Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Android Hardware

Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 Benchmarks Show An Incredible GPU, Faster CPU (hothardware.com) 52

MojoKid writes: Though the company has been evangelizing its new Snapdragon 845 Mobile Platform for a while now, Qualcomm is lifting the veil today on the new chip's benchmark performance profile. At the heart of the Snapdragon 845 is the new Kyro 385 CPU, which features four high-performance cores operating at 2.8GHz and four efficiency cores that are dialed back to 1.7GHz, all of which should culminate in a claimed 25 percent uplift over the previous generation Snapdragon 835, along with improved power efficiency. In addition, the Snapdragon 845's new Adreno 630 integrated GPU core should deliver a boost in performance over its predecessor as well, with up to a 30 percent increase in graphics throughput, allowing it to become the first mobile platform to enable room-scale VR/AR experiences. Armed with prototype reference devices, members of the press put the Snapdragon 845 through its paces and the chip proved to be anywhere from 15 to 35 percent faster, depending on workloads and benchmarks, with graphics showing especially strong. Next-generation Android smartphones and other devices based on the Snapdragon 845 are expected to be unveiled at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona at the end of this month.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 Benchmarks Show An Incredible GPU, Faster CPU

Comments Filter:
  • Sigh.; (Score:5, Insightful)

    by furiousgeorge ( 30912 ) on Monday February 12, 2018 @08:54PM (#56112427)

    "Incredible GPU" (I'll just leave for a moment this is a chip just to be maybe 'unveiled', while the the latest iOS chip which you can buy for 6 months is already way ahead as usual...)

    Unless they've fired their entire OpenGL/Vulkan driver engineering department and started over, I can't get excited. It'll just be *another* big bag of pain and busted features.

    As God as my witness, I wish somebody would make the investment to give Qualcomm some actual competition, cause they are a nightmare.

    Signed : Mobile Games Graphics Engineer.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Adreno has at least some open source stack, as does Tegra K/X via nouveau, vivante via etnaviv. VC4, while anemic has signifcant support as well as general enough purpose to run OCL code on (albeit not securely thanks to the lack of an mmu.. but then GPU code has the potential for just as much risk.

      Honestly the worst is still Imagination Technologies or whoever has inherited their PowerVR GPU architecture, followed by ARM with their cut rate Mali drivers.

      Seriously, these assholes just need to openly documen

    • Lies.

      Finally we will crush the lamers who just use ARM IP unmodified with our brilliant and revolutionary Kryo core, the crown jewel of Qualcomm which we've spent a fortune optimising.

      Wait, actually we're going take ARM A73 cores, hack them around and just call it Kryo [wikipedia.org] and just pull in a cheap ARM GPU hard macro unmodified. Actually we've pretty much given up on doing microarchitecture design and are gradually turning into a company that just takes hard macros from ARM and puts them on chips. Oh dear.

      Yours

    • "Incredible GPU" (I'll just leave for a moment this is a chip just to be maybe 'unveiled', while the the latest iOS chip which you can buy for 6 months is already way ahead as usual...)

      Unless they've fired their entire OpenGL/Vulkan driver engineering department and started over, I can't get excited. It'll just be *another* big bag of pain and busted features.

      As God as my witness, I wish somebody would make the investment to give Qualcomm some actual competition, cause they are a nightmare.

      Signed : Mobile Games Graphics Engineer.

      I mean it could come from Apple but they're too busy walling off their garden. Full marks though, after years of marketing bluster that didn't really stack up, Apple seem to have created a monster CPU. It's just a shame it's trapped only in their devices.

  • Is it stupid of me to wonder why Intel/AMD don't do the whole "two fast cores, and lots more slower cores" bit?

    • Three reasons. The first is that Intel has control over their process, which currently gives them a big advantage in the analogue electronics side of chip design. ARM cores have to be synthesisable on any process and even Qualcomm likes to have a couple of options for fabs so that they can negotiate a good rate. This means that Intel can do clock and power gating at a much finer granularity than anyone else.

      The second is that the workloads where big.LITTLE makes sense are fairly limited. If you're buyi

  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Monday February 12, 2018 @10:11PM (#56112819)
    >> random chip company releases numbers to buttress its marketing claims

    Nice, er, incremental improvement. Now, if you don't mind, I have a nap to take...ZZZzzz
    • The bigger issue is real devices won’t see as much gain because the prototype devices used to benchmark are likely to have a much larger thermal headroom than the average/tablet using this CPU.

  • by Humbubba ( 2443838 ) on Monday February 12, 2018 @11:52PM (#56113169)
    Quote from GizmoChina:

    So how does Qualcomm's new chip perform against those in the market currently? Long story short, it is not the king... It was ran through benchmarking apps Geekbench and AnTuTu and then pitted against other phones and chipsets. The test device was compared to the Huawei Mate 10 Pro with its Kirin 970 SoC, the OnePlus 5T with Snapdragon 835, the Exynos 8895 toting Galaxy Note8, and the Apple A11 Bionic iPhone X...

    Qualcomm's new chip beats all but one - the Apple A11 Bionic. Apple's chipset not only trumps it but does so with at least 2000 points in both the single-core and multi-core tests. Qualcomm's joy as the king of Android chipsets will actually be short-lived as the Exynos 9810 is said to be ahead in performance too.https://www.gizmochina.com/2018/02/12/snapdragon-845-battles-snapdragon-835-exynos-8895-kirin-970-apple-a11-bionic/ [gizmochina.com]

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I'm starting to think that Geekbench scores for the iPhone are bullshit. The A11 Bionic has 2 high performance cores, but somehow out performs chips with 4 high performance cores. Yet iPhones don't appear to be any faster than Android phones, and in fact they are often quite a bit slower in real world use due to having only 2GB of RAM.

      Even if Apple has somehow managed to get >2x the performance per core, Geekbench seems to have little relation to real performance.

      • AmiMoJo said

        I'm starting to think that Geekbench scores for the iPhone are bullshit. The A11 Bionic has 2 high performance cores, but somehow out performs chips with 4 high performance cores. Yet iPhones don't appear to be any faster than Android phones, and in fact they are often quite a bit slower in real world use due to having only 2GB of RAM.

        Many have criticized the Geekbench processor benchmarks, unbelievably, even Linus Torvalds. But he relented with version 4.0, saying it looks much better. Version 4.2's GPU test fixes put it in line with OpenCL and CUDA results. I don't see any problem.

        I've not tried either the SD845 nor the A11 Bionic processors. If you have, you're a better geek than me, which isn't saying very much. I'm sure you're right about the 2GB bottleneck. As I look over their different specs, there are two other th

      • The iPhone X and 8 Plus have 3GB of RAM, only the iPhone 8 has 2GB.

        iPhone apps are rarely RAM limited, and indeed, when you watch those speed tests on YouTube where they open a whole bunch of apps to see how fast each phone can process things, iPhones win will considerable regularity. The iPhone 7 was winning those tests right up until the iPhone 8 was released.

        iPhone single core performance has always been better than the multi-core, because most day-to-day tasks on phones don't parallelize well, outside o

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          The main issue with having little RAM is that you end up waiting as apps reload after being forced out. Even within apps such as the web browser some parts might get swapped out, e.g. background tabs.

          The next biggest influence on phone performance is flash memory speed. Samsung is king, but other phones are quite good too. iPhones are competitive.

          • Until recently (that is, the iPhone 8, 8 plus and X), iOS tended to be *better* about keeping apps in memory. If you watch any speedtest involving the iPhone 7, it decidedly trounced any other handset, even with only 2GB of RAM. (Web tabs have always been reloaded, which is good or bad depending on your point of view—I usually want the tab reloaded anyway.)

            Anyway, it's still *very* close between the iPhone 8 plus and the Note 8, for instance. Despite having twice as much RAM, the Note 8 only barely be

            • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              I dunno, the X seems noticeably slower than the Pixel 2 in many regards. Especially where RAM really helps like keeping the camera app in memory all the time for speedy access.

  • I think snapdragon 845 will take over the big games. Affordable Salon management software [easysalonsoft.com]
  • Damn, and I should bought an 1080Ti - I better chuck that in the bin now and wait for my new phone.

System restarting, wait...

Working...