The Apple iPad Mini 4 Review
by Brandon Chester on October 28, 2015 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Tablets
- Apple
- Mobile
- iPad Mini 4
Battery Life
When Apple unveiled the original iPad they claimed that it had a ten hour battery life, and that claim generally held up well. That ten hour battery rating has continued with every iPad released since then, and it has become something of a de-facto target for other tablet manufacturers. Rarely do I see a company promise above ten hours, and nobody has really been able to go very far above it in our web browsing battery life test.
Even though the iPad Mini 4 is rated for 10 hours of usage and Apple is usually able to meet that goal in lighter and more balanced workloads, there will obviously be differences depending on exactly what tasks the user is performing. Because of this, it's important to examine the Mini 4's battery life in a variety of different scenarios to see how different workloads influence the battery life. As always, the first two tests are our WiFi web browsing test and video playback test, followed by BaseMark OS II's CPU-bound battery test, and GFXBench 3.0's GPU-bound battery test.
WiFi web browsing battery life on the Mini 4 is exactly where it needs to be. It actually lasts about 40 minutes longer than the iPad Air 2 which is likely due to the lower power requirements of the smaller display during the duration of the test. Video playback battery life is actually slightly shorter than I expected, although still quite good. Since Apple does apply CABC during full screen video playback when the UI isn't showing it's likely that the reason for the gap between the Mini 4 and the Air 2 is due to the Air 2's larger battery, with the display's brightness and gamma being played with a bit to reduce display power consumption, and the power cost of decoding H.264 video essentially being the same fixed amount on both devices.
The iPad Mini 4 does exceptionally well in BaseMark OS II's battery test. Not only does it last longer than any other device on record, but it also achieves the highest battery score on record. A simplified description of the battery score is that it's a combination of the device's average battery drain per unit of time, along with consideration given to the device's CPU load during the duration of the test. In the case of the iPad Mini, the amount of throttling occurring was far lower than most other devices, with only the Nexus 9 being close while also lasting an hour shorter. This doesn't bode well for other tablets like the Galaxy Tab S2 which don't last as long and throttle much more heavily during a prolonged CPU load.
GFXBench's infinite T-Rex HD test is another very strong showing for the Mini 4. It lasts quite a long time, and sustains its performance for the entire duration of the test. This is something that really has to be considered when comparing the performance of Apple's SoCs with the competition, especially when discussing the GPU. For example, both the Tab S2 and Mini 4 achieve similar frame rates if you just run the T-Rex HD test once, but as you can see the Tab S2 actually runs well below 30fps when you continue to run the test, and so with a real game with that level of visual quality the Tab S2 would never be able to produce a playable frame rate.
Apple usually does well in our various battery tests, and the Mini 4 is no exception. Video playback battery life is definitely not as good as full sized tablets or anything using an AMOLED display, but it's still a good result. As for the rest of the tests, the Mini 4 consistently achieves a great battery life combined with great sustained performance, and there's not much more you could ask for from a mini tablet.
Charge Time
The time to charge a tablet is almost always longer than a smartphone, especially now that quick-charging phones charge at a rate as fast or faster than tablets do, while also having significantly smaller batteries. The last few tablets I've looked at have had longer charge times than I had hoped for, but I wasn't really worried about the iPad Mini 4's charge time because it comes with Apple's 12W charger and the iPad Air 2 already had the lowest charge time on record for a full size tablet
At 3.13 hours to charge, the iPad Mini 4 is second only to the Dell Venue 8 as far as the charge time for tablets is concerned. I actually have to give Dell credit for pushing their charge time so low. While the Mini 4 isn't the fastest tablet on record, 3.13 hours to go from 0% to 100% is still a pretty good result, and in my experience charging it at night every couple of days is more than enough to keep the battery going so I don't expect that it's going to pose an issue for users.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
98 Comments
View All Comments
Speedfriend - Wednesday, October 28, 2015 - link
Any idea why this uses the 8 and not the A8X? Does that imply the chassis is not capable of dissipating the higher TDP of the A8X?michael2k - Wednesday, October 28, 2015 - link
I imagine they would have needed a bigger battery to offset the performance cost of the faster GPU and additional CPU core. Throw in a bigger battery and you have to make the iPad a fractional bit thicker, maybe 0.7mm, and another 14g heavier.And throw those three changes (more expensive CPU, more expensive battery, heavier iPad) and you need to bump the cost up just slightly, reducing margins just slightly, on top of the changes in the display that already increase the cost, and it makes sense why they sacrificed performance slightly. This is especially true when the A8 is already and still class leading a year later.
ThomasS31 - Wednesday, October 28, 2015 - link
This has nothing to do with cost... its just a decision to keep everything as thin and light as possible to appeal to the fans and consumers.Ivy said not long ago, they could make a thicker iphone to last longer (battery), but they do not want as it will not appeal as much to the consumers as the current thin phones.
Nothing to do with cost or price... just a decision, some of us like, and some of us not. :)
michael2k - Wednesday, October 28, 2015 - link
None of the outward justification is cost, of course, but they have to hew to a budget like everything else in the world. They increased the cost of the SoC, the memory, the cameras, and the screen, as is. Throwing in the more expensive A8X, the battery for said A8X, and the thicker shell to support both means they would have, as you said, lose the design goal of thinner and lighter. So there would be three reasons to stick to the A8:1) Thinner
2) Lighter
3) Cheaper
GC2:CS - Thursday, October 29, 2015 - link
Considering how energy efficient the Apple chips are, het deffinitelly isn't a problem.You has A8, even if a bit underclocked in an 6,1mm iPod touch. There it can almost perfectly sustain it's peak 1,1 Ghz CPU clock and GPU performance. iPad mini is just a much bigger device, there is more than enough room to dissipate heat, even if it would mean an A8X has to throotle a bit more aggressively than in Air 2.
A8X is a three billion transistor monster, it's big, it's pricey and since it's an X there is no stacked memory on it. That might be the reason - all iPad minis used PoP to save space and so I think that a possibility of an X chip in any iPad mini is quite small.
Also it uses a quite lot of power. If you look at that Gfx bench battery life test above, maybe Apple wanted to match them in terms of battery life under load.
And then while mini might be cappable of dissipating enough heat, Apple possibly didn't wanted the temperatures to go that high. iPad mini 4 is found to be rather cool running even under load.
But I doo agree that an A9 would be much better match. Even though it doesn't have 128-bit memory interface (What has it by the way ?) it bassically matches the performance of A8X, while being much smaller and lower powered, much more efficient than even A8.
Apple said that it's an shrunken down iPad Air 2. In terms of battery life, features, design, cameras display yes.
But with smaller size (and less matter to built a tablet from) there has to be compromise somewhere. Apple didn't matched the performance of Air 2, because it would require more advenced tech (A9) to do so in smaller device. But that would make it more advanced than an shrunken down Air 2 in terms of used tech. Bassically they built the best small tablet possible with let's say the same genertion of technology as iPad Air 2.
iPad mini 2 got smaller color gamut, iPad mini 4 got lower performance. And unless Apple invents a way to make those devices bigger from the inside, they can't defy physics.
Pneumothorax - Thursday, October 29, 2015 - link
Here's the thing, the A9 would've been an easy drop in the Mini 4 and would've matched/exceeded the Air 2 in most benchmarks along with giving better battery life and much less heat. Apple is just being Apple - milking the cow for all it's worth.NetMage - Saturday, October 31, 2015 - link
The mini's considerable price drop versus the Air or phone means giving up something.Drumsticks - Wednesday, October 28, 2015 - link
Thanks for the review. I always enjoy reading Anandtech reviews of Apple products. While I'm an Android/Microsoft guy (any hints on when to expect your 6P review? I'm sure it's a ways off but I'd love a hint!), I have a lot of respect for Apple's hardware engineering and SoC design teams. They do really, really great work, and it almost disappoints me that I dislike iOS (and to an extent, Apple. This is an opinion that is fully subjective and not looking to start a fight! There's plenty of reasons to like Apple).Apple has, for the last several years been a major driver of innovation in the whole industry, which is great. It's awesome to see (in my opinion) both Microsoft AND Google doing the same nowadays. All three of the big guys are driving the industry forward, and it's good for us all :D
amdwilliam1985 - Thursday, October 29, 2015 - link
Same here, I recommend Apple products to others(my parents and my brother all use iPhones), but when it comes to personal device, I'll go with Android/Nexus, will be picking up a Nexus 6P soon, when it's available in Hong Kong.ps: Personally, I want to support Google/Alphabet, don't want to give my money to Apple and then have it sit in their bank doing nothing(besides earning interests ;). It's just a personal believe, I believe with great power comes great responsibilities(Apple should be doing more to help the [tech] world). Luckily, there are always companies like Google who pushes on with crazy projects like Project Loon, Project Fi, Project Soli, Project Jacquard and etc...
I watch Apple WWDC and Google IO live every year, Google's event is just so much more exciting and inspiring to the tech geek in me. Apple's show is more about how they are the best and if you can't join them, then you're a loser kind of show, lol.
Knowing my money helps Google to help improving the world/tech helps me sleep better at night, lol.
lucam - Wednesday, October 28, 2015 - link
The A8 is still a good decent Soc from what I can see and I have a suspicion that in the Apple TV for not having similar thermal constrains and no battery it can go even faster...