iPad mini iPad Mini 2 Retina = 324 ppi (2048 x 1536 pixels)?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by palpatine, Feb 5, 2013.

  1. palpatine macrumors 68040

    May 3, 2011
    It sounds like a baseless rumor to me at the moment, but if true, it would certainly turn my head!


    The resolution on the alleged iPad Mini 2 is said to measure 2048 x 1536 pixels, which would be roughly four times the resolution of the first-generation iPad Mini, but by packing this many pixels into a smaller device, Apple actually boosts the density of the iPad Mini with Retina display to 324 pixels per inch (ppi). As a frame of reference, the iPad 3 and 4 both have display densities of 264 ppi, while the iPhone 5 has a similar density of 326 ppi.
  2. djransom macrumors 68040


    May 14, 2008
    If this does come to past I would definitely purchase a Mini as oppose to the larger iPad.
  3. hovscorpion12 macrumors 65816


    Sep 12, 2011
    Not bad. It matches the iPhone PPI (iPhone 4-iPhone 5). My question is the screen resolution. If Apple includes the 1536 x 2048 pixels found on the full scale iPad. this is a buy!!:D:D:D.
  4. jabingla2810 macrumors 68020

    Oct 15, 2008
    It would be 326 PPI, the same as the iPhone 4, 4S and 5.

    Apple picked the 7.9" size screen at resolution of 1024 x 768 because it matched the same pixel density as the iPhone 3GS. Obviously they have a lot of experience and high supplies of such displays.

    The iPad Mini retina display will essentially be the iPhone 4 display but larger, same pixel density anyway.

    Apple keeping costs down by using some good maths.
  5. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Jul 4, 2007
    Atlanta, GA
    1024 x 768 was chosen so the huge library of iPad apps would not have to be rewritten for a new resolution; they could just keep using the non-retina assets. It had nothing to do with keeping the iPhone 3GS' ppi. This is why the rMini will have the iPad 4's resolution but with a higher ppi.
  6. jabingla2810 macrumors 68020

    Oct 15, 2008
    You didn't understand my post.

    Obviously they chose the same resolution as the iPad 2, but my point is that they chose the SIZE of the screen, 7.9" so the PPI is the same as the iPhone 3GS, 163 PPI.

    Therefore the retina iPad mini will have the same PPI as the iPhone 4, 326 PPI.

    This helps keep supply costs down because they are dealing with the same LCD screens, just different sizes.

    The article the OP links is wrong, 324 PPI is something the iPad mini won't have, and worryingly it has been copied by a host of other useless websites that can't do maths.
  7. palpatine thread starter macrumors 68040

    May 3, 2011
    Do you have an article that gets it "right"? I am not sure what there is to worry about, but whatever the ppi, if we are talking about something above 300, that sounds pretty good to me. CNET (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57567519-37/ipad-mini-retina-display-may-surpass-ipad-4/), by the way, is giving the same number. It may be that they are reporting what they are hearing. At this point, I trust whatever imaginary source they have more than our calculations, which are not based on any knowledge of what is actually being produced.
  8. adnoh macrumors 6502a


    Nov 14, 2010
  9. SnowLeopard2008, Feb 5, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2013

    SnowLeopard2008 macrumors 604


    Jul 4, 2008
    Silicon Valley
    You don't get it either. Apple chose the resolution (# of pixels) to match iPad 1 and 2 so apps won't need different assets (think the images for buttons, pictures, game art, etc.). Apple chose 7.9" physical screen size (as opposed to 6" or 7" or whatever) so that the pixel density is the same as iPhone 3GS. This means that GUI elements (like the actual physical size of buttons, icons, etc. NOT pixel size but size measured with a ruler) will be the same size that users are already used to touching on their current iPhones and iPads. This is incredibly smart because the roadmap to retina is already built by their iPhone 4, 4S, 5. They can order the same exact LCDs as iPhone 4, 4S, 5 but just cut them at larger sizes. This helps with supply chain. They don't need to deal with a new problem of "how to go to retina?" because the attributes of the non-retina display is the same as their previous non-retina-but-was-upgraded-to-retina devices. Albeit just larger physical size.

    iPhone 3GS has 163 PPI. To go retina, Apple doubled the pixel count both horizontally and vertically. Result was iPhone 4 which has 326 PPI. Notice 163 * 2 = 326.

    iPad 1 and 2 has 132 PPI. To go retina, Apple double the pixel count both horizontally and vertically. Result was iPad 3 which has 264 PPI. Notice 132 * 2 = 264.

    iPad mini has 163 PPI. To go retina, Apple needs to double the pixel count both horizontally and vertically. Result will (hypothetically) be iPad mini with Retina which has 264 PPI. Notice 163 * 2 = 326. To go through with this, they just need to order the same exact part as iPhone 4, 4S, 5 but just larger physical size. You don't need a totally different supplier or totally different part. It's the same exact part with same exact PPI, just larger physical size.

    Apple tends to use the same core components (CPU/GPU, Bluetooth, WiFi, GPS, Accelerometer, Gyro, camera sensors, screen panel/technology/type/etc.) across various iOS devices. This holds many advantages. It's easier to maintain a performance standard since it's the same component just different form factor. It's easier to write apps for since you know the WiFi chip isn't from 10+ vendors but from 1-2. It's also good for scaling production of devices since they shared core components. You don't need to order a whole bunch of parts for each device. Just the same one but a massive quantity. It's also good for introducing new models because core technologies are leverage and shared from past.
  10. palpatine thread starter macrumors 68040

    May 3, 2011
    No. But, thanks for the explanation. Do you have an article reporting that? I was just looking for "actual" (whatever that means in the rumor-rich tech world) first-hand reports.
  11. SnowLeopard2008 macrumors 604


    Jul 4, 2008
    Silicon Valley
    Reporting what? The numbers I used? It's no secret what the screen pixel densities are for past iPhones and iPads. Of course this is "speculation" but Apple introduces a new technology (i.e. retina display) or concept and slowly spreads it across their entire product line. Of course they won't tell you that up front directly. But it's evident that they introduced retina on the iPhone 4. Then on iPad. And then on Macs. They took a new technology and spread it from small devices (easier to control yield on smaller stuff) and then rapidly scaled it.

    No company in the tech world will walk you through their entire thought process and reasoning for every decision they make.
  12. jabingla2810 macrumors 68020

    Oct 15, 2008




    These websites theorise an iPad mini with 326 PPI.

    They are only rumours like the your original post, however they make much more sense. I mean you only have to do the sum 163(PPI of iPad Mini)x2.
  13. cwwilson macrumors 65816


    Jan 27, 2009
    Oklahoma City, OK
    I hope it doesn't come out too soon, an October release date would give me enough time to enjoy my current mini. I only just bought it in December! :p
  14. AdonisSMU macrumors 603

    Oct 23, 2010
    Wait so you cant enjoy it if you dont have the newest toy on the market? How does a new iPad effect your enjoyment of your current iPad?
  15. danpass macrumors 68020


    Jun 27, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Pffffttt. We knew it would eventually be retina and we knew it would be 2048 since that is the only logical resolution to maintain app integrity.
  16. LightOnAHill macrumors regular

    Jun 26, 2010
    I think he meant it as a joke, hence the pink smiley face... :confused:
  17. temna macrumors 6502a


    May 5, 2008
    Considering all the issues the manufacturers had with the current mini screen and the new generation screens for the iPad 5, can anyone realistically see a retina iPad mini before October? Let's be realistic and not fanboy crazy. Hell, I'd be surprised to see retina before the mini 3 at the rate things are going for screen development and production, especially considering they don't want Samsung anywhere near this production.
  18. daywiz, Feb 6, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013

    daywiz macrumors regular

    Nov 12, 2012
    Just to avoid confusion and clarify the discrepancy between the resolution & PPI, here is the simple explanation.

    Product: Present ipad mini
    Resolution: 1024 × 768
    PPI: 163

    Product: Supposed retina ipad mini
    Resolution: 2048 × 1536 ( exactly double
    PPI: 326

    Reason for the confusion:

    Most of the website are considering the iPad Mini to be 7.9" , when its actually on 7.85".

    Look at the calculation below to understand the difference

    Product: CLAIMED SIZE ipad mini
    Resolution: 1024 × 768
    Screen Size: 7.9"
    PPI: 162.03

    Product: ACTUAL ipad mini
    Resolution: 1024 × 768
    Screen Size: 7.85"
    PPI: 163.06

    Likewise the supposed RETINA ipad Mini

    Product: CLAIMED SIZE ipad mini
    Resolution: 2048 × 1536
    Screen Size: 7.9"
    PPI: 324.05 *

    Product: ACTUAL ipad mini
    Resolution: 2048 × 1536
    Screen Size: 7.85"
    PPI: 326.11*

    Therefore, you can be sure if they are going for Retina its going to 326 ppi for sure, just like all the other iOS Retina devices hitting the 326 ppi. The only exception is the full size ipad, which is 263.92, just shy of 264.

    Hope that clears the confusion.

  19. palpatine thread starter macrumors 68040

    May 3, 2011
  20. A Hebrew macrumors 6502a

    A Hebrew

    Jan 7, 2012
    That rumor is not baseless. Apple will NOT give it a different resolution because that would be a hassle for devs and users.
  21. hobx macrumors regular

    Sep 6, 2010
    You know, I have a sneaking suspicion that apple is going to wait to the iPad 3 for this upgrade and go for a proc and graphics upgrade. Apple likes to get as much as possible from its hardware and the current screen will only have had a year of sales, not much for all the development that went into it. It will drive us nuts, but the general public will still buy them en masse.
  22. Xiroteus macrumors 65816

    Mar 31, 2012
    If this does get a retina display (it has to) of this level I would seriously think about picking this up, however I want to see what the iPad 5 does first and of course I am still looking at the Surface, this would be in line price wise.
  23. D.T. macrumors G3


    Sep 15, 2011
    Vilano Beach, FL
    It's kind of a no-brainer for Apple to use 2048x1536 - existing apps work OOTB, no additional assets for "retina spec" apps, the physical size of the device using that resolution produces touch target/UI elements that are within the HIG guidelines, not to mention it should look amazing at 326PPI.

    The real question is SOC, battery life and form factor.

    The A5X in some variant makes sense: it'll run a 2048 display at [roughly] the same performance as an A5/1024, and if they package it up like they did for the iPad 3, the Mini 2 will also see a RAM bump to 1GB.

    That being said, it seems like the A6 is the trend for high[er] end devices, unless Apple wants to position the standard iPad as higher end vs. the Mini (as opposed to simply a difference in form factor).

    Otherwise it'll be a decision based on A5X vs. A6X:

    Which one is cheaper.
    Which one run cooler, uses less power.

    One thing I'd be curious about, A5X vs. A6 (non-X) in terms of GPU power. We know the standard A6 is incredibly fast on the iP5, but that's pushing ~2.4 million less pixels. If A6 @ 2048 == A5 @ 1024, I could see them developing from the A6 (though the 4th Gen AppleTV might be an indicator of more widespread use of the A5X for the coming year...)
  24. Davejprince macrumors regular

    Sep 29, 2012
    The Netherlands
    The Retina-display, now on the iPad Mini.

Share This Page