3 ms·

Nice. Should probably include the year in the title (2019?) but it's interesting to me because even the latest 2024 XR2+ Gen2 is based on the Snapdragon 865 wi

Nice. Should probably include the year in the title (2019?) but it's interesting to me because even the latest 2024 XR2+ Gen2 is based on the Snapdragon 865 with almost the same iGPU which may mean there is a technical benefit (vs just extra cost) from not using the newer 888s

helf 2y ago
The year is... He posted it yesterday lol.
crest 2y ago
Did you read the date of publication of the article benchmarks or did you just blindly assume the author published them on the day the embargo on publishing benchmarks for the chip fell?
TehCorwiz 2y ago
I'm not disputing your suggested date, but I can't find it anywhere in the article. Can you explain where you got it?
- adrian_b 2y ago
  The article is new, only the tested CPU+GPU is from 2019. Snapdragon 855 was indeed the chipset used in most flagship Android smartphones of 2019. I have one in my ASUS ZenFone. Based on the big ARM cores that are included, it is easy to determine the manufacturing year of a flagship smartphone. The cheaper smartphones can continue to use older cores. Arm announces a core one year before it becomes used in smartphones. Cortex-A72 => 2016 Cortex-A73 => 2017 Cortex-A75 => 2018 Cortex-A76 => 2019 (like in the tested Snapdragon 855) Cortex-A77 => 2020 Cortex-X1 => 2021 Cortex-X2 => 2022 Cortex-X3 => 2023 Cortex-X4 => 2024
  - jamesy0ung 2y ago
    I didn't realise the cores in the Pi 5 were 4 years old already. Surely if some vendor like qualcomm or mediatek released a sbc with decent software and recent cores, they could sweep the floor.
    - nsteel 2y ago
      They are 16nm, so yeh, "old". Newer tech means a newer node and considerably more expensive. At which point, why are you buying an SBC over some small intel/amd thing?
  - TehCorwiz 2y ago
    Ok. Cool, but the title makes it clear which one it's talking about. Usually when a date is added to the title it's in order to clarify when the article was published, not necessarily when the object of the article began to exist.

helf 2y ago

The year is... He posted it yesterday lol.

crest 2y ago

Did you read the date of publication of the article benchmarks or did you just blindly assume the author published them on the day the embargo on publishing benchmarks for the chip fell?

TehCorwiz 2y ago

I'm not disputing your suggested date, but I can't find it anywhere in the article. Can you explain where you got it?

adrian_b 2y ago
The article is new, only the tested CPU+GPU is from 2019. Snapdragon 855 was indeed the chipset used in most flagship Android smartphones of 2019. I have one in my ASUS ZenFone. Based on the big ARM cores that are included, it is easy to determine the manufacturing year of a flagship smartphone. The cheaper smartphones can continue to use older cores. Arm announces a core one year before it becomes used in smartphones. Cortex-A72 => 2016 Cortex-A73 => 2017 Cortex-A75 => 2018 Cortex-A76 => 2019 (like in the tested Snapdragon 855) Cortex-A77 => 2020 Cortex-X1 => 2021 Cortex-X2 => 2022 Cortex-X3 => 2023 Cortex-X4 => 2024
- jamesy0ung 2y ago
  I didn't realise the cores in the Pi 5 were 4 years old already. Surely if some vendor like qualcomm or mediatek released a sbc with decent software and recent cores, they could sweep the floor.
  - nsteel 2y ago
    They are 16nm, so yeh, "old". Newer tech means a newer node and considerably more expensive. At which point, why are you buying an SBC over some small intel/amd thing?
- TehCorwiz 2y ago
  Ok. Cool, but the title makes it clear which one it's talking about. Usually when a date is added to the title it's in order to clarify when the article was published, not necessarily when the object of the article began to exist.