Problem is that Qualcomm doesn't have a proper PC SoC or even a tablet SoC. They only care about pushing LTE and expanding licensing so they neglect all other markets.
Here you'll have limited PC perf at a price premium due to connectivity while folks that can afford the LTE connected machine, tend to buy better PCs. On top of that, this is a high end phone SoC and high end is another price premium.
OEMs will have to build low perf shiny machines with high res displays and charge 500$ and up to get away with it. A 250$ machine that retails for 350$ just because it has LTE doesn't work.
It's also said that Microsoft and the OEMs are investing in this instead of asking for a viable solution.This kind of behavior is why the industry keeps making poor products, decade after decade. SD835 perf at 25-30$ with no LTE would be great but not this , at 2x the price. Hopefully M$ expands support to other SoCs and maybe we get decent machines further down the road.
Hmm I don't know, with the recent US ban on laptops these might really take off. Then again we'll have to see how well the x86 emulation works & the number of "apps" that work on this competing platform. The latter will decide it if does end up being another WinRT or doubles up as a serious competitor to something like the MS' Surface.
Eh, Surface 3 was doing OK-ish with atom until other OEMs made same-but-better devices. Now imagine it with this and all the new chip brings: higher performance even in x86 stuff, way better battery life, USB-C, LTE built in, thinner and lighter. Add this new SP pen, hinge and keyboard, and it is a pretty compelling note taking/drawing device.
Geekbench gives us an indication that this should be faster than a Surface 3. Only time will tell but it is highly unlikely the OEMs are going to be selling premium devices that aren't any good.
GB isn't apples to apples, but it's the best we have easy access to. So, keeping GB in mind, subtract from that score the emulation overhead compared to the well optimized Linux that provided the GB results in the first place.
Will be interesting to see how portable the changes to Windows 10 are to make it run on this SoC. Are they generic enough that it'll run on any future SoC? Or are they SoC-specific? Meaning, the x86 translation stuff.
If it's portable enough, it will be interesting to see what other OEMs come up with using DynamIQ-based SoCs with A75/A55 CPUs. :)
This could lead to a resurrection of the Windows NetBook.
A75 has a wider TDP range, too. Scales up better. Also, I hope they never use the term Netbook again. It invokes images of hideous, clunky, horribly slow pieces of garbage. Just call them Ultrathins or whatnot.
I'd say the usage model for actual netbooks is dead. If people want a small computer, they want a tablet, and there are plenty of good tablets that dock to good keyboards. (I've actually got one coming in the mail.) This will definitely extend that market, as seen in the battery life image in this post. (The guy obviously has a tablet with a keyboard folio.)
You're being irrational. Ask for a viable solution? Ask who? Intel? They've been working with Intel for years... yet Intel abandoned ULP Atoms - Cherry Trail-T was the last tablet/hybrid and low-cost slim notebook friendly chip. Everything else in their lineup is either higher cost (yes, higher than 835) or higher watt, and sometimes both. AMD isn't even close to having anything in this category - AMD has more profitable markets to target for the foreseeable future.
MS and their partners had two choices: Completely abandon these segments of the market (low-cost lightweight laptops/hybrids/tablets) to another OS running ARM chips... or run ARM chips. Gasp, they chose to run ARM chips - and this time they came up with a solution on their own that allows them to maintain Win32 compatibility! Windows itself was already portable to other platforms (such as ARM). Now they've ported the entire Win32/DX/etc library stack (they had ported a subset previously with WinRT).
This also means that performance will be good even when running "emulated" Win32 programs. They're not emulating an entire x86 system. The OS and MS software and libraries are all native ARM. They're also using advanced emulation techniques. Now they can use modern ARM SoCs like 835 and beyond to offer OEMs and customers better-than-Atom performance at competitive power and pricing.
I really don't see a better solution, but perhaps you have a revolutionary x86 solution you're keeping secret? Transmeta Ultra Deluxe?
So what I don't get is how is this possible, when Nvidia wasn't able to do x86 on it's CPUs? I mean I'm not sure now, but certainly when they came out they easily beat any ARM CPUs save for Apple's, and they seemed ideal for a Surface style mid-range tablet.
1) Has anyone seriously complained about the size of a motherboard of a Windows laptop? Just look at the MacBook teardowns; these things are already tiny relative to everything else.
2) Qualcomm's size example seems disingenuous. They're comparing Snapdragon 835 to what looks like a Kaby Lake-Y. Qualcomm wishes they had the CPU performance of an Intel Core CPU. Sure, 835 is half the size, and it's half the performance as well. Surely Apollo Lake would be a better example in terms of integration and performance.
It`s limited to 32bit not because of some hardware limitation, just like Atom wasn`t. In case of Atom it was product stratification, and here Qualcomm and MS are trying to stay clear from patent infringement case possibilities.
I'll be very interested to see what these devices are like. Though I'm still hoping we'll see a non-pro Surface running this, as that's what I'm most interested in. So glad that Microsoft is releasing a full Windows on ARM OS this time around.
Intel deserves this. They don't take Atom seriously making Microsoft go out of their way for this partnership. Can't recall where I have read it but the latest Atom x5 or x7 is comparable to the performance of a Snapdragon 800?! That makes Atom a few years behind!
"Qualcomm is keen to point out that a competitor's platform will need things like M.2 in order to add storage"
Fiddlesticks, I was hoping these ARM laptops would have M.2. With eMMC, as soon as you reach the write-cycles, the whole computer is dead, because the eMMC is soldered in. I was hoping for M.2 so that when the drive dies, you can replace it and the laptop will keep going strong.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
24 Comments
Back to Article
jjj - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Problem is that Qualcomm doesn't have a proper PC SoC or even a tablet SoC.They only care about pushing LTE and expanding licensing so they neglect all other markets.
Here you'll have limited PC perf at a price premium due to connectivity while folks that can afford the LTE connected machine, tend to buy better PCs.
On top of that, this is a high end phone SoC and high end is another price premium.
OEMs will have to build low perf shiny machines with high res displays and charge 500$ and up to get away with it. A 250$ machine that retails for 350$ just because it has LTE doesn't work.
It's also said that Microsoft and the OEMs are investing in this instead of asking for a viable solution.This kind of behavior is why the industry keeps making poor products, decade after decade.
SD835 perf at 25-30$ with no LTE would be great but not this , at 2x the price.
Hopefully M$ expands support to other SoCs and maybe we get decent machines further down the road.
R0H1T - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Hmm I don't know, with the recent US ban on laptops these might really take off. Then again we'll have to see how well the x86 emulation works & the number of "apps" that work on this competing platform. The latter will decide it if does end up being another WinRT or doubles up as a serious competitor to something like the MS' Surface.Zizy - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Eh, Surface 3 was doing OK-ish with atom until other OEMs made same-but-better devices. Now imagine it with this and all the new chip brings: higher performance even in x86 stuff, way better battery life, USB-C, LTE built in, thinner and lighter. Add this new SP pen, hinge and keyboard, and it is a pretty compelling note taking/drawing device.milli - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
'higher performance even in x86 stuff'You know this for a fact? Source?
BedfordTim - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Geekbench gives us an indication that this should be faster than a Surface 3. Only time will tell but it is highly unlikely the OEMs are going to be selling premium devices that aren't any good.tuxRoller - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
GB isn't apples to apples, but it's the best we have easy access to.So, keeping GB in mind, subtract from that score the emulation overhead compared to the well optimized Linux that provided the GB results in the first place.
phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Will be interesting to see how portable the changes to Windows 10 are to make it run on this SoC. Are they generic enough that it'll run on any future SoC? Or are they SoC-specific? Meaning, the x86 translation stuff.If it's portable enough, it will be interesting to see what other OEMs come up with using DynamIQ-based SoCs with A75/A55 CPUs. :)
This could lead to a resurrection of the Windows NetBook.
Alexvrb - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
A75 has a wider TDP range, too. Scales up better. Also, I hope they never use the term Netbook again. It invokes images of hideous, clunky, horribly slow pieces of garbage. Just call them Ultrathins or whatnot.mkozakewich - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
I'd say the usage model for actual netbooks is dead. If people want a small computer, they want a tablet, and there are plenty of good tablets that dock to good keyboards. (I've actually got one coming in the mail.) This will definitely extend that market, as seen in the battery life image in this post. (The guy obviously has a tablet with a keyboard folio.)Alexvrb - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
You're being irrational. Ask for a viable solution? Ask who? Intel? They've been working with Intel for years... yet Intel abandoned ULP Atoms - Cherry Trail-T was the last tablet/hybrid and low-cost slim notebook friendly chip. Everything else in their lineup is either higher cost (yes, higher than 835) or higher watt, and sometimes both. AMD isn't even close to having anything in this category - AMD has more profitable markets to target for the foreseeable future.MS and their partners had two choices: Completely abandon these segments of the market (low-cost lightweight laptops/hybrids/tablets) to another OS running ARM chips... or run ARM chips. Gasp, they chose to run ARM chips - and this time they came up with a solution on their own that allows them to maintain Win32 compatibility! Windows itself was already portable to other platforms (such as ARM). Now they've ported the entire Win32/DX/etc library stack (they had ported a subset previously with WinRT).
This also means that performance will be good even when running "emulated" Win32 programs. They're not emulating an entire x86 system. The OS and MS software and libraries are all native ARM. They're also using advanced emulation techniques. Now they can use modern ARM SoCs like 835 and beyond to offer OEMs and customers better-than-Atom performance at competitive power and pricing.
I really don't see a better solution, but perhaps you have a revolutionary x86 solution you're keeping secret? Transmeta Ultra Deluxe?
Wolfpup - Thursday, June 8, 2017 - link
So what I don't get is how is this possible, when Nvidia wasn't able to do x86 on it's CPUs? I mean I'm not sure now, but certainly when they came out they easily beat any ARM CPUs save for Apple's, and they seemed ideal for a Surface style mid-range tablet.ViRGE - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Two thoughts:1) Has anyone seriously complained about the size of a motherboard of a Windows laptop? Just look at the MacBook teardowns; these things are already tiny relative to everything else.
2) Qualcomm's size example seems disingenuous. They're comparing Snapdragon 835 to what looks like a Kaby Lake-Y. Qualcomm wishes they had the CPU performance of an Intel Core CPU. Sure, 835 is half the size, and it's half the performance as well. Surely Apollo Lake would be a better example in terms of integration and performance.
mitcoes - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Probably it will perform better with Chrome OS or GNU/Linux or even Android with a desktop launcher.I hope Qualcomm will not follow Nokia steps
Alexvrb - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
If they did that, it wouldn't run Win32 programs. Kind of negates the purpose.mkozakewich - Friday, June 2, 2017 - link
That's what dual-boot is for!SydneyBlue120d - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
I wonder if we will get 64bit compatibilty with the Snapdragon 845?Hurr Durr - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
It`s limited to 32bit not because of some hardware limitation, just like Atom wasn`t. In case of Atom it was product stratification, and here Qualcomm and MS are trying to stay clear from patent infringement case possibilities.domboy - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
I'll be very interested to see what these devices are like. Though I'm still hoping we'll see a non-pro Surface running this, as that's what I'm most interested in. So glad that Microsoft is releasing a full Windows on ARM OS this time around.BloodyBunnySlippers - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
"OEMs can use the extra space and weight for extra battery"Yes, but will they? Or will they just do what they do with phones and just go thinner?
Hurr Durr - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Of course they will!I`d rather have a proper W10 phone with this SoC...
hahmed330 - Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - link
Can't wait to play (or try to) play Battlefield 3 or even Battlefield 4 on this machine.zodiacfml - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
Intel deserves this. They don't take Atom seriously making Microsoft go out of their way for this partnership. Can't recall where I have read it but the latest Atom x5 or x7 is comparable to the performance of a Snapdragon 800?! That makes Atom a few years behind!Mikewind Dale - Thursday, June 1, 2017 - link
"Qualcomm is keen to point out that a competitor's platform will need things like M.2 in order to add storage"Fiddlesticks, I was hoping these ARM laptops would have M.2. With eMMC, as soon as you reach the write-cycles, the whole computer is dead, because the eMMC is soldered in. I was hoping for M.2 so that when the drive dies, you can replace it and the laptop will keep going strong.
vladx - Sunday, June 4, 2017 - link
Technology has advanced enough that they can now pack SSDs in smaller formats than M.2, not just eMMC:http://www.anandtech.com/show/10166/samsung-demos-...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10546/toshiba-announ...