Preview round-up: Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 820 SoC

Qualcomm's fortune with its Snapdragon 810 SoC wasn't the best. This powerful chip, used in several manufacturers' flagship phones, was prone to overheating and thermal throttling. The SoC's performance wasn't that stellar, either. Some reviewers pointed out that the company's Snapdragon 801 and 805 chips often delivered similar performance in many tasks.

The firm isn't just sitting around, though. Qualcomm is putting the finishing touches on its new and improved Snapdragon 820 SoC. The company claims this chip has significantly better performance and power consumption than the 810.

To fullfill that promise, the company designed Kryo, its first custom 64-bit CPU core built on a 14-nm FinFET process. Kryo packs two "performance" cores and two "low power" cores, a bit like the 810's "big.LITTLE" 4+4 core arrangement. Qualcomm says that its Kryo core purportedly offers twice the performance and power efficiency over the Snapdragon 810. The company also claims the new Adreno GPU onboard should be 40% faster than older parts, too.

Qualcomm recently let a handful of reviewers take a poke at a test phablet containing a Snapdragon 820 MPD/S SoC. This test chip's big CPU cores are clocked at 2.2 GHz, and its low-power units run at 1.6 GHz. The test handset was equipped with 3GB of RAM and a 6.2" 2560×1600 display.

The CPU results the reviewers gathered are promising but somewhat inconsistent. Geekbench tests present the 820 as a definite improvement over the 810 it replaces, particularly in tasks using floating-point arithmetic. The new core arrangement also looks to be a better fit for most workloads—Basemark and PCMark results show the Snapdragon 820 test system beating many other devices, particularly the Samsung Galaxy Note 5 and Galaxy S6.

Only AnandTech tested the Snapdragon 820 against the Apple A9-equipped iPhone 6S Plus, though. Seeing how the 820's CPU isn't much faster than the iPad Air 2 (and sometimes slower), it's not a surprise that the 820 testbed loses out against Apple's latest-and-greatest SoC most of the time. Things take a turn for the worse when it comes to JavaScript performance, too. In the Kraken and Octane tests, the 820 struggles to keep up with, let alone beat its direct competitors. Meanwhile, the iPhone 6S Plus is in a league of its own when it comes to handling JavaScript.

The new Adreno GPU fares quite a bit better. Graphics tests show the Snapdragon 820 as a clear winner over every other mobile device tested in GFXBench and Basemark. In 3DMark, Qualcomm's latest matches Apple's A9. Overall, the Snapdragon 820 looks like it could deliver excellent graphics performance.

The overall picture for the Snapdragon 820 in its current form is kind of a mixed bag. On the one hand, the Snapdragon 820 is indeed faster in a number of CPU-related tasks than the 810 it replaces. On the other, the CPU improvements don't show up in every test, and the 820 often trades blows with its Snapdragon 810 brother, as well as with Samsung's Exynos 7420 and Apple's A8X. The new Adreno GPU looks particularly strong against its direct competitors, though, often besting them by wide margins.

If there's an fly in Qualcomm's ointment, though, its name is "Apple A9." The chip inside the iPhone 6S Plus wipes the floor with the Snapdragon 820 when it comes to CPU-related tasks, and matches it for GPU performance. It should also be noted that the reviewers weren't able to test battery life, so it's not clear yet whether Qualcomm's promises of better energy efficiency will hold.

Comments closed
    • BobbinThreadbare
    • 4 years ago

    Nice to see them get away from the ridiculous 8 core design for a phone chip.

    • NeelyCam
    • 4 years ago

    Just saw this OnePlus 2 review on Anandtech:
    [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/show/9828/the-oneplus-2-review/2[/url<] Terrible performance from a snapdragon 810. Just disgusting.

      • tipoo
      • 4 years ago

      “We solved the 810 overheating issue!”
      *never uses A57 cores*

      Err…Yay? Performing like a 410 in web browsing, harsh.

    • ultima_trev
    • 4 years ago

    Hopefully the performance is only due to immature drivers. Otherwise this doesn’t bode well for Qualcomm. I find it odd that except in Basemark the Adreno 530 is barely able to edge out the Adreno 4xx from the 810/808/805, if at all. 🙁

    • Mad_Dane
    • 4 years ago

    Great their forthcoming chip can’t even beat what is old news on the market now! No wonder mobile sales are dropping in huge numbers, this push for yearly updates is pointless when they have nothing new to speak of!

    Battery life, charge time and the ability to swap the battery when it gets worn is top priority in my next phone!

    • rechicero
    • 4 years ago

    I’m confused with mobile SoC reviews.

    We accept that synthetic benchmarks are nor that trustworthy for CPUs and GPUs and yet, those are the ones used.

    We know that just a change of Android flavor can mean a huge change in performance and yet we compare 2 SoC under different SOs.

    I understand it as an intelectual game, but… that’s all. Comparing the A9 with any non Apple SoC seems futile: they are meant to run different software.

      • adisor19
      • 4 years ago

      No, it’s a totally valid comparison. The software is not all at fault here. The SoCs count for a lot. A9 will dominate SoCs this year and this time, Qualcom doesn’t have anything out that is even remotely competitive with it.

      This year marks the split in the market where Apple will be the leader not only in design and integration but also in raw CPU and GPU power.

      Mark my works, every year from now on, no other competitor will surpass Apple’s CPU and GPU performance in the smartphone/tablet space.

      Intel should and probably is already worried.

      Adi

        • rechicero
        • 4 years ago

        I’m not saying which SoC is better. I just say there is little point in comparing with Apple hardware wise. What you say is probably true but, do you really think anybody is going to choose OSX instead of Android because the A9 is somewhat better than the 820?

        In fact, if the 820 was better, do you think Apple would lose marketshare because of that? I don’t think so.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          it doesn’t matter why it doesn’t make sense. doing it this way makes apple look fast, so adi supports it.

          • biffzinker
          • 4 years ago

          Easy way to measure who is the competent ARM CPU designer? Who is managing to push ARM CPU performance forward?

      • TheJack
      • 4 years ago

      Yes. Only user experience can be a valid measurement in these cases, but then again those experiences tend to be subjective at best and outright fanboyist at worst. So, what to do?

    • Ninjitsu
    • 4 years ago

    Does the Apple comparison even matter though? I mean, Apple’s never going to let you run Android on an iPhone, nor will you get to run iOS on anything but an Apple chip.

    The comparison is academic at most. Different software stacks, different performance characteristics, hardly any good cross-platform tools that can return reliable and consistent results to account for the many variables.

    Frankly if the 820 mostly wins the Android segment (and is power efficient) then Qualcomm’s done its job. We hit the “good enough” point in the mid range mobile segment this year with the 3rd gen Moto G, it really doesn’t matter much unless software’s making use of the extra compute available.

    Unless people are rendering videos on their iPhones or something, I’m not completely sure what the point is anymore.

      • sweatshopking
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah, we don’t know how much of the speed difference is because android sucks, which it does.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 4 years ago

        Yeah, to that end: [url<]https://meta.discourse.org/t/the-state-of-javascript-on-android-in-2015-is-poor/33889[/url<]

          • biffzinker
          • 4 years ago

          Google could learn something from Microsoft now that they open sourced their Chakra javascript engine perhaps?

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            Maybe so. Can’t hurt at this point.

            I do know that iOS vs Android is valuable and should matter to Qualcomm (and Google too, obviously) because consumers walking into a store are going to look at them side by side. If browsing the mobile web is important to the buyer then iOS wins handily. Maybe that’s why mobile browser share heavily favors Safari.

            Oh, yeah, lots of native apps are built with HTML and JavaScript on the front end. It could matter more than I initially thought.

        • biffzinker
        • 4 years ago

        Hold up, did you just say Android sucks?

        Given a choice between iOS 9.2, Windows 10 Mobile, and Android 6.0 I’ll stick with Android for now.

      • tipoo
      • 4 years ago

      It won’t compete in direct SoC sales, yeah. But it does lead by high example. That’s pretty much what the ideal SoC in an android phone would be for me. Two cores, great idle characteristics so no helper cores with context switching, big fat designs with high IPC so they can clock it low, etc.

      Snapdragon 820 is an improvement in trading MT for ST performance, but still not quite up there. The 1/3rd L2 cache and no L3 cache, more cycles on int mult, int add, float mult, float add, etc etc, they all point to Android SoC makers still not aiming high enough.

      • adisor19
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah, the comparison still stands. You’re probably but hurt that Qualcom is no longer competitive with Apple’s designs anymore and that’s ok and totally normal. Apple has way more $$ to throw at their CPU design team and as a general rule, the more $$ you throw, the better the designs.

      Android OEMs are racing to the bottom and Qualcom is adjusting their designs accordingly. In a few years, it will be painfully obvious : you want a high performance smartphone/tablet, your only choice will be Apple.

      Adi

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        That’s the point – most people don’t want high end stuff if they have to pay full price for it. We’re already at the point where you don’t need to spend much on a phone to avoid frustrating performance. The real competition is in software and security, now.

        Oh and, Qualcomm was never competing with Apple. It’s OEMs that compete with Apple.

        Nice trolling/fanboying/PR-ing though.

          • adisor19
          • 4 years ago

          Of course Qualcom was not competing with Apple LMAO. Must be why they rushed like crazy to put out a 64bit part, cause they weren’t competing with Apple and they weren’t caught with their pants down when the A7 was released.

          I’m not trolling. At least not this time 😉

          Adi

      • blastdoor
      • 4 years ago

      I think you’re clearly right that if the 820 wins the Android segment then Qualcomm has done its job.

      It actually might be a major mistake for Qualcomm to make a more powerful core than what they’ve done here. A bigger, more powerful core would result in a more expensive SOC and their OEM customers may not be able to afford that (because they might not be able to pass the cost along to customers).

      I think the only reason Apple makes such a big powerful core is that they intend this core to be used in many different products. Right now it goes from iPhone to iPad Pro, but in the future it might scale further than that. But if all Apple sold were iPhones, then it probably would have made more sense to keep iterating Swift rather than leaping to Cyclone.

    • Rurouni
    • 4 years ago

    People focusing on performance too much these days. What I’m most interested in is the power consumption, which is probably the main aim of 820 after their previous SoC that is known to overheat. If they can deliver all that performance without throttling (or at least lesser throttling) vs other SoCs, then I consider that a huge win.
    Anyway, what I’m saying is in mobile SoC you can’t separate performance and power consumption.

    Edit: What I meant is that people looked at the performance first then power consumption 2nd, which shouldn’t be that way on a mobile SoC. Power consumption is just as important, if not more on a mobile SoC vs outright performance, thus should also be mentioned if we are talking about mobile SoC. If a SoC has very high performance but throttles a lot or getting very hot, then it’s somewhat useless. If a SoC has a very good power consumption but the performance is very low, then it might be good for some but not good enough for others. In this case, if 820 power consumption (also thermal wise) is better than A9, then I would prefer that since the performance is already good enough on 820.
    I know that I’m mixing power consumption with thermal, which is related but not necessary equal, so sorry for that.

    • RdVi
    • 4 years ago

    Aside from JS browser optimisation, performance looks good enough for the CPU and great for the GPU. What will make it or break it will be power consumption/heat. Looking forward to tests on actual devices 🙂

    • Rza79
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]The chip inside the iPhone 6S Plus wipes the floor with the Snapdragon 820 when it comes to CPU-related tasks, and matches it for GPU performance.[/quote<] A9's single core performance is faster but it will still lose on multi-threaded tasks. On both relevant offscreen tests, Qualcomm GPU is 12.5% faster.

      • tipoo
      • 4 years ago

      The 820 dials back from 4 big cores to 2 big cores. If the A9 is winning ST, I expect it will also be winning MT against this one. The little cores can be thrown in too when the governor wants, but that still barely put the old 4+4 design above the A9 in MT, now it’s 2+2.

      Actually you can use this to flip back and forth for comparison. Holy moly, look at the SPEC2000 results, A9 does dominate it.
      [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/show/9686/the-apple-iphone-6s-and-iphone-6s-plus-review/4[/url<]

        • Rza79
        • 4 years ago

        Keep in account that SPECint is single threaded and that Anand used A57 binaries to get some preliminary results. No compiler optimizations yet and you know how much that matters for SPEC.

          • tipoo
          • 4 years ago

          The breakout of Geekbench 3, ST and MT is also there, if you prefer. Or if you like neither, real world benchmarks on subsequent pages.

          Either way, it’s pretty clearly an A9 win for both single core and multicore this time around, the 820 trades off some multicore performance to come closer in single core performance, which I find worth it, but still short of the A9.

            • Rza79
            • 4 years ago

            I don’t see what you see. In single-threaded performance, the A9 wins easily. But not in multi-threaded scenarios.

            The few fully multi-threaded tests are Geekbench MT and 3DMark physics, which the 820 both wins.

            I made a quick Geekbench MT breakdown. I list the number of wins.
            INT
            A9: 3 – 820: 10

            FP
            A9: 4 – 820: 6 (The tests that the A9 wins, it’s close. The ones that the 820 wins, one some the difference is huge)

            I’m not trying to bash the A9 because its single core performance is great but it remains a dual core chip and it’s not beating the 820 on multi-threaded tests.

            • Rza79
            • 4 years ago

            Went ahead and made a comparison in Geekbench:

            [url<]http://i.imgur.com/Qq4OHys.png[/url<]

            • ImSpartacus
            • 4 years ago

            Is that in the classic Anandtech styling? Looks like you put some time into it. I appreciated getting to easily see those side by side.

            • Rza79
            • 4 years ago

            It didn’t take too much effort. I just copy/paste Anand’s tables into Excel and merged them. It took Anand’s styling as it is. Kudos to Excel.

            • tipoo
            • 4 years ago

            Ok, full kudos, point taken. Thanks for the effort.

            I will say that the MT results are still using all of the 2+2, which I imagine real world apps will trail off on the last two cores. I wonder if the MT performance advantage would still be positive without the low power cores chucked in. And how much power using all 4 together takes, so if the governor may turn a cluster of 2 off eventually into gameplay/whatever. This is all speculation of course on my part, for now, yeah, the benchmarks do show it winning MT.

            • Rza79
            • 4 years ago

            I would assume that in CPU-bound tasks (like Geekbench), all four cores will be used.
            I also assume that in GPU-bound tasks (like games), it will probably just use the low-power cluster to give full power to the GPU.

            • Beelzebubba9
            • 4 years ago

            Great post, thanks!

            • Rza79
            • 4 years ago

            So … I went ahead and made one more comparison:

            [url<]http://i.imgur.com/O3L6bQM.png[/url<] The MT8173 equipped Amazon Fire TV 2 vs the 820. The MT8173 is a 2xA72 (2Ghz) & 2xA53 (1.6Ghz?) 28nm SOC. It's 28nm so it's not totally fair but it's the earliest comparison we can make. The A72 seems to lose on IPC and will need a higher frequency to beat Kryo. Also interesting is that the gap widens on MT since the 820 has the processes advantage and also comes with four big cores vs two big + two small.

      • cygnus1
      • 4 years ago

      No it won’t, because the 820 only runs 2 of the cores at any one time.

        • Rza79
        • 4 years ago

        Where do you get that from because that’s just not true.
        It can use all four cores at once given that power restrictions allow it.
        Looking at Geekbench MT results, it’s putting up a decent fight against the 8-core 810. It’s loosing at an average of 10% in INT and winning at around 30% in FP.
        Geekbench is very primitive and doesn’t show the big picture but it’s proving that all 4 cores are being used.

    • mtruchado
    • 4 years ago

    Lately the SoC which impress me the most is the intel Z3590 in terms of price, performance and consumption. Unfortunately looks like only Asus is willing to use It.

      • biffzinker
      • 4 years ago

      But does the Intel iGPU have the perfomance to match the Apple A9 or Qualcomm 820?

        • sweatshopking
        • 4 years ago

        NO, IT DOESN’T.

        • auxy
        • 4 years ago

        No, but it doesn’t need it. Not for what most people do on their mobile devices. These big GPU parts on these mobile processors are just nonsensical. Mobile gaming has never really been relevant as anything but casual mess to fiddle around with on the train, and the most popular mobile games barely use the GPU at all. Intel’s 8th and 9th generation GPU hardware is plenty fine.

          • biffzinker
          • 4 years ago

          So I suppose you see the smartphone existing as only in the shape of a rectangle? What if a device yet to appear had a use for a high performance GPU?

            • Ninjitsu
            • 4 years ago

            Then it’ll ship with a high perf GPU. Till such a hypothetical smartphone exists, I don’t see a point.

            [quote<]So I suppose you see the smartphone existing as only in the shape of a rectangle?[/quote<] U wot m8?

            • biffzinker
            • 4 years ago

            [quote<]So I suppose you see the smartphone existing as only in the shape of a rectangle?[/quote<] I talking about how the smartphone as we know it today will change into something else for example Hololens from Microsoft, the wearable Goggle was working on. At some point people will stop carrying around with them a smartphone. Usually companies keep building on their past cpu/gpu designs, why not get it right the first time?

          • Unknown-Error
          • 4 years ago

          Errr…….but most people around the world don’t need Apple A9 like CPU performance either. My old phone based on Quad-core ARM A7 @ 1.3GHz was more than capable of handling Sudoku variants, Chess, 5- in-a-row, Checkers etc. Only problem was battery life (but at least the battery was removable if the thing got stuck). If you are talking about “good enough”, then there are even cheaper ARM options.

            • auxy
            • 4 years ago

            Your argument is a good attempt, but talking about CPU and GPU performance is completely different.

            A faster CPU is -always- useful. Every application will benefit.

            Meanwhile, a faster GPU is only really useful to the point that it can no longer be a bottleneck. Current GPUs on mobile SoCs have satisfied this requirement a long time ago, aside from more hardcore-style games, and the batteries in these devices don’t really have the capacity to support that kind of usecase anyway, so ultimately it’s just a bunch of wasted silicon.

            I realize as biffzinker is pointing out above that there are other usecases, like set-top boxes or wannabe game consoles like the SHIELD TV and the Apple TV thing, but ultimately those have proven to be pretty much stillborn.

            My thesis was simply that the Intel Z3590’s (Moorefield) PowerVR-derived GPU is older but still ‘good enough’ for the overwhelming majority of mobile usecases and I think that point stands.

            • Unknown-Error
            • 4 years ago

            Yeah, I see your point. Off-course for someone like me Z3590 is overkill. Z3560 based Lenovo K80, Zenfone 2 ZE550ML are more than adequate.

            • XTF
            • 4 years ago

            That’s not true, in general.. For a basic internet / office PC, the fastest and most expensive Xeon doesn’t make sense over the simplest i3.
            For a basic smartphone for an undemanding user, a SD410 might be fine and a (much) faster CPU won’t provide any real benefit.

            • auxy
            • 4 years ago

            I didn’t say it was necessary, nor did I make any value judgement. If you really want to get technical a Core i3 offers very little for a ‘normal’ user over a Pentium. However, faster single-threaded performance (“a” faster CPU) is always helpful. (*’▽’) It’s not about ‘fast enough’, it’s about ‘faster’.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          Nonsensical? I dont agree. My old man father plays games on his smartphone which are graphically intensive. You might not, but at this stage, improving the graphics capabilities is a welcome advancement.

          • adisor19
          • 4 years ago

          Wrong on sooo many levels. Mobile gaming consoles are dead. Smartphones are thew new consoles and they need powerful CPUs and GPUs.

          Adi

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            OMG. I AGREE WITH ADI 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁

            • biffzinker
            • 4 years ago

            How much longer will you need to have a game console under your TV? When will the smartphone take over that role? So far the smartphone has made music players, video players, voice recorders, and digital cameras as examples redundant.

        • Ninjitsu
        • 4 years ago

        YES, CAN IT RUN CRYSIS? CAN IT?

        • Andrew Lauritzen
        • 4 years ago

        Uhh… pretty sure that atom part uses a PowerVR GPU, no?

          • biffzinker
          • 4 years ago

          Nope, although I might of missed something.
          [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvermont#Roadmap[/url<] I remember a woman that works at Intel anandtech talked to saying the ultra mobile chips referring to smartphones stating they were using PowerVR G6230/G6430.

      • Unknown-Error
      • 4 years ago

      It is impressive because Intel priced in very competitively. I was initially attracted to the Zenfone 2 because of the CPU performance. Its CPU gives premium-like performance for a less than half of the cost. So if you are going buy an Intel phone and not too concerned with graphics, then now is the time, because eventually Intel will start charging a premium price for premium performance. Z3560, Z3580 is Intels’ attempt to breakthrough in to the phone market.

        • adisor19
        • 4 years ago

        Without a proper GPU, intel’s mobile SoCs are dead in the water.

        Intel needs to buy nVidia and FAST.

        Adi

          • Andrew Lauritzen
          • 4 years ago

          That chip uses a PowerVR GPU… I don’t think you can argue that there’s anything not “proper” about that in the mobile space, particularly compared to NVIDIA’s attempts to date.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 4 years ago

            BUT IT’S NOT APPLE

            • adisor19
            • 4 years ago

            Needs more cores and a more up to date design. It’s still useless if it’s an old PowerVR GPU from 3 years ago.

            Adi

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      I wish they’d put those in smaller phones. I refuse to buy a phone with a screen larger than 5″.

        • biffzinker
        • 4 years ago

        How about the 6″ demo phone Qualcomm was using for their Snapdragon 820? I laughed, even though it’s never going to be released.

          • Ninjitsu
          • 4 years ago

          Lol practically a [s<]brick[/s<] tablet.

    • tipoo
    • 4 years ago

    Mixed feels. A move away from the frankly bad Cortex A57 cores, cool. But you could pretty well tell from the very first page on Anandtech that this was set to punch below A9, couldn’t you? Longer latencies on float, int, 1/3rd the L2, no L3 at all. And particularly as a big.LITTLE design that means less sharing between high power/low power core clusters, more painful cluster switching.

    And unlike S810, there’s 2, not 4, “big” cores to at least make up for the lackluster IPC 810 had compared to A9.

    Just think their aim wasn’t high enough…Again…It’s now maybe competitive with A8 from last year on the CPU, though the GPU does trade blows with A9.

    Save us, Samsung’s upcoming custom cores…

    Flip back and forth from the 820 review to this, really is domination
    [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/show/9686/the-apple-iphone-6s-and-iphone-6s-plus-review/4[/url<] Now, don't get me wrong, the gain in single core performance is great compared to S810, the performance will be in a more utilizable format than spread accross 4+4. But I think they could have aimed higher. Guess that's Apples benefit in knowing they're going to sell a high profit, high margin phone wrapped around the SoC, so they can be more liberal with die area.

      • adisor19
      • 4 years ago

      Yup, Samsung is the only hope left standing for a high performance SoC that could be potentially competitive with Apple’s latest and greatest.

      However, the reality is that Samsung is seeing diminishing mobile market share especially in the high end. They will be even less inclined to throw $$ at their CPU and GPU design teams. I’m sorry to say this but you should get used to Apple staying on top from now on.

      Adi

        • ImSpartacus
        • 4 years ago

        Unfortunately, you’re probably right. Apple has a pretty remarkable high performance core.

        It sucks that no one else is incentivized to really go balls to the walls and get some awesome single thread performance.

        • w76
        • 4 years ago

        Somewhere out there, one lone guy working on ARM at Nvidia is feeling lonely and left out.

        Assuming Nvidia is even still pursuing this, I haven’t noticed any news in a while.

          • tipoo
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah, actually what are their plans? They seem to have dumped their own Denver favoring stock ARM cores for K1/X1 now. Are they planning on improving Denver and trying again?

    • sweatshopking
    • 4 years ago

    Basically what we all expected. APPLE should just buy ARM.

      • biffzinker
      • 4 years ago

      Why would Apple buy ARM? Next time ssk put some effort into trolling. 😉

        • sweatshopking
        • 4 years ago

        SAME REASON THEY DO EVERYTHING. TO SCREW COMPETITORS AND LOCK CUSTOMERS IN.

          • biffzinker
          • 4 years ago

          Well if that’s the outcome your looking for Apple could get away with just buying Qualcomm.

          Last time I checked ARM is the company Apple, and Qualcomm buy a license from to the ISA for their own design.

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            You’re right, but right now everyone uses arm since MIPS and the rest are basically dead. They could give no further licensing, and then qualcomm and samsung would be in trouble when the licenses expired.

            • biffzinker
            • 4 years ago

            SSK, claiming MIPS as basically dead might be getting ahead of yourself since Imagination Technologies that supplies Apple with the building blocks for their GPU own MIPS. MIPS could make a comeback in smartphones (Android.) Heck at one time MIPS was the processor chosen for Microsoft Windows CE 5.0/6.0 devices back during the push for PDAs (had one myself a Toshiba.)

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            Technically true, and mips has some footing in china, but I think it is a long shot at this point.

            • adisor19
            • 4 years ago

            It’s not in their best interest. Apple already has quite a big stake in ARM shares and they like it that way. Same thing for PowerVR. Apple owns lots of shares but that’s it. They just make sure those companies remain big and healthy in the marketplace in order to keep Intel competitive.

            Adi

            • biffzinker
            • 4 years ago

            You guys, if Apple bought Qualcomm that would hurt LG, use to be Samsung, One Plus, HTC, Sony, Amazon, Lenovo, Acer, Asus, Sharp, Microsoft/Nokia, Xiaomi, Oppo, Panasonic etc.

          • ImSpartacus
          • 4 years ago

          >Competitors

          lel

        • the
        • 4 years ago

        Why? To control a key part in their competitor’s products and get a handsome sum in royalties. Thus Apple wins regardless if they are successful or if their competitors are successful: they’d make money either way.

        And in fairness, I don’t think SSK is trolling. Or at least putting any effort into it. The idea of [url=http://wccftech.com/apple-acquiring-arm/<]Apple buying ARM[/url<] has floated around before though it tends to quickly fade away when people realize it'd never get approved by regulators in the EU or US.

          • biffzinker
          • 4 years ago

          True, but the news post was about Qualcomm and their recent SoC 820. How do you jump to Apple buying ARM when the article was about Qualcomm?
          Edit: When ssk types in ALL CAPITALS he usually is trolling.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          Never get approval? I think it probably would. They’d like argue that they’d still license it out, and they probably would, they just have to make it less attractive though still technically licensable to shut them up. X86, mips, and other ISA’s can all claim to be competitors. I think they’d probably get approval.

          • ImSpartacus
          • 4 years ago

          Historically, Apple never banks on their competitors being successful.

          They have a pretty long history of throwing up the finger and doing their own thing independently of the standards followed by their competition (with the perception that they can do pretty much everything better).

          I think that implicit arrogance would conflict with them trying to make money from the success of their competitors.

      • tipoo
      • 4 years ago

      Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for a nominal fee?

        • sweatshopking
        • 4 years ago

        Why does ANYONE buy a cow? because, in some situations, in the long run it’s profitable.

          • tipoo
          • 4 years ago

          But would they even be allowed to buy the cow, when regulators want a competitive milk economy and there’s pretty much just one cow in the SoC milk race?

          • adisor19
          • 4 years ago

          Not in this case. Remember, Apples doesn’t depend on ARM’s CPU designs cause they make their own. They depend on ARM’s architecture. They will only step in to buy ARM if ARM is in big trouble financially or if another competitor will attempt to buy ARM. Otherwise, they’ll stay put and enjoy their dominant position in the market place.

          Adi

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 4 years ago

      want to ARMwrestle?

      • adisor19
      • 4 years ago

      While you’re clearly trolling, Apple needs ARM to stay more or less independent in order to keep Intel in check. The more licensees there are for ARM, the more it matters in the over all market place.

      Remember SSK, Apple doesn’t have the entire ARM phone market to themselves. There are a lot of third party phone makers out there and it’s good that way.

      Apple just has all the profits 😀

      Adi

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This