This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/hardware by /u/ArsLoginName on 2024-04-08 02:13:30.

Many of us are x86 hardware enthusiasts, but with Qualcomm releasing their Nuvia acquired Snapdragon X Elite for the PC market, it made me think of my former ‘elite’ Snapdragon 855 announced all the way back in December 2018. Yes. 5+ years ago from when the X Elite is going to hit the market.

So with 5 years of high tech progress, one would think that surely today’s mid-range phones would leave this ancient relic 8 core (1x A76 2.84 GHz, 3x A76 2.42 GHz and 4x1.8 GHz A55 cores) processor far behind. After all, QC has released the 855+, 865, 865+, 870, 888, 888+, 8 Gen 1, 8+ Gen 1, 8 Gen 2, and recent 8 Gen 3 (that’s 10 flagship or flagship based processors) based on the ARM A77/A55, A78/A55, Cortex X1/A78/A55, Cortex X2/A710, Cortex X3/A710, and Cortex X4/A720/A520 architectures with node increases from TSMC 7 nm down to TSMC 4 nm during these years. Unfortunately, it is impossible to find a new < $500 QC based ‘mid-range’ Android phone in the US with the last being the '22 Samsung Galaxy S21 FE (SD 888 based) (sorry Google Pixel fans; but Graphene OS is intriguing).

Based upon what is available in the US for $500-ish, there is Samsung’s just-recently-retired mid range A54 based upon the Exynos 1380 with 4x2.75 GHz Cortex-A78 and 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 on Samsung’s 4 nm. This phone just barely edges out (+5% ST, +3.5% MT) the 5 year old SD855 processor according to notebookcheck’s GB5.5 scores. Yes. 5 years later and for roughly the same $500 price (then and now), you get the same performance.

Before everyone jumps on Exynos, it’s not like QC’s Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 based upon 4x 2.4 GHz A710 4x 1.8 GHz A510 was doing anything special either. GB5.5 ST score of +7.1% and MT score of +8.1% compared to the SD855 according to notebookcheck’s numbers. No. 7-8% better isn’t any better either. This is despite “According to ARM, the (A710) performance cores are 10 percent faster and 35 percent more efficient than the old Cortex-A78 cores. The efficiency cores are supposed to be 35 percent more powerful and 20 percent more efficient than the old Cortex-A55 cores.”

It is true the SD7 G1 and Exynos 1380 are both manufactured on Samsung 4 nm. But where are the architecture gains in going from the A78/A55 cores (Exynos 1380) to the A710/A510 cores for the same process node? If all of this is true, then why doesn’t the SD 7G1 leave the A76 based SD 855 further behind??

Who is to blame? QC? ARM? Samsung? Because Apple surely has increased the performance of the A series without jacking up the power draw the way QC & ARM are doing with the X2, X3, and X4 cores. See Golden Reviewers SPECint06 Big and small core efficiency tables for more information on that.

It looks like QC has really dropped the ball on this and no longer cares about the mid-range US market. Samsung is trying with their new Exynos 1480 4 nm LPP+ in the new A55, but GB5 MT is only 20% better than 5 year old SD855. On the positive side, this suggests the 4 nm LPP+ is about 15% better than the original 4 nm node since the cores are the same between the Exynos 1480 and 1380.

Shouldn’t the mid-range have moved up in performance the way the ‘flagships’ have? Should someone just license the SD888 design and put in on TSMC 4 nm as the leading edge cell phone processors move to 3 nm? Still very reasonable performance (about 2/3rd of SD8 G3) with a much lower power consumption.

At this rate based upon performance, it is better to buy a 4-5 year old refurbished A12 based iPhone 12 than any mid-range Android. Because even then, the A12 would outperform today’s newest mid range Samsung A55 Android by 23% (GB5.5 MT score) and the old 855 by 47%. Why have QC and Android abandoned the all important $500 price segment?