Yes, the new iPad Mini’s chip is missing a GPU core – here’s why it doesn’t matter

Chip manufacturing is a sophisticated engineering process that produces CPUs and GPUs by arranging tracks and transistors on a nanometer scale. However, not all chips are created equal; variations in silicon material and manufacturing processes lead to differences in performance.

Following manufacturing, each chip undergoes rigorous testing for key performance metrics such as speed, power consumption, and thermal output. Based on these evaluations, chips are sorted into different “bins.” 

Also: The iPad Mini 7 is almost perfect – except for one critical missing feature

High-performing chips with power efficiency and superior frequencies or fully functional cores are classified in premium bins. In contrast, underperforming or defective chips are assigned to lower bins. 

This binning process allows manufacturers to optimize profits by selling chips according to their capabilities.

Major chip manufacturers like Intel and AMD have long utilized this strategy, and Apple follows suit. 

Also: Intel chip bug FAQ: Which PCs are affected, how to get the patch, and everything else you need to know

Recently, 9To5Mac observed that the A17 Pro chip in the new iPad Mini features a 6-core CPU and a 5-core GPU, while the A17 Pro in the iPhone 15 Pro has a 6-core CPU and a 6-core GPU.

Rather than producing a unique chip for the iPad Mini, it’s likely that TSMC, Apple’s chip manufacturer, had a batch of A17 Pro chips with five functioning GPU cores. Apple likely opted to use these chips for the iPad Mini. Additionally, the reduction in GPU cores may not stem from defects but could be a deliberate decision to create a more cost-effective chip by deliberately disabling cores.

Also: 5 Apple products you shouldn’t buy right now

Apple probably contracted TSMC to manufacture a specific number of A17 Pro chips with a 5-core GPU, leaving TSMC to determine how to achieve that quantity. Notably, aside from the core count difference, all chips, regardless of their bin classification, would have passed the necessary quality control tests.

Ultimately, whether a core is disabled due to a defect or through intentional design, the end result remains the same. It’s a functional chip!

However, I agree that Apple’s use of the same name for chips with different specifications can be a bit confusing for users who are interested in the number of cores in their silicon.