5 ms·

Hopefully this partnership will allow Qualcomm to bring the Snapdragon performance on par with the Apple CPUs.

niftich 9y ago
Why would that be the case? Do you foresee this putting a great deal of performance-related pressure on Qualcomm that wasn't there before, despite them being a top-shipping smartphone CPU vendor? Given Qualcomm's just-announced partnership with AMD [1], Qualcomm is clearly pursuing multiple strategies to compete with Intel, but they can leverage AMD to cover their weaknesses, instead of trying to outpace Apple's A-series in places where the market seems fine with the current Snapdragons. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15855188 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15855188
- microcolonel 9y ago
  Well, Apple and Qualcomm have taken different approaches. Having a (successful) desktop/laptop product will cause them to make architectural decisions which don't make sense on a smartphone in general.
- mtgx 9y ago
  > Do you foresee this putting a great deal of performance-related pressure on Qualcomm that wasn't there before Possibly. Although I don't doubt Apple may have superior expertise in designing ARM chips (which sounds strange when comparing to the #1 ARM chip maker), I think one of the main reasons Qualcomm hasn't been able to match Apple is that Qualcomm has to optimize its chip for a variety of OEM needs. Apple on the other hand, could even push the TDP by 20% on its chip, if it know that it can make up for that loss of efficiency with more optimized software that's developed specifically for that chip. The AMD partnership is very interesting. I hope they double down on that. Fun fact: Qualcomm wanted to buy AMD in 2015, but because of some terrible management and engineering choices with the Snapdragon 810, which led to a sales slump that year, the board was so furious that i wanted to sell Qualcomm's chip business! (and sell just modems). Of course, that would have been a terrible idea, business-wise, which is why if Broadcom buys Qualcomm I hope it does get rid of that board and Qualcomm's CEO from day one. Another fun fact: Qualcomm's Adreno GPU is AMD's old Mobile Radeon GPU division, and Adreno is an anagram of Radeon. I've been hoping someone like Qualcomm or Samsung buys AMD. Perhaps it may actually do that eventually, with or without Broadcom's help. Then we can see some real competition against Intel, and AMD alone simply lacks the funds to compete head-on with Intel in many areas. Also, now I'm starting to wonder if Broadcom knew about this deal and it's why it wanted to buy Qualcomm now.
  - megy 9y ago
    > I think one of the main reasons Qualcomm hasn't been able to match Apple is that Qualcomm has to optimize its chip for a variety of OEM needs. This just makes no sense at all. So you are saying some OEM's want slow chips? No, of course not. Or are you saying that Samsung S8 has different needs to LG V30 or to the Google Pixel? No, of course not. There needs are all the same.
    - lorenzhs 9y ago
      Smartphones and tablets are not Qualcomm’a only market by far. They have plenty of other customers, too.
matthoiland 9y ago
The A11 chip is insane for a tablet. Would love to see a Surface Pro with this performance.
- baldfat 9y ago
  The i5 and i7 of Surface Pros absolutely melt A11's performance. The A11 would have run laps for battery life though.
  - bigdubs 9y ago
    Not really according to geekbench. a11: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 i7 (rmbp): https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5285899 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5285899 4.1k vs. 4.8k
    - Joeri 9y ago
      Interesting that the multi-core score is a lot lower. Probably you're seeing thermal management in that multi-core score, meaning a macbook with active cooling should be able to reach much higher multi-core numbers. The A11 is way too overpowered for a phone or tablet. Apple is clearly in the awkward phase where they've almost gotten the right CPU to put in their laptops. The A12 will be a no-brainer. Same performance as i7, way better battery life, way cheaper to produce.
      - bigdubs 9y ago
        I think hyperthreading with the i7 also gives it an edge with multi-core
      - endorphone 9y ago
        Note that the A11 has two "big" cores, and four much slower but power efficient "little" cores. If they were making an A11 variant for desktop use they would have the power profile to use more big cores.
bitmapbrother 9y ago
Why would this partnership have any significance on the performance of Qualcomm SoC's? Qualcomm doesn't really drive the performance of the architecture they license - that would be ARM. The next generation Snapdragon, Exynos and Kirin SoC's will all use ARM's new A75 and A55 core dynamIQ reference designs and their performance will be the same.
ricw 9y ago
This is unlikely. Apple's CPU budget for it's devices is likely much higher than anything Qualcomm's customers are willing to pay (vs the current snapdragon pricing). Apple's CPUs are very very large and consequently relatively expensive. As an example, a latest gen snapdragon 835 has 3 billion transistors, while Apple's A11 has 4.3 billion.
- Symmetry 9y ago
  And those numbers severely understate the difference since, IIRC, a much larger fraction of Apple's SoC transistor budget is devoted to its application processors. EDIT: Found an image. More a simple understatement than a severe one. https://wccftech.com/apple-a10-fusion-cores-bigger-than-competition/ https://wccftech.com/apple-a10-fusion-cores-bigger-than-comp...
- endorphone 9y ago
  Of course competitors want more powerful options, and they certainly have the budget for it given the pricing of premium Android devices. Qualcomm simply fell behind. While Apple went for powerful, enormous cores in small numbers, Qualcomm and friends bet on simpler, smaller cores. Apple has started copy/pasting their fantastic cores, yielding the enormous transistor counts. I admit to being a skeptic when Apple went off to do their own thing, sure that a whole industry (and options like the Tegra) would make them eat their hat. Apple executed and are in a remarkable position now.

Why would that be the case? Do you foresee this putting a great deal of performance-related pressure on Qualcomm that wasn't there before, despite them being a top-shipping smartphone CPU vendor? Given Qualcomm's just-announced partnership with AMD [1], Qualcomm is clearly pursuing multiple strategies to compete with Intel, but they can leverage AMD to cover their weaknesses, instead of trying to outpace Apple's A-series in places where the market seems fine with the current Snapdragons. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15855188 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15855188

microcolonel 9y ago
Well, Apple and Qualcomm have taken different approaches. Having a (successful) desktop/laptop product will cause them to make architectural decisions which don't make sense on a smartphone in general.
mtgx 9y ago
> Do you foresee this putting a great deal of performance-related pressure on Qualcomm that wasn't there before Possibly. Although I don't doubt Apple may have superior expertise in designing ARM chips (which sounds strange when comparing to the #1 ARM chip maker), I think one of the main reasons Qualcomm hasn't been able to match Apple is that Qualcomm has to optimize its chip for a variety of OEM needs. Apple on the other hand, could even push the TDP by 20% on its chip, if it know that it can make up for that loss of efficiency with more optimized software that's developed specifically for that chip. The AMD partnership is very interesting. I hope they double down on that. Fun fact: Qualcomm wanted to buy AMD in 2015, but because of some terrible management and engineering choices with the Snapdragon 810, which led to a sales slump that year, the board was so furious that i wanted to sell Qualcomm's chip business! (and sell just modems). Of course, that would have been a terrible idea, business-wise, which is why if Broadcom buys Qualcomm I hope it does get rid of that board and Qualcomm's CEO from day one. Another fun fact: Qualcomm's Adreno GPU is AMD's old Mobile Radeon GPU division, and Adreno is an anagram of Radeon. I've been hoping someone like Qualcomm or Samsung buys AMD. Perhaps it may actually do that eventually, with or without Broadcom's help. Then we can see some real competition against Intel, and AMD alone simply lacks the funds to compete head-on with Intel in many areas. Also, now I'm starting to wonder if Broadcom knew about this deal and it's why it wanted to buy Qualcomm now.
- megy 9y ago
  > I think one of the main reasons Qualcomm hasn't been able to match Apple is that Qualcomm has to optimize its chip for a variety of OEM needs. This just makes no sense at all. So you are saying some OEM's want slow chips? No, of course not. Or are you saying that Samsung S8 has different needs to LG V30 or to the Google Pixel? No, of course not. There needs are all the same.
  - lorenzhs 9y ago
    Smartphones and tablets are not Qualcomm’a only market by far. They have plenty of other customers, too.

matthoiland 9y ago

The A11 chip is insane for a tablet. Would love to see a Surface Pro with this performance.

baldfat 9y ago
The i5 and i7 of Surface Pros absolutely melt A11's performance. The A11 would have run laps for battery life though.
- bigdubs 9y ago
  Not really according to geekbench. a11: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 i7 (rmbp): https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5285899 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5285899 4.1k vs. 4.8k
  - Joeri 9y ago
    Interesting that the multi-core score is a lot lower. Probably you're seeing thermal management in that multi-core score, meaning a macbook with active cooling should be able to reach much higher multi-core numbers. The A11 is way too overpowered for a phone or tablet. Apple is clearly in the awkward phase where they've almost gotten the right CPU to put in their laptops. The A12 will be a no-brainer. Same performance as i7, way better battery life, way cheaper to produce.
    - bigdubs 9y ago
      I think hyperthreading with the i7 also gives it an edge with multi-core
    - endorphone 9y ago
      Note that the A11 has two "big" cores, and four much slower but power efficient "little" cores. If they were making an A11 variant for desktop use they would have the power profile to use more big cores.

bitmapbrother 9y ago

Why would this partnership have any significance on the performance of Qualcomm SoC's? Qualcomm doesn't really drive the performance of the architecture they license - that would be ARM. The next generation Snapdragon, Exynos and Kirin SoC's will all use ARM's new A75 and A55 core dynamIQ reference designs and their performance will be the same.

ricw 9y ago

This is unlikely. Apple's CPU budget for it's devices is likely much higher than anything Qualcomm's customers are willing to pay (vs the current snapdragon pricing). Apple's CPUs are very very large and consequently relatively expensive. As an example, a latest gen snapdragon 835 has 3 billion transistors, while Apple's A11 has 4.3 billion.

Symmetry 9y ago
And those numbers severely understate the difference since, IIRC, a much larger fraction of Apple's SoC transistor budget is devoted to its application processors. EDIT: Found an image. More a simple understatement than a severe one. https://wccftech.com/apple-a10-fusion-cores-bigger-than-competition/ https://wccftech.com/apple-a10-fusion-cores-bigger-than-comp...
endorphone 9y ago
Of course competitors want more powerful options, and they certainly have the budget for it given the pricing of premium Android devices. Qualcomm simply fell behind. While Apple went for powerful, enormous cores in small numbers, Qualcomm and friends bet on simpler, smaller cores. Apple has started copy/pasting their fantastic cores, yielding the enormous transistor counts. I admit to being a skeptic when Apple went off to do their own thing, sure that a whole industry (and options like the Tegra) would make them eat their hat. Apple executed and are in a remarkable position now.