Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPad mini iPad Mini 2 to have A7 chip?

I

irDigital0l

Guest
Original poster
Dec 7, 2010
2,901
0
Just stumbled to a 9to5mac article in which they summarized KGI's Mingchi Kuo Oct 22 event predictions.

- Slimmer and lighter iPad 5 (7.5 mm and 500 g)
- iPad 5 to have narrower side bezels like iPad mini
- iPad mini 2 has Retina display (2048 x 1536)
- iPad 5 to have A7X, iPad mini 2 to have A7
- iPad 5 and iPad mini 2 to have 8MP camera
- No Touch ID or gold finish for iPad 5 and iPad mini 2

I believe the A6X chip will satisfy the iPad mini 2 and its Retina display but if it will use the new A7 chip, I think I may just get that instead of the iPad 5.

Anyone think it would be logical for Apple to use the A7 instead of A6/A6X for the iPad mini 2? While it would be nice, I just can't see Apple making the iPad mini 2 on par with the iPad 5. Would an A6 or A6X chip seem more reasonable?
 
Pretty sure Apple wants all devices to go 64 bit now, so the transition will be less of a struggle for iOS developers in 2-3 years. At that point there would be no need to develop any more 32 bit app-versions because all devices (even the older ones) support 64 bit architecture. A 32 bit iPad mini would suspend that transition.
Question remains, what role the "x-part" of the processor plays in supporting a retina display. But i guess the normal A7 chip is still more capable than the A6X version.
 
I'm thinking the A6X isn't power-efficient enough to be put in the iPad mini and still have decent battery life.

I haven't heard any rumors about an A6X die shrink, so I'm betting on an A7-class chip, though maybe slower clocked to save on power.
 
Whatever chip the mini 2 gets, if it's Retina, it will have an "X" chip (A6X or A7X). Apple hasn't ever put a non-X chip in a retina iPad, and it would be very surprising for that to happen now. Apple prides itself in the animations and scrolling being smooth; I just don't see them cutting it close on the new Retina mini.

And, Apple has never put an X chip into anything other than a retina iPad, showing that they design them specifically for that purpose. Except Apple TV :)
 
I hope to hell it gets an A7X and a decent amount of RAM. I really want a mini but I need to run some pretty demanding apps.
 
Hell no, although I'd love that. They would never make the mini on par in every aspect with mega, and only have screen size as the major factor between the two. Something substantial has got to keep them apart so that the one doesn't hurt the others sales.

It's like consumer decisions and compromise. More money for a better chip and bigger screen or less money for a smaller chip and smaller screen. Then consumers will think about their day to day use to make a more informed decision.

And Apple would never make any of their devices jump 2 chips. It's all incremental.
 
irDigital0l said:
Just stumbled to a 9to5mac article in which they summarized KGI's Mingchi Kuo Oct 22 event predictions.

- Slimmer and lighter iPad 5 (7.5 mm and 500 g)
- iPad 5 to have narrower side bezels like iPad mini
- iPad mini 2 has Retina display (2048 x 1536)
- iPad 5 to have A7X, iPad mini 2 to have A7
- iPad 5 and iPad mini 2 to have 8MP camera
- No Touch ID or gold finish for iPad 5 and iPad mini 2

I believe the A6X chip will satisfy the iPad mini 2 and its Retina display but if it will use the new A7 chip, I think I may just get that instead of the iPad 5.

Anyone think it would be logical for Apple to use the A7 instead of A6/A6X for the iPad mini 2? While it would be nice, I just can't see Apple making the iPad mini 2 on par with the iPad 5. Would an A6 or A6X chip seem more reasonable?
Click to expand...

Although I would have gone with the A6X, i think with the recent developments like the 28nm & 64-bit, and the A7 being equivalent to the A6X in terms of performance, i think its cost effective and the right path to go for Apple. That said, the ipad mini 2 will pick up the same internals of the iphone 5S, and leave the more powerful specs for the ipad 5. It also lines up with the supposed increase in thickness for the ipad mini 2. ( Retina screen + Bigger battery+ bigger Soc)

Here is what I think

- Slimmer and lighter iPad 5 (7.8 mm and 495 g)
- iPad 5 to have narrower side bezels like iPad mini
- iPad mini 2 has Retina display (2048 x 1536)
- iPad mini 2 to become slightly thicker (7.5mm and 375 g approximately)
- iPad 5 to have A7X, iPad mini 2 to have A7
- iPad 5 and iPad mini 2 to have 8MP camera ( Mini might get the same 8mp from the iphone 5C, while the ipad gets the better version)
- Touch ID for Ipad 5, gold finish for both
- iPad 5 to get PowerVr G6630 and ipad mini to get G6430 for graphics
- New smart covers
 
Glideslope said:
Mini II A7X. Not sure on the RAM. :apple:
Click to expand...

Don't think so. It will A7 and 1 Gb RAM for the ipad mini, along with A7X and 2GB RAM for 9.7 ipad.

As for graphics G6430 comes with 4 clusters, so it should technically satisfy the X part, which would have otherwise come with A6X. A6X and A7 technically have the same performance levels. the ipad in all likelyhood will get the G6630.

----------
preyan said:
And Apple would never make any of their devices jump 2 chips. It's all incremental.
Click to expand...

A7= A6X performance - maybe a 10% improvement over the A6X. Its technically not a drastic jump of 2 generations if you look at it that way, yet its more futureproof with things like 64 bit & 28nm SoC chipset. the 4 cluster approach from the G6430 graphics chip should take care of X part that will be missing in the A7.
 
Jantelagen said:
What would be the reasoning for Apple giving the iPad mini 2 their top of the line processor, wouldn't A6X be the logical next step? It would surely be able to drive the rumored retina display, and the mini would still be cheaper and a "step down" from the full size iPad.
Click to expand...

From what I've read the A7 is as powerful (gpu wise) as the A6X and is a more powerful cpu too while using less power.
 
Honza said:
Whatever chip the mini 2 gets, if it's Retina, it will have an "X" chip (A6X or A7X). Apple hasn't ever put a non-X chip in a retina iPad, and it would be very surprising for that to happen now. Apple prides itself in the animations and scrolling being smooth; I just don't see them cutting it close on the new Retina mini.

And, Apple has never put an X chip into anything other than a retina iPad, showing that they design them specifically for that purpose. Except Apple TV :)
Click to expand...
X series is not power efficient enough. Retina display already gonna crunch iPad Mini's battery. Battery power to push extra backlight through tiny pixels

Consider
A5 to A6
New gen cpu and gpu. Doubled performance.
Same cores.

A6 to A6X
Same gen
Same cpu, doubled gpu cores to 4

A6 to A7
New gen, doubled performance.
Gpu increased 2 to 3 core

A5 to A7 leap frogs A6X.
CPU. Leap frogs a generation, quadruples performance.
GPI. Leap frogs a generation and adds a gpu core. More than quadruples performance.

A7 will run graphically as fast if not faster than A6X.

You should be praying for an A7

----------
Jantelagen said:
What would be the reasoning for Apple giving the iPad mini 2 their top of the line processor, wouldn't A6X be the logical next step? It would surely be able to drive the rumored retina display, and the mini would still be cheaper and a "step down" from the full size iPad.
Click to expand...
Trying to accelerate ecosystem to 64bit.
Energy efficiency of A7 vs A6X.

A6X would help reduce manufacturing line strain for new 28nm though. Thats the ONLY reason Zi can see.
 
Curun said:
X series is not power efficient enough. Retina display already gonna crunch iPad Mini's battery. Battery power to push extra backlight through tiny pixels

Consider
A5 to A6
New gen cpu and gpu. Doubled performance.
Same cores.

A6 to A6X
Same gen
Same cpu, doubled gpu cores to 4

A6 to A7
New gen, doubled performance.
Gpu increased 2 to 3 core

A5 to A7 leap frogs A6X.
CPU. Leap frogs a generation, quadruples performance.
GPI. Leap frogs a generation and adds a gpu core. More than quadruples performance.

A7 will run graphically as fast if not faster than A6X.

You should be praying for an A7
Click to expand...

The only concern would be whether the 3 core approach would be powerful enough to run the 7.85"Retina, while the A6X had 4. I also believe the A7 is more than enough, but you never know.

----------


Curun said:
Trying to accelerate ecosystem to 64bit.
Energy efficiency of A7 vs A6X.

A6X would help reduce manufacturing line strain for new 28nm though. Thats the ONLY reason Zi can see.
Click to expand...

There is no particular strain for the 28nm line. Apple just stops purchasing A6X SoCs from samsung. As it is, they have reduced the manufacturing of iphone 5Cs which is the only other product using A6 series. Reduction in those lines would help them, help them make the manufacturing process more efficient, and even retool an additional foundry lines to manufacture A7 and A7X.
 
daywiz said:
The only concern would be whether the 3 core approach would be powerful enough to run the 7.85"Retina, while the A6X had 4. I also believe the A7 is more than enough, but you never know.

----------




There is no particular strain for the 28nm line. Apple just stops purchasing A6X SoCs from samsung. As it is, they have reduced the manufacturing of iphone 5Cs which is the only other product using A6 series. Reduction in those lines would help them, help them make the manufacturing process more efficient, and even retool an additional foundry lines to manufacture A7 and A7X.
Click to expand...
Each if those 3 cores is a newer generation and higher performance than the cores in the 4 core A6X.

Sure its only speculation as I have no samples. But Id clearly take my chances with an A7 over an A6X that already has lag complaints of iPad4.
 
It makes sense based on the assumption that they'd want to shift all their devices over to 64-bit hardware ASAP.

EDIT: However... it makes sense for them both to use the A7X. They'll both need it at 2048x1536. I'm interested to see what Apple will do.
 
Last edited:
daywiz said:
The only concern would be whether the 3 core approach would be powerful enough to run the 7.85"Retina, while the A6X had 4. I also believe the A7 is more than enough, but you never know.

----------




There is no particular strain for the 28nm line. Apple just stops purchasing A6X SoCs from samsung. As it is, they have reduced the manufacturing of iphone 5Cs which is the only other product using A6 series. Reduction in those lines would help them, help them make the manufacturing process more efficient, and even retool an additional foundry lines to manufacture A7 and A7X.
Click to expand...

A7 has a 4 cluster GPU not a triple core I believe.
 
Curun said:
X series is not power efficient enough. Retina display already gonna crunch iPad Mini's battery. Battery power to push extra backlight through tiny pixels

A7 will run graphically as fast if not faster than A6X.

You should be praying for an A7
Click to expand...


If the A7 doubles graphics performance from A6, and A6X also doubles graphics performance from A6, then A7 = A6X with respect to graphics performance. Now all of this gum flapping is of course speculation, and nobody here has benchmarks for the new iPad, or battery life. I just think it would be strange to go against what Apple has traditionally done, which is to put an X series chip in an iPad with 2048x1536 resolution.
 
Honza said:
If the A7 doubles graphics performance from A6, and A6X also doubles graphics performance from A6, then A7 = A6X with respect to graphics performance. Now all of this gum flapping is of course speculation, and nobody here has benchmarks for the new iPad, or battery life. I just think it would be strange to go against what Apple has traditionally done, which is to put an X series chip in an iPad with 2048x1536 resolution.
Click to expand...

What Apple has 'traditionally done' applies to 2 devices, both of which needed SoC's that were a step above what they could do in phones at the time and that were, frankly, big compromises. Remember the Retina iPad is... I think I'm right here... the only new version of an iOS device to significantly increase in size and weight over the previous generation. The A5X in particular was the ARM equivalent of the trick some laptop vendors did a few years back of putting desktop parts into 'gaming' laptops as it was the only way to get the necessary power.

We've now reached a point where those compromises don't necessarily have to be made. Actually I'll go further than that, I don't think they *can* be made in the iPad Mini as there just isn't room in the chassis. Everything we've seen about the A7 suggests that it is more than capable on the graphics side with the only slight question mark being over the memory bandwidth. As far as CPU is concerned an A7 would actually be significantly more powerful than the A6X. It would also be far more power efficient, generate less heat and be a considerably smaller package (and, likely, pretty much the same cost if not a little cheaper).

And here's the kicker for me: it makes sense from a marketing PoV. The iPad gets an A7X and a push towards content creation / 'pro' markets hopefully complete with apps. The retina mini gets the A7 (maybe with slight tweaks such as clock speed) and benefits from the 64 bit message Apple will be pushing hard while fitting into a nice neat hole of 'general purpose use / consumption' and selling on price. In other words the same basic strategy they currently use with the Macbook Air and Macbook Pro. It's a message that's simple, is proven to work very well and means that the vast majority of marketing benefits both products.
 
The A7's GPU and the A6X's GPU have the same amount of GFLOPs, it will probably perform a little better than the A6X though.

Perhaps Apple will use the A7X SoC in the mini, but rename it to something else like "A7M" and give the A7X in the larger iPad a few hundred MHz clock speed boost for the CPU, to differentiate.
 
Jantelagen said:
What would be the reasoning for Apple giving the iPad mini 2 their top of the line processor, wouldn't A6X be the logical next step? It would surely be able to drive the rumored retina display, and the mini would still be cheaper and a "step down" from the full size iPad.
Click to expand...

I would think Apple wants to go full 64 bit as soon as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back