smartass, 10 Sep 2016All the companies can't make their own architecture and ditching qualacomm by samsung is limit... moreYes, all companies can't make their own architecture, but they can ditch Snapdragon for Exynos. Samsung can offer prices, Qualcomm can't imagine..
Anonymous, 09 Sep 2016I'd prefer Qualcomm tbh. I don't want more explosive Samsung-made products thanks. So you totally forgot about SD810!! How funny!!
Actually it doesn't. Its mostly software side. until nvidia volta. there is no complete vulkan support on nvidia, you can see comparison of amd cards and nvidia card by running same game on dx12 and vulkan. nvidia gains 1-2 frames and at times loose frames. but amd gains massive 30+ usually 30-50% more performance in vulkan compared to dx12
Anonymous, 09 Sep 2016qualcomm can't handle tuchwiz properly. thats why they start thinking about nvidia/amd.TouchWiz is not related to Qualcomm, so your point is invalid
Imagine you want a PC and instead of Intel VS AMD or NVidia VS AMD you had like 7 brands for cpu's and another 7 for gpu's. This is what mobile market is becomming. Once was Snapdragon VS Mediatek now is VS Exynyos VS Rokchip VS Intel (not the old ones the new ones that LG wants to acquire) VS Kirin... Then there are complains that Android is not optimized enough. There is a point that too much choice is bad.
Simon, 10 Sep 2016Nvidia did not produce results in the mobile sphere, they have essentially no design wins, whi... morename me the last amd mobile chip. amd sold certain patents to mobile graphics, they didn't make the adreno gpu, they didn't even design anything they sold the patents and QUALCOMM designed the gpu and architecture, nvidea have more presence in the mobile market even tho they may not have been a success
before nvidia can t do anything with their soc with their gpu s and customised cpu named denver
I doubt AMD has something interesting to offer. Sure, they've gotten into PS4 Power-hungry version, but, as far as I know, they weren't successful in putting their chipsets into mobile phones. Nvidia, on the other hand, had a few phones and has some currently selling mobile products. Main problem being: they're mostly tablets and a TV box, not exactly mobile phones either.
If I were to choose from these two, I'd take Nvidia as they have more mobile experience. But I'm not a Samsung executive, so its up to them. And AMD may have some ace up in the sleeve. Only time will tell.
Anonymous, 09 Sep 2016Can you explain why they should use Nvidia over Amd?less power, less heat. simple as that. amd might be cheaper, but you also get what you pay for.
Grey1213, 10 Sep 2016Nvidia have produced results in the mobile sphere, they even have exclusive games which may al... moreNvidia did not produce results in the mobile sphere, they have essentially no design wins, which means nobody is using them. AMD was the most successful player in the mobile GPU sphere to the point that the tech was purchased by Qualcomm and renamed to Adreno, and nothing is stopping AMD from developing a new mobile core, since a group of the Canadian ATI engineers responsible for that tech are still there.
mateau, 10 Sep 2016Your analysis is flawed. AMD has the advantage. Both AMD and Samsung are HSA members and NVi... moreI think you need to get the facts straight, nvidea support Asynchronous Compute just not to the same scale, they also support Vulcan, in testing it has gave improvement to nvidea hardware, what this article was saying is that pascal is a superior architecture, even without the level of support for Asynchronous Compute that amd has pascal still outperforms amd's gcn architecture
Trial and error to increase profit and left customer with defective product like note7. S7 the and only flagship with quick charge 2
Anonymous, 09 Sep 2016Don't know what to think about it. I mean Intel is also bad at mobile SoCs.intel use powerVR gpu for mobile soc and license nvidia ip for laptop/desktop processor
That's amazing. The exynos devices have always had smoother performances and generally less Throttle with much better audio
Your analysis is flawed. AMD has the advantage. Both AMD and Samsung are HSA members and NVidia is not. Samsung is dropping OpenGL for Vulkan API by Kronos which just happens to have been supplied by AMD's Mantle. As you know Mantle supports Asynchronous Compute and NVidia does not.
Also QUALCOMM Snapdragon used the Adreno GPU which is Radeon Technology that AMD sold to them years ago. Both Exynos Mali and Adreno support Vulkan API. What this means is an seemless transition to Radeon cores for Samsung's Android App's.
AMD also has years of experience designing high performance APU's using both x86 and ARM. AMD is already working with Samsung developing the 7nm litho process. Tegra has always been the redheaded stepchild of the mobile space. Now Samsung could always use Exynos and AMD has far more experience developing APU's than NVidia does. Likely this would be a Semi-custom project. All NVidia has for integrated graphics is Tegra.
And again AMD hardware is optimized for Vulkan.
Can you explain what is more superior about Pascal that will make it a better solution for Android? DX11??