Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30,050
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,939 times in 680 posts

    Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Firm has already made "significant progress," towards this end, says a new report.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,885
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked
    325 times in 230 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Samsung went down this path with not insignificant resources. They made a hash of it.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Wonderful Warwick!
    Posts
    3,174
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    123 times in 105 posts

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    Samsung went down this path with not insignificant resources. They made a hash of it.
    I think that's a tad harsh. Sold milions but people wanted Snapdragon. When you have 2 versions of a phone with differing hardware and 1 is the de facto standard they would probably have been better dropping snapdragon and using all Exynos. If google do that they may do better
    Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    155
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    8 times in 7 posts

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Samsung's Exynos was always worse than the competing SD part though. Usually slower as well as less efficient. That's why people wanted the international hardware with SD instead.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Wonderful Warwick!
    Posts
    3,174
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    123 times in 105 posts

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Quote Originally Posted by edmundhonda View Post
    Samsung's Exynos was always worse than the competing SD part though. Usually slower as well as less efficient. That's why people wanted the international hardware with SD instead.
    Not always worse, usually less efficient. Like I said perhaps if they just used Exynos worldwide they would have been ok
    Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Wonderful Warwick!
    Posts
    3,174
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    123 times in 105 posts

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Oh and Qualcomm are probably the worst tech company with practices that make Apple and nVidia look like saints...
    Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!

  7. #7
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,885
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked
    325 times in 230 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Quote Originally Posted by 3dcandy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmundhonda View Post
    Samsung's Exynos was always worse than the competing SD part though. Usually slower as well as less efficient. That's why people wanted the international hardware with SD instead.
    Not always worse, usually less efficient. Like I said perhaps if they just used Exynos worldwide they would have been ok
    The S9 was comprehensively worse with the Exynos. The ISP meant camera processing was poorer, the screen output was even worse despite the panel being the same. Even the audio out was comprehensively way worse. The efficiency was worse to the point where even journalists wrote a better scheduler for them and the peak performance could not match the snapdragon variant.

    The S10 wasn't so bad and represents a decent buy at the moment.

    The Exynos S20 has AWFUL battery life compared to the Snapdragon variant. To the point where the snapdragon can provide all day battery life and the Exynos is simply not fit for purpose as a mobile phone being used for productivity and needing to be available for use all day without access to a charger. It can't last anywhere near all day unless you turn off most of the features (at which point just buy a cheaper phone). The performance per watt is beyond awful (double the power required for the same workload compared to SD) and some aspects are a retrograde step. They are seeing the same percentage increase in performance and power consumption on a new process node. That's impressive work. Probably a result of the department knowing they were all about to get fired.

    If they had use Exynos worldwide, the competition would have been laughing as they got 14 hours of battery life whilst the Samsung got 7 in the same test.

    I understand why they have their own silly-cone especially given the QC practices. I also have a personal and passionate hatred for ARM. But that's not the issue. Hopefully Samsung's next generation of phones will not have the same issues given they are stopping custom designs.

  8. #8
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,921
    Thanks
    581
    Thanked
    1,170 times in 996 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    I also have a personal and passionate hatred for ARM.
    That seems quite unusual. They don't get everything right, but seem fairly switched on in most regards to the point I was at one time considering working for them (but even with relocation help, I didn't want to pull the kids out of school to move to Cambridge).

    Having said that, I believe in the long run RISC-V will trash ARM's business.

  9. #9
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,885
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked
    325 times in 230 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    I also have a personal and passionate hatred for ARM.
    That seems quite unusual. They don't get everything right, but seem fairly switched on in most regards to the point I was at one time considering working for them (but even with relocation help, I didn't want to pull the kids out of school to move to Cambridge).

    Having said that, I believe in the long run RISC-V will trash ARM's business.
    It is unusual. I wouldn't recommend working for them unless you're 100% normal or able to convince people that you are.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,505
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked
    74 times in 61 posts
    • lodore's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Z87-GD65 GAMING
      • CPU:
      • Intel 4770k Haswell I7
      • Memory:
      • 16gb DDR3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 2tb hard drive and 2X 120gb ssd
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 2X MSI nvidia 770 in SLI
      • PSU:
      • XFX 700 watt fully modular
      • Case:
      • CoolerMaster HafXM
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • two 24inch hd monitors. one Asus and one Dell
      • Internet:
      • 50mb BT broadband

    Re: Google developing its own SoCs for Pixels and Chromebooks

    I was expecting Google to of done this already. I am hoping google will be able to provide longer updates if using custom chips. the other advantage is google isn't late to the game in October using almost last years chip.

    I am currently using Pixel 2 xl and as long as i get updates i see no reason to upgrade.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •