Battery life wouldn’t be the reasons. It changes linearly with frequency, so it would only be a handful of % difference (less, given that most of the time the processor wouldn‘t be running all cores at full frequency).
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.
New iPad Mini Has Downclocked A15 Chip Compared to iPhone 13
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Battery life wouldn’t be the reasons. It changes linearly with frequency, so it would only be a handful of % difference (less, given that most of the time the processor wouldn‘t be running all cores at full frequency).
Not sure, as we do not know when the next Air upgrade will be and there may not be any perceivable difference in performance for a regular customer. After all, not many people choose iPads based on the Geekbench score results.
What are you talking about? By the time 5-6+ years comes around the battery will require replacement and new tech will temp one to upgrade. This is not a kitchen appliance where you buy it and no major change is expected in 6-12 years.
My guess is under clocking gives them a little breathing room for speed improvement on the next generation.
A 40% boost this time around was plenty.
If behind locked doors in the top secret lab, they developed a working prototype of a chip that was 100X faster than anything available today, does anyone think they'd plop that sucker in the next i-device the following year?
Of course not. We'd see the same incremental improvement year after year like we always have. They'd milk that tech for decades.
A 40% boost this time around was plenty.
If behind locked doors in the top secret lab, they developed a working prototype of a chip that was 100X faster than anything available today, does anyone think they'd plop that sucker in the next i-device the following year?
Of course not. We'd see the same incremental improvement year after year like we always have. They'd milk that tech for decades.
lets see...
- down clocked cpu
- 60hz only display
- 500 nits max brightness
- Inflated prices
- 64gb ram only on base
- 4gb system ram
- 2 speakers
My 2017, 10.5" iPad Pro has
- 120ghz ProMotion display
- 600 nits max brightness
- 4 speakers
- 4gb of system ram
I was really tempted to get the new mini because I love the form factor but they seemed to have crippled it so much that I will just pass.
- down clocked cpu
- 60hz only display
- 500 nits max brightness
- Inflated prices
- 64gb ram only on base
- 4gb system ram
- 2 speakers
My 2017, 10.5" iPad Pro has
- 120ghz ProMotion display
- 600 nits max brightness
- 4 speakers
- 4gb of system ram
I was really tempted to get the new mini because I love the form factor but they seemed to have crippled it so much that I will just pass.
iPad Mini is the best mobile gaming device out there, as it offers a great balance between screen size and weight.
Apple sold a lot of iPad Mini 5 devices when it put a high powered chip even though it raised the price by $100 and the demand was huge to bring out another update for these gamers.
So in that context this news is a real bummer, even I had the Mini 5 but let it go when PUBG Mobile was banned in my region last year. I bought the new pro last month, and I wish I waited for the Mini 5.
Is it technically possible to have better or worse chips of the same generation? How does it work?
The RAM isn’t integral to the chip, it’s stacked in a PoP arrangement so they can quite easily make any RAM/ chip combination they want arbitrarily.
I did not think of gamers, presuming they would prefer bigger screens anyhow. 🤔
How do you figure? mini 6 is a complete redesign from previous and R&D costs have to be gradually recouped. Now if it was the same previous shell then I could see your point but not so with a redesign. The next iPad mini 7 will come with base 128GB storage and a 512GB high end option. It’s an educated guess from previous and market projections.
My 2017 iPad Pro has more advanced components, especially on the display dept. and runs buttery smooth despite being 4 years old!
Well bin me! Why give less than your best Apple?
Would an iPad Pro 8.3 with the following specs interest you for $699?
- M1 processor
- 120hz promotion display
- 128gb base
- 8gb ram
- 4 speakers
I've the iPad Pro 11 2021, and I'm not sure I would have bought a 8.3" device for $100 less.
Maybe $450 for the current Mini 6 would have made more sense.
Agreed, most users will see the redesign, larger screen, faster from previous gen, Pencil 2 and landscape speakers along with CenterStage and will be sold on it. I don’t believe many complainers know what type of customer likes the iPad mini. I know children to adults and professionals that require something pocketable, responsive for their profession and this hits all those marks and I forgot the same if not better battery life.
so super fast versus the competition, and your complaining? about what? You did read the part where these are way faster than what they replaces as well? BTW: down clocking is usually to get extra battery or for thermal constraints, no one would just down clock for the heck of it
Yes. There is variability in the manufacturing process. A chip is formed by forming one layer on top of another. Some layers have semiconductors that need to be doped with contaminants to affect their electrical characteristics, some are insulating layers that also contain metal, etc. The various polygonal shapes may have slightly different sizes from one wafer to the next, layers may have different thicknesses, the doping may vary, etc. This happens both from wafer to wafer, and across the wafer (for example, the edges of a wafer have different properties than chips from the center).
As a result, you get a bell curve. So, for example, 50% of the chips can run as fast as X. 20% run as fast as X+10, and 20% run only as fast as X-10. 5% run as fast as X+20, and 5% run as fas as X-20. Or whatever.
When the chips are made, they are automatically tested to see how fast they can run, and they are put into different virtual “bins” based on their capabilities. “High bin” parts are the best, and “low bin” parts are the slowest. These can go into different products, or different versions of the same product.
Maybe a global silicon and component shortage has something to do with it hence the delayed iPad Air 5 release.
There are 3 feature tiers
1
2
3
The new mini is in the middle with the air. If they gave it all the tier 1 features they would have either price it like a pro or come out with a whole new set of pro differentiators. I’m ok with tier 2 features for tier 2 prices.
Despite it being digital technology, chips form imperfectly. So the yield of the good chips gets put into good bins. Traditionally apple would only buy the good bins but they effectively already own all chips, so they have to trash or place the remaining chips somewhere else.
??? Citation please.
Maybe not to you. If the $329 iPad is a better utility:cost ratio for you, then have at it.
Not to go all micro economics on you, but there is not a right price for all people. The demand curve is sloped-- so there are people who will not buy because the price is higher than they personally can justify, and there are people would happily pay more than $499 and are getting a deal on this device.
Unless Apple sells precisely zero of these, then ignore what I said.
It does if those chips would otherwise be thrown in the trash.
I paid $450 for the base iPad mini 6, it’s a good deal in my financial situation as I also traded my mini 5 and with other perks I am getting this almost free so yeah budget better.
$499 with 128gb minimum and ProMotion, I would have pulled the trigger.