After its disastrous Exynos 5 Octa, Samsung may have lost Apple's A7 contract to TSMC

11415161719

Comments

  • Reply 361 of 391
    I'm not sure of the reason for dissing the UK press considering the UK is one of the very few countries where Apple has decent market share.

    What I am finding interesting is the implications of the iPhone 5c non sale sales disaster. With as few as 9% of buyers wanting the 5c, can Samsung supply enough 64 bit chipsets to satisfy the increased 5s demand?
  • Reply 362 of 391
    BTW Big.little is just a variation of 'companion core'.

    Tegra 3 has it, the Kindle HD has it. Tegra 4 has it.
    Exynos big-little is just a very high specification variant.
  • Reply 363 of 391
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post



    So many other sites are touting the Exynos 5 Octa chip as an A7 killer but this site says Apple's A7 has the upper hand. Only time will tell who's right.

    If Exynos was such a winner, why did the US S4s ship with Qualcomm chips?

  • Reply 364 of 391
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    If Exynos was such a winner, why did the US S4s ship with Qualcomm chips?

    From what I can remember it didn't play nice with the LTE chipset.
  • Reply 365 of 391
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

    It's all about laying the groundwork for future products.

    No, it's all about the efficiencies of the ARMv8 processor architecture - and more specifically the AArch64 ISA.

     

    ARM pared a decade's worth of cruft from the ARMv7 32 bit architecture - stuff like condition code masks which made just about all instructions conditional and doubling the number of general purpose and floating point registers. ARM completely rearchitected the instruction set to streamline it - oh, and as a side benefit they're able to address more memory.

     

    Apple, being a platform developer, was able to rapidly bring their OS and framworks up to 64-bit snuff - after all, iOS shares frameworks and the kernel with MacOS X which is 64 bit.

     

    Be interesting to see Google's people get Android up to 64 bit, and it'll be grand entertainment to see Google trying to get Larry to give them 64 bit libraries for their java middleware.

  • Reply 366 of 391
    What screen resolution is the A7 phone got?
    I'm not quite sure what I can physically do with 64 bit.
  • Reply 367 of 391
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    What screen resolution is the A7 phone got?
    I'm not quite sure what I can physically do with 64 bit.

    It's not a question of what you can do, but what can developers do with a 64 bit processor?
  • Reply 368 of 391
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Verne Arase View Post

     

     

    Be interesting to see Google's people get Android up to 64 bit, and it'll be grand entertainment to see Google trying to get Larry to give them 64 bit libraries for their java middleware.


    As far as I'm aware Oracle contribute no code to Android. (other than the 8 lines that was argued about in court)

  • Reply 369 of 391
    Dont you guys think that this article is very bias? It is self praising, I love Apple, but it doesnt meant that it is the king of the smartphone industry already, think of the market share worldwide, Apple has a lot to do, after the results in Q3 2013, they have drop in their market share. Apple has done so good in capturing high income users, but what about the low income users? 5C is just Iphone5 in a plastic. Love Apple`s way of outsourcing they manufacturing to other companies, most of it is in China. For the first time, Users get to have a thumb print ID scanner, Genius! but there are already flaws. now HTC is moving in with the technology. Criticizing Samsung is just like criticizing Apple for using Samsung`s semiconductors, isn`t that contradicting? We hate Samsung, but still uses their chips. I`m not being negative towards Apple, but the Apple community has been changing to become more bias, and looking down on others because they are using Asian products. Still a good article. Always looking the yin and yang of every products.
  • Reply 370 of 391
    This article needs some corrections-

    "And in fact, after developing the Exynos 5, Samsung announced that its Galaxy S4 phones bound for North America would be powered by Qualcomm chips, not its own new Exynos 5. That seemed to be puzzling, because Samsung is regarded as a leading designer and manufacturer of ARM chips, so why would it use a competitor's parts, particularly for such a flagship product?"

    "Of course, the problem with the Exynos 5 wasn't its benchmarks, but rather that it was such an expensive pig that even Samsung didn't want to use it in its American-bound flagship smartphone."

    The author might not be aware the reason Samsung doesn't use the Exynos 5 in North American models has nothing to do with its expense or its quality. Rather, it is because North American cellular service is behind the times, and Samsung would have had to create a separate LTE modem chip in order to support 4G speeds. Samsung went with the Qualcomm chip rather than doing this, because LTE modem is already available for the Snapdragon. It's as simple as that.
  • Reply 371 of 391
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    scar wrote: »
    The author might not be aware the reason Samsung doesn't use the Exynos 5 in North American models has nothing to do with its expense or its quality. Rather, it is because North American cellular service is behind the times, and Samsung would have had to create a separate LTE modem chip in order to support 4G speeds. Samsung went with the Qualcomm chip rather than doing this, because LTE modem is already available for the Snapdragon. It's as simple as that.

    Actually in this case the North American cell service is ahead of the world. The Exynos chip didn't play nice with the LTE chipset. Much of the world either still using 3G GSM or only now transitioning to LTE.
  • Reply 372 of 391
    Originally Posted by galron View Post

    I love Apple, but

     

    Shut up and go away.

     

    Apple has done so good in capturing high income users, but what about the low income users?


     

    Apple couldn’t care less. They don’t make products for them; they don’t care about cheap products.

     

    5C is just Iphone5 in a plastic.


     

    Well, that’s wrong.

     

    Criticizing Samsung is just like criticizing Apple for using Samsung`s semiconductors, isn`t that contradicting?


     

    Not in the slightest. Please bone up on all this.

     

    …the Apple community has been changing to become more bias, and looking down on others because they are using Asian products.


     

    Nope. Wrong. Try again.

  • Reply 373 of 391
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    Actually in this case the North American cell service is ahead of the world. The Exynos chip didn't play nice with the LTE chipset. Much of the world either still using 3G GSM or only now transitioning to LTE.

    The Qualcom Snapdragon already has an LTE chipset that's compatible with the North American network, which is why it was chosen for the Galaxy S4.

     

    Samsung developed an LTE Advanced chipset that's compatible with Exynos 5, which is why the 8-core version of the Galaxy S4 was released in South Korea.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-koreas-mobile-network-touted-as-worlds-fastest/

     

    Again, the author says Samsung didn't go with the Exynos 5 in the North American version of the Galaxy S4 because "it was such an expensive pig that even Samsung didn't want to use it in its American-bound flagship smartphone," when, in fact, it was because the North American LTE network is behind the times.   I should have been more clear and specified the North American LTE network in my original post.

     

    You said "Much of the world either still using 3G GSM or only now transitioning to LTE".  I take it you define "Much of the world" as the European Union?  In Asia, both LTE-A availability and adoption is widespread.  Only 3% of EU and 19% of US subscribers have 4G LTE phones, as opposed to over 60% in South Korea, for instance. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324412604578515222989449746

     

    Until I'm seeing download speeds of over 100 MB on LTE, I'm sticking with my statement that the North American cell phone network is behind the times...

  • Reply 374 of 391
    scar wrote: »
    The Qualcom Snapdragon already has an LTE chipset that's compatible with the North American network, which is why it was chosen for the Galaxy S4.

    Samsung developed an LTE Advanced chipset that's compatible with Exynos 5, which is why the 8-core version of the Galaxy S4 was released in South Korea.
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-koreas-mobile-network-touted-as-worlds-fastest/

    Again, the author says Samsung didn't go with the Exynos 5 in the North American version of the Galaxy S4 because "it was such an expensive pig that even Samsung didn't want to use it in its American-bound flagship smartphone," when, in fact, it was because the North American LTE network is behind the times.   I should have been more clear and specified the LTE network.

    You said "Much of the world either still using 3G GSM or only now transitioning to LTE".  I take it you define "Much of the world" as the European Union?  In Asia, both LTE-A availability and adoption is widespread.  Only 3% of EU and 19% of US subscribers have 4G LTE phones, as opposed to over 60% in South Korea, for instance. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324412604578515222989449746

    Until I'm seeing download speeds of over 100 MB on LTE, it's safe to say the North American cell network is not ahead of anyone but the EU and Africa.

    Are you forgetting South America, Canada, India, Africa, and China? Most of these countries only just launched their LTE networks in the last few months to a year.
  • Reply 375 of 391
    In the UK EE was first with LTE so they became the mains seller of the iPhone 5.

    Uncannily, they have become the most complained about network in the UK. Too many dropped calls it seems.
  • Reply 376 of 391
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    Are you forgetting South America, Canada, India, Africa, and China? Most of these countries only just launched their LTE networks in the last few months to a year.

    No, hence my edit before your reply-

     

    "Until I'm seeing download speeds of over 100 MB on LTE, I'm sticking with my statement that the North American cell phone network is behind the times..."

  • Reply 377 of 391
    scar wrote: »
    No, hence my edit before your reply-

    "Until I'm seeing download speeds of over 100 MB on LTE, I'm sticking with my statement that the North American cell phone network is behind the times..."

    The US will always be behind because the network here in upgraded incrementally while other countries leap frog onto the lastest and greatest. On more than one occasion has a US telecom invested in a technology that became obsolete by the time the roll out was complete.
  • Reply 378 of 391
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    The US will always be behind because the network here in upgraded incrementally while other countries leap frog onto the lastest and greatest. On more than one occasion has a US telecom invested in a technology that became obsolete by the time the roll out was complete.

    Well, let's not forget my original post, because we're getting off topic.  

     

    Samsung used a Snapdragon processor in the North American variant of the Galaxy S4 because there was already an LTE modem chip compatible with our outdated cellular networks in existence, not because "it was such an expensive pig that even Samsung didn't want to use it in its American-bound flagship smartphone."  And that's the real point.

  • Reply 379 of 391
    scar wrote: »
    Well, let's not forget my original post, because we're getting off topic.  

    Samsung used a Snapdragon processor in the North American variant of the Galaxy S4 because there was already an LTE modem chip compatible with our outdated cellular networks in existence, not because "it was such an expensive pig that even Samsung didn't want to use it in its American-bound flagship smartphone."  And that's the real point.

    I agreed with you, but why was Apple able to make their processor to work with all LTE chipsets? Did they do something different?
  • Reply 380 of 391
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Scar View Post

     

    The Qualcom Snapdragon already has an LTE chipset that's compatible with the North American network, which is why it was chosen for the Galaxy S4.

     

    Samsung developed an LTE Advanced chipset that's compatible with Exynos 5, which is why the 8-core version of the Galaxy S4 was released in South Korea.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-koreas-mobile-network-touted-as-worlds-fastest/

     

    Again, the author says Samsung didn't go with the Exynos 5 in the North American version of the Galaxy S4 because "it was such an expensive pig that even Samsung didn't want to use it in its American-bound flagship smartphone," when, in fact, it was because the North American LTE network is behind the times.   I should have been more clear and specified the North American LTE network in my original post.

     

    You said "Much of the world either still using 3G GSM or only now transitioning to LTE".  I take it you define "Much of the world" as the European Union?  In Asia, both LTE-A availability and adoption is widespread.  Only 3% of EU and 19% of US subscribers have 4G LTE phones, as opposed to over 60% in South Korea, for instance. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324412604578515222989449746

     

    Until I'm seeing download speeds of over 100 MB on LTE, I'm sticking with my statement that the North American cell phone network is behind the times...


     

    Australia:-

     

Sign In or Register to comment.