Does current iPhone have faster cellular data than 12 mini?
Seems plenty fast to me on 5G, even LTE
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 17 Base Model Rumored to Feature Larger Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Does current iPhone have faster cellular data than 12 mini?
Seems plenty fast to me on 5G, even LTE
No. Only Wi-Fi and Bluetooth are newer.
I mentioned cellular data speed in my previous post because that would certainly have some weight when assigning our subjective values to the history of iPhone models. My mini makes an outstanding tethered hotspot, so that makes me like it more than pre-5G models I loved.
Last edited:
I would disagree, the 16 has a much newer and faster modem than the 12. Even the jump from a 15 Pro to 16 Pro is significant in speed. We are talking about the x55 vs x71 after all.
iPhone 16 Pro Models Reportedly Boast Up to 26% Faster 5G Speeds
Apple's latest iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max are delivering significantly faster 5G speeds compared to their predecessors, according to new...
www.macrumors.com
Last edited:
And there you have the reality of physics. That is simply not possible. The larger phones will ALWAYS be better, because they can be. Even if Apple can make a good enough mini, the larger ones will be better in the same iteration.
Though it should be noted that the upcoming iPhone Air is definitely an indication that Apple desires to make things smaller when possible. Just not the display, because that's the dimension (height) they can't sacrifice at this time to achieve acceptable performance.
I'm not sure what's making you conclude this.
The battery suck is the screen. Make the screen smaller and the battery can be smaller.
The actual hardware guts are pretty small relatively speaking, whereas the battery is huge in comparison.
iPhone 16 below:
iPhone 12 mini was 5-6% of sales.
iPhone 13 mini was 3% of sales.
That's a disaster. In one iteration, what little interest there was dropped by 50%.
There is no real world argument for the product to continue to exist.
The iPhone 14 Plus shot up to around 11% of sales, with the 15 Plus sitting around 9%. Nothing to write home about, but more than triple the interest that the mini saw.
It really doesn't matter how many dozens of people on the internet come together to upvote everything mini and downvote everything realistic. You had your shot. You failed to materialize into a market. While I think Apple will continue to make the iPhone smaller in every dimension that it can, making the display smaller isn't something that has proven itself to be a worthwhile business. Especially since making it smaller means it can't be as good in every other way (battery, thermals, camera suite, etc. etc. etc.)
You're not sure where I conclude that bigger will always allow for more battery, better thermal performance, and better cameras?
I don't feel like that's something that requires explanation.
This is a good point
We've never had iPhones smaller than the iPhone Mini, so it definitely can't work.
Not today you don't. Things change. But you know that, and you're choosing to be belligerent instead.
That's good to know, and I'll take the extra speed in a future iPhone someday, as I rely on one for a hotspot. I was only thinking about 5G vs LTE vs 3G vs EDGE on the models over the years when I compared them.
You quote these as though they are hard numbers. Are you breaking Apple NDAs? I was under the impression that they haven't provided sales numbers breakdowns by individual product in a very long time.
If you're talking about upgrading to an iPhone 16, and worried about price (and not sure about what an iPhone 17 may bring), wait until the iPhone 17 is announced - there should be a price drop on the iPhone 16 at that point (following by what has happened in many previous years). When a new one comes out, they usually (A) drop the price on the previous model and (B) reduce the number of storage and color configurations available, BUT, there will still be phones in all the previous storage sizes / colors in the pipeline for a little bit (so act fast at that point).
The teal is very pretty - I wish they did interesting colors on the Pro line, but this time around is was white, black, silver, or slightly-sandy-silver (so I went with black and put a pink case on it).
Quite the opposite, demand for smaller phones is growing. The Minis captured a good portion of sales provided there was a lot cheaper option available (SE). The 14 and 15 Plus have no competition in the lineup except for the much more expensive Pro models, and that taken into consideration, these numbers are poor. If Apple didn’t offer SE at the time, all SE sales would be potentially Mini sales and Minis would easily surpass 15%. And even if they didn’t, even 5-10% of all iPhones sales should be enough to continue selling the model.
Last edited:
These are shipment numbers and they can be estimated. Still, she/he doesn’t know what these numbers actually mean. These are not bad numbers and they aren’t the reason why Apple isn’t selling an iPhone Mini currently. It’s because they can’t bring anything new to the table. They can pack more into a phablet, everyone can, it’s a lot easier than packing more into a smaller package. That would require innovation, and that’s not something on Apple’s menu currently. There is no new Mini model because they barely made people upgrade to 14,15 or 16 with the really little reason they could justify an upgrade with. If you compare the last 4-5 models, there is hardly any real reason to upgrade. They know this, and they knew they just aren’t capable of making people with SE, 12 or 13 Mini to upgrade again to 14 or 15 Mini unless there is a really good reason for it. They don’t innovate, the yearly iPhone updates are negligible, so I do believe we will see another Mini model as soon as Apple gathers enough actual improvements to make it worth a release and worth for customers to upgrade to it.
Apple will do everything they can do capture every single potential % or marketshare. And 5-10% or people who want a Mini sized iPhone is in reality a lot of people and a lot of potential sales, also a lot of potentially lost customers if they don’t meet their needs. They just aren’t ready yet. People upgrade their iPhones a lot less now and 13 Mini is still a powerful device, people won’t upgrade unless the next Mini is really worth it. They will learn a lot on the 17 Air and possibly make another Mini in a year or two, or three, but some day they will. Just like they are going to sell a standard MacBook again with A18, they want the small percentage of people who didn’t buy the Air or Pro.
Last edited:
Yes. Apple used to work hard to really shock the world with how much they can pack into a small package (iPod specifically blew people’s minds on what was possible with “physics”, the same with iPhone 1-5).
You're literally responding to a post full of 90% fact, 10% logical conclusion, and you start with "Quite the opposite." No, not the opposite. I gave you literal truth.
They factually did not. Between 3 and 6% is not a "good portion" of sales, no matter how you stretch the definition of the word "good".
They are the same size as the Pro model, so they have direct competition in the lineup. Unlike the mini, which actually had no competition in the lineup.
The Plus models did on average 2-3x better than the mini, which you called poor, while calling the mini good.
This is conjecture, and it isn't even smart conjecture, because the SE was (at the time) dramatically cheaper (by $300!) than the mini. They aren't even the same market.
According to who? You? According to Apple, 3-6% of sales was not enough to keep. And neither was 10-15%, because even the Plus model is being replaced by the Air this year.
Sorry to break your comment apart like this, but it's rare that someone is wrong this many times in one paragraph, it bore responding individually.
Oh boy. More like 100% sales data, 0% product nuance. I love breaking it down. 3–6% of iPhone sales is millions of units per year. Apple sells around 200 million iPhones annually, so 6% of that is 12 million units, 3% is 6 million units. You're saying millions of units annually isn’t “good enough”, but Apple sells the Apple TV and HomePod—both of which don’t even approach 1% of iPhone sales volume. So why do they still exist? Because Apple understands ecosystem and segment coverage.
Also, keep in mind that iPhone SE—a phone with even lower margins and fewer up sell opportunities—continued to be made with far less marketing push than the Mini ever had. If raw share was the only metric that mattered, the SE would’ve been axed first.
Mini had no in-lineup competition? Plus models compete with the Pro Max? This is completely backwards. The Mini had to compete against iPhone 12/13 standard with same internals and bigger screen, a cheaper and similar size feel iPhone SE and on top of that people hesitant about small screens becoming obsolete.
The Plus models don’t compete with the Pro Max for most buyers. The price delta is over $200, and the Pro Max appeals to an entirely different crowd - photographers, status buyers, etc. The Plus exists as a budget large-screen model, a segment with not a lot of historical demand. When 6S and 6S Plus came out, these were the only two new flagship models available and 6S sold over 70%.
You claim iPhone 14 Plus at 11% and 15 Plus at 9% prove that Minis were a flop. Let’s say 9–11% is 2–3x better than 3–6% (a stretch in itself). That still means that only 1 in 10 people buys the Plus - and again, this is with no direct large-screen budget competitor in the lineup. In contrast, the Mini had a budget small-screen competitor (SE) and size-preference stigma working against it.
I can't believe you're saying that Apple is now rumored to be replacing the Plus with an “iPhone Air”, "which further proves that 10% share isn't enough either" - that's completely undermining your entire argument
SE buyers wouldn’t have bought Minis due to price? Price gaps don’t prevent upgrade drift. The SE and Mini shared the exact same screen size niche, and had nearly identical hand-feel dimensions. Many buyers would’ve stretched budgets if the SE didn’t exist as a $399 “safety net.” Apple intentionally put two small phones in the same lineup and splitting the segment. It’s the classic cannibalization trap which Apple accepts for the rest of its product lines (AirPods vs. AirPods Pro, iPad vs. iPad Air, etc.). Also, the Mini had better features (OLED, Face ID, MagSafe). For some SE users, it would have been a natural next step. What you're saying just shows you have zero product nuance.
The truth is, Apple experiments with size variants because different people want different things. Apple’s cutthroat with SKUs, but they’ll revisit form factors - especially if market conditions shift. The Mini might’ve failed then, but it’s primed for a comeback if SE moves to a new form factor, or foldables and compact flagships increase popularity but especially because people DO want lighter/smaller phones again. You don't see people cry for a larger phone anymore, but you do see more and more people BEG for a smaller one.
The Mini was a niche product that sold millions without the support or marketing, or positioning the Plus models got. Given the right circumstances (e.g., removal of SE, repositioning), it could easily hit 10%+ share now. And that's more than enough for a company that still sells HomePods and iPad minis.
So next time, skip the “logical conclusion” part as you’re not very good at it.
Last edited:
Just to add to your excellent comment, mini never got any marketing push. There were no ads, nothing. It was just shuffled together with 12 and 13. Plus you really had to dig for it on their website.Oh boy. More like 100% sales data, 0% product nuance. I love breaking it down. 3–6% of iPhone sales is millions of units per year. Apple sells around 200 million iPhones annually, so 6% of that is 12 million units, 3% is 6 million units. You're saying millions of units annually isn’t “good enough”, but Apple sells the Apple TV and HomePod—both of which don’t even approach 1% of iPhone sales volume. So why do they still exist? Because Apple understands ecosystem and segment coverage.
Also, keep in mind that iPhone SE—a phone with even lower margins and fewer up sell opportunities—continued to be made with far less marketing push than the Mini ever had. If raw share was the only metric that mattered, the SE would’ve been axed first.
Mini had no in-lineup competition? Plus models compete with the Pro Max? This is completely backwards. The Mini had to compete against iPhone 12/13 standard with same internals and bigger screen, a cheaper and similar size feel iPhone SE and on top of that people hesitant about small screens becoming obsolete.
The Plus models don’t compete with the Pro Max for most buyers. The price delta is over $200, and the Pro Max appeals to an entirely different crowd - photographers, status buyers, etc. The Plus exists as a budget large-screen model, a segment with not a lot of historical demand. When 6S and 6S Plus came out, these were the only two new flagship models available and 6S sold over 70%.
You claim iPhone 14 Plus at 11% and 15 Plus at 9% prove that Minis were a flop. Let’s say 9–11% is 2–3x better than 3–6% (a stretch in itself). That still means that only 1 in 10 people buys the Plus - and again, this is with no direct large-screen budget competitor in the lineup. In contrast, the Mini had a budget small-screen competitor (SE) and size-preference stigma working against it.
I can't believe you're saying that Apple is now rumored to be replacing the Plus with an “iPhone Air”, "which further proves that 10% share isn't enough either" - that's completely undermining your entire argument
SE buyers wouldn’t have bought Minis due to price? Price gaps don’t prevent upgrade drift. The SE and Mini shared the exact same screen size niche, and had nearly identical hand-feel dimensions. Many buyers would’ve stretched budgets if the SE didn’t exist as a $399 “safety net.” Apple intentionally put two small phones in the same lineup and splitting the segment. It’s the classic cannibalization trap which Apple accepts for the rest of its product lines (AirPods vs. AirPods Pro, iPad vs. iPad Air, etc.). Also, the Mini had better features (OLED, Face ID, MagSafe). For some SE users, it would have been a natural next step. What you're saying just shows you have zero product nuance.
The truth is, Apple experiments with size variants because different people want different things. Apple’s cutthroat with SKUs, but they’ll revisit form factors - especially if market conditions shift. The Mini might’ve failed then, but it’s primed for a comeback if SE moves to a new form factor, or foldables and compact flagships increase popularity but especially because people DO want lighter/smaller phones again. You don't see people cry for a larger phone anymore, but you do see more and more people BEG for a smaller one.
The Mini was a niche product that sold millions without the support or marketing, or positioning the Plus models got. Given the right circumstances (e.g., removal of SE, repositioning), it could easily hit 10%+ share now. And that's more than enough for a company that still sells HomePods and iPad minis.
So next time, skip the “logical conclusion” part as you’re not very good at it.