5 ms·

Samsung's custom cores haven't been competitive with Qualcomm so far, much less Apple. You only have to look at comparisons between the Surface Pro X and the M

Samsung's custom cores haven't been competitive with Qualcomm so far, much less Apple. You only have to look at comparisons between the Surface Pro X and the M1 Macbook Air to see how far behind Qualcomm is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhESSZIXvCA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhESSZIXvCA

judge2020 6y ago
Differences between them start at 4:20 https://youtu.be/OhESSZIXvCA?t=261 https://youtu.be/OhESSZIXvCA?t=261
trynumber9 6y ago
They're not using their custom cores anymore. See the ARM X1/A78/A55 arrangement used in the Exynos 2100. They licensed AMD graphics IP to use that as a differentiating feature.
- dannyw 6y ago
  They still use substantially less cache than Qualcomm.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - scoopertrooper 6y ago
    Maybe so, but in cache is one part of the overall story. If you look at benchmarks run on phones with both types of processor, Qualcomm is ahead, but the 2100 is nipping at their heels.
nxc18 6y ago
Even more damming, the future Surface pro X, with updated Qualcomm chip, will still be slower than windows in a VM on M1 Mac. https://www.windowscentral.com/leaked-snapdragon-processor-could-bring-big-boost-surface-pro-x https://www.windowscentral.com/leaked-snapdragon-processor-c...
cageface 6y ago
The latest Exynos chips are pretty competitive with Qualcomm. Samsung has closed the gap considerably in this generation and even outperforms Qualcomm in some respects. https://www.gsmarena.com/exynos_2100_vs_snapdragon_888_benchmarking_the_samsung_galaxy_s21_ultra_performance-news-47611.php https://www.gsmarena.com/exynos_2100_vs_snapdragon_888_bench... In the long run having their own fabs is going to give them the upper hand in this battle I suspect.
underwater 6y ago
They're comparing a dev-channel Windows feature to a stable MacOS feature. And they compare an emulated Chrome benchmark against a native version of Chrome. The Windows feature doesn't even run some apps, which is a clear sign that it's not optimised. It's obvious that M1 is a lot faster, but all the theatrics and data in this video doesn't make up for the fact that this is not a good comparison.

judge2020 6y ago

Differences between them start at 4:20 https://youtu.be/OhESSZIXvCA?t=261 https://youtu.be/OhESSZIXvCA?t=261

trynumber9 6y ago

They're not using their custom cores anymore. See the ARM X1/A78/A55 arrangement used in the Exynos 2100. They licensed AMD graphics IP to use that as a differentiating feature.

dannyw 6y ago
They still use substantially less cache than Qualcomm.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- scoopertrooper 6y ago
  Maybe so, but in cache is one part of the overall story. If you look at benchmarks run on phones with both types of processor, Qualcomm is ahead, but the 2100 is nipping at their heels.

nxc18 6y ago

Even more damming, the future Surface pro X, with updated Qualcomm chip, will still be slower than windows in a VM on M1 Mac. https://www.windowscentral.com/leaked-snapdragon-processor-could-bring-big-boost-surface-pro-x https://www.windowscentral.com/leaked-snapdragon-processor-c...

cageface 6y ago

The latest Exynos chips are pretty competitive with Qualcomm. Samsung has closed the gap considerably in this generation and even outperforms Qualcomm in some respects. https://www.gsmarena.com/exynos_2100_vs_snapdragon_888_benchmarking_the_samsung_galaxy_s21_ultra_performance-news-47611.php https://www.gsmarena.com/exynos_2100_vs_snapdragon_888_bench... In the long run having their own fabs is going to give them the upper hand in this battle I suspect.

underwater 6y ago

They're comparing a dev-channel Windows feature to a stable MacOS feature. And they compare an emulated Chrome benchmark against a native version of Chrome. The Windows feature doesn't even run some apps, which is a clear sign that it's not optimised. It's obvious that M1 is a lot faster, but all the theatrics and data in this video doesn't make up for the fact that this is not a good comparison.