The Qualcomm LTE chip was also previously confirmed to still be 45 nm.
It's very possible Apple wanted to push a 32 nm chip this year but their supply chain couldn't deliver the volume. Hence the need for un-Applelike increased weight and thickness to accomodate the extra batteries. I believe Samsung is making their chips and reports were they were sticking with them. I doubt the Apple vs Samsung lawsuits have anything to do with this though.
This suggests that next years iPad may feature both a process shrink 'tick' (to 28/32 nm) and an architecture improvement 'tock' (to the Cortex A15). That would be big performance gains and allow the device to shed some batts and get thinner again. Expect a keynote slide declaring the 2013 iPad to be "the thinnest iPad ever".
What's more interesting is the possibility that when the "new iPhone" is introduced it may not run the A5X but the 32 nm chips may be ready. Maybe we'll see a few years of iphones running dual gpu "A#" chips and iPads running quad gpu "A#X" chips.
It's very possible Apple wanted to push a 32 nm chip this year but their supply chain couldn't deliver the volume. Hence the need for un-Applelike increased weight and thickness to accomodate the extra batteries. I believe Samsung is making their chips and reports were they were sticking with them. I doubt the Apple vs Samsung lawsuits have anything to do with this though.
This suggests that next years iPad may feature both a process shrink 'tick' (to 28/32 nm) and an architecture improvement 'tock' (to the Cortex A15). That would be big performance gains and allow the device to shed some batts and get thinner again. Expect a keynote slide declaring the 2013 iPad to be "the thinnest iPad ever".
What's more interesting is the possibility that when the "new iPhone" is introduced it may not run the A5X but the 32 nm chips may be ready. Maybe we'll see a few years of iphones running dual gpu "A#" chips and iPads running quad gpu "A#X" chips.