scale is the dual GPU used by the iPad two was slightly better than the Tegra 3, while the A5X upped it to quad GPU and finally the A6X tweaked it for a partial increase… roughly placing it about 3x better than the Tegra 3 graphics… But as already pointed out the Tegra 4 claims to be 3x better than the Tegra 3 as well… So if true then it evens out!

Leaving the only significant difference being CPU performance and a quad Cortex A15 will clearly provide more performance than a Apple’s custom dual core!

So flame all you want, you’re only fooling yourself!

While it remains to be seen how much of an improvement the Tegra 4 will be over the Tegra 3. Nvidia’s track record isn’t really Amy worse than any other company in the mobile market.

Besides, you’re kidding yourself to think any of these mobile offerings provide really good graphics when the best of them only rival 5-7 year old gaming consoles that are themselves a few years behind the curve from PC gaming rigs!

So lets stop exaggerating what league any of them are at!

Fact are facts whether you like them or not buy a 3x improvement would put the Tegra back on the top ARM offerings and it doesn’t matter if it falls a little short be aide they’re still be in the same league!

Besides, competition is good… so get over it!

First, you don’t know what the Tegra 4 performance is yet compared to others because it hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed yet! So you’re confusing you’re opinion of Nvidia Tegra with whether the Tegra 4 would be a good product or not!

Second, none of the ARM GPU’s are as pointed out really all that great to begin with! These are solutions seeking to be the best of the low end solutions, not the top!

Making power efficient designs comes with compromise, as the really powerful GPU’s will tend to use more power than the entire tablet! Even for gaming laptops and desktops the GPU can be the most power consuming component!

It’s one of the things that’s been holding ARM back because mobile devices can’t be pushed to the limits because the run times would be way too short if they really pushed them!

Only Apple has really pushed it and they only get away with it because they are one of the only few companies with the resources to fit a massive battery into their tablet without making it too bulky or heavy!

So let’s stop with the exaggerations, Tegra 4 may or may not get to the top of ARM offerings but it won’t be on the bottom either and it’s still way better than the previous generation and that’s what we look for in any new product… really, no one is going to suffer using a Tegra 4!

Now this is why no one will take you seriously, real gamers go with real gaming systems. Mobile devices aren’t real gaming systems in that respect!

Like already pointed out the best they can offer is still several years behind PC gaming standards.

They’re fun mobile devices that you can do casual gaming and maybe something equivalent to where PC gaming was several years ago but nothing to take as seriously as you’re apparently trying to!

Mobile solutions are also hampered by the fact they need to be mobile, meaning they can only push performance so far without it resulting in raising power consumption too high and negatively impact the device run time.

Apple only got away with it because they had the resources to engineer a larger battery and still keep the device specs in control but that was a one time deal that they can’t pull off again!

Never mind no one is yet pushing the limits of gaming on either Android or iOS anyway! So most games are made for the lowest common denominator among mobile device users.

Sure, Tegra started low because they were late entering the market but multiple times improvements each generation is faster than the industry as a whole is moving forward. So it’s not like Nvidia isn’t clearly catching up.

Even Apple started low with their iPhones and it took them years to develop the A6X for the latest iPad!

So reality is most new products don’t provide multiple times improvements from the previous generation… Meanwhile, Nvidia is managing this with every new release! Thanks in part to them catching up and adapting to the learning curve for making hardware optimized for mobile devices and timing releases to each new FAB improvement… Going now to 28nm and then to 14nm, etc.

Meaning, Nvidia Tegra has actually manged to go from a low to mid range solution to now competing with the top end solutions in just a few years.

Sure, by the end of the year there will be better SoCs from other companies but they’re not going to be way ahead and by the beginning of next year there will be the Tegra 5 with another multiple times improvement to again close the gap.

So reality is they’re just basically leap frogging each other now and like it or not the Nvidia Tegra is now plenty good enough for most people. Regardless of how you may feel about it!

This doesn’t negate that there are other good products too, it just shows there’s healthy competition and that’s always good for the consumers!

Disappoint compared to what? By all indications the Tegra 4 will be one of the top ARM offerings!

All ARM is mediocre if you really want to compare performance to what gaming laptops and desktops offer!

You apparently think way too highly of the alternatives, but they’re in the same league as far as end users are concerned.

And no, I’m no fanboy of any sort but rather I’m a realist! Like it or not the Tegra has improved and will continue to do so. It may not be the best of the best but it’s one of the best now and that’s good enough for most people.

Anyone who wants more is going to get a real platform for gaming, etc instead of using these limited mobile devices and that’s the reality!

Nope, the S4 Adreno 320 only claims about Xbox 360 level graphics and still loses to even the older Apple A5X and if the Tegra 4 does manage 3x improvement then it will also beat the Adreno 320!

But just like Apple’s quad GPU, the key point is they’re only providing game console range graphics that are already 5-7 years old and again weren’t top of the line even when they were new!

Pretty much all the actual gaming consoles are updating anyway, Nintendo was does do top of the line but the other two are just about a year to go, so it won’t be long before these ARM solutions can no longer claim console level graphics anymore as they’ll all be behind the curve again!

So again, they’re all mediocre solutions! One upping each other for the top of the low level is hardly anything to brag about! While the difference between them changes with every new release!

It’s hardly like either iOS or Android provide a proper gaming ecosystem for more than casual gaming or even the advance tools needed to provide anything really more advance.

Unreal engine 3 already pushes the limits of what ARM solutions can offer, and that’s several years old standard… Unreal engine 4 has been around since 2005 and 5 is in Beta already!

While Apple’s A7/A7X has no solid details yet, aside from TSMC taking over production from Samsung, and isn’t expected for awhile yet, 2014 at the earliest and by then Nvidia will be releasing the Tegra 5!

Also, on Mali you’re talking about the second generation of Mali-T600 GPUs before the first generation has even shipped… They’re not all coming out at the same time!

Besides Mali, Imagination, NVIDIA and Qualcomm are all on a similar upgrade schedule for the next two to four years.

What this means for consumers is steady competition and that’ll benefit us far more than any temporary claims to being the top offering!

Now what you can complain about is what standards each are supporting… Nvidia’s Tegra 4 still maintained the non-unified architecture of Tegra 3 and so won’t fully support OpenGL ES 3.0 with the T4′s GPU, but it’s debate-able whether it matters too much as some standards may still take another year or two to really get used and by then the next, next gen hardware will be out and will support the newer standards.

While the Tegra 4 does make some improvements like Real multisampling AA is finally supported as well as frame buffer compression (color and z), support for 24-bit z and stencil (up from 16 bits per pixel), FP16 filter and blend is supported in hardware, and Percentage-closer filtering is supported for shadows.

Also, Max texture resolution is now 4K x 4K, up from 2K x 2K in Tegra 3.

Another thing to actually focus on for all these solutions is that they don’t all perform equally well on all benchmarks. There are things one will do better than others and vice versa. So don’t get carried away with the “x” times improvement claims as that’s usually just taken from whatever benchmark gave the biggest improvement and ignores all the lower benchmarks for every other type of performance consideration.

So what people may choose may be determined by whatever game they like to play and on which device it looks better but this will vary depending on the game and how it is optimized and which graphic solution it takes the best advantage of…