New iPad Mini Has Downclocked A15 Chip Compared to iPhone 13

[jz0309]

However, Apple doesn't offer choices of processors for the same iPhone or iPad. M1 Macs are all the same except for the number of GPU cores. That said, binning processors improves yields and reduces costs. If some A15 chips are not quite good enough to run at full speed but have 5 good GPUs, they go into the iPad mini. Those with a defective GPU can go into the iPhone 13 (non-Pro).

And just to complicate matters, there is the concept of “fusing” which allows you to turn certain features on or off, post fab processing, and possibly regardless of bins.
Intel has those capabilities and can turn an i9 into an i3 through fusing, that’s an extreme example just for illustration.

 

[KPOM]

This seems like a basic efficiency practice in mass production. I would imagine that every industry mass producing products has some form of this.

Yes. Companies like Intel and AMD do this by offering the same processor at different clock speeds. Apple sold otherwise identical Macs with different processor speeds (eg i5 and i7) but haven’t done that with the iPhone or iPad, and have significantly limited that with the M1 Macs. But they still want the benefits of binning.

 

[KPOM]

And just to complicate matters, there is the concept of “fusing” which allows you to turn certain features on or off, post fab processing, and possibly regardless of bins.
Intel has those capabilities and can turn an i9 into an i3 through fusing, that’s an extreme example just for illustration.

And few people complain that they charge twice as much for the i9 or i7 than the i3 even though they literally are made on the same process at the same time.

It makes good business sense. If you have a bunch of unsold i9s and then Dell or HP places a big order for i5s, just turn the i9s into i5s.

 

[jz0309]

And few people complain that they charge twice as much for the i9 or i7 than the i3 even though they literally are made on the same process at the same time.

It makes good business sense. If you have a bunch of unsold i9s and then Dell or HP places a big order for i5s, just turn the i9s into i5s.

Yep, it is cheaper than every product on their own maskset etc etc…

 

[HarryWild]

Apple always find ways to short change the Mini!

1. lower clock speed.
2. frugly limit memory amount
3. force people to spend extra $150 for 256GB storage option. No 128GB available!
4. offer new strange colors along with traditional Space Gray

I sure there are many more short cuts when people have a chance to use the Mini 6!

 

[KPOM]

Apple always find ways to short change the Mini!

1. lower clock speed.
2. frugly limit memory amount
3. force people to spend extra $150 for 256GB storage option. No 128GB available!

I sure there are many more short cuts when people have a chance to use the Mini 6!

The base iPad, mini and Air are all offered with 64GB and 256GB options. For about 90% of the public that is just fine. I just ordered a 64GB mini. I have about 90GB free on my 128 GB iPad Pro. The base mini will be more than enough for me. Post Delta wave I plan to travel more and the mini is perfect for that.

Remember that most people aren’t editing 4K videos on an iPad mini. More storage on phones makes sense because they are now our primary cameras and video cameras.

 

[Chocomonsters]

Does downclocking save apple money?

Yes. If the objective was inventory utilization of binning chips. So it may not be down clocking but utilizing yield that couldn’t make a cut for iPhone.

 

[jwcdis]

This is the result of typical binning from any wafer fabrication process where there are 2 main variations:

1. Chips can have defects such as broken cores these can be seen in the Macbook Air M1 models to where some models have 7 core GPU's and others have 8 core GPUs. This is the same as the iPhone 13 Pro Max where it has a 5 core GPU and the iPhone 13 has a 4 core gpu. For Intel and AMD broken cores are what separates i5/i7/i9 cpus. Since Apple doesn't have a large enough variety of products they put them in their "not-as" flagship products or on the lower storage option of some products. The bad chips are still worth a lot if you can the right buyer or insert them into something where it won't make too much of a difference usually as a value proposition

2. Not all chips are made equally even if the cores all come out OK, some can perform better or worse in terms of carrying a electrons through them due to geometry/layering. The iPad mini is being binned with slower CPU is the same as buying a locked/unlocked processor from Intel or AMD (think like a i5-10700K and i5-10700). In the long run for iPad Air losing 300 MHz is not something you will cry about, it will still be a great tablet. It is just brings a slight uneasy feeling that even though you're paying a premium price for this tablet, you're not getting their best chips. It's really unfortunate they hide (or fail to mention) these sorts of things in their keynote presentations

 

[turbineseaplane]

3. force people to spend extra $150 for 256GB storage option. No 128GB available!

The price to go from 64gb (a chip they keep in this scenario) and have 256gb instead is highway robbery.

Flat out eye gouging theft

 

[turbineseaplane]

It is just brings a slight uneasy feeling that even though you're paying a premium price for this tablet, you're not getting their best chips. It's really unfortunate they hide (or fail to mention) these sorts of things in their keynote presentations

Even more uneasy since the line got a 25% entry price increase

 

[Abstract]

1) How do you call a processor that is the same processor as the one in the iPhone 13 but runs at a lower speed?
2) The fact that Apple never discloses the speed of the processors does not mean that they right in doing so.

Cmaier is right. It’s not underclocking. It’s due to chip manufacturing variation. Apple probably had an internal tolerance specification where a chip passes QA if it exceeds a certain speed.

It’s a similar with cars and specified power output from motors. The HP/kW value they specify is extremely conservative, since it’s Ok to sell you something with more power, but not OK to sell you a product with less. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Even if Apple were to include clockspeed, it would be pointless because all their products would exceed it. They’d advertise whatever conservative value they want, even if some exceed the spec by 10-15%.


BTW, I’m not saying I like it. 🤷🏻‍♂️ However, it’s not underclocking.

 

[Solomani]

Five law offices are already preparing a lawsuit because Apple downclocked the iPad Mini. Lawsuits are being prepared even before any consumers have ever received this product. Am I not correct to predict that there will be lawsuits because of this? Let's get real. There will be lawsuits. Whether the lawsuits have merit or not is another story.

Let's see what we call this?

"Clockgate"

Downclockgate

Minigate

 

[DeepIn2U]

The price to go from 64gb (a chip they keep in this scenario) and have 256gb instead is highway robbery.

Flat out eye gouging theft

This is like crying and trying to put Humpty-Dumpty (Android tablets) together again.

all the kings horses be Android tablets cheaper much cheaper in $ and more options here and there always failed to sell in competitive numbers or be used in various use cases. Why? Because beyond the parts of the sum, they all didn’t live up to the sum of their parts!

so go ahead use the Android tablets save your money and stress and come back or not tell us how good Android tablets are cause of cheaper costs and what you really do with it and how often.

 

[Solomani]

How can a much larger chassis (utilising a similar passive cooling method) have a processor running at lower clocks? Is it maybe to save battery power?

A smaller chassis (like in the iPad Mini) likely has less ability to dissipate processor heat? Possible overheating could be one reason. But I'm sure I will be corrected by eggier eggheads here.

 

[orthorim]

Third iPad in history to have a underclocked processor

the other two are the iPad Pro 9.7 inch (2.16 from 2.26) and iPad 7th generation (2.32 from 2.34)

10 answers down finally an informative answer.

So they did it before.

Chances are, iPad A15 is way too fast for normal users anyway, nobody needs that much power for the apps available on the iPad. So trade-off for battery life / heat generation, I am guessing. Which would be a very good trade-off.

For example doesn't get hot after hours of gaming use - things like that, practical things Apple cares about more than feeds and speeds.

Plus, your game won't run faster with a faster chip, an A15 will likely make easy work of any available games - since iPad games have to support back devices from years and years ago.

 

[orthorim]

It’s more likely to use chips that can’t run at full speed, instead of throwing them out. The tail end of the curve is smaller than the middle, so you need to use those in a low volume product, which iPhone is not.

Interesting theory, is this backed by anything?

Really depends on how binning works, how factories work, how microchips are manufactured...

As someone who has no clue, it makes no sense to me a chip could be deemed "not stable" for the full clock rate, but "stable and good" for a 10% lower clock rate. I vaguely remember about the process with wafers and so on but - logically - it would make more sense to say "this chip is good" and "this chip is bad"... I would imagine that 99% of chips that can't reach the full CPU rate for whatever reason, also can't reach a 10% lesser CPU rate.

But - I could be completely off, maybe chips do have a bell curve of supported clock speeds and very little variation in other orthogonal dimensions.

 

[cmaier]

Interesting theory, is this backed by anything?

Really depends on how binning works, how factories work, how microchips are manufactured...

As someone who has no clue, it makes no sense to me a chip could be deemed "not stable" for the full clock rate, but "stable and good" for a 10% lower clock rate. I vaguely remember about the process with wafers and so on but - logically - it would make more sense to say "this chip is good" and "this chip is bad"... I would imagine that 99% of chips that can't reach the full CPU rate for whatever reason, also can't reach a 10% lesser CPU rate.

But - I could be completely off, maybe chips do have a bell curve of supported clock speeds and very little variation in other orthogonal dimensions.

Yes, you are completely off. The way I explained it is exactly how it works. You have critical paths. The critical paths vary in length based on slight variations in geometries or doping of semiconductor structures or layers. Your maximum clock frequency is 1 divided by the worst critical path.

 

[SpotOnT]

I don’t think Apple would take the chance of risking a class action lawsuit and will probably keep them downclocked even if they no longer have to. You know if the iPad mini 6 suddenly gets a “better” A15 a year from now, we’ll all find out here and on other sites. Maybe Apple will upgrade it instead with a binned A16. Those binned processors have to go somewhere.

I can see that argument. At the same time though, isn’t calling it an A15 chip in both the iPad and iPhone, when it has different performance, also a lawsuit waiting to happen?

This was a design choice. iPad Mini is a consumer model or entry level iPad. They don't want this to exceed the M1 iPad's. Not sure what you mean by full speed A15 chips. By next year M2 and A16 will be released. A15 will be considered a consumer series chip and not a flagship chip. The A15 will most like become integrated in Apple TV next year and $329 iPad next year. From my understanding A16 will rival M1 performance in the iPhone for 2022. Bottom line is that this an S year for Apple. No need to invest heavily as business to change product design if not needed. Chip shortage and buying have flattened. Apple expectation is to maintain break even or higher sales through 2022. As I believe 2022 will be a huge year for Apple with new product designs in Apple Watch and iPhone along with anticipation of announcing their Apple vehicle EV car(s).

I am not sure I agree with this. I don’t think Apple would give the iPad Mini chip the same name as the one in the iPhones and then intentionally cripple it so it doesn’t compete very well with the iPad Pro. As an example, the iPhone SE has always come out with a full performance flagship chip. The iPad Mini probably wouldn’t compete with the iPad Pro anyway, simply due to form factor, screen quality etc.

By next year, I mean that Apple tends to only update the iPad Mini every few years. So I assume the A15 will be in the mini for quite a while. Heck, Apple still makes and sells the iPhone 11 with an A13 chip.

 

[iPadified]

I think we should be happy it is A15 chip in the mini that is released at the same time as the precious iPhone. We could have been stuck with an A14 in the mini an no one would have been surprised.

 

[Denzo]

Interesting theory, is this backed by anything?
But - I could be completely off, maybe chips do have a bell curve of supported clock speeds and very little variation in other orthogonal dimensions.

Yeah this is how silicon manufacturers work. Same with graphics cards. CPUs etc. there’s a bell curve in production quality and companies have gotten clever at differentiating via creation of other product/model lines so as not to waste product.
Something similar with engines- which are no where near as complex but still built to a microscopic tolerance - and yet engine outputs vary, so you can imagine a thing with millions of transistors etc in such a small space.

 

[kazmac]

I decided to wait on the Mini.

My experiences with the M1 overheating on the iPad Pros almost instantly was a reminder. I also want to see if folks find it significantly lighter (7.5 grams doesn’t sound like much on paper.)

Hearing this news makes me feel slightly better about the A15 in the Mini insofar as heat, but I also understand why people are annoyed.

 

[KPOM]

Even more uneasy since the line got a 25% entry price increase

But it is still $100 less than the iPad Air.

 

[ikir]

A company can’t decide anymore clock speed of its own CPU on its own product. Rumors website will reach for a comment

it is incredible powerful, better to don’t overheat for 2% performance increase since the display heat up a lot and this thing is small. But iPhone… yes yes Apple know what is doing, so stop being a forum engineer or a marketing expert.

 

[ikir]

They just did not want to spend money developing a chip for Pro model.

Apple is spending much more that other company in research and they do their own SOC. they feel good about M1 on iPad and I feel good too about it!

 

[Xtir]

Because it's itchy?

But doesn’t scratching makes it worse itchy?