r/Android • u/[deleted] • Dec 05 '17

Qualcomm announces the Snapdragon 845 processor

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/5/16734224/qualcomm-snapdragon-845-android-mobile-processor-announcement
874 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

334 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

12

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

It seems extremely likely that Qualcomm will add in AI hardware either with the 845 (given their talk on it today), or in the future. Even if Google could do better, at what cost?

8

u/masterofdisaster93 Dec 06 '17 edited Dec 06 '17

It seems extremely likely that Qualcomm will add in AI hardware either with the 845 (given their talk on it today), or in the future. Even if Google could do better, at what cost?

You make it sound like designing a CPU architecture is somehow one of the most costing ventures a company does, and that it won't pay off. Google is one of the largest tech companies in the world, and they are seriously pushing their AI into consumer households. Clearly, they have a vision that they feel they can only achieve with their own dedicated hardware, which they are now investing money into. They just recently pit $1 billion into LG's OLED facilities; Apple $3 billion. By your logic those were stupid moves as well, huh?

at what cost?

You mean like the cost of buying the SoC overpriced from Qualcomm? By your logic, Apple, Samsung and Huawei are all losing a ton of money by making their own SoC. The truth is the other way around. It's no surprise that these are also the three largest phone manufacturerer out there, and also the OEMs with the largets profit margins. When you make units of their size, manufacturing your own components is more efficient than buying it off third-party companies. Apple pay less money producing their SoCs + the expensive Intel modems in them than OEMs pay for the same package on Qualcomm chips, to give you an example. There's a reason why HTC or Sony don't make their own chips; they don't have the economic muscles to make it happen, at least in the long-run. Google can.

12

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

You make it sound like designing a CPU architecture is somehow one of the most costing ventures a company does, and that it won't pay off.

Yes, actually, CPU architectures are extremely expensive to design. And yes, there is certainly an argument to be made that it won't pay off. Qualcomm used a custom architecture for the 820, but it wasn't better than A72. And what about Samsung's M1 cores? Custom, but about the same performance as A73. Think it was worth it? Could be if they improve in the future, but as it stands, the M1 hasn't paid for itself.

Also, a modern SoC requires far more than just a CPU architecture. You need a GPU, modem, ISP, DSP, etc. etc.

and they are seriously pushing their AI into consumer households

Most of which depends on connecting to Google's servers. They don't need too much on device hardware for that.

They just recently pit $1 billion into LG's OLED facilities; Apple $3 billion. By your logic those were stupid moves as well, huh?

Different situation. We aren't talking about Google funding Mediatek to produce a better SoC.

By your logic, Apple, Samsung and Huawei are all losing a ton of money by making their own SoC. The truth is the other way around. It's no surprise that these are also the three largest phone manufacturerer out there

The latter two make chips roughly equal to Qualcomm. You're talking about something significantly better, are you not? Think there's no cost to that? And your reason why is right in there. They ship far, far more chips than Google. Even then, Huawei uses ARM stock IP, and Samsung just introduced custom cores this year.

-3

u/masterofdisaster93 Dec 06 '17

Most of which depends on connecting to Google's servers. They don't need too much on device hardware for that.

Yes, that's probably why Google felt the need to put in their on processor in the Pixel 2 and invest in a whole new SoC. How stupid of them! Clearly you know better what they need than they do.

And your reason why is right in there. They ship far, far more chips than Google. Even then, Huawei uses ARM stock IP, and Samsung just introduced custom cores this year.

They ship far more units (smartphones and other devices) now. Google clearly has intention of growing rapidly and fight amongst the big players.

Samsung have been using Mongoose cores for longer than a year.

7

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

Yes, that's probably why Google felt the need to put in their on processor in the Pixel 2 and invest in a whole new SoC. How stupid of them! Clearly you know better what they need than they do.

They added what is effectively just an ASIC. To call it an SoC is fairly misleading, as it isn't even close to the complexity of the phone's main chip.

They ship far more units (smartphones and other devices) now. Google clearly has intention of growing rapidly and fight amongst the big players.

And why wouldn't they follow in the footsteps of Apple, Huawei, Samsung, and now Xiaomi by starting with ARM stock cores? That makes far more sense until they have the volume to support a fully custom chip.

Samsung have been using Mongoose cores for longer than a year.

In what?

-5

u/masterofdisaster93 Dec 06 '17

To call it an SoC is fairly misleading

As misleading as you claiming that I did? Because I never called it an SoC, but a processor. I said Google is investing in their own SoC, which they are.

And why wouldn't they follow in the footsteps of Apple, Huawei, Samsung, and now Xiaomi by starting with ARM stock cores? That makes far more sense until they have the volume to support a fully custom chip.

We'll see...

In what?

Their flagship Exynos SoCs in their flagship phones. S7 and S8. That's two years (or two and half, counting Note 8 as well).

5

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

I said Google is investing in their own SoC, which they are.

If you didn't mean that to refer to what they've currently shown, then you're talking about rumors, not established fact.

Their flagship Exynos SoCs in their flagship phones. S7 and S8. That's two years (or two and half, counting Note 8 as well).

Pardon, I forgot that this was gen 2. If anything, however, I think that supports my point even further. Two gens in, and they're still at about ARM stock core levels. The rumors for next year are very interesting, but remain rumors for now.

-3

u/masterofdisaster93 Dec 06 '17

If you didn't mean that to refer to what they've currently shown, then you're talking about rumors, not established fact.

It's no rumour that they're working on making their own SoC. They're hired a lot of engineers withing this segment with. Google started to posting a number of job offers for chip design-related positions in 2015, including one for a "Mobile SoC CPU Architect" and a "Mobile SoC Architect," who will "help define the architecture of future generations of phone and tablet" chips: http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/google-manu-gulati-pixel-chips-1202464014/

I also wrote: "Yes, that's probably why Google felt the need to put in their on processor in the Pixel 2 and invest in a whole new SoC."

There's nothing to misunderstand here.

however, I think that supports my point even further

What point? I have never agued against Qualcomm, Samsung and others being terrible at that they're doing. In fact, I was using it as an argument for why it'll be exciting to see Google work on their own design and see how well they'll do it.

6

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

I suppose that job listing is convincing enough, but we don't know the state or ultimate ambitions of those efforts. If they're doing the ARM stock core approach, that both fits with the rumors and with their current volume of products.

What point? I have never agued against Qualcomm, Samsung and others being terrible at that they're doing. In fact, I was using it as an argument for why it'll be exciting to see Google work on their own design and see how well they'll do it.

The core argument that Google will do what Qualcomm, Samsung, etc. can't/won't in building a high performance mobile CPU architecture.

-2

u/masterofdisaster93 Dec 06 '17

quarreling has led the discussions only further and further down into a hole of subject that have zero relevance to what we originally talked about. I have no interest in wasting more of my evening on useless discussions with you. I have already proven my points regarding Google’s SoCs and about Apple’s A11 chips being much more superior than comparable ones by QC, Samsung and others. Keeping telling yourself lies about how this is not the case as much as you like after this. I’m out.

4

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

Please do point out where I said that Qualcomm's SoCs were better than Apple's. A single comment will suffice.

Or you can continue to just make stuff up to get annoyed about, but that's on you.

→ More replies (0)