Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So, what I'm getting here (and someone please feel free to disprove this) is that the A6 chips (the A6X in the 4th Generation iPad included in this) was seriously powerful and a very respectable step forward (in terms of speed, if nothing else) from the A5, but it was/is thermally inefficient, which is why it was left out of the first generation iPad mini ...
It's a little more complicated. Even if two chips have the same brand name, they might be very different. The first A5 chip was build on a 45 nanometer process (like A5X in iPad 3), while later revisions of the A5 use the same 32 nanometer process as the A6 and A6X chips. All A5 are running roughly at the same speed, but newer ones use far less energy.

Apple A5 family
(S5L8940, 45nm) A5
(S5L8942, 32nm) A5r2
(S5L8947, 32nm) A5r3

Apple A5X
(S5L8945X, 45nm) A5X

Apple A6
(S5L8955X, 32nm) A6

Apple A6X
(S5L8955X, 32nm) A6X

Apple A7 family
(S5L8960X, 28nm) A7
(S5L8965X, 28nm) A7

The A7 brought another process shrink, which allowed the iPad Air to use a smaller battery and lose weight. And the iPad mini with Retina Display to compute much more pixels in the same form factor.
 
I did absolutely love the mini's size and portability, and if I were using it as "just a tablet" I would definitely choose the 2nd gen. retina over the Air.

Just wanted to give you a bit more perspective. Many, many people actually prefer the 9.7" screen over the 7.9" and it most often has to do with either informed, logical reasons like mine or simply personal choice, not ignorance or ego massaging justification.

Agree with your comments on iOS 7 though - it needs extensive memory optimisation/leakage fixes above all else, as well as a long list of bug fixes and UI graphic optimisation. How can it be that my iPad can zip through Infinity Blade 3 without skipping a frame, but stutters on a basic UI zoom effect whenever I four-finger pinch to exit an app. The iPad version of iOS 7 is the worst. I mean it even says "Ringer silent" when I toggle the hardware mute switch as if it were an iPhone. Talk about unpolished!

It is odd to hear people talk about the iPad Mini vs Air choice as if it were choosing the 5S vs Galaxy S3. So much hatred and taunting in people's words.

I'm not saying you of course, but rather the person you were responding to (I didn't want to quote them and get them riled up).
I just wanted to say that I appreciated your post, and the balance it had in choosing an Air vs Mini.

Tough choice, but I personally decided to go the Mini route and see how I like it.
When you said that you'd probably stick to the Mini were it just a tablet to you, I related most to that statement. That's what I'm looking for.
Once they include TouchID in the future, it will tempt me to upgrade, and we'll see if I stick to the mini or go Air.
 
Apple have got to stop sourcing their panels from LG. They are rubbish.

..and I think Apple have to get over themselves over the whole Samsung thing, and source quality panels from a company that can make quality panels...
 
Last edited:
So, what I'm getting here (and someone please feel free to disprove this) is that the A6 chips (the A6X in the 4th Generation iPad included in this) was seriously powerful and a very respectable step forward (in terms of speed, if nothing else) from the A5, but it was/is thermally inefficient, which is why it was left out of the first generation iPad mini (and thusly why the first generation iPad mini wasn't in parity with the fourth generation iPad with CPUs the way this generation of iPad Air is with this new generation of iPad mini with retina) and the fifth generation iPod touch. Both of those, prior to the October event, were the thinnest iOS devices out there and thusly, were too thin to run the A6 and were stuck with the A5. Obviously, Apple doesn't feel the need to rush with an update to the iPod touch this year; but given that the previous generation of iPod touch was substantially more in parity with its contemporary iPhone release when it first came out, it would seem that it was another case of Apple sacrificing performance for thinness until it can find a thermally efficient processor to allow them to have their cake (make a thin device) and eat it too (make it as fast as its contemporaries). Now, they have the A7, which people keep praising for its thermal efficiency, and, as a result, the iPad mini is able to be in much more parity with the full-sized iPad. Is this sound? Obviously, Apple isn't clarifying this.

No. The reason this isn't sound is because it neglects many other factors.

Given that the iPhone 5 and the iPhone 5S have roughly the same heat dissipation capability (read: it's got the same amount of metal in the same volume, and roughly the same shape and arrangement of said metal), but that the A7's thermal throttling is much more noticeable than the A6 (if it even does it at all), it's likely that the A6 would have no problem in the first gen iPad mini if the A7 works in the same space.

It's more likely that the 1st gen iPad mini was being worked on before the A6 was available or that supply of the A6 wasn't sure to be enough. People assume that just because a product comes out around the same time that it was developed around the same time, this is simply a bad assumption.

Basically:
Thermal characteristics of the A6 definitely were NOT a factor for the 1st gen iPad mini.
We simply don't know why they chose the A5 for the 1st gen iPad mini.
 
I am typing this on the new iPad Air in my signature. I went from an iPad 3 to an iPad mini, and now back to full size with the iPad Air. Main reason is that for my use case, I appreciate the larger size. My use case is attached to a logitech keyboard cover 8 hours a day at work as my, ironically enough, Windows 8 laptop which sits next to my Macbook Air. I RDP into a virtual machine running the company's accounting software and do everything else on the Mac. With the mini, the keyboard is simply too cramped to be productive, but with the Air, the keyboard is very good. The reason I do this is because I travel extensively and using RDP software (Microsoft's newly released RDP client is great and has simplified this a lot for me, and made it cheaper!!) I have a truly best of both worlds scenario, as long as I have a good keyboard to pair with iPad. I get flawless iOS, OSX, and Windows (even though I hate using it) running well in an extremely portable and high performance package, that weighs half of what even my 11" Macbook Air does!!

I did absolutely love the mini's size and portability, and if I were using it as "just a tablet" I would definitely choose the 2nd gen. retina over the Air.

Just wanted to give you a bit more perspective. Many, many people actually prefer the 9.7" screen over the 7.9" and it most often has to do with either informed, logical reasons like mine or simply personal choice, not ignorance or ego massaging justification.

Agree with your comments on iOS 7 though - it needs extensive memory optimisation/leakage fixes above all else, as well as a long list of bug fixes and UI graphic optimisation. How can it be that my iPad can zip through Infinity Blade 3 without skipping a frame, but stutters on a basic UI zoom effect whenever I four-finger pinch to exit an app. The iPad version of iOS 7 is the worst. I mean it even says "Ringer silent" when I toggle the hardware mute switch as if it were an iPhone. Talk about unpolished!

Thanks for your comment. Regarding your first paragraph, of course there are going to be users like you. I'm not refuting that, but was simply not speaking about that group specifically, because it is a very small portion of the population. Most of the comments I make regard the general population, which is, for the iPad, people who use it to watch videos and play angry birds.

The point being, that even though some may appreciate the larger screen (and yes a good portion of those choose the full-sized iPad for that reason), there were also a good amount of people who justified their purchase of the iPad 4 over the mini because it seemed to be the "flag-ship" device over the mini (which was purposefully given lower specs). Now that they have the exact same specs, I think we'll see a different thought process.

In fact I've already seen plenty of Air users who have been trying to justify their purchase in another way besides the bigger screen. It's just buyers remorse because the mini has the same specs, but feels lighter and more comfortable in the hand. But for those who bought the air because they enjoy the bigger screen more, power to them.

And yes, again, iOS 7 is horrendous. I'm a picky person, but I feel like even the average consumer would notice 25+ bugs in this software in over a week.

Here's another one I just noticed a second ago. Go to your first home screen (if you don't have the stocks app take it on and throw it there) and double tap to go into the app-switching mode. While going into that mode look at the stocks app. The vertical lines on the app freak out - every single time haha.
 
Why do you mention this?
I chose mini BECAUSE the display is smaller.
So what?

Because both of this device is basically the same in spec, the only differentiate factor is the screen and battery. But the air is smaller and lighter from previous gen and still retain the same screen size which is a win for me.

Air is better then the mini, imo.
 
The iPad Air's geekbench score puts it at 6-13% higher than then Retina Mini's.

Both are within ~10% of the iPhone 5S

~~~So even more now than ever an iPad is looking like just an iPhone with a larger screen :D:D:D

Yeah yeah .. and swimming pool is just a larger bath tub so it shouldn't even exist in the first place. Everyone could just swim freely in their bathroom. :D
 
:eek:

That battery looks like a brick itself, never mind the case.

The one in the Air sin't much better either, being only a tiny board...


Now we know, where Apple's get their juices from ..... (edit: no pun intended)
 
Screen the guy is holding has a yellow tint.

Thanks for that! I am now avoiding this dud and moving to samsung and android. Bye bye Apple. :rolleyes:

----------

It is odd to hear people talk about the iPad Mini vs Air choice as if it were choosing the 5S vs Galaxy S3. So much hatred and taunting in people's words.

I'm not saying you of course, but rather the person you were responding to (I didn't want to quote them and get them riled up).
I just wanted to say that I appreciated your post, and the balance it had in choosing an Air vs Mini.

Tough choice, but I personally decided to go the Mini route and see how I like it.
When you said that you'd probably stick to the Mini were it just a tablet to you, I related most to that statement. That's what I'm looking for.
Once they include TouchID in the future, it will tempt me to upgrade, and we'll see if I stick to the mini or go Air.

In group out group - always the same. Sports teams, religions, countries, car manufacturers, tech companies, soda brand etc.

Some people love to love their chosen one of these things and love to hate others.

It is funny to watch though.
 
Big question

Why does no Apple A7X processor exist? There seems to be no X model for the CPUs this time around; really would've helped to differentiate in power among certain products. :confused:
 
The article fails to mention one thing that MANY have been wondering since the idea of an iPad Mini Retina:

ifixit said:
Within the A7 package is Elpida F8164A1PD 1 GB LPDDR3 DRAM

:D
 
Why does no Apple A7X processor exist? There seems to be no X model for the CPUs this time around; really would've helped to differentiate in power among certain products. :confused:

This is becaue the A7 is hardcore enough to power all of them. The technology existed to be able to give all devices the best processor. Think of it as though ALL the devices have received a an X version, so there is no need for the X moniker.

They did make different versions though. The iPad Air is clocked out to 0.1 Ghz faster than the iPad mini and iPhone 5S version, and in tests gets 10-13% higher performance.

----------

The article fails to mention one thing that MANY have been wondering since the idea of an iPad Mini Retina:

Originally Posted by ifixit
Within the A7 package is Elpida F8164A1PD 1 GB LPDDR3 DRAM

:D

Indeed, I read that as well - so the RAM in the 5S and mini A7 is onboard the chip, but NOT on the iPad Air. What, if anything does that actually mean???
 
I don't like their stupid scores. They talk about it as if it actually means anything besides how much money can be put into their own pockets from selling spare parts to consumers.

I think this is not justified. The score is important, because it tells something about the sustainability of Apple products. If it's harder to repair, it's also harder to repair for Apple. If you take your iPad mini to Apple to have it fixed, they will most probably send you a new one, and throw the old one away. Or if not that, will have to throw a large chunk away (e.g. the whole display assembly). Remember: it's always better to reuse than to recycle.
 
Indeed, I read that as well - so the RAM in the 5S and mini A7 is onboard the chip, but NOT on the iPad Air. What, if anything does that actually mean???
It could mean that two heat sources are spatially separated and that this is the reason why the iPad Air can run at a slightly higher clock speed and doesn't suffer from throttling like the A7 in the iPhone 5s. It could also mean, that there wasn't enough room in the iPad mini to put two chips in it. Or it could be in preparation for being able to put more RAM into the iPad Air without designing a new A7 variant.

Generally smaller machines always tend to be slower machines. We need Anand Lal Shimpi to learn more.
 
I was originally going to replace my original iPad mini with the retina display model but since seeing the A7 chip is slightly slower than that on the Air I decided to buy The iPad Air 128gb cellular. I need the slightly better A7 chip for video and music production.
 
I think this is not justified. The score is important, because it tells something about the sustainability of Apple products. If it's harder to repair, it's also harder to repair for Apple. If you take your iPad mini to Apple to have it fixed, they will most probably send you a new one, and throw the old one away. Or if not that, will have to throw a large chunk away (e.g. the whole display assembly). Remember: it's always better to reuse than to recycle.

I just wanted to acknowledge your reply to me. Good points I hadn't considered, I appreciate it.
 
It is odd to hear people talk about the iPad Mini vs Air choice as if it were choosing the 5S vs Galaxy S3. So much hatred and taunting in people's words.

I'm not saying you of course, but rather the person you were responding to (I didn't want to quote them and get them riled up).
I just wanted to say that I appreciated your post, and the balance it had in choosing an Air vs Mini.

Tough choice, but I personally decided to go the Mini route and see how I like it.
When you said that you'd probably stick to the Mini were it just a tablet to you, I related most to that statement. That's what I'm looking for.
Once they include TouchID in the future, it will tempt me to upgrade, and we'll see if I stick to the mini or go Air.
Why is that any different? Makes as much sense as 5S vs S3.

Both are Fortune500 type profit driven, ginormous corporations, peddling fancy consumer widgets. Completely illogical. Might as well get riled up over individual products from the same corporation.
 
No. The reason this isn't sound is because it neglects many other factors.

Given that the iPhone 5 and the iPhone 5S have roughly the same heat dissipation capability (read: it's got the same amount of metal in the same volume, and roughly the same shape and arrangement of said metal), but that the A7's thermal throttling is much more noticeable than the A6 (if it even does it at all), it's likely that the A6 would have no problem in the first gen iPad mini if the A7 works in the same space.

It's more likely that the 1st gen iPad mini was being worked on before the A6 was available or that supply of the A6 wasn't sure to be enough. People assume that just because a product comes out around the same time that it was developed around the same time, this is simply a bad assumption.

Basically:
Thermal characteristics of the A6 definitely were NOT a factor for the 1st gen iPad mini.
We simply don't know why they chose the A5 for the 1st gen iPad mini.

Ah. I do remember hearing that the A7 is substantially more thermally efficient than the A6 and that the A6 was somewhat worse at this than the A5. Though to be fair, I might've simply been misinterpreting a comparison made between the A6X and the iPad Air's A7. Perhaps I'm also misinterpreting the broader comparison to be made between AxX chips and Ax chips.

I feel like with the iPad mini and the iPhone 5 each evenly dividing attention in Late 2012, there would've had to be a really good reason to not give the iPad mini the iPhone 5's processor. I refuse to believe, especially in light of their respective 2013 successors, that they did this as a marketing move.

It's a little more complicated. Even if two chips have the same brand name, they might be very different. The first A5 chip was build on a 45 nanometer process (like A5X in iPad 3), while later revisions of the A5 use the same 32 nanometer process as the A6 and A6X chips. All A5 are running roughly at the same speed, but newer ones use far less energy.

Apple A5 family
(S5L8940, 45nm) A5
(S5L8942, 32nm) A5r2
(S5L8947, 32nm) A5r3

Apple A5X
(S5L8945X, 45nm) A5X

Apple A6
(S5L8955X, 32nm) A6

Apple A6X
(S5L8955X, 32nm) A6X

Apple A7 family
(S5L8960X, 28nm) A7
(S5L8965X, 28nm) A7

The A7 brought another process shrink, which allowed the iPad Air to use a smaller battery and lose weight. And the iPad mini with Retina Display to compute much more pixels in the same form factor.

See, I was under the impression that the A6 was more thermally inefficient than either generation of A5; though, again, perhaps I am mistaking the A6 to A7 comparison to the A6X to A7 comparison as the X chips did seem to generate more heat than their non-X counterparts. Either way, pending a formal explanation it sort of makes no sense that Apple would use a processor one generation older than at-the-time current on the first iPad mini but then use a processor that IS current on the second. To chalk it up to marketing would make very little sense as what they're doing now would appear to defy that. Again, I would figure that technological/physical or supply constraints would be the only reason to stunt the performance of the Fifth Generation iPod touch and the First Generation iPad mini THAT much more than the most current iPhone/full-sized-iPad. The "that's just Apple; they want to shaft early adopters and make more money" argument doesn't seem appropriate here.
 
Honestly, I've never heard any one says those words out loud.

What! Have you never heard of people using iPads to do music and video production? Is the A7 chip no good for music and video production on the iPad? I don't understand why you think that is an odd thing for me to say that I need the slightly better A7 chip for video and music production on the iPad.:roll eyes:

Obviously, if I want to do serious music and video production I'll use my Mac but the iPad and A7 chip is handy for on the move.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.