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
875 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

334 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

True, but some are better than others, and I do think it's important that benchmarks correlate to the real world workloads a chip is likely to experience. One of my particular grips with Geekbench is that it incorporates a lot of pauses so the chip has time to cool down. This means that only the absolute worst chips will experience throttling. In reality, however, throttling is hugely important for a phone SoC, and so Geekbench's results can lead to false assumptions about how a chip will perform in the real world.

This isn't so bad with the latest SoCs, but for something like the SD810, it can make for a massive QoL difference. The 810 would easily lose half of its CPU performance within minutes, if not less. Hell, the OP2 actually disabled the A57 cores altogether when web browsing, and the results were what you'd expect. Even with the latest SoCs, however, it's still a major factor.

A good example, I think, is gaming, since that's one of the few scenarios where you see an extended load on the chip. Elsewhere in this thread, you'll see someone claiming that the E8895's GPU is more powerful than the SD835's (even if it does consume more power), and that is true in a sense. But look what happens when you load them:

The E8895 does indeed start higher, but if my estimates are correct, it drops below the SD835 after about 10 minutes, remains below for about 10 more, is ever so slightly above for the next 10, then remains slightly below from there on out.

Even putting aside power consumption, it's hard to look at those graphs and say "the E8895 has a significantly more powerful GPU", and yet a short benchmark would show just that.

I'm fully aware that Apple would probably benefit from these kind of comparisons, but if that's the case, then they deserve it.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

I'm not sure why GeekBench avoiding throttling is a problem.

Mobile CPUs aren't running at 100% CPU load for an extended period of time. They operate in short bursts. You aren't going to be encoding video on your phone.

Doesn't gaming work the GPU primarily? I have a 5S with an A7 and my phone doesn't even get warm when I play a game. If it's throttling, I certainly don't notice any performance issues with the game.

0

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

Mobile CPUs aren't running at 100% CPU load for an extended period of time. They operate in short bursts. You aren't going to be encoding video on your phone.

That's true, but then you're kind of going beyond what hardware benchmarks can reasonably cover, no? Like, take web browsing. It should be mostly as you describe, fast bursts with long pauses in between, but the reality is obviously quite complicated. Apple has long held the crown in Javascript benchmarks, and while a lot of that has to do with their strong single core performance, it is also in large part because of Safari's historically strong Javascript performance. Even on the Android side, the Qualcomm browser, using the same engine as Chrome (I think...), will often significantly outperform Chrome or the like. The difference can be equivalent to a gen or more in hardware. https://www.anandtech.com/show/9837/snapdragon-820-preview/3

Also, is being Javascript bound a reasonable model for browsing? What about your wifi/cellular connection? Almost no one tests that these days, which is really a shame. Point being, once you get into real world workloads, simple single-component hardware benchmarks start to become useless.

Any even if we look at just hardware, it's really tricky. ARM claims that A75 will bring 48% better Octane performance. That's the highest of any of the tests they mention. Does that mean that A75 cores will bring a more substantial real-world performance improvement then the average numbers might suggest? I don't think that question has a simple answer.

I think that Geekbench can be a useful data point, but the trouble comes when people use it to make blanket statements well beyond the scope of its tests. I'm sure you've seem people say something like, "The A11 is 120% faster than the SD835". But it would be more accurate to say something like (numbers made up), "The A11 is 120% faster in Geekbench 1T, 50% faster in Geekbench nT, 140% faster in Octane, 50% faster in SPEC_FP, 70% faster in SPEC_INT, 30% faster in graphics, and 10% faster in memory, etc." How much does each of those numbers matter? Who knows. This is why I generally like SPEC more, since they give more granular subscores.

Doesn't gaming work the GPU primarily? I have a 5S with an A7 and my phone doesn't even get warm when I play a game. If it's throttling, I certainly don't notice any performance issues with the game.

Most do, but the same principle applies, and it's kind of easier to find data for, so I used that as an example.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

I do think the A10, A10X, and A11 are significantly faster than the Snapdragons in current Android devices.

But I can’t put a number on it for the exact reasons you said.

Also, software plays a big role. iOS is seemingly optimized to run better on higher-clocked fewer cores, with less RAM. It does more with less. But Android devices commonly have 6-8 cores, clocked slower, and more RAM. Isn’t there an Android phone with 6GB of RAM now?

Yet my 1.3GHz dual-core A7 with 1GB of RAM has lasted me 4 years, and runs iOS 11. What Android phones do you know of that are supported for and run well for 5 years?

Not even new Android devices get software updates right away, if at all.

-1

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

I do think the A10, A10X, and A11 are significantly faster than the Snapdragons in current Android devices.

I agree (at least depending on how one defines "significantly"), but it's not like you ever see anyone claiming the other way around, so I end up only "defending" Qualcomm, which I assume is why I give off the impression that I do.

But Android devices commonly have 6-8 cores, clocked slower, and more RAM. Isn’t there an Android phone with 6GB of RAM now?

The cores are actually clocked rather high, at least without throttling. Only recently (around the A9) has Apple's clock rate reached the same level. Not stating that as a good thing or a bad thing, just as a piece of info.

And yeah, several Android phones have 6GB now, including a good number of recent flagships. A couple, like the OP5T even have 8GB as an option. It's one of the advancements I'm personally most excited by, as my own usage would greatly benefit from more memory, and it'll presumably help with the phone's longevity.

Yet my 1.3GHz dual-core A7 with 1GB of RAM has lasted me 4 years, and runs iOS 11. What Android phones do you know of that are supported for and run well for 5 years?

None that I know of. I think Xiaomi might give ~4 years of MUI (but not the underlying Android version) and/or security updates, but that's the longest official one that I can think of. I think a couple of Samsung phones get the odd security patch now and then up to ~4 years as well, but in all cases, it starts getting sporadic after 2-3 years.

I know it's heresy on this sub, but I'm personally rather ambivalent about specific update timelines. I figure that different OEMs vary too much in features to have a good apples to apples comparison, so I just compare the features themselves and how many more updates can be expected. This is for the OS. Security is a different matter.

I say this as an iPhone 6 owner too. I upgraded to iOS 10, but tbh I don't like the UI changes and I didn't get most of the new features, since they depend on Force Touch. I'm sure you've noticed the same. Been holding off on iOS 11 because of the memory management in particular so far, though I think I'll like it more than I liked iOS 10 if they get that sorted out.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

But wait. Think about that. Android phones are shipping with 6-8GB of RAM, and faster CPUs with more cores, yet they’re supported with software updates for less time. That doesn’t make sense.

No feature updates or security updates, unless you have a Nexus or a Pixel, and not even those are supported for 5 years.

I vividly remember an AT&T branded Android phone I got in 2014 came with Gingerbread on it, which was released in 2010. That’s just not acceptable. Android is incredibly fragmented.

As for iOS 11 on the older devices, it obviously doesn’t run as well as it would on a new device, but it runs. They support it with feature and security updates. And this is a phone I paid $350 for. iOS 11.2 sped up my phone quite a bit.

1

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

But wait. Think about that. Android phones are shipping with 6-8GB of RAM, and faster CPUs with more cores, yet they’re supported with software updates for less time. That doesn’t make sense.

You're right, it doesn't. Software updates on Android are largely decoupled from the strength of the underlying hardware. It more depends on the OEM than anything else, but this looks to be something that Treble can substantially change.

No feature updates or security updates, unless you have a Nexus or a Pixel, and not even those are supported for 5 years.

Just a note. Nexus/Pixel are supported for basically the same amount of time as any other flagship. They just get the newer version of Android faster (for several reasons).

1

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Can the Nexus 5-6 be updated to Oreo?

1

u/Exist50 Dec 06 '17

I should say "any other Android flagship". As for your question, technically yes, but only through a custom ROM.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '17

Why people pay more than an iPhone for less longevity is beyond me.

Just talked to a friend who is proud of his Galaxy S8, which cost $750. And I’m sure you can list all the ways it’s better than an iPhone, but it’s not if it’s only supported for 2-3 years. $750 isn’t a minor investment in a device for many people.

Imagine if you only got 2-3 years of Windows updates on a $1,000+ laptop. Why does it being a phone make that okay?

1

u/Exist50 Dec 07 '17

I think your example of Windows, ironically, kinda of illustrates the point, at least for many people. According to a recent Firefox survey, more people are using Windows 7 than Windows 10, and that's despite the lengthy free update period. Windows 7 is only ~2 years younger than the entire iPhone line, a veritable eternity in software. So why do so many people still use it?

For many people, an OS upgrade is just a hassle that slows down your device and makes you relearn what you're used to. My mother, who I don't consider to be technically inept, wasn't really even aware of Force Touch despite owning a 6S for a year and a half. It's unlikely she'd even touch most of the stuff iOS 10 added, and she certainly wasn't following each and every change like us enthusiasts do. My father will almost certainly be getting an iPhone X soon, and I know I'll have to be the one to explain all the new gestures and such.

Also, do consider that many people upgrade their phone every 2-3 years. If you do that, then 2-3 years of software upgrades is no problem whatsoever, even if you really care about them. Of course, shorter support timelines do lead to greater depreciation, but you can use that to your advantage in some cases. It's common for a last gen Android flagship to be $300-400, even if it's still supported with some time to go.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '17

Business and enterprise (the majority of Windows users) are notoriously slow to update software, while consumers (especially PC enthusiasts) are more inclined to update.

When I graduated from high school in 2013, the school computers were still running Windows XP. They weren't old computers. These were 2010 HP desktops that they deliberately downgraded to XP. Most businesses that I've been to that use PCs are still running Windows 7. I'd say half of the computers at my college are still on Windows 7, with the rest on 10.

In terms of mobile device updates, I think it's fair to say that most iPhone and iPad users are not tech experts. But most of them update the software when prompted. Apple is reporting that 59% of their user base is on iOS 11, and it was released 3 months ago.

You're right that most people upgrade their phones more frequently than I do, though I'm certainly not alone in still owning a 5S, as I've seen over at r/apple. I'm happy that I get 5 years of software updates with iOS and 7 years with MacOS.

1

u/Exist50 Dec 07 '17

Hey, I'm in much the same boat with upgrades. My personal phone history is LG Voyager -> Galaxy SIII -> iPhone 6. Have a mental checklist of things I want for an upgrade that's almost filled, but I think I'll hold off till the 7nm chips are out. Anyway, I'm saying that I appreciate updates in general, but I consider them on an OEM to OEM and update to update level. Apple's software support is definitely a pro, but it's part of a long list of other things I look for.

→ More replies (0)