Qualcomm reclaims the clock speed title with the Snapdragon 870 5G chipset and its 3.2 GHz CPU
- d
- dude111
- 8{f
- 19 Jan 2021
Firewarrior96, 19 Jan 2021This article will confuse the hell out of every reader even... moreI believe both 865 and 865+ can be paired with a BT 5.2 chip as they aren't integrated into the soc (neither the wifi module).
And the 865+ had support for it, so it's not really new.
In fact, the part number for each one is SM8250, SM8250-AB and SM8250-AC (865, 865+ and 870 respectively). Pretty much what they were doing with the original 800 (801 and 805).
This is an 865++ or even an 865+v2
- ?
- Anonymous
- L7%
- 19 Jan 2021
SD870 is like 1% faster then SD865+
- S
- Shady69
- rpQ
- 19 Jan 2021
danwat1234, 19 Jan 2021I'd rather stick with a 888 with 5 nanometer power eff... moreits not even power efficient compared to the 865
- d
- danwat1234
- 4$d
- 19 Jan 2021
Shady69, 19 Jan 2021the high refresh rate imo is the worst gimmick of them all,... moreThat's why variable refresh rate tech is here such as for the samsung. So we can have power efficient displays with high refresh rate when we want to.
- d
- danwat1234
- 4$d
- 19 Jan 2021
I'd rather stick with a 888 with 5 nanometer power efficiency and integrated modem. 870 undoubtedly will cost less
- l
- lhh
- nTb
- 19 Jan 2021
Qcomm Stuck on A55 and nothing to match m1
- MagicMonkeyBoy
- g5%
- 19 Jan 2021
sixtymes, 19 Jan 2021you would think they would put the effort in to tweaking an... moreNo problem. It's really designed for gaming phones... With excellent cooling systems... I don't care about flagships. I am a gamer with a gaming phone... It's the cooling that matters most to me. Give me an 888 gaming phone... And I know with cooling systems... There will be no throttling issues at all... Infact... We can squeeze even more power out of it... No problem.
- s
- sixtymes
- kvH
- 19 Jan 2021
you would think they would put the effort in to tweaking an 888. hmmm, throttle issues for the 888?
- ?
- Anonymous
- iAE
- 19 Jan 2021
Let's see if this beats 888 in performance lol
- F
- Fast Freddie
- nEt
- 19 Jan 2021
I always thought 3.1 was a bit slow. 3.2 should be quick enough.
- D
- AnonD-973296
- GYi
- 19 Jan 2021
[deleted post]boi if u have nothing to say about it, then plz just s#ut up
- ?
- Anonymous
- 043
- 19 Jan 2021
Anonymous, 19 Jan 2021All Apple iPad Pro models from 2017(!) until today, already... moreyou are right with the first paragraph but please stop doing what you did with the last sentence. If you don't (currently) want it, that doesn't mean it is a gimmick. I would have wanted it on the iPhones. I would have wanted it on all iPhones that were released since the iPad Pro came out. And you will want it as well, when Apple paints it with their marketing magic. And it isn't as bad for battery life because it is not constant 60Hz, but adaptive. Even if you wanted to turn it off (which is nonsense because it amazing, and if I had a Samsung of previous years, I would have always chosen 1080p@120Hz over 1440p@60Hz) to save battery, you can do that, and because of the adaptive-ness, still save battery life. Because currently, the iPhones sit at constant 60Hz. If you limit the refresh rate on the iPad Pro, it will be between 24-60Hz (I think 24 was the lowest it can go, I'm not sure).
They purely it for cost saving this year, and to have something to include in the iPhone next year, and you justifying that just makes the value worse for the consumers. And I'm currently using iPhone/iPad/Mac exclusively. Just don't be a sheep please.
- l
- little bunny fu fu
- j{g
- 19 Jan 2021
Shady69, 19 Jan 2021the high refresh rate imo is the worst gimmick of them all,... moreOkay... A 120 refresh rate is not a gimmick. It's an improved refresh rate from 90Hz. It's faster and more smooth, but it takes more power. A 60Hz takes less space but is more power-efficient.
- J
- JDK
- ybx
- 19 Jan 2021
[deleted post]Hahahaaaaaa lol, you keep on calling me junior in every thread.
Do you have anything else to contribute to the conversation? If not, then there's no reason for you to be here.
- ?
- Anonymous
- 8Kf
- 19 Jan 2021
Firewarrior96, 19 Jan 2021This article will confuse the hell out of every reader even... moreYes.
865 + overclock = 865+
865+ + overclock = 870
OEMs will be fooling costumers.
These ones will think they have brand new Chipset, while it is just something OEMs could have done to 865 if they want too.
Qualcomm gets money.
OEMs get money.
You get chip that has nothing better than the 865.
- i
- ioio
- j{g
- 19 Jan 2021
SON GOKU, 19 Jan 2021Awesome, maybe it will be a match for the Exynos 1080.only if the chip doesn't over heat
- D
- AnonD-940827
- 8pQ
- 19 Jan 2021
Andreidinutu, 19 Jan 2021So comparing the 480 to the 888 through a benchmark is usel... moreIf course.! Doesn't matter what technology, the benchmarks are far from the actual real life performance.
But sure, live by the numbers. You should try to live in reality instead.
- ?
- Anonymous
- p%L
- 19 Jan 2021
DaFink, 19 Jan 2021Well stop buying them then, duh!!!!!!Seriously??? You are defending cheap build quality?
You should be asking the company to to make better products instead.
- N
- Norwegian Gangster
- p%L
- 19 Jan 2021
[deleted post]Most of their products are over priced and overrated.
I happily chose the MI 10T Pro over the iPhone 12 at 800$.
Spent the remaining money on a TWS.
- S
- Sev
- U@$
- 19 Jan 2021
Lol.... What a pity! A 2021 soc just 0.07ghz faster than 2020 soc, the Kirin 9000. Had not the US did that chaos around Huawei, this record could have been broken this year itself with the next gen Kirin chipset