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
So with the A15 basically being an A14 overclocked +10% and upgraded GPU. Then the A15 in the iPad mini downclocked 10% is bacially an A14 with upgraded GPU = A14X.
I don’t think you know how to compare product categories properly. One product has an OLED the other not, one is more pocketable the other not, one has an advance camera system on an iOS product the other does not, I could keep going on but the point is made.
The premise of this article seems to question any design decisions Apple does for a particular price point. Here we are comparing why the A15 w/ 5-core GPU clock rate in the $499 mini is reduced a tad to 2.9 Ghz compared to $1099 iPhone 13 Pro Max, or the $999 iPhone 13 Pro that both offer a 3.2Ghz A15 w/5-core GPU. But where is the article that directly compares the $799 iPhone 13, and $699 iPhone 13 mini for having a A15 that offers only 4-core GPU? Are those running 3.2 Ghz?
Without comments you can assume they did this to maximize battery life as the previous mini 5 can readily get well over 10 hours as I found out during a recent power interruption and with the performance improvements over the A12 Bionic no one will care.
But this might also have to do with Apple's marketing, that it would be weird to compared the two most expensive iPhone 13's as having the fastest processing on the planet and its the same as a $499 iPad mini.
Last edited:
The lower clock rate might not be binning of the SOC, but cheaper bins of the DRAM chips in the package.
As for the price, Apple probably has good data that the market is strongly segmented. They probably noted that most potential Mini customers aren't much interested full sized iPads. So Apple can price the Mini 6 as a great deal in comparison to the Mini 5 and inferior Android mini tablets, and ignore whether or not that price looks like a good deal in comparison to the Air or Pro. If that boosts Apple's bottom line times unit sales (which requires lots and lots of people who think the new Mini 6 is a better deal than keeping the money in their pocket), all the better.
As for the price, Apple probably has good data that the market is strongly segmented. They probably noted that most potential Mini customers aren't much interested full sized iPads. So Apple can price the Mini 6 as a great deal in comparison to the Mini 5 and inferior Android mini tablets, and ignore whether or not that price looks like a good deal in comparison to the Air or Pro. If that boosts Apple's bottom line times unit sales (which requires lots and lots of people who think the new Mini 6 is a better deal than keeping the money in their pocket), all the better.
I suspect with the body surface size the iPhone 13 and Pro may down-clock to reduce heat output and battery life bringing it inline with the iPad mini 6. If the mini 6 had the same iPhone 13 Pro chip it may outdo it for sustained performance, maybe that is part of the decision.
If the two most expensive iPhones 13's ($999/$1099) have a slightly faster A15 w/5 core GPU then the $499 iPad mini , which is making billions? But yes a viable product feature set will make billions especially when size matters such as you are stuck on a plane with cramped space.
Bigger screen size and pen support have higher priority than extra camera sensors as long as it has good primary camera sensor > ProMotion/OLED, etc. plus $400 savings.
CPU power does not change linearly. At the end of the curve the power increase to speed increase can change dramatically. That last 10% could potentially use 25% more power. Maybe even worse than that.
edit: I thought you were familiar with this stuff so maybe I’m missing something. But the lower binned chips would be particularly bad at the top end. I also realize CPU power does not affect overall battery life as much as other things but it sure makes a difference on my 1st gen SE.
Last edited:
Ipad Mini has never been a flagship tablet. They now have the features of the iPad Pro now with Apple Pencil. Although GPU, CPU, and screen quality will still be available to the iPad Pro models.
Do we really think this is a design choice rather, rather than just a supply issue where Apple is using subpar chips due to the chip shortage?
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we see the iPad mini with full speed A15 chips in a year or two when production yields/supply issues improve.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we see the iPad mini with full speed A15 chips in a year or two when production yields/supply issues improve.
Apple wanted to improve battery life by downclocking. You won't even notice the difference. Heck A14 vs A15 will be negligible at best.
Nobody needs an iPad at all. That’s besides the point.
My guess is that it’s due to battery life, and possibly making use of lower-quality A15 bins.
What's the problem in replacing its battery after three years?
And even though you want to keep it for only three years, the resale price you would get for it in 2024 would be higher if it had 6GB of RAM.
I don't know about that and it's not really my concern. One of my biggest complaints with my iphone 11PM is heat, and the throttling that happens when it gets hot. It's quite annoying. I was kind of hoping it would run a little cooler because of the underclocking. I also have android phone with a snapdragon 888 processor and it definitely runs cooler than my iPhone and can sustain its speed much longer. I was hoping the Mini would be the same.
Though I suspect cmaier is going to say it wont effect heat much either if battery life isn't effected. So I guess I would be in favor of underclocking it even more if it could sustain its speed better. And no, I don't want a fan it it!
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).
Last edited:
Got 2 on order, next Friday cannot come soon enough. I have some awaiting for Christmas gifts but will pick those up closer to the holidays.
On the other hand, it may reduce the longevity in terms of the performance required by future iOS versions.