tinterpol

What makes a Mediatek chipset less desirable?

What is it about Mediatek that makes their chipsets less desirable even though they have quad-core and octa-core. Are they cheaply made? Less power efficient? I think they're mostly on Chinese phones?

Most Useful Answer CTPAHHIK  Sep. 5, 2014 at 13:22

Good overview of cheaper SoC

First 2 pages - the rest is technical.

Add a comment
7 comments

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 4, 2014 at 20:51

Geek territory...with a dash of troll potential. I like it :p So I pinned this to the homepage.

I have no answer for you. But: interestingly some 'experts' reckon in real life usage dual-core devices actually out-perform quad-core + models... in a way...
Both Testdroid and OpenSignal found huge numbers of variations in screens. “The smaller the screen resolution the device contains, the more likely it fails with apps or games,” noted Testdroid. It also found that dual-core devices were more stable than quad-core - even though the latter are often touted for the extra speed they might deliver.

CTPAHHIK  Sep. 5, 2014 at 08:49

There are a number of reasons:
- Mediatek is slow. Think of Qualcomm as Intel and MediaTek is AMD. Everyone wants a laptop with Intel CPU as they are vastly superior to AMD. In mobile device everything is integrated you have CPU and GPU together. With Mediatek you have slow CPU and GPU.
- Driver support - Mediatek = none. Qualcomm is quick to fix any issues and provide updates. Mediatek is slow. Qualcomm supports older hardware much longer, Mediatek simply moves on
- Developer base - When everyone has Qualcomm developers will optimized for Qualcomm first, Exynos second and Mediatek whenever.

Anyone looking for premium phone wants to have premium support. None of current Chinese phones have it.

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 5, 2014 at 09:03

There are a number of reasons:
- Mediatek is slow. Think of Qualcomm as Intel and MediaTek is AMD. Everyone wants a laptop with Intel CPU as they are vastly superior to AMD. In mobile device everything is integrated you have CPU and GPU together. With Mediatek you have slow CPU and GPU.
- Driver support - Mediatek = none. Qualcomm is quick to fix any issues and provide updates. Mediatek is slow. Qualcomm supports older hardware much longer, Mediatek simply moves on
- Developer base - When everyone has Qualcomm developers will optimized for Qualcomm first, Exynos second and Mediatek whenever.

Anyone looking for premium phone wants to have premium support. None of current Chinese phones have it.


Fair enough - but lets not distract from the fact that Qualcom has as little input as Mediatek on the people who are REALLY the gatekeepers to that great support: the OEMs and Networks.
If your fr*gging network can't be ar*ed to update & bring the latest updates and fixes to your branded device, then that is the end of that. Qualcomm can't fix your device bothed by a cr*p ROM.

And PS: come on!!! As IF anyone outside the geek-o-spere knows what "Intel Inside" meant! Or, hey: "Vista Ready"....

CTPAHHIK  Sep. 5, 2014 at 09:49

Good point, since MediakTek phones are not sold by Networks there is no excuse for not having an update.
Another reason not to bother.

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 5, 2014 at 10:53

Good point, since MediakTek phones are not sold by Networks there is no excuse for not having an update.
Another reason not to bother.
I had two Acer phones sim-free with mediatek processors. And Acer could teach the big companies a thing or two about good speedy updates. You ARE generalising. You may be mostly right, but there are exceptions on both sides of the fence, and if you own a lemon it matters f*ck all whose philosophy is to blame.

That's my point. AGAIN: your points are valid. BUT totally irrelevant to 10s of millions who still wait on Gingerbread or whose iPhones got messed up by iOS7.1.x - THIS debate means little to few. Like benchmarks. When the N9 was launched people looked at the hardware specs and said: the thing shouldn't be as fast and smooth as it is! There....

CTPAHHIK  Sep. 5, 2014 at 13:22

Good overview of cheaper SoC

First 2 pages - the rest is technical.

JanSt / MOD  Sep. 5, 2014 at 13:58

Thanks.
Again, to be clear: I'm not saying you're wrong - obviously some Chinese cheapos have poor support, and the processors aren't up to the flim flam hardware promise.

Email:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

Comment: