Qualcomm only integrates the modem into their SOCs while Transceivers, RF amps, envelope trackers, antennas, etc are still additional components.
So if a feature of it is not used (like mmWave in non-US models) the blocks specific to that feature are simply turned or fused off and it makes no difference in power usage.
On the other hand making a different SOC featuring everything but mmWave makes no financial sense as in the era of 15+ Billion transistor mobile SOCs the mmWave-only modem blocks are more of a rounding error (in the modem mmWave and FR1 bands share pretty much all blocks but the interface to the mmWave modules).
Fair enough. I guess I got confused by the first generation, where the mmWave 8xx was discrete and the non-mmWave 7xx was integrated. Must have been an integration issue and not a die space issue.
To be precise, mmwave's support is a compromise to the American operators and the government. The United States first approved mmwave, while the first commercial 5g modem (supporting sub6 and mmwave) manufacturers were Huawei and Qualcomm. Huawei obviously cannot enter the US market. So Qualcomm must support mmwave.... The second batch of equipment manufacturers independently developing 5g modems include samsung, unisoc and mtk. Mtk has only recently resolved mmwave, unisoc has not yet resolved mmwave, and exynos 1080 has only resolved mmwave. In addition to mmwave technical barriers, Mtk and Unisoc are Chinese enterprises. Obviously, the US government will not allow them to dump cheap chips to the US to hurt Qualcomm
From the high level specs I just don't see the point of the prime core. It's 40mhz faster than the other three cores. Doesn't seem to be a meaningful difference. Does it have a larger cache compared to the other 3 cores? Does it have it's own power plane? Is it just a marketing point to say it's got one better core?
Might have a different cache setup, not sure on that, and it's on a different clock domain so it can be doing something different than the other cores. The small difference does seem silly at first though I'd agree, and I've not been that convinced of this three layer bigger.big.little sandwich (Apple still mostly dominates without)
The prime core in Qualcomm's architectures is on its own clock plane. And it often has more cache, as well (though we don't have those figures for this part right now). So 1+3+4 is accurate.
Actually I'm fairly impressed. The QC 7g1 should be slightly ahead of the QSD 870. So if this chipset is overclocked, it can surpass the QSD 888+ and also the QC 8g1. However, I am not a fan of such high-voltage chipsets in phones, I want them to be Warm, Passively Cooled, and requiring a smaller battery.
This feels like the right chip in the right spot. The QSD 778 and QSD 780 were a huge revolution, I figured they would finally match/surpass the QSD 845 but they ended up bringing QSD 855/855+/860 levels to budget options. And the QC 7g1 extends that. The midrange segment has been stuck on the QSD 720-QSD 768G level of performance (QSD 835) for too long.
I would be pretty happy to have this chipset in my phone, especially if it means that I am paying for USD $500 price instead of a USD $999 price. Just look at the Samsung A52-s, they discontinued that as fast as possible because it was threatening their luxury options.
It might match 870 in cpu performance, but the gpu being only 20% faster than 778g's 642L means its only going to be on par with 855's adreno 640. Prolly gonna be a lot more efficient tho. While d8100's mali is on par with 888's adreno 660. 7 gen 1 is on the samsung node with a710 cores i wont be expecting too much.
The QSD 780 had a slightly faster GPU than the QSD 855+ and slightly below the QSD 860. Basically on-par with the QSD 860. The QSD 778 basically uses the same setup.
Adding 20% on top of it, should make it at least QSD 865 territory. But it's likely it will be QSD 870 level. But it really depends on the device. Some have drivers that perform faster than others, and it helps if the device is large and was designed with cooling in mind. Pretty big gap in performance sometimes.
Even if the MediaTek chipset is technically superior, I would rather Qualcomm. For one thing, I won't be supporting a company that has GPL violations, secondly it means custom firmware can be an option, and lastly it will have much more stable software (eg AetherSX2 and Dolphin performance between Adreno vs Mali is huge).
855+ and 860 are the same thing in cpu and gpu perf. 780g matches 855+ gpu. 778g is worse. 855 is 20% faster than it. 865 is 25% faster than 855. Drivers are all the same for same chipset, getting updates faster is the only difference.
Dolphin has improved on mali a lot, its pretty much similar to adreno now, though a few games might have problems. Citra too runs very well, though graphic glitches might be even more than dolphin. Right now its aether and skyline(maybe eggns too) that adreno is clealry superior in.i would get a snapdragon too for the same reasons, but these are just niche usecases.
Yes, Doesn't make sense for me to buy a new device this/next year without AV1 support as I too keep devices for 4-5 years. I'd rather go for a Dimensity device with AV1 support
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
22 Comments
Back to Article
lmcd - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
mmWave still seems like a bit of an anti-feature. Rather see the die space go to a better CPU, but we're still ruled by US carriers.Arsenica - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
Qualcomm only integrates the modem into their SOCs while Transceivers, RF amps, envelope trackers, antennas, etc are still additional components.So if a feature of it is not used (like mmWave in non-US models) the blocks specific to that feature are simply turned or fused off and it makes no difference in power usage.
On the other hand making a different SOC featuring everything but mmWave makes no financial sense as in the era of 15+ Billion transistor mobile SOCs the mmWave-only modem blocks are more of a rounding error (in the modem mmWave and FR1 bands share pretty much all blocks but the interface to the mmWave modules).
Wereweeb - Saturday, May 21, 2022 - link
Thanks for the infolmcd - Monday, May 23, 2022 - link
Fair enough. I guess I got confused by the first generation, where the mmWave 8xx was discrete and the non-mmWave 7xx was integrated. Must have been an integration issue and not a die space issue.ylylxb - Saturday, October 8, 2022 - link
To be precise, mmwave's support is a compromise to the American operators and the government. The United States first approved mmwave, while the first commercial 5g modem (supporting sub6 and mmwave) manufacturers were Huawei and Qualcomm. Huawei obviously cannot enter the US market. So Qualcomm must support mmwave.... The second batch of equipment manufacturers independently developing 5g modems include samsung, unisoc and mtk. Mtk has only recently resolved mmwave, unisoc has not yet resolved mmwave, and exynos 1080 has only resolved mmwave. In addition to mmwave technical barriers,Mtk and Unisoc are Chinese enterprises. Obviously, the US government will not allow them to dump cheap chips to the US to hurt Qualcomm
kpb321 - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
From the high level specs I just don't see the point of the prime core. It's 40mhz faster than the other three cores. Doesn't seem to be a meaningful difference. Does it have a larger cache compared to the other 3 cores? Does it have it's own power plane? Is it just a marketing point to say it's got one better core?Wilco1 - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
The prime core typically has double the L2 cache which can make a lot of difference. I agree that the frequencies seem quite close.ballsystemlord - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
I'm certain that the extra 40Mhz makes a world of difference for performance on the top core.tipoo - Saturday, May 21, 2022 - link
Might have a different cache setup, not sure on that, and it's on a different clock domain so it can be doing something different than the other cores. The small difference does seem silly at first though I'd agree, and I've not been that convinced of this three layer bigger.big.little sandwich (Apple still mostly dominates without)syxbit - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
Is this really a 1+3+4? when the first 4 cores are identical minus a tiny, tiny, tiny clock difference?Ryan Smith - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
The prime core in Qualcomm's architectures is on its own clock plane. And it often has more cache, as well (though we don't have those figures for this part right now). So 1+3+4 is accurate.Dante Verizon - Friday, May 20, 2022 - link
Probably no big performance gain over the 778G/780.Kangal - Sunday, May 22, 2022 - link
Actually I'm fairly impressed.The QC 7g1 should be slightly ahead of the QSD 870. So if this chipset is overclocked, it can surpass the QSD 888+ and also the QC 8g1. However, I am not a fan of such high-voltage chipsets in phones, I want them to be Warm, Passively Cooled, and requiring a smaller battery.
This feels like the right chip in the right spot. The QSD 778 and QSD 780 were a huge revolution, I figured they would finally match/surpass the QSD 845 but they ended up bringing QSD 855/855+/860 levels to budget options. And the QC 7g1 extends that. The midrange segment has been stuck on the QSD 720-QSD 768G level of performance (QSD 835) for too long.
I would be pretty happy to have this chipset in my phone, especially if it means that I am paying for USD $500 price instead of a USD $999 price. Just look at the Samsung A52-s, they discontinued that as fast as possible because it was threatening their luxury options.
iphonebestgamephone - Sunday, May 22, 2022 - link
It might match 870 in cpu performance, but the gpu being only 20% faster than 778g's 642L means its only going to be on par with 855's adreno 640. Prolly gonna be a lot more efficient tho. While d8100's mali is on par with 888's adreno 660. 7 gen 1 is on the samsung node with a710 cores i wont be expecting too much.Kangal - Sunday, May 22, 2022 - link
The QSD 780 had a slightly faster GPU than the QSD 855+ and slightly below the QSD 860. Basically on-par with the QSD 860. The QSD 778 basically uses the same setup.Adding 20% on top of it, should make it at least QSD 865 territory. But it's likely it will be QSD 870 level. But it really depends on the device. Some have drivers that perform faster than others, and it helps if the device is large and was designed with cooling in mind. Pretty big gap in performance sometimes.
Even if the MediaTek chipset is technically superior, I would rather Qualcomm. For one thing, I won't be supporting a company that has GPL violations, secondly it means custom firmware can be an option, and lastly it will have much more stable software (eg AetherSX2 and Dolphin performance between Adreno vs Mali is huge).
iphonebestgamephone - Monday, May 23, 2022 - link
855+ and 860 are the same thing in cpu and gpu perf. 780g matches 855+ gpu. 778g is worse. 855 is 20% faster than it. 865 is 25% faster than 855. Drivers are all the same for same chipset, getting updates faster is the only difference.Dolphin has improved on mali a lot, its pretty much similar to adreno now, though a few games might have problems. Citra too runs very well, though graphic glitches might be even more than dolphin. Right now its aether and skyline(maybe eggns too) that adreno is clealry superior in.i would get a snapdragon too for the same reasons, but these are just niche usecases.
Captain obvious - Saturday, May 21, 2022 - link
Qualcomm probably compared against the 778 because the 780 was only used on a single phone before being quietly discontinued.I guess they cancelled it in favour of more 5lpe wafers for the 888, and used almost the same blocks on the 778g using tsmc n6.
Wereweeb - Saturday, May 21, 2022 - link
Any word on whether the security features are comparable to the SD8G1's?brucethemoose - Sunday, May 22, 2022 - link
Still no AV1 decode.That's expected, since the 8 doesn't have it, but I have to wonder how long Qualcomm is gonna hold out.
Also, it makes me *really* not want a Qualcomm 7/8 device, since I tend to keep them for a long time and maybe hand them down.
patel21 - Monday, May 23, 2022 - link
Yes, Doesn't make sense for me to buy a new device this/next year without AV1 support as I too keep devices for 4-5 years. I'd rather go for a Dimensity device with AV1 supportWardrive86 - Monday, May 23, 2022 - link
By not giving the adreno a specific name and some details it gives the impression that even Qualcomm isnt impressed with it.kubussz - Thursday, July 21, 2022 - link
Hi, which is better snapdragon 780g or 778g?