8 ms·

This -- is super freakin' cool. Real value add from Google, considering everyone is on the same very mediocre Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 platform. (Please PLEASE f

This -- is super freakin' cool. Real value add from Google, considering everyone is on the same very mediocre Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 platform. (Please PLEASE for the love of God, Google, build your own mobile SoCs so someone can remotely catch up to Apple's 3 year lead in mobile performance already) Credible too because Pixel 2 had such stellar picture quality in the reviews.

efraim 9y ago
I'm curious why you think Google would be better at building SoC's than Qualcomm?
- codinghorror 9y ago
  Anyone has to be better than Qualcomm, I hope. Their performance is just embarrassing at this point, relative to where Apple is. Compare: https://browser.geekbench.com/android-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/android-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks 4214 versus 1965. And that's assuming you own the very very very latest Android device from this year. It gets far worse the deeper / older you go in years.
  - efraim 9y ago
    Qualcomm is seriously lagging Apple but so are Samsung and HiSilicon[0][1], they seem to be about the same performance. Android Authority [2] tried to explain why Apple is faster and their best argument (among a few) seems to be that Apple's silicon is just larger. Qualcomm could probably make larger chips if they get payed for it. [0] https://www.anandtech.com/show/11540/samsung-galaxy-s8-exynos-versus-snapdragon https://www.anandtech.com/show/11540/samsung-galaxy-s8-exyno... [1] https://www.anandtech.com/show/11088/hisilicon-kirin-960-performance-and-power https://www.anandtech.com/show/11088/hisilicon-kirin-960-per... [2] https://www.androidauthority.com/why-are-apples-chips-faster-than-qualcomms-gary-explains-802738/ https://www.androidauthority.com/why-are-apples-chips-faster...
    - abritinthebay 9y ago
      That's somewhat over-simplifying their argument - the long and the short of it though was that Qualcomm has different business interests in chip-making (ie, bulk, cheap, quick to produce) than Apple - so Qualcomm is extremely unlikely to ever match Apple. Of course if Google did in-house SoC design and had Qualcomm as a manufacturer then of course they could do it, but that's so far no happened and at that point it's Google's chip practically speaking anyhow.
      - blackguardx 9y ago
        Qualcomm is fabless, just like most everyone else except for Intel at this point.
        abritinthebay 9y ago
        Oh well that’s even sadder for them then. I thought they still had some factories? They used to...
    - kllrnohj 9y ago
      One of the other theories I've heard is that it's partly because 4 is an unlucky number in Chinese, which is a major market. Thus why so many SoC vendors pushed to 8 core chips instead of taking those extra transistors and spending them on an L3 cache instead, which would have helped real world performance far more than the extra 4 cores do. Probably not very true, but it's a fun theory. More likely is it just looks better on the spec sheet to have more cores & ever higher burst-only frequencies rather than the things that would have more bang/buck on more real world workloads like an L3 cache would. It's why you ended up with ridiculous nonsense like the Helio X20 & X30 (10-core SoCs with only 2 good cores and 8 low power ones)
      - jdietrich 9y ago
        Those low power cores don't take up a vast amount of die area, but they substantially improve battery life. Apple seems wedded to the idea that 12 hours of screen-on time is sufficient, so they're happy to keep pushing for maximum performance; other manufacturers are willing to trade off a bit of performance for a lot more battery life.
  - newusertoday 9y ago
    that is a cpu score, most of the camera processing is done dsp with cpu only getting used for control so this would not be the right metric to compare.
    - codinghorror 9y ago
      right, that's why the (presumably) dedicated chip for post-processing is a nice value add, as my comment said..
  - dm319 9y ago
    I don't see how Apple makes use of that power. After experiencing the general slickness of the pixel and it's awesome HDR abilities, then observing the iPhone calculator input/ animation lag, I would say that extra power isn't put to any use.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - matthewmacleod 9y ago
      That’s a silly comparison. The iPhone’s calculator is sloppy programming, but it’s not indicative of any particular performance issue. There are a bunch of neat real-time effects ones iPhones, and ARKit is pretty cool. But it’s really the opportunities that high performance offers for devs that matter!
samfisher83 9y ago
Chip making isn't magic. The more transistors you have the more things you can do. For example you can have more cache, more decoding units, more execution units etc. All this increase in complexity has costs which other phone manufacturer may or not want to pay for. Apple has a billion more transistors to work with. Will most consumers even notice the difference? will they pay more? Apple has a high asp so they can do it. How many other manfuctuers can do that?
- tertius 9y ago
  > Will most consumers even notice the difference? Well, it allows them to advance UI instead of just making it faster.
atomicnumber1 9y ago
A. They are already working on one. I expect it to arrive with Pixel 3 next year. B. It's really hard to develop your own SOCs let alone get it right. And, it'd be difficult to catch up with Apple's lead, but If'd to bet on someone, I'd bet on Google.

efraim 9y ago

I'm curious why you think Google would be better at building SoC's than Qualcomm?

codinghorror 9y ago
Anyone has to be better than Qualcomm, I hope. Their performance is just embarrassing at this point, relative to where Apple is. Compare: https://browser.geekbench.com/android-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/android-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks 4214 versus 1965. And that's assuming you own the very very very latest Android device from this year. It gets far worse the deeper / older you go in years.
- efraim 9y ago
  Qualcomm is seriously lagging Apple but so are Samsung and HiSilicon[0][1], they seem to be about the same performance. Android Authority [2] tried to explain why Apple is faster and their best argument (among a few) seems to be that Apple's silicon is just larger. Qualcomm could probably make larger chips if they get payed for it. [0] https://www.anandtech.com/show/11540/samsung-galaxy-s8-exynos-versus-snapdragon https://www.anandtech.com/show/11540/samsung-galaxy-s8-exyno... [1] https://www.anandtech.com/show/11088/hisilicon-kirin-960-performance-and-power https://www.anandtech.com/show/11088/hisilicon-kirin-960-per... [2] https://www.androidauthority.com/why-are-apples-chips-faster-than-qualcomms-gary-explains-802738/ https://www.androidauthority.com/why-are-apples-chips-faster...
  - abritinthebay 9y ago
    That's somewhat over-simplifying their argument - the long and the short of it though was that Qualcomm has different business interests in chip-making (ie, bulk, cheap, quick to produce) than Apple - so Qualcomm is extremely unlikely to ever match Apple. Of course if Google did in-house SoC design and had Qualcomm as a manufacturer then of course they could do it, but that's so far no happened and at that point it's Google's chip practically speaking anyhow.
    - blackguardx 9y ago
      Qualcomm is fabless, just like most everyone else except for Intel at this point.
      - abritinthebay 9y ago
        Oh well that’s even sadder for them then. I thought they still had some factories? They used to...
  - kllrnohj 9y ago
    One of the other theories I've heard is that it's partly because 4 is an unlucky number in Chinese, which is a major market. Thus why so many SoC vendors pushed to 8 core chips instead of taking those extra transistors and spending them on an L3 cache instead, which would have helped real world performance far more than the extra 4 cores do. Probably not very true, but it's a fun theory. More likely is it just looks better on the spec sheet to have more cores & ever higher burst-only frequencies rather than the things that would have more bang/buck on more real world workloads like an L3 cache would. It's why you ended up with ridiculous nonsense like the Helio X20 & X30 (10-core SoCs with only 2 good cores and 8 low power ones)
    - jdietrich 9y ago
      Those low power cores don't take up a vast amount of die area, but they substantially improve battery life. Apple seems wedded to the idea that 12 hours of screen-on time is sufficient, so they're happy to keep pushing for maximum performance; other manufacturers are willing to trade off a bit of performance for a lot more battery life.
- newusertoday 9y ago
  that is a cpu score, most of the camera processing is done dsp with cpu only getting used for control so this would not be the right metric to compare.
  - codinghorror 9y ago
    right, that's why the (presumably) dedicated chip for post-processing is a nice value add, as my comment said..
- dm319 9y ago
  I don't see how Apple makes use of that power. After experiencing the general slickness of the pixel and it's awesome HDR abilities, then observing the iPhone calculator input/ animation lag, I would say that extra power isn't put to any use.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - matthewmacleod 9y ago
    That’s a silly comparison. The iPhone’s calculator is sloppy programming, but it’s not indicative of any particular performance issue. There are a bunch of neat real-time effects ones iPhones, and ARKit is pretty cool. But it’s really the opportunities that high performance offers for devs that matter!

samfisher83 9y ago

Chip making isn't magic. The more transistors you have the more things you can do. For example you can have more cache, more decoding units, more execution units etc. All this increase in complexity has costs which other phone manufacturer may or not want to pay for. Apple has a billion more transistors to work with. Will most consumers even notice the difference? will they pay more? Apple has a high asp so they can do it. How many other manfuctuers can do that?

tertius 9y ago
> Will most consumers even notice the difference? Well, it allows them to advance UI instead of just making it faster.

atomicnumber1 9y ago

A. They are already working on one. I expect it to arrive with Pixel 3 next year. B. It's really hard to develop your own SOCs let alone get it right. And, it'd be difficult to catch up with Apple's lead, but If'd to bet on someone, I'd bet on Google.