Upcoming Snapdragon 1000 might have 12 W TDP, take on Intel directly

07 June 2018
Even the Snapdragon 850 has around 6.5 W TDP. For comparison, an Intel Core i5 or i7 U uses 15 W.

Sort by:

  • M
  • Moj
  • a3m
  • 24 Jun 2018

Technican, 24 Jun 2018Entire SOC uses 12 watt. The CPU inside Snapdragon 1000 wil... morewouldn't that mean the same way for intel?
it's 15W would be CPU + GPU.
or is it the other wayround?
and basically intel's GPU is far better than QC!
https://ark.intel.com/products/124968/Intel-Core-i7-8650U-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz
https://ark.intel.com/products/122589/Intel-Core-i7-8550U-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_00-GHz
(check out this links and see TDP and how they can be configured as low as 10W or as high as 28W and the CPU freqs)

    • T
    • Technican
    • 8u8
    • 24 Jun 2018

    @12W,why use ARM?, 08 Jun 2018If the Snapdragon 1000 uses 12W, why use it and not an Inte... moreEntire SOC uses 12 watt. The CPU inside Snapdragon 1000 will 6,5 watt TDP

      • ?
      • Anonymous
      • j5$
      • 24 Jun 2018

      Kangal, 08 Jun 2018Umm... that's what they're doing already. Windows 10 runs n... moreDepends on how you measure it, but, since we're talking about games compiled for the we're talking about streaming sp gflops. In that area the ps3 manages around 200gflops vs about 900gflops for the 5960x.
      The point being that a gpu is a better way to emulate all those spes:)

        Kangal, 08 Jun 2018Umm... that's what they're doing already. Windows 10 runs n... moreWow... incredible explanation. Thanks!

          • ?
          • Anonymous
          • 2SZ
          • 09 Jun 2018

          AnonD-731363, 09 Jun 2018Man technology for US army is 5-20 years far ahead of what ... moreWhere's the source for US Army at present having a chip with under 12 Watt TDP that's 1000 (or even 2) times more powerful than Snapdragon 1000?

            • D
            • AnonD-731363
            • SH3
            • 09 Jun 2018

            Anonymous, 08 Jun 2018Good to know army is capable of breaking the laws of physics.Man technology for US army is 5-20 years far ahead of what civilians can use.
            You have no idea.
            I know a stargate series was just a movie but its a same ghood working example as anything else.

              • ?
              • Anonymous
              • ssY
              • 09 Jun 2018

              Kangal, 08 Jun 2018Umm... that's what they're doing already. Windows 10 runs n... moreAnd still run Android virtual java machine that written with carrpy java.

                • ?
                • Anonymous
                • ut@
                • 08 Jun 2018

                AnonD-731363, 08 Jun 2018Why to release such a weak chip i mean almost no upgrade fr... moreGood to know army is capable of breaking the laws of physics.

                  • D
                  • AnonD-731363
                  • SH3
                  • 08 Jun 2018

                  Why to release such a weak chip i mean almost no upgrade from SD845
                  When they have much more like 1000 times powerfull and far beyound ready and is available for an army.

                    • C
                    • Carol
                    • L7b
                    • 08 Jun 2018

                    Anonymous, 08 Jun 2018Do not need to compare edge to edge performance or benchmar... moreI do not understand this stupidity. Intel does not need to be defeated. On the countrary, the more on market the cheaper for end user, the better technology implementation. I see no reason why would more then 100.000 people be left out of jobs. This mentality here in gsmarena is absolutly brainless and sick at the core.

                      Intel thought that no competitor would ever come along. I like the products (for stability), but they were dead wrong. Both ARM & AMD are eating them alive in the consumer market. Companies will still buy their chips, mainly for reliability, but that can/will change in years to come.

                        • ?
                        • Anonymous
                        • pdH
                        • 08 Jun 2018

                        leledumbo, 08 Jun 2018No, M$ needs to stop emulating and start doing things nativ... moreMS don’t that. Most of its own Windows store programs have arm versions!
                        The other companies Are the problem. They make narise x86 programs and games. But well this is not Gaming machine in anyway.
                        This is fast enough in web surfing and normal MS Office programs that you can find from Windows store allready!

                          • ?
                          • Anonymous
                          • pdH
                          • 08 Jun 2018

                          zodiacfml, 08 Jun 2018...and it will still feel like an Intel Atom due to Windows... moreSo you would like to see more +1000$ chromebooks? Well ques what you can be sure that some flagship chromebooks will have this chip!

                            • K
                            • Kangal
                            • uCX
                            • 08 Jun 2018

                            leledumbo, 08 Jun 2018No, M$ needs to stop emulating and start doing things nativ... moreUmm... that's what they're doing already. Windows 10 runs natively on the ARM/Qualcomm SoC's, it only resorts to software emulation when it comes to running x86-code. And frankly I think the emulation is running very well, because, usually emulation is VERY VERY VERY WASTEFUL. Case in point, it takes something like an Intel 5960X to emulate the PS3 system, about x50 more powerful.

                            The bottleneck isn't so much the hardware, than it is the software. As with even a little tweaking the performance difference/needed can drop from x50 all the way down to x10 differential. On top of this, I'll repost my previous comment as I think it is useful as a reference frame:
                            ARM Quadcores history is important:
                            1.6GHz Cortex A9 Exynos 4412
                            1.5GHz Krait-200 QSD 400/S4 Pro
                            1.7GHz Krait-300 QSD 600
                            2.3GHz Krait-400 QSD 800
                            2.7GHz Krait-450 QSD 805
                            2.1GHz Cortex A57 Exynos 7420
                            2.3GHz Cortex A72 Exynos 8890
                            2.4GHz Cortex A73 QSD 835
                            2.8GHz Cortex A75 QSD 845
                            ....the QSD 850 will use a physically larger size and a bigger TDP budget to hit and maintain 3.0GHz on the same QSD845-based SoC. Which is basically a +15% performance increase in practice over the QSD 845.

                            So now that we got that out of the way, let's see how Qualcomm's Snapdragon chips performs and competes in Windows against Intel. Here are two most relevant chipsets:

                            Intel (6th gen) Atom X7-Z8750 - 4 cores / +0 threads (x86-64, Bay Trail/Pentium-line)
                            Intel (8th gen) Core i7-8650U - 4 cores / +4 threads (x86-64, Coffee Lake + SMT)
                            Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 - 4 cores / +4 mini-cores (ARMv8-64, Cortex A73 + A53)
                            Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 - 4 cores / +4 mini-cores (ARMv8-64, Cortex A75 + A55)
                            Qualcomm Snapdragon 850 - 4 cores / +4 mini-cores (ARMv8-64, Cortex A75 + A55)

                            And now let's see how they behave:
                            Atom Z8750 - max6W - ave4W - ave 2.2GHz - max2.6GHz
                            i7-8650U - max15W* - ave12W - ave 2.6GHz - max4.2GHz
                            QSD 835 - max6W - ave4W - ave 2.3GHz - max 2.4GHz
                            QSD 845 - max6W - ave5W - ave 2.5GHz - max 2.8GHz
                            QSD 850 - max8W - ave6W - ave 2.7GHz - max 3.0GHz

                            So we can see the new QSD 850 SoC is about the same size as the Intel CPU, has roughly the same lithography, the same core counts, and the same frequency. However, the Intel chip uses ~x2.0 more power on average. In terms of IPC the ARM chip is slightly superior "in-theory" but in practice it really depends on the Thermals, the Windows Kernel, OS, Drivers, and the Application. So far I've noticed the QSD 835 laptops performing between ~x1.8 - x8.0 slower than the Intel chips on benchmarks. So at-best the QSD 835 laptops barely matches/beats the Intel laptops on Efficiency, and at-worst its a complete joke. This is looking at reputable benchmarks like CineBench, PCMark, 3DMark, Handbrake, Basemark.

                            However, that's the QSD 835 and the QSD 850 promises better performance. Overall it should be 15%-30% faster hardware wise from my calculations. And that's exactly what Qualcomm is announcing. However, that still does NOT change the result of Qualcomm vs Intel. So?
                            Well, the only way the QSD 850 Laptops can improve against Intel Laptops is if Microsoft improves from the software front. There are few recent rumours saying to expect a "doubling of performance", so if that is true, then the performance difference should be between ~x0.9 - x4.0 meaning in very rare instances the Qualcomm chipset could be slightly faster at HALF the power draw... but in majority of cases they should be four times slower at half the power draw. Or in layman's terms, Intel's still winning with x2 efficiency level of Qualcomm due to x86 overhead.

                            The newly announced QSD 1000 is supposedly the same approach as the QSD 850, but based on a new architecture. Probably built on TSMC's 7nm lithography and using a Highly Customised A75 (or maybe lightly-custom A76, maybe not). However, I do think this next-gen SoC will debut on phones before laptops because there's just a larger profit margin in high-end phones. So whatever the "QSD 865" will be in 2019, we can infer the QSD 1000 should be around +15% faster. When I said "Highly Customised" I don't mean like Qualcomm's light changes to the QSD810, QSD835, QSD845 SoC's to Vanilla "ARM Cortex Ax" processors. I mean like Qualcomm's heavy changes to Cortex A9 to build the Krait-200 line, Cortex A15 to build the Krait-450 chips, and the famous Kryo-100 core of the QSD 820 are actually customised Cortex A57's.

                            My Personal Take: Qualcomm should've sold these QSD 835/850 chips at the usual US$50 price-tag to OEMs. And we could've had affordable Windows in form-factors like a Note4, GPD Win2, iPad mini, and Razer Gaming Tablet....alongside Netbooks, Chromebooks, and Ultrabooks. Swing and Miss; both of you Qualcomm and Microsoft it seems only AMD is doing the heavy-lifting when it comes to competition lately.

                            *configurable to 25W for Large, Thick, Heavy Gaming Laptops

                              • ?
                              • Anonymous
                              • vGk
                              • 08 Jun 2018

                              Anonymous, 08 Jun 2018Do not need to compare edge to edge performance or benchmar... moreNo crap. Intel will win

                                • S
                                • Stan
                                • j@k
                                • 08 Jun 2018

                                zodiacfml, 08 Jun 2018...and it will still feel like an Intel Atom due to Windows... moreA Core 2 Quad Q9505 feels very snappy with 4GB RAM and an SSD, it is a little faster than a Celeron N3450, which was tested against Snapdragon 835, and bested it by about 30% on average. With SD845 being about 25% faster than SD835, that puts it roughly in the same shoes as a Celeron N3450.

                                Based on this, i'd say the SD1000 will fill the same performance shoes as Q9650 or m3 class CPUs at the very least.

                                  • ?
                                  • Anonymous
                                  • 6TT
                                  • 08 Jun 2018

                                  Do not need to compare edge to edge performance or benchmarks.

                                  Just make sure the following:
                                  1. Support eGPU via thunderbolt 3
                                  2. Run at room temperature under full load
                                  3. Run x86 applications "well" enough

                                  Then Intel will be defeated.

                                    ...and it will still feel like an Intel Atom due to Windows and costs $1000.

                                    They should stop dreaming and start making Android/Chrome OS laptops

                                      • @
                                      • @12W,why use ARM?
                                      • pvS
                                      • 08 Jun 2018

                                      If the Snapdragon 1000 uses 12W, why use it and not an Intel chip? What is the benefit?!
                                      There would only be disadvantages - software compatibility and less performance than Intel!

                                      DoA!!!

                                        Razor, 07 Jun 2018Considering that this arm powered devices were meant to rep... moreNo, M$ needs to stop emulating and start doing things natively, providing emulation layer only as fallback mechanism.

                                          1 of 2