Bla, 17 Apr 2019Dont you see I dont care for all those chipsets and prices for each. I just want you to tell m... moreYou're arguing against yourself, not me.
I never said anything about release dates, or that the QSD 660 was not a successor of something. And in case you haven't realised, I know about this stuff much more intricately than you do, and I know of the marketing, product cancellations and name changes too. You literally invented all of that rubbish, to argue against it, to make yourself look correct. Too bad, everyone can go back and read my previous comments, and realise the disingenuous strategy you have concocted.
Let me repeat/rephrase what I have already said....
USD 2017/2018 MediaTek -> 2019 MediaTek
USD ~$100, 2GB RAM, 32GB NAND, 540p, Camera is useable, No ingress protection
QSD 617 -> QSD 439 -> QSD 632
USD ~$200, 4GB RAM, 64GB NAND, 720p, Camera is decent, Splash resistant
QSD 650 -> QSD 636 -> QSD 665
USD ~$300, 6GB RAM, 128GB NAND, 1080p, Camera is good, IP55
QSD 653 -> QSD 712 -> QSD 730
USD ~$500, 8GB RAM, 256GB storage, 1440p, Camera is great, IP68,
QSD 835 -> QSD 845 -> QSD 855
....please, go back and see my previous long post which had all the different processors in hierarchy with their average performance compiled into a list. Notice that all the processors that I've discussed are in that list, and you can see their performances. Unfortunately, this will be my last response in this forum, there is nothing I can say or add on top of this that will be productive as a discussion for the readers.
Kangal, 11 Apr 2019Yes, the problem is you. I am trying to communicate with you, but you are not comprehending w... moreDont you see I dont care for all those chipsets and prices for each. I just want you to tell me why 660 is not a succesor to 650/652/653? That was my only reason why I wrote to you in the first place. I appriciate your polute type of dialogue but, I want facts, not opinions. I will repeat. Why 660 is NOT a succesot of 65x series? Why? What chispet came after 65x and had improve specs by a lot? The answer is 660. Holy Jesus. 65X was the first chispet that matched performance of one generation old top 800 series. 65X was performing just a little lower than 810, but with GPU of 808. It was a very big difference from low tier 615. The same was doing the 660. He matched performance of 820. I am really sorry that I can't speak or write english that good as you, but I hope you will find a punchline of all Im saying.
Kangal, 11 Apr 2019Yes, the problem is you. I am trying to communicate with you, but you are not comprehending w... moreFirst aka premium mid end chipset from Qualcomm was 650, 652, 653. Next premium mid end chispet was 660 as it came right after, as a new gen. Then we see 636 which you said is downclocked 660. But 636 came after 660. So why mentioning the 636 when that chipset arrived after 660? Problem is in you, my dear stuborn friend who likes to copy paste without understanding the relasing dates of each chispet. Please Copy paste the releasing dates. 636 is not faster by a lot from his according to you, predeccesor 650/653/653. It is only more efficient due to more modern finnet, but they are performing simillary. They really performe about the same. But 660 in another hand, is a different story. 660 is a succesor to first EVER premium mid end chipset, the 65x series. That include 650, 652 and 653. When 650 and 652 arrived they had oficially different names. 650 was 618 and 652 was 620, but those were so much powerfull with first incorporatiom of big cores A72 then their so called predecessors 615, 616 and 617 using only clusters of A53, that Qualcomm decided to split 600 series into two mid tier. Lower and higher medium class of chipset. And now it's 2019. We have 3 tiers in 600 series.
Well this sounds interesting sadly my Moto X4 has SD630 and thats 2017 phone which costed me 395 bucks brand new initial day of release.
Bla, 10 Apr 2019How could I mixed you with someone when I reply to your comment? 660 have A73 cores, while 65... moreI've replied to your previous comment, its very long so it is waiting for Moderators to Approve the comment for you to view it soon. In the meantime, I wanted to share with you the Mobile Chipset Hierarchy. It's comprehensive, but not all-inclusive, and based on a lot of datapoints as an aggregate. I hope you enjoy:
Position - Chipset NameÂ….. CPU single-core / CPU multi-thread / GPU performance
82 - Tegra 3............Â… 300 / 1,100 / 7,000
81 - Exynos 4412Â…... 400 / 1,100 / 6,000
80 - QSD 400Â….......... 500 / 1,600 / 11,000 (Krait-200 S4 Pro)
79 - QSD 600Â….......... 600 / 2,000 / 12,000
78 - Apple A6 (?)Â….... 700 / 1,300 / 8,000
76 - Helio P20Â…........ 800 / 3,400 / 11,000
75 - Helio P22........Â… 800 / 3,500 / 11,000
74 - QSD 429Â…........ 800 / 3,600 / 11,000
73 - QSD 439.........Â… 800 / 3,700 / 11,000
72 - QSD 450Â…......... 800 / 3,700 / 12,000
71 - Helio P23.......Â… 800 / 3,800 / 12,000
70 - Helio P25........Â… 800 / 3,800 / 14,000
69 - QSD 625Â…......... 800 / 3,900 / 13,000
68 - Helio P30........Â… 900 / 3,900 / 15,000
67 - QSD 626..........Â… 900 / 4,200 / 14,000
66 - Helio P35Â…......... 900 / 3,900 / 17,000
65 - QSD 630..........Â… 900 / 4,300 / 15,000
63- Exynos 5420.......Â… 900 / 2,700 / 13,000
62 - Exynos 5430Â…...... 900 / 2,900 / 14,000
61 - QSD 800Â….......... 1,000 / 2,800 / 13,000
60 - RK 3288..........Â… 1,100 / 2,800 / 15,000
59 - QSD 801Â…........... 1,100 / 3,000 / 15,000
58 - Tegra 4Â…............. 1,100 / 2,900 / 17,000
57 - QSD 808 (?)......Â… 1,300 / 3,600 / 14,000 (unsustainable thermals)
56 - QSD 810 (?)Â…...... 1,300 / 4,500 / 19,000 (unsustainable thermals)
55 - QSD 805..........Â…. 1,200 / 3,400 / 18,000
54 - QSD 632Â…........... 1,200 / 4,400 / 16,000
52 - Apple A7 (?).........Â… 1,500 / 2,900 / 12,000
51 - Exynos 5433Â…........ 1,200 / 4,200 / 16,000
50 - Tegra K1-32bit (?)Â… 1,200 / 4,000 / 19,000 (unsustainable thermals)
49 - QSD 650Â…................ 1,400 / 3,100 / 12,000
48 - Helio X20Â….............. 1,500 / 4,500 / 10,000
47 - Apple A8 (?)Â….......... 1,600 / 3,100 / 14,000
45 - Tegra K1-Denver (?)Â… 1,900 / 4,100 / 19,000 (unsustainable thermals)
44 - RK 3399 (?)Â….............. 1,400 / 3,700 / 11,000
43 - QSD 652Â….................... 1,400 / 4,600 / 12,000
42 - QSD 653Â….................... 1,400 / 4,700 / 13,000
41 - Exynos 7420............Â…. 1,300 / 4,500 / 18,000
40 - Tegra X1 (?)Â…............... 1,400 / 4,700 / 24,000 (unsustainable thermals)
39 - Helio X23Â…................... 1,600 / 4,500 / 11,000
38 - Helio X25Â…................... 1,700 / 4,500 / 11,000
37 - Helio X27...................Â… 1,700 / 4,600 / 12,000
36 - Exynos 7885Â….............. 1,500 / 4,500 / 15,000
34 - QSD 636Â…........ 1,400 / 5,000 / 17,000
33 - Kirin 710........... 1,600 / 5,400 / 16,000
32 - QSD 670Â…......... 1,700 / 5,300 / 18,000
31 - QSD 660Â…......... 1,600 / 5,700 / 18,000
30 - QSD 820.........Â… 1,700 / 4,300 / 20,000 (underclocked)
28 - Kirin 950........Â… 1,700 / 5,200 / 15,000
27 - Helio P60Â…....... 1,500 / 5,700 / 18,000
26 - Kirin 955.........Â… 1,700 / 5,300 / 16,000
25 - Helio P70........Â… 1,600 / 5,900 / 18,000
24 - Helio X30........Â…. 2,000 / 5,600 / 14,000
23 - QSD 675..........Â… 1,900 / 5,900 / 17,000
22 - QSD 710..........Â… 1,900 / 5,600 / 19,000
21 - QSD 821.........Â…. 1,900 / 4,400 / 22,000 (overclocked)
20 - Apple A9 (?)....Â…. 2,200 / 4,600 / 16,000
18 - QSD 712Â…........ 1,900 / 5,700 / 20,000
17 - Exynos 8890Â…. 1,800 / 5,900 / 19,000
16 - Kirin 960.......Â…. 1,800 / 6,400 / 15,000
15 - Helio P90.......Â… 1,900 / 5,900 / 19,000
13 - Exynos 8895Â…........ 2,000 / 6,700 / 21,000
12 - Kirin 970Â…............... 1,900 / 6,900 / 21,000
11 - QSD 835Â…................ 2,000 / 6,800 / 25,000
10 - Exynos 9810 (?)Â….... 3,600 / 8,800 / 26,000 (unsustainable thermals)
9 - Exynos 9820 (?).......Â… 4,500 / 9,900 / 29,000 (unsustainable thermals)
7 - Apple A10 (?)..Â… 3,400 / 6,100 / 20,000
6 - QSD 845..........Â… 2,500 / 8,900 / 33,000
5 - Kirin 980Â….......... 3,200 / 10,000 / 28,000
4 - QSD 855..........Â… 3,500 / 12,000 / 38,000
2 - Apple A11 (?)Â….... 4,100 / 10,000 / 24,000
1 - Apple A12 (?)....Â… 4,800 / 12,000 / 27,000
*A balanced SoC is most desired, with importance given to IPC, then Total CPU, and finally Graphical Powress
*thermals and battery life taken into account when positioning
*scores are based on averages, and rounded up/down, due to variance of handsets
*some scores are not properly available (?), but an estimate is provided.
Bla, 10 Apr 2019"To the current market:
QSD 625, QSD 636, QSD 712, QSD 845"
What? And where are 630 and 6... moreYes, the problem is you.
I am trying to communicate with you, but you are not comprehending what I am trying to say. Don't strawman the CPU typing, however, that was a pretty big oversight, yet I am mature enough to overlook petty things like that. Ie, I am trying to have a genuine dialogue here.
For the ultra cheap phones, you do NOT need a Qualcomm Snapdragon SoC/chipset. Get a different chipset ie Exynos, Kirin, MediaTek, RockChip, AMLogic, Allwinner, VIA, etc etc. Why? Because at this price point, you are more forgivable for things like Efficiency, CPU speed, GPU speed, DSP quality, Radio performance, getting stable/frequent/long-term software updates, let alone getting GPL sources for drivers, kernels, and documentation.
...hence, there's really no need for a Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset that is worse than the QSD 439.
The QSD 439/450/625/626/630 are practically identical chipsets, and some are interchangeable on the "motherboard". These chipsets offer great efficiency, great GPU, great radios, and "passable CPU" performance for the Low-End of the market. Here we're talking about price points around ~USD $100. And alongside it, you should expect something like 2GB RAM, 32GB storage, and 720p (or lower) display. The recent QSD 632 (which hasn't quite hit the market) is very similar to these chipsets, and offers slightly better CPU performance, but make no mistake its by and large a Low-End Chipset even if you find it in a Mid-Range Phone like the rip-off HMD-China handsets. It makes sense for Qualcomm to phase out the QSD 439/450/625/626/630... and double-down on the QSD 632 instead, that way they can continue to put pressure on their direct competitors and be a leader in this market.
Now, the next step-up is the QSD 636. This is basically a cut-down QSD 660, if you don't understand what that means, think of the Nvidia GTX 1070, 1070 Ti, and the 1080. These are all the same gpu, but the slower models are cut-down from the larger ones during the binning stage. And as I said earlier, the QSD 636 is a much better chipset than the QSD 439/630 and the QSD 632, and the QSD 650/652/653. This is a Low-Midrange chipset. We're talking about price points around ~USD $200. You should expect something with 4GB RAM, 64GB storage, and 720p display. As I said earlier, Qualcomm may want to phase this out and refresh it with the QSD 665 instead to stay relevant.
Now, there is no need for processors from Qualcomm that are faster than the QSD 636 and slower than the QSD 712. These in-between chipsets don't make a significant difference to the end experience, and a bigger difference to the user can come from improving other aspects of the phone like: marketing, software support, build quality, IO, cameras, display. That's quite a logical/rational and easy thing to understand, yet, people are getting duped into buying phones with QSD 660 chipsets at prices barely beneath the flagship QSD 845/855 phones. I'm of the opinion, that an informed public is a smart/happy public, and consequently market place.
Yet, I do agree that there is a segment in the market for a High-Midrange chipset. We're talking pricing of ~USD $300. And expecting specifications of similar to 6GB RAM, 128GB storage, and 1080p displays. Here, the QSD 712 behaves very well and much better than the QSD 670, 660, 675, and basically on-par with the QSD 710. And again, as I said earlier the new QSD 730 is a solid improvement and deserves this silver medal spot. (Ignore the QSD 730G, which is the "gamer edition", it will not be better/different, and is a poor marketing trick). If Qualcomm allows the QSD 730 to thrive in this position (by reducing the above Mid-Midrange chipset availability), it will mean they are improving the Market Share and spurring competition and coming out again as leaders in the segment.
Now, of course there is another tier above this. Here we're talking ~USD $500 price or more, and with 8GB RAM (or more), with 256GB storage (or more), and a display resolution of 1440p (or more). You guessed it, its the flagship segment, and we're talking about chipsets like the QSD 855, but there's nothing that needs to be said here.
I hope you now understand the message I was intending to convey. And there's really No Bad Chipsets, only Bad Prices!!! (eg, as much as I have "hated on" the QSD 670 in this exposition, I would take it in a heartbeat if it was placed in a $100 phone!!!).
Kangal, 09 Apr 2019Those lithography numbers are little more than marketing at this point. Tech nerds like me kno... moreWhile it is great to see chipset manufacturers going for smaller wafer sizes year by year, the gain in performance is negligible at best. I mean, they're making small, baby steps after all, so it's hard to even notice the performance improvement you'll get from them, unless you're moving from let's say a 20nm to a 14nm, taking the SNAPDRAGON 810 and the SNAPDRAGON 820 as an example respectively. In most cases, the only difference you'll notice when moving to a smaller wafer is probably the better battery life. If you're after big performance gains, then u should focus on the CPU and GPU side of things even more as compared to these nanolithography numbers, as those are the main factors that greatly affect the performance gain you're getting
Kangal, 10 Apr 2019No, I never said that, and if anything I think the opposite. In chipsets, you want the smalles... more When did I say 65x is better than 636? I didn't. 636 is performing much better then 65x only because it's more efficiant, but it's not much faster. Neither is the gpu much faster. 509 in 636 is a slightly improvement over 510 in 65x models.
All I'm saying is 660 was update to 65x series. Not 636. Over and out. I promise :)
Kangal, 10 Apr 2019No, I never said that, and if anything I think the opposite. In chipsets, you want the smalles... moreHow could I mixed you with someone when I reply to your comment? 660 have A73 cores, while 65x having A72. 660 is on newer 14nm finnet, 65x is on 28. Do you see what I am talking about? Where is 660? And when he has arrived? In which time? 660 is absolutley not just a overclocked 653.
Kangal, 10 Apr 2019I'd look at the Snapdragon Portfolio like this lineup below.
We have come from this:
QSD 6... more"To the current market:
QSD 625, QSD 636, QSD 712, QSD 845"
What? And where are 630 and 660? Okay I was wrong with saying 636 has only custom A53 cores and totally forget about another cluster with custom A73. Just because of my lapsus with type core you don't listen and ignore everything what I'm saying. In one time we had 835 for high end, 660 for premium mid end, 625 for mid end and 435 for so called low end becuase series 200 is really low. My point was that 650 was the first to incorporate A7x cores to mid end chipset. Nevermind the 652/653. They are basicly the same just with another two A72 cores added. And now lets talk about time after 650. Which was the next mid end chipset to have A7x cores? According to you it was 710. But where is 660?
I just give up. Aparently problem is in me.
dude111, 10 Apr 2019https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_(integrated_circuit)Thanks dude!
I'll wait until next year. Things are always improving so it pays to wait.
ProJames-CHM, 10 Apr 2019It goes without saying that the situation is a mess. Nothing truly new besides lithography bei... moreI'd look at the Snapdragon Portfolio like this lineup below.
We have come from this:
QSD 617, QSD 650, QSD 653, QSD 835
To the current market:
QSD 625, QSD 636, QSD 712, QSD 845
And in the near future to the:
QSD 632, QSD 665, QSD 730, QSD 855 (or faster)
2GB RAM, 4GB RAM, 6GB RAM, 8GB RAM (or more)
NAND 32GB, 64GB, 128GB, and 256GB storage (or more)
USD ~$100, ~$200, ~$300, and ~$500 (and more)
PS: I don't really see much need for phones cheaper than ~US $100 to have a Snapdragon chipset, since at that very tight budget you have bigger concerns, and you can get by with a Exynos, Kirin, MediaTek, RockChip, AMLogic Allwinner, etc etc.
I also don't see much need for these weird intermediate chipsets like the QSD 660, 670, 675, 710. When you can get-by with the QSD 636 on the lower side of the scale, and the QSD 712 on the higher side of the scale.
Which is why I think it's possible we are looking at a new lineup refresh (discontinuing chipsets like the QSD 625, 636, 660, 670, 710, 712) to focus on the new/better/more advanced chipsets.
....you know, to stay competitive and relevant in the market against the alternatives!
Bla, 10 Apr 2019So you are saying by your logic that 820 is not a succsesor to 810 since they are built in dif... moreNo, I never said that, and if anything I think the opposite. In chipsets, you want the smallest (ie Most Advanced) lithography, the latest Big Cores, a lot of decent Small Cores, and many repetitive graphical cores.
You clearly don't know these chips as much as you try to make it sound. The QSD 636 is a better SoC than the old QSD 653 chip, nevermind the 652 and 650. And the QSD 660 is a slightly overclocked version of it (both CPU and GPU).
Maybe you got my comment mixed with someone else?
Kangal, 10 Apr 2019Yeah, he didn't know.
Also the QSD 636/660 are on the 14nm node, whereas the QSD 650/652/653 ... moreSo you are saying by your logic that 820 is not a succsesor to 810 since they are built in different finnet. 835 is not a succsesor to 820 because it is smaller die? Thats called technology progress.
Tell me guys, which is the first mid-range SD chipset to incorporate powerfull A7x cores into their chipset?
Next question, which is the second one being released in the same mid-range class also with A7x cores?
Shanti Dope, 10 Apr 2019636 is technically an underclocked 660, so we can say that both of them are the successor of t... moreYou are talking about cpu only and chipset is not only cpu. 660 is a succesor to 650/652 and 636 is another mid-range succesor to 630. Look at the release dates of each one. 636 is much younger then 660. In fact before 660 there was only 650/652 to have pretty significant processing power of only one or maybe two generation old top chipsets. 650/652 was the first Qualcomm try with "premium mid-range" specs.
Shanti Dope, 10 Apr 2019636 is technically an underclocked 660, so we can say that both of them are the successor of t... moreYeah, he didn't know.
Also the QSD 636/660 are on the 14nm node, whereas the QSD 650/652/653 are on the 28nm node. Big lithography difference there.
Comparing SD730 to SD665, it doesn't make sense that the earlier has less 36 MP than the latter's 48 MP as mentioned in your article:
"Also new in the 730 are the Adreno 618 GPU (which promises 25% increased performance), Hexagon 688 DSP, and Spectra 350 ISP, the latter of which enables up to a 36 MP single main camera or..."
I referred to https://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/files/snapdragon-730-mobile-platform-product-brief.pdf and found that 36 MP is actually a mode for the SD730 camera but it can be 48 MP and even go up to 192 MP with limitations of course!
So If I may suggest, choose a camera mode (e.g. maximum resolution or with "MFNR,
ZSL,...") for all processors for a clear comparison. Thank you...
Bla, 10 Apr 2019"Qualcomm is discontinuing it's low-end models (QSD 636 and QSD 660) and replacing them. Just ... more636 is technically an underclocked 660, so we can say that both of them are the successor of the 650/652/653.
636 is superior to 650 due to having 2 more A73 cores.