[Rumor] Full Specs Leak for Next Gen Kindle Fire HD Tablets; Snapdragon 800 & More

[dgstorm]

The folks at BGR supposedly have a hot scoop on the next generation Kindle Fire HD tablets scheduled to come out later this year. According to their intel, the new tablets will come sporting ultra-high end specs, yet will still keep affordable pricing. If this rumor is true, the other tablet makers in the world should be a bit worried. Here's the breakdown of what is supposedly on the horizon for the next Kindle Fire HD products,

Kindle Fire HD 2 7-inch:

• 1,920 x 1,200-pixel 7-inch display with a new design
• Quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 (MSM8974) system on a chip - includes four Krait 400 CPUs and Adreno 330 graphics - the prototypes are said to be clocked at about 2GHz
• 2GB Ram
• Front-facing camera
• Wi-Fi and optional available cellular
• 16GB, 32GB or 64GB internal storage options
• Android 4.2.2 Jelly Bean with Amazon’s heavy customizations
• More comfortable and lighter

Kindle Fire HD 2 8.9-inch:

• 2,560 x 1,600-pixel 8.9-inch high-definition display
• Quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 (MSM8974) system on a chip - includes four Krait 400 CPUs and Adreno 330 graphics - the prototypes are said to be clocked at about 2GHz
• 2GB Ram
• Front-facing camera
• Wi-Fi and optional available cellular
• 16GB, 32GB or 64GB internal storage options
• Android 4.2.2 Jelly Bean with Amazon’s heavy customizations
• More comfortable and lighter
• Also features an 8-megapixel rear camera

Supposedly these devices will be launching in the fall, and maybe as soon as September. We will keep you apprised of any further details as they arrive. What do you guys think? Could Amazon be heating up the tablet wars all over again?

Source: Kindle-FireForum

 

[johnomaz]

So its nearly identical to the 2013 Nexus 7 except you're stuck with Amazon's software and most likely locked down pretty tight. Meh, still better than an iPad.

 

[kodiak799]

I like the storage options, but I'd rather see 3-4gigs of ram as opposed to the latest top-end cpu. And point taken about being locked-down with Amazon's software.

There was a blurb not long ago about a new wafer process in ram - which means faster AND 4gig stacks are just around the corner, probably Q1 or Q2 of 2014 in devices.

I'm not shelling out money for anything less than 3gigs of ram. And, realistically, 4 gigs because I think dual-boot devices are just around the corner and they're going to need 4gigs.

 

[akhenax]

I like the storage options, but I'd rather see 3-4gigs of ram as opposed to the latest top-end cpu. And point taken about being locked-down with Amazon's software.

There was a blurb not long ago about a new wafer process in ram - which means faster AND 4gig stacks are just around the corner, probably Q1 or Q2 of 2014 in devices.

I'm not shelling out money for anything less than 3gigs of ram. And, realistically, 4 gigs because I think dual-boot devices are just around the corner and they're going to need 4gigs.

I still have yet to see a use case for dual boot devices. Sure it sounds cool, but if I'm using Android on a tablet, why would I dual boot into Windows? I would rather be running Windows, and always have access to Android via an emulator or protected VM. Still need more Ram for either case.

With the way things are going, every year we double the power of our devices, so now that devices are starting to get 2 gigs of mem, 4 is indeed right around the corner.

 

[kodiak799]

I still have yet to see a use case for dual boot devices.

Might prefer to run pure android for a variety of reasons. But then there are times where you might need to run Windows. It's about device convergence and reducing how many devices one has to carry around.

 

[GAstorino]

And why do they limit the storage? They dribble the storage out likes it freaking gold. Nexus, Ipod, Amazon. 64 gb finally hell they had a 160 gb drive on an Ipod 5 years ago and Archos had handhelds with 500 GB drives 5 + years ago. They make the money on the content not the units but how much content can you put on a unit with 32 gb standard. I have to add and subtract videos all the time because by the time you put on apps, books, O/S you are not left with huge volumns of storage with movies running 1/2 - 1 gb each. If you are going to limit storage at least at minimum allow me to put in a sd card and/or attach a usb drive without rooting.

 

[jspradling7]

I bought 2 of the original Fires' for me and my wife when they first came out. They were running CM shortly thereafter. We bought a Nexus 10 when they first came out. I would never willingly spend money on another Kindle if I can buy a Nexus.

 

[Yellowhammer]

I bought a fire HD 8.9 for my wife, and she loves it. But she refuses to let me root it. I've played with it, and it's a pretty cool device. If I wanted a tablet, I would definitely be interested in the next model.

 

[hotice]

Sad but true

I think CPU and GPU are much better in these new Kindles than the new Nexus 7. The Nexus 7 has a Snapdragon 4 Pro which is great but it's basically four cores like the two that the One X, Galaxy S3, and Razr HD had last year coupled with a faster GPU, though it does have twice the L2 cache. The Snapdragon 800 is much more powerful. It's using an improved Krait architecture and a much faster GPU that can do hardware QHD/4K video compress/decompression. Don't get me wrong the Snapdragon S4 Pro is no slouch and was not a bad choice for the Nexus 7. It's very fast and has enough graphic power to push pixels fast at 1920x1200 resolution but the Snapdragon 800 is a huge jump up. It could be argued that this doesn't make a difference at the 1920x1200 resolution but it probably does at 2560x1600 (meaning the faster GPU my be required to maintain high frame rates at 2560x1600). The GPU in the Nexus 10 was underpowered for the resolution it had. The new Kindle 8.9 should not be. I just think it's sad that the best tablet hardware on the planet is running a very custom version of Android and has no Play Store (probably will be the case).

 

[kodiak799]

It could be argued that this doesn't make a difference at the 1920x1200 resolution but it probably does at 2560x1600.

And there's no need to argue your eye can't tell the difference on an 8" from two feet.

 

[hotice]

And there's no need to argue your eye can't tell the difference on an 8" from two feet.

That's a different topic. I completely agree with you. I think 1280x800 is actually a very good resolution for a 7" tablet and if it were up to me 10ish tablets would stop at 1920x1200 resolution. I gave up on that battle as Apple marketing has convinced everyone they need uselessly high resolution to fling birds at pigs. Needlessly high resolution requires a faster GPU and takes more battery power for no perceivable or practical benefit. My point was that the GPU in the Exynos of the Nexus 10 was underpowered to maintain high frame rates at the extremely high 2560x1600 resolution. The new Kindle 8.9 should have no problem with frame rates even at that high resolution with the Snapdragon 800.

 

[kodiak799]

That's a different topic. I completely agree with you. I think 1280x800 is actually a very good resolution for a 7" tablet and if it were up to me 10ish tablets would stop at 1920x1200 resolution.

My laptop is a 13" screen with 720p. I think it's laughable to have more than that on smaller screens. I'll take more ram and storage every time.

 

[hotice]

My laptop is a 13" screen with 720p. I think it's laughable to have more than that on smaller screens. I'll take more ram and storage every time.

My 13" tablet is only 1366x768, slightly higher than 720p, and I wish it was higher. For me that resolution is too low. I would want at least a 768 vertical so 1366x768 would be the same aspect ratio but more practical just because of some applications and graphics made with a 1024x768 display in mind. Really, this comes down to personal need and preference at these relatively low DPIs.