4 ms·

Considering the absurd levels of heat generation from Qualcomm chips of late, that page is not encouraging. Packing unnecessary features into their chips is wh

Considering the absurd levels of heat generation from Qualcomm chips of late, that page is not encouraging. Packing unnecessary features into their chips is why my Snapdragon 888 phone with a 4500mAh battery gets the same screen-on time as my Snapdragon 845 phone with a 3300mAh battery.

kimixa 5y ago
Depends on how well integrated and power gated those "Unnecessary" features are - it may be of functionally zero cost when running the "same" use case, while allowing significant improvements in newly-accelerated use cases. If it's loosely integrated (e.g. doesn't need super high bus access) it's not even as if it'll affect stuff like the clock tree or bus complexity much either.
sliken 5y ago
Same screen size? Same screen brightness? Same screen resolution? I'd be surprised if the new CPU would take that much power, especially since for most use cases the CPU is mostly idle.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- causality0 5y ago
  The SD845 phone has a larger screen. Galaxy S21+ and Oneplus 6. Notebookcheck's wi-fi browsing battery runtime tests set the brightness at 150 nits. Oneplus 6 gets 12hr42min, S21+ gets 10hr51min. At minimum brightness they get 30:06 and 29:40, respectively. All this despite the fact the Oneplus 6 has a 3300mAh battery and a 115.4cm^2 screen and the S21+ has a 4800mAh battery and a 108.4cm^2 screen. It's pathetic.
  - sliken 5y ago
    I wonder how much of that is Samsung's OS+Software. I had the top of the line Samsung Note (forget which generation). Felt slow, laggy, unpleasant to use, and even the home button had a very noticeable lag to it. Was a pain to root, had to jump through a few hoops, but did manage to get Cyanogen on there. The result felt WAY better, snappy, better scrolling, much less aggressive at killing apps, faster app switching, minimal lag for the home button, and generally just a pleasure to use. I mentioned this in various forums and the theory was that Samsung was optimizing for benchmarks instead of multitasking. Even things like switching apps to use maps or contacts during a call would cause whatever app you were using to be killed. I returned the Samsung Note to stock before selling it, and checked, and sure enough it felt sluggish and even with just 2-3 apps going when I switched I'd get a splash screen as the app relaunched after being killed. I "upgraded" to a pixel, that had less ram and CPU, and it felt WAY better than the stock Samsung Note. I do wonder if your results are related to the Samsung software being optimized for benchmarks (i.e. running the clock high, killing off anything that's not fullscreen currently, etc) instead of interactive use. Generally the OnePlus phones seem to be closer to pure android than Samsung from what I can tell.
    - causality0 5y ago
      The oneplus 9 has a SD888 and a 4500mAh battery. Its websurfing test was 14 hours. Seven percent longer surfing than the OP6 with a 36% larger battery. The SD888 is a bad chip. All evidence points to the 8 gen 1 as also being a bad chip. Qualcomm's only saving grace is that the Exynos 2200 isn't a bad chip; it's an atrocious chip.
      - mrlonglong 5y ago
        The Exynos chip was why I switched to an OnePlus 9 pro rather than go with Samsung for my last mobile upgrade. I felt the Exynos wasn't all that good. Still happy I made the right decision even if I am still waiting for the oxygenOS 12 upgrade:-D

kimixa 5y ago

Depends on how well integrated and power gated those "Unnecessary" features are - it may be of functionally zero cost when running the "same" use case, while allowing significant improvements in newly-accelerated use cases. If it's loosely integrated (e.g. doesn't need super high bus access) it's not even as if it'll affect stuff like the clock tree or bus complexity much either.

sliken 5y ago

Same screen size? Same screen brightness? Same screen resolution? I'd be surprised if the new CPU would take that much power, especially since for most use cases the CPU is mostly idle.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
causality0 5y ago
The SD845 phone has a larger screen. Galaxy S21+ and Oneplus 6. Notebookcheck's wi-fi browsing battery runtime tests set the brightness at 150 nits. Oneplus 6 gets 12hr42min, S21+ gets 10hr51min. At minimum brightness they get 30:06 and 29:40, respectively. All this despite the fact the Oneplus 6 has a 3300mAh battery and a 115.4cm^2 screen and the S21+ has a 4800mAh battery and a 108.4cm^2 screen. It's pathetic.
- sliken 5y ago
  I wonder how much of that is Samsung's OS+Software. I had the top of the line Samsung Note (forget which generation). Felt slow, laggy, unpleasant to use, and even the home button had a very noticeable lag to it. Was a pain to root, had to jump through a few hoops, but did manage to get Cyanogen on there. The result felt WAY better, snappy, better scrolling, much less aggressive at killing apps, faster app switching, minimal lag for the home button, and generally just a pleasure to use. I mentioned this in various forums and the theory was that Samsung was optimizing for benchmarks instead of multitasking. Even things like switching apps to use maps or contacts during a call would cause whatever app you were using to be killed. I returned the Samsung Note to stock before selling it, and checked, and sure enough it felt sluggish and even with just 2-3 apps going when I switched I'd get a splash screen as the app relaunched after being killed. I "upgraded" to a pixel, that had less ram and CPU, and it felt WAY better than the stock Samsung Note. I do wonder if your results are related to the Samsung software being optimized for benchmarks (i.e. running the clock high, killing off anything that's not fullscreen currently, etc) instead of interactive use. Generally the OnePlus phones seem to be closer to pure android than Samsung from what I can tell.
  - causality0 5y ago
    The oneplus 9 has a SD888 and a 4500mAh battery. Its websurfing test was 14 hours. Seven percent longer surfing than the OP6 with a 36% larger battery. The SD888 is a bad chip. All evidence points to the 8 gen 1 as also being a bad chip. Qualcomm's only saving grace is that the Exynos 2200 isn't a bad chip; it's an atrocious chip.
    - mrlonglong 5y ago
      The Exynos chip was why I switched to an OnePlus 9 pro rather than go with Samsung for my last mobile upgrade. I felt the Exynos wasn't all that good. Still happy I made the right decision even if I am still waiting for the oxygenOS 12 upgrade:-D