AnonD-731363, 05 Jun 2018Hope not.
Samsung is last in everything especialy in updates.
Sony had Vaio their laptop o... moreThe updates and the drivers are two things. If they release Exynos processors for laptops, they just need to provide end-users the drivers (through Windows Update).
They do drivers quite fast. It's just you don't notice it since the updates are slowed down by their overlay and whacky release schedule
mir, 06 Jun 2018The beginning of the end for Intel.Not yet. They need something to take on high power processing (aka HQ and HK series). That's where the money is. Also processors with enterprise functionalities (vPro).
The beginning of the end for Intel.
g6 user, 05 Jun 2018that's right sd 800 on lg g2 provided amazing performance no lags even on ram management and i... moreBecause on that time, SD800 build for high end tablet, and SD600 for flagship phone (Samsung S4, and HTC) only LG try to put in their G2 after had better timing announcement..
Marc Aurel, 05 Jun 2018Sorry, but you can't compare processor IPC counts between different ISAs. At best you can come... moreThat was exactly my point.
The QSD 850 running at 3.0GHz on all-four cores should be more efficient than the latest Core i7 running at 3.0GHz on all-four cores. Probably a little slower in IPC figures, but at the advantage of far less battery life. This is purely theoretical, and only applies in reality if both chipsets were coded to the same native/efficiency level.
However, in reality the hardware advances are largely pointless. Even benchmarks are sketchy. The real important factor is how well Windows 10 runs natively on this different architecture, and how efficient the x86-emulation process is.
I'm pretty much saying that instead of getting a QSD 1000 laptop, get an Intel Atom Z8700 (or Z8750). But even better would be to get a Core M3/M5 (i5/i7-Y). They would come close in terms of battery life, but offer significantly more performance. The setup up to the Quadcore Core i7-U chips is purely for more performance for less battery (equal efficiency) and many people are willing to make this trade-off in a product as large as a laptop. And this will not change until Microsoft fixes the software, and makes ARM products run its code more efficiently (and I'd say they are halfway there).
Anonymous, 05 Jun 2018After Snapdragon 800, there really hasn’t been a big noticeable difference to the end user.that's right sd 800 on lg g2 provided amazing performance no lags even on ram management and internet speed the g2 was able to beat s6 edge it is on youtube ..... adreno 330 is really good. the reason because QUALCOMM didn't want to provide drivers for the 801/800 even 805 is because they are really good socs and they didn't want to have these chips as competition for their upc comings low - mid range such sd 4xx series and 6xx series even 2xx they outed as well.
I don't trust benchmarks at all these are manipulated my lg g5 sd 820 was getting geekbench 3 single core 2100 points and then after geekbecnh 4 I was getting 1600... really using same android version and same amount of apps and stuff .....
Athull, 05 Jun 2018It isn't at all. I run a phone with 821 and have compared it to phones with 835 and 845. The b... moreIt's noticeable in gaming when it gets really hot there tends to be some throttling that happens and games may give some noticeable performance drops. Day to day usage it definitely won't really make for anything noticeable.
Linux distro on this machine will be nice, hardware decoding makes multimedia processing better. With everything being native, this could replace my laptop for heavy programming, video rendering and server administration. Battery life should be awesome as hell.
Intel gets squeezed, 05 Jun 2018This is a great attack on Intel. The last straw is actually Thunderbolt 3 / eGPU & Windows... moreProblem is that the emulation is always super slow... so snapdragon should be 5 times more speedy than Intel...
Even Intel Atom is faster than snapdragon 850 or snapdragon 1000 when running normal Windows applications. But those aps fromwindows store that run anti-venäläisen arm mode can be faster than atom versions... but any game or similar Are much after using Intel Atom...
stivi737, 05 Jun 2018considering the obsolete 800 and the disastrous 810, of course the 820 was miles ahead. The 83... moreIt isn't at all. I run a phone with 821 and have compared it to phones with 835 and 845. The biggest difference is not in raw performance but in heat. My phone gets very hot after extensive usage while they remain much cooler.
Well still its tiny upgrade but nothing significant.
15% performance is like nothing compared to difference between Snap 810 and 820.
Zero, 05 Jun 2018Samsung if is smart, they would simply use their Exynos, ask AMD for an entry level GPU and en... moreHope not.
Samsung is last in everything especialy in updates.
Sony had Vaio their laptop or notebook branch and died.
Sony put the prices so high than even a basic model cost over 1000.
Like the case of Samsung. J5 2017 cost still around 180-200 euros but for same price competitors offers 3 times as better cell phones in specs and inbuild quality.
If Samsung opens its gates for laptop they will die the same year.
Kangal, 05 Jun 2018I think a little perspective on these ARM Quadcores is important here: 1.6GHz Cortex A9 Exyno... moreSorry, but you can't compare processor IPC counts between different ISAs. At best you can come up very theoretical GFLOPS comparisons, but those are pretty much meaningless as well between ISAs. Therefore the ONLY way to compare processors with different ISAs is with benchmarking software. Of course software optimizations, and especially compilers' ability to produce efficient code for the ISA and processor architecture in question, have a huge effect, but you just can't say that software is the only cause for Qualcomm's SoCs being slower than Intel's.
GovindRuby, 05 Jun 2018The Asus Rog Phone Runs 845 At 2.96 Gigahertz. So It Might Be Like Running Snapdragon 850 For ... moreMaybe depending on how you look
The 2.9ghz actually is an overclocked version of sd845, other is the same, ROG phone able pull this by having bigger battery and proper cooling
The sd850 is suppose to have more TDP, bigger surface area, more consistent max clock speed and less thermal throttling considering a laptop or 2in1 have significantly bigger battery than a phone and better cooling
Kangal, 05 Jun 2018I think a little perspective on these ARM Quadcores is important here: 1.6GHz Cortex A9 Exyno... moreappreciate for your effort to write a very long detail essay. just remind that SD850 is still single app based processor, not multitasking friendly as intel chips.
The Asus Rog Phone Runs 845 At 2.96 Gigahertz. So It Might Be Like Running Snapdragon 850 For Android.
Snarkle, 05 Jun 2018I wonder how the Snapdragon 1000 fits in this scenario.I think a little perspective on these ARM Quadcores is important here:
1.6GHz Cortex A9 Exynos 4412
1.5GHz Krait-200 QSD 400/S4 Pro
1.7GHz Krait-300 QSD 600
2.3GHz Krait-400 QSD 800
2.7GHz Krait-450 QSD 805
2.1GHz Cortex A57 Exynos 7420
2.3GHz Cortex A72 Exynos 8890
2.4GHz Cortex A73 QSD 835
2.8GHz Cortex A75 QSD 845
....the QSD 850 will use a physically larger size and a bigger TDP budget to hit and maintain 3.0GHz on the same QSD845-based SoC. Which is basically a +15% performance increase in practice over the QSD 845.
So now that we got that out of the way, let's see how Qualcomm's Snapdragon chips performs and competes in Windows against Intel. Here are two most relevant chipsets:
Intel (6th gen) Atom X7-Z8750 - 4 cores / +0 threads (x86-64, Bay Trail/Pentium-line)
Intel (8th gen) Core i7-8650U - 4 cores / +4 threads (x86-64, Coffee Lake + SMT)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 - 4 cores / +4 mini-cores (ARMv8-64, Cortex A73 + A53)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 - 4 cores / +4 mini-cores (ARMv8-64, Cortex A75 + A55)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 850 - 4 cores / +4 mini-cores (ARMv8-64, Cortex A75 + A55)
And now let's see how they behave:
Atom Z8750 - max6W - ave4W - ave 2.2GHz - max2.6GHz
i7-8650U - max15W* - ave12W - ave 2.6GHz - max4.2GHz
QSD 835 - max6W - ave4W - ave 2.3GHz - max 2.4GHz
QSD 845 - max6W - ave5W - ave 2.5GHz - max 2.8GHz
QSD 850 - max8W - ave6W - ave 2.7GHz - max 3.0GHz
So we can see the new QSD 850 SoC is about the same size as the Intel CPU, has roughly the same lithography, the same core counts, and the same frequency. However, the Intel chip uses ~x2.0 more power on average. In terms of IPC the ARM chip is slightly superior "in-theory" but in practice it really depends on the Thermals, the Windows Kernel, OS, Drivers, and the Application. So far I've noticed the QSD 835 laptops performing between ~x1.8 - x8.0 slower than the Intel chips on benchmarks. So at-best the QSD 835 laptops barely matches/beats the Intel laptops on Efficiency, and at-worst its a complete joke. This is looking at reputable benchmarks like CineBench, PCMark, 3DMark, Handbrake, Basemark.
However, that's the QSD 835 and the QSD 850 promises better performance. Overall it should be 15%-30% faster hardware wise from my calculations. And that's exactly what Qualcomm is announcing. However, that still does NOT change the result of Qualcomm vs Intel. So?
Well, the only way the QSD 850 Laptops can improve against Intel Laptops is if Microsoft improves from the software front. There are few recent rumours saying to expect a "doubling of performance", so if that is true, then the performance difference should be between ~x0.9 - x4.0 meaning in very rare instances the Qualcomm chipset could be slightly faster at HALF the power draw... but in majority of cases they should be four times slower at half the power draw. Or in layman's terms, Intel's still winning with x2 efficiency level of Qualcomm due to x86 overhead.
The newly announced QSD 1000 is supposedly the same approach as the QSD 850, but based on a new architecture. Probably built on TSMC's 7nm lithography and using a Highly Customised A75 (or maybe lightly-custom A76, maybe not). However, I do think this next-gen SoC will debut on phones before laptops because there's just a larger profit margin in high-end phones. So whatever the "QSD 865" will be in 2019, we can infer the QSD 1000 should be around +15% faster. When I said "Highly Customised" I don't mean like Qualcomm's light changes to the QSD810, QSD835, QSD845 SoC's to Vanilla "ARM Cortex Ax" processors. I mean like Qualcomm's heavy changes to Cortex A9 to build the Krait-200 line, Cortex A15 to build the Krait-450 chips, and the famous Kryo-100 core of the QSD 820 are actually customised Cortex A57's.
My Personal Take: Qualcomm should've sold these QSD 835/850 chips at the usual US$50 price-tag to OEMs. And we could've had affordable Windows in form-factors like a Note4, GPD Win2, iPad mini, and Razer Gaming Tablet....alongside Netbooks, Chromebooks, and Ultrabooks. Swing and Miss; both of you Qualcomm and Microsoft it seems only AMD is doing the heavy-lifting when it comes to competition lately.
*configurable to 25W for Large, Thick, Heavy Gaming Laptops
NO !! THANKS !!
I will wait for Snapdragon 1000 Mobile coming soon: