inquisitiveme

Do any phones have the Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 yet?

Do any phones have the Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 yet? Even if they're just announced with it. I don't think there's anything official yet -- is there?

Most Useful Answer matt101101  May. 2, 2013 at 21:16

Nope, nothing yet. Honestly, there's no software which will take advantage of such a chip yet either, so I wouldn't get too excited about it.

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

Add a comment
23 comments

matt101101 / MOD  May. 2, 2013 at 21:16

Nope, nothing yet. Honestly, there's no software which will take advantage of such a chip yet either, so I wouldn't get too excited about it.

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

fuzzball55  May. 3, 2013 at 00:53

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

Octa-Core which only uses 4 cores at a time. Is that really Octa-Core? That is like a V8 that can only use 4 cyclinders at a time. It is only incrementally better at a cost of power consumption. Instead, just over-clock the Snapdragon 600 to 2 GHz.

matt101101 / MOD  May. 3, 2013 at 12:28

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

Octa-Core which only uses 4 cores at a time. Is that really Octa-Core? That is like a V8 that can only use 4 cyclinders at a time. It is only incrementally better at a cost of power consumption. Instead, just over-clock the Snapdragon 600 to 2 GHz.

I understand how it works, but even using only 4 cores it still gets better benchmark results than the S4 with the Snapdragon chip. On that basis, you could OC the Exynos too, Exynos chips usually OC quite well, the S2 could reach 1.6ghz and the Note 2 can reach 1.92ghz, for example.

Jason5267  May. 4, 2013 at 01:31

if you want the best wait till snapdragon 800 phones and tegra 4 phones come , snapdragon 600 is qualcoms mid range cpu the 800 is guaranteed to be more than 25% faster and then you can overclock that. but realisticly from tegra 3 up is ore than enough.

matt101101 / MOD  May. 4, 2013 at 16:23

if you want the best wait till snapdragon 800 phones and tegra 4 phones come , snapdragon 600 is qualcoms mid range cpu the 800 is guaranteed to be more than 25% faster and then you can overclock that. but realisticly from tegra 3 up is ore than enough.
The "wait for X" argument is a bit silly, you could forever say wait for the next jump in technology, but technology is always outdoing itself. I'd agree with you if Snapdragon 800 devices had been announced for launch in the near future, but they haven't, no device has yet been confirmed to be using the 800 chip.

What I do agree with you about is that anything Tegra 3 or better is enough power for anything smartphones are currently asked to do. The Snapdragon 600 and Exynos Octa-core are both totally needless overkill. Hell, there's not a lot an overclocked Galaxy S2 can't do just as well as a flagship 2013 smartphone.

Jason5267  May. 4, 2013 at 20:17

True about waiting , companies should be focusing on battery life and durability of devices not making them capable of powering screens with more than double the ppi than what we can see wich is only 300ppi , a 720p s4 pro is what I would go for because its cheap fast and good has batterylife the only positive about fast cpu's are that you can underclock the quad cores to 300mhz without getting any lag and have amazing battery life , my optimus 3D can run everything smoothly even at 600mhz , from games to hd video since they use the gpu mainly

fuzzball55  May. 8, 2013 at 04:32

To answer this poor guy's question...no phones out yet, but there is a rumor of the LG LS980 http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/07/sprint-ls980-snapdragon-800/

matt101101 / MOD  May. 8, 2013 at 12:07

To answer this poor guy's question...no phones out yet, but there is a rumor of the LG LS980 http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/07/sprint-ls980-snapdragon-800/
I did; first post (which was correct when I wrote it).

The article you've linked to was only created yesterday, I couldn't exactly foresee that 6 days ago, could I?

JC702  May. 15, 2013 at 21:14

No phones currently offer it, but should you wait for one that does offer it? Depends on your carrier if you are in the US. If you have Sprint, I would wait for a Snapdragon 800 device that should be able to utilize all of their upcoming bands for LTE. Currently, Sprint's flagship phones only support LTE in the 1900mhz frequency, not the coming 800mhz range or Clears 2600mhz range. The 800mhz range will offer better in building penetration, and the 2600mhz range should offer faster data speeds. Although the HTC One is tempting, I think i personally will hold out. As for other carries, I don't know if this impacts them in the slightest.

oldjackbob  May. 19, 2013 at 04:59

I'm envisioning a phone that would replace my home and work PCs. It would become my PC in my pocket. When I go to work I'd plug my phone into a docking station and use it as my workstation (all my work-related stuff is on company servers), and when I come home in the evening I'd plug my phone into a docking station there and use it as my home PC (all my home-related stuff would be on a local docking station USB drive). My phone would become my go-everywhere do-everything machine.

It will take a high-powered phone to run MS Word or a spreadsheet with lots of macros on a high-res monitor tied to a docking station. That's why I want a super-smartphone. Ideally, I could get rid of all of my PCs.

Hey, a guy can dream, no?

yiweitech  May. 19, 2013 at 16:04

I'd like to see this as well, that would be truly revolutionary, probably give it 20-30 years and it might become a reality.

Terrorsoul  May. 19, 2013 at 16:56

I'm envisioning a phone that would replace my home and work PCs. It would become my PC in my pocket. When I go to work I'd plug my phone into a docking station and use it as my workstation (all my work-related stuff is on company servers), and when I come home in the evening I'd plug my phone into a docking station there and use it as my home PC (all my home-related stuff would be on a local docking station USB drive). My phone would become my go-everywhere do-everything machine.

It will take a high-powered phone to run MS Word or a spreadsheet with lots of macros on a high-res monitor tied to a docking station. That's why I want a super-smartphone. Ideally, I could get rid of all of my PCs.

Hey, a guy can dream, no?


You realise this is technically already being done with Ubuntu Touch for Android, Connect phone to monitor and you have Ubuntu Desktop that can run pretty much all Linux software, disconnect the phone and your back to your normal smartphone!

yiweitech  May. 19, 2013 at 22:22

You realise this is technically already being done with Ubuntu Touch for Android, Connect phone to monitor and you have Ubuntu Desktop that can run pretty much all Linux software, disconnect the phone and your back to your normal smartphone!

Ubuntu is not mainstream enough to be a daily driver, it is (IMO) too similar to OS X (and not by accident since Apple ripped the Linux kernels). There's not too many people developing software for it and it isn't being sourced to OEMs like Windows and OS X are. Ubuntu touch definitely has promise (first hand experience), but it's either going to succeed against the competition (Android (my fav.), iOS (unfortunate that's in there), Win phone 8 (it's going to tank soon), and BB10 (we'll see how it goes)) or it's going to tank (which doesn't matter much for the devs since they're open source and community supported, so not much money lost). Besides, Ubuntu runs CM10 so it's really actually Android...I'd like to see it progress but I still prefer Android.

samizad  Jun. 25, 2013 at 14:09

The Sony Xperia Z Ultra just got announced today with a Snapdragon 800 CPU, although, it is more of a large phablet than a phone.

amirbahalegharn  Jul. 17, 2013 at 05:58

I think we should wait for "xiaomi mi3" , the best budget/performance smartphone of the year

Furu3  Aug. 17, 2013 at 10:10

Samsung Galaxy Note 3 comes with Snapdragon 800

fuzzball55  Aug. 19, 2013 at 01:04

mtautkus  Aug. 25, 2013 at 10:06

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

Octa-Core which only uses 4 cores at a time. Is that really Octa-Core? That is like a V8 that can only use 4 cyclinders at a time. It is only incrementally better at a cost of power consumption. Instead, just over-clock the Snapdragon 600 to 2 GHz.

I understand how it works, but even using only 4 cores it still gets better benchmark results than the S4 with the Snapdragon chip. On that basis, you could OC the Exynos too, Exynos chips usually OC quite well, the S2 could reach 1.6ghz and the Note 2 can reach 1.92ghz, for example.


"for example"? the two examples you just used both have snapdragon processors not exynos..

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 25, 2013 at 12:52

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

Octa-Core which only uses 4 cores at a time. Is that really Octa-Core? That is like a V8 that can only use 4 cyclinders at a time. It is only incrementally better at a cost of power consumption. Instead, just over-clock the Snapdragon 600 to 2 GHz.

I understand how it works, but even using only 4 cores it still gets better benchmark results than the S4 with the Snapdragon chip. On that basis, you could OC the Exynos too, Exynos chips usually OC quite well, the S2 could reach 1.6ghz and the Note 2 can reach 1.92ghz, for example.


"for example"? the two examples you just used both have snapdragon processors not exynos..

Err, not here in the UK they don't. The real, as Samsung intended it, S2 (GT-i9100) has an Exynos chip as does the real, as Samsung intended it, Note 2 (N7100). International variants (read: US variants which the carriers have made Samsung fiddle with) may have used Snapdragon chips, but the original (*cough* best *cough*) models used Samsung's own Exynos SoCs.

fuzzball55  Aug. 26, 2013 at 08:18

If you're in the market for a stupidly powerful phone, the Octa-Core S4 is the best you can currently buy (or should that be import...).

Octa-Core which only uses 4 cores at a time. Is that really Octa-Core? That is like a V8 that can only use 4 cyclinders at a time. It is only incrementally better at a cost of power consumption. Instead, just over-clock the Snapdragon 600 to 2 GHz.

I understand how it works, but even using only 4 cores it still gets better benchmark results than the S4 with the Snapdragon chip. On that basis, you could OC the Exynos too, Exynos chips usually OC quite well, the S2 could reach 1.6ghz and the Note 2 can reach 1.92ghz, for example.


"for example"? the two examples you just used both have snapdragon processors not exynos..

Err, not here in the UK they don't. The real, as Samsung intended it, S2 (GT-i9100) has an Exynos chip as does the real, as Samsung intended it, Note 2 (N7100). International variants (read: US variants which the carriers have made Samsung fiddle with) may have used Snapdragon chips, but the original (*cough* best *cough*) models used Samsung's own Exynos SoCs.


So if the Exynos 5 is so great then why is Samsung putting Snapdragon 800 in its flagship Galaxy S4 in its native Korea market?

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-officially-announces-Samsung-Galaxy-S4-with-Snapdragon-800-and-LTE-A-connectivity_id44512

The reason is that only Snapdragon 800 can do LTE-Advance on a single chip. That is 150Mbps to your phone!

Check the benchmarks (includes Exynos comparisons):
http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/18/qualcomm-snapdragon-800-mdp-benchmarks/

The reason is when you want a well balanced CPU, GPU, and LTE radio, Snapdragon 800 will beat them all this year. Next year we will see where we are at. But this year is the year of Snapdragon.

From my understanding, the reason Samsung used non-Snapdragons in UK in 2012 is because they though that 4G LTE was not built out enough to be a market differentiator so they used their own radio and CPU/GPU. In the US where 4G LTE coverage is very good, it is a major factor in phone sales. We keep our 4G radios on in the US and expect battery life to be comparable to 3G and only Snapdragon can do that at this point.

Compare UK 4G coverage versus US 4G.
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/features/broadband/3424488/4g-lte-network-rollout-in-uk/
https://explore.ee.co.uk/coverage-checker
http://www.verizonwireless.com/wcms/consumer/4g-lte.html
http://www.att.com/network/

The major reason that Qualcomm Snapdragon is used in the US is because we have multiple wireless standards in the US and good 4G LTE coverage. Only Snapdragon can cover all the different variations.

4G LTE is a big factor in the US market. I know that you guys in UK are just discovering 4G LTE technology, but don't slam the US for demanding LTE wireless technology and insinuate that our wireless providers make Samsung "fiddle" with the phones for the US market. It is the US consumers who demand the cutting edge. That is why the Exynos 5 would be disappointing in the US. It would be a fast processor with an LTE radio that would drain battery life quickly because it is not built into the CPU/GPU. The carriers are building out 84Mbps as well as LTE-Advance for 150Mbps. Next year will be a build out of LTE-A so it will be a major factor for high-end phones next year. And since LTE-A uses multiple radios at once, so it is even a bigger issue to build the radio in with the CPU/GPU.

There is still time for Exynos 5 to add LTE-A, next year, but they better put it on the same chip as the CPU/GPU otherwise it will not be power efficient. But it will probably be good enough for some markets next year as they are able to ramp up production.

The problem is by next year Snapdragon will be moving to a more power efficient manufacturing process, so it will still have an edge in battery life.

Here my thinking...

It seems to me that an octa-core chip is more complex than a quad-core chip and thus more difficult to build. The Snapdragon 800 is as powerful as the ARM Cortex A15 octa-core, but in a quad-core design instead. ARM Cortex A15 is what is inside of the Exynos 5. Since Snapdragon 800 is a quad-core, it will be easier to manufacture which means that Snapdragon can be made at higher yields than any octa-core chip. It would be better to move to a smaller manufacturing process than making a chip that is more complicated. That is because the smaller a chip's manufacturing process, the more power efficient it can be. Also, you can crank the speed at which it operates (Snapdragon tops out at 2.3GHz whereas Exynos 5 tops out at 1.8GHz). Thus Qualcomm is betting that the public wants the power of a Cortex A15 chip, but with the power efficiency of a quad-core, with the fastest radio that technology has to offer. Because these are wireless devices after all. Unless all you do is play games, you will want to have a well balanced system which is what Snapdragon targets. The fact that it tops some of the benchmarks is a testament to how power efficient it is.

And since it looks like the UK's EE network will be pushing for LTE-A even ahead of the US this year, I'm guessing you will see more Snapdragon.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2354694/Superfast-4G-broadband-DOUBLE-web-speeds-hit-12-UK-cities-including-London-Glasgow-tomorrow.html

Cheers.

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 26, 2013 at 12:38

Delightful rant; not particularly relevant for the most part, though.

I never mentioned the Exynos 5 or the Snapdragon 800, mainly on the basis that the two phones we're speaking about, namely the S2 and Note 2, don't use either of the chips you've spoken about. Hell, the S2 was one of the original breed of dual-core phones, the Exynos 5 and Snapdragon 800 were still the reserve of research and development labs, I would imagine.

For the two phones we're actually talking about, the Exynos chip version is better than the equivalent Snapdragon chip version. I never suggested the same was true for every phone, or every Snapdragon vs Exynos argument.

Side note: consumers don't care about 4G here in the UK, we can get truly unlimited, uncapped DC-HSPA with tethering for £15 per month (sub-£10 if you include cashback) from Three. 4G is an absolute rip off here, nobody I know uses it or has any intention of using it (well, until Three give it away for free, that is).

UAE  Aug. 26, 2013 at 13:56

MT6592 is a real octa core. Exynos 5 got a 4+4 quad core structure.

UAE  Aug. 26, 2013 at 13:58

Maybe Xperia Z ultra is the first qualcomm smartphone. and much more will presents on IFA berlin.

Email:

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

Comment: