Qualcomm Touts 'Superior Cellular Performance' of Android Phones With Snapdragon 845 Chips

[mi7chy]

I never saw the point of 5G where most of us are held back by ridiculous data cap. With a faster speed, we'll just use up our data faster and be charged for overage quicker. Hurray?

Smart consumers do have unlimited data and even use it as a home or mobile hotspot. You just have to research it.

Even without unlimited data, faster throughput helps with battery life since the download finishes quicker so the radio can go into low power mode.

 

[Black Magic]

Well that isn't how data works. You have access to the data faster. The data you are consuming isn't eating into your data cap any faster. A 10mb picture is still a 10mb picture regardless how fast you can access it.
[doublepost=1532371726][/doublepost]
To be fair that poster has been attacking all T-Mobile customers in this thread basically saying you're poor if you have T-Mobile.

If you read the comments, I have been the one under siege by the T-Mobile capes. Having said that, T-Mobile is notorious for not being able to receive signal indoors and for having a lower quality network. Care to dispute that?

While the Qualcomm modem is superior to Intel's, I haven't noticed any connectivity or performance issues to make me complain. Is there really a problem here or is Qualcomm just trying to put pressure on Apple? We both know the answer.

 

[quaresma]

What's the point of achieving 30mbps instead of 21mbps on LTE when all that means is you reach your 5 GB data cap 30 minutes sooner?

LOL that may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard from a fanboy! You prefer slower speed? Dude come on

 

[bbednarz]

If you read the comments, I have been the one under siege by the T-Mobile capes. Having said that, T-Mobile is notorious for not being able to receive signal indoors and for having a lower quality network. Care to dispute that?

While the Qualcomm modem is superior to Intel's, I haven't noticed any connectivity or performance issues to make me complain. Is there really a problem here or is Qualcomm just trying to put pressure on Apple? We both know the answer.

pro tip: when you tell people that they are "working on a tight budget" that comes off as incredibly condescending. It comes off as calling people poor because of their choice of cell provider. Don't act shocked when you're "under siege" after comments like that.

I can only dispute my personal experiences. I switched from ATT to T-Mobile the day after Thanksgiving 2016. There has been no difference in the service I have received. My bill was cut in half from what I was spending at ATT. Call it what you want, but an extra $60-75 dollars per month in my pocket is much appreciated. I cant imagine any sane person WANTS to spend more on cell service for no real gain. You can cite any source you want to justify your claims. If T-Mobile was not delivering a good product for me I would move onto another carrier.

 

[Black Magic]

pro tip: when you tell people that they are "working on a tight budget" that comes off as incredibly condescending. It comes off as calling people poor because of their choice of cell provider. Don't act shocked when you're "under siege" after comments like that.

I can only dispute my personal experiences. I switched from ATT to T-Mobile the day after Thanksgiving 2016. There has been no difference in the service I have received. My bill was cut in half from what I was spending at ATT. Call it what you want, but an extra $60-75 dollars per month in my pocket is much appreciated. I cant imagine any sane person WANTS to spend more on cell service for no real gain. You can cite any source you want to justify your claims. If T-Mobile was not delivering a good product for me I would move onto another carrier.

I pay the same price you pay for service I'm just on a different carrier.

 

[fairuz]

All irrelevent. No provider will be able to meet the specs for a decade at the current build out rates.

Did you look the "typical results" charts for different providers at the top? If they're true, then Qualcomm's chip is better IRL.

Of course, it's Qualcomm's own tests. They're going to be biased. But I wouldn't doubt that Qualcomm's chip performs better than Intel's, at least for now.
[doublepost=1532379618][/doublepost]

Smart consumers do have unlimited data and even use it as a home or mobile hotspot. You just have to research it.

Even without unlimited data, faster throughput helps with battery life since the download finishes quicker so the radio can go into low power mode.

Many smart consumers can't get unlimited data without sacrificing speed or coverage. You can't have it all in most places in the US. You usually don't even get the choice.
In response to the second thing: But does the phone use more power while it's transferring data at that higher 5G speed?
[doublepost=1532379679][/doublepost]

LOL that may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard from a fanboy! You prefer slower speed? Dude come on

I don't care about download speed on my PHONE, as long as it's at least 1mbit/s. The only thing exciting about Qualcomm's claims is the latency.

 

[Soccertess]

Being faster doesn't make up for the user experience of Android though

When this was first reported, people cried that the commercial wasn't representative of real world results. Once evidence is presented contrary, people jump to user experience. How about that user experience with Siri? Have you tried Google now?

I don't mean to attack, just saying Apple is NOT at the top of the pyramid any more. Android provides much better user experience in many many ways, but Apple has it's strong areas for sure. We can't just blindly defend Apple. Next you will say share price is up?

So let's be honest, Android from a user experience point of view has done an amazing job improving itself. "Some" hardware out there is arguably much higher above Apple. But let's not defend Apple when they drop the ball. I personally don't want to live in a world of dongle and mediocre products just because they have a picture of an apple on it.

RIP Steve: wish you were here to save Apple from Tim and Angela!

 

[pika2000]

Shots fired. Your move intel.

How about comparison with Mediatek? I though they are being considered by Apple as well.

 

[341328]

This is pretty impressive.

 

[iosuser]

Being faster doesn't make up for the user experience of Android though

Having faster download speed doesn’t help when the rest of the phone is lagging.

 

[mi7chy]

Having faster download speed doesn’t help when the rest of the phone is lagging.

Apple disabled secret throttling though and made it user selectable.

 

[IG88]

I'm always skeptical of "statistics" which intentionally exclude portions of the available data; that old quip about "lies, damn lies and statistics" promptly springs to mind.

For example, in this instance: why were the Sprint and Verizon iPhone models (those are the ones with that Qualcomm X16 chip) left off of the chart? The obvious gut response would be a speculate that Qualcomm didn't want to point out that their older chip also runs slower than their newer chip -- which is exactly what you would expect from any older chip. But reputable companies often tout the improvements of their own technology over the previous generation of that same technology... so why not do that as well, in this instance? After all, the benchmarks performed last year seemed to suggest that even the X16 beat out the XMM 7480 chips. Didn't it?

Unless of course the real world results contained within Ookla's Sprint/Verizon dataset didn't match up to the idealized test scenario of those previous benchmarks. Kind'a makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Could be that Apple is gimping the X16, in which case it wouldn't benefit QC to advertise those speeds.

Apple did get caught gimping the X12 to make it as slow as the Intel XMM 7360 in the iPhone 7.

https://www.recode.net/2016/11/18/13681324/apple-limiting-some-iphone-7-download-speeds
[doublepost=1532401095][/doublepost]

Even more important than throughput is the ability to stay connected. One of the reasons why most companies don't issue iPhone as company phones. Here's an example of iPhone owner who found out the hard way about his expensive personal iPhone X that doesn't even hold up to the older Galaxy S8.

Apple need to stop cheapening out and pay Qualcomm if they want the best and stop dumbing it down to Intel radio level.

https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/7xqtdg/iphone_slow_to_pick_up_service_on_the_nyc_subway

Apple is supposedly dumping Intel come 2020.

https://9to5mac.com/2018/07/05/apple-radio-chips-intel/

 

[more fps]

I'm no fanboy. I use both on a daily basis and you'd be surprised how much better the user experience is on Android these days. In many aspects it's better than iOS.

The biggest Android issue is not getting updates from your phone manufacturer and software bloat, but if you get a Pixel or an Android One device (third party devices updated by Google with stock Android) this problem is solved.

Android one doesn’t mean google is providing the updates. It still falls on OEM, just makes it easier compared to phones with heavier skin like touchwiz.

 

[iosuser]

Apple disabled secret throttling though and made it user selectable.

I was referring to Android, kind of as a joke. It’s still kind of true though that some of the latest high end Android phones (Samsung) have so much bloat that having all the latest hardware in them merely catches up to iPhones with less hardware.

For the record I have a Galaxy S9+ as spare. Daily phone is X.

 

[mi7chy]

Apple is supposedly dumping Intel come 2020.

https://9to5mac.com/2018/07/05/apple-radio-chips-intel/

Correct. When it happens it's because smart consumers are putting pressure on Apple to get their monies worth and not something Apple will do on their own out of good faith.

 

[torana355]

Download / upload speed is a function of range and connection/signal reliability. It is not just more speed.

Apple fans choose to ignore that very fact. I cant even use an Apple phone at my work if i wanted to, people get no reception with them, even on my S9 i only get 1 bar of 4G. But having bad reception is no big deal hey Apple fans

 

[ErikGrim]

Qualcomm this morning published a blog post touting the superiority of its Snapdragon 845 chip with integrated X20 LTE modem compared to other competing chips such as the Intel XMM 7480, which is the LTE chip used in some iPhone X models.

The data Qualcomm is sharing comes from an Ookla database of more than a million speedtests conducted by smartphone users all over the world. For those unfamiliar with Ookla, the company makes a Speedtest service that is designed to provide users with a way to measure their LTE and WiFi connectivity speeds.

Ookla regularly creates reports based on the user-submitted tests that it collects, which have become popular advertising points for cellular carriers and smartphone manufacturers who come out on top. Qualcomm's blog post focuses on data collected in the most recent Ookla report, from the period between April and June 2018.

Because Ookla reports can determine connectivity speeds between different devices and chipsets, the data can provide an interesting look at the top performing LTE chips. Qualcomm says that because of the large number of samples taken, the impartiality of the Ookla test, and the notable difference between the Snapdragon 845 and competing chips, it felt compelled to publicize the Ookla results.

In Ookla's results, which measured download speeds, upload speeds, and latency on the T-Mobile and AT&T networks, the Android smartphones equipped with the Snapdragon 845 included in devices like the Galaxy S9 and S9+, beat out smartphones equipped with Intel XMM 7480 and XMM 7360 chips, which includes the iPhone X, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, iPhone 7, and iPhone 7 Plus.

On T-Mobile's network, for example, the Snapdragon X20 LTE chip was 53 percent faster than the Intel XMM 7480 included in the iPhone X/8/8 Plus when it came to download speeds, and latency was 32 percent lower. It was 68 percent faster downloading content than the Intel XMM 7360 in the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus and offered 35 percent lower latency.

On AT&T's network, download speeds with Qualcomm's chip were 40 percent faster than the XMM 7480, upload speeds were 20 percent faster, and latency was 20 percent lower. Compared to the XMM 7360, download speeds were 64 percent faster, upload speeds were 41 percent faster, and latency was 27 percent lower.

Apple's iPhones actually use a mix of chips from Intel and Qualcomm, with some models equipped with Qualcomm's X16, but these devices were not included in the data shared by Qualcomm. The X16 chip is not as new as the X20 and is slower, so this chip would not measure up to Android smartphones equipped with newer technology.

Samsung also recently used Ookla's speedtest results in an anti-Apple advertisement highlighting the faster download speeds of the Galaxy S9 and the Galaxy S9+.

It's worth noting that the Galaxy S9 and S9+, along with other Android smartphones equipped with Snapdragon 845 processors and X20 LTE chips, like the LG ThinQ, Asus Zenfone 5Z, and OnePlus 6, are newer than Apple's flagship device, the iPhone X, and thus have newer technology.

Apple provided the following statement to Bloomberg in response to the speed-test data shared by Qualcomm:Apple is planning to introduce a new lineup of smartphones that are set to debut in just about a month and a half, if Apple follows its typical release schedule, and these devices will have new LTE technology.

Rumors have suggested Apple will introduce improved antenna technology for faster connection speeds, plus dual-SIM dual standby functionality. Apple may be planning to use Intel's XMM 7560 and Qualcomm's X20 chips, both of which are faster than the LTE chips in the iPhone X and will allow Apple's iPhones to better compete with the current crop of Android devices.

Full, detailed speed comparisons of the Snapdragon 845 with Intel's modems can be found over on Qualcomm's site for those interested.

Article Link: Qualcomm Touts 'Superior Cellular Performance' of Android Phones With Snapdragon 845 Chips

[doublepost=1532402334][/doublepost]

I don’t get it. I’ve never gotten below 100Mbs on 4G for the last three generations of A series phones. 31Mbs is something to brag about?

 

[Nico Subaru]

in canada rogers LTE+ on my Samsung galaxy s9+ 105mbps down load & 30mbps upload

you know what I did with that S9 !! I sold that junk because the softwear sucked.


side by side test the iPhone x loaded the page just as fast as the s9 did on the same network right beside each other.

 

[gnasher729]

Samsung's marketing department seems to be desperate. Look at what Apple does. Positive comments about Samsung = 0. Negative comments about Samsung = 0. You don't tell your customers that competition exists. Samsung is behaving infantile. Yes, it makes their fanboys happy. The average Joe Customer with a Samsung phone in his pocket thinks "Why are they talking **** about iPhones? Maybe I should look at iPhones, since Samsung seems to be so afraid of them." And the average Joe Customer with an iPhone in his pocket thinks: "Why are they talking **** about iPhones? If I ever switch away from an iPhone, there is ONE company that I'm not going to switch to, and that is Samsung".
[doublepost=1532426646][/doublepost]

This is just for marketing. I am sure their data is skewed. Using favorable points and not true sampling. Highest lows would be more impressive than unattainable real world speeds.

Well, the chip comes from Qualcomm, and the measurements come from Qualcomm. I'm sure Intel chips will do wonderfully when Intel measures them.
[doublepost=1532426757][/doublepost]

Smart consumers do have unlimited data and even use it as a home or mobile hotspot. You just have to research it.

Even without unlimited data, faster throughput helps with battery life since the download finishes quicker so the radio can go into low power mode.

It's all a matter of how much you want to spend. I have better things to spend my money on than mobile data.
[doublepost=1532427006][/doublepost]

You now understand your statement about switching does not hold water. My suggestion, always look at the areas one will be in 90+% of the time, purchase from the carrier that provides the better signal and service for that area you will be spending 90+% of your time in. That could be the Bubba Network or a name brand network, it is the signal strength and service in the area you desire that is important, not a network name.

Also consider that at home and at work you most likely have much faster WiFi, so the mobile data speed there doesn't matter that much.

 

[I7guy]

LOL that may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard from a fanboy! You prefer slower speed? Dude come on

A 4g fanboy? That’s rich. Poster is not wrong. Faster speeds are always welcome, but 5g isn’t going to fix what’s wrong with the US cell phone market.

 

[genovelle]

"With both LTE-Advanced speeds and Apple's custom-designed A11 Bionic, the smartest and most powerful chip ever in a smartphone, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone X provide an incredibly fast wireless experience that can easily handle today's most demanding tasks. With up to 27 LTE bands, more than any other smartphone in the world, these iPhones also provide the best worldwide LTE coverage." - Apple

How is this a response to a speed test? I detest corporate speak. Apple could have easily said, "Our phones are more than fast enough to handle any task thrown at it." Or better yet, say nothing at all. I think it's a known fact that Qualcomm's modems are generally considered faster than Intel's. Instead they issue a word salad - with no dressing.

Let’s see. They carry both in their phones. Connection speeds don’t actually mean better performance online. They actually do say it can easily handle today’s most demanding tasks. Also they point out that by offering 27 bands of LTE they have more coverage worldwide than any other phone, so it will work in more places meaning another phone would have to drop to 3G or 2G to work at all.

 

[69Mustang]

Let’s see. They carry both in their phones. Connection speeds don’t actually mean better performance online. They actually do say it can easily handle today’s most demanding tasks. Also they point out that by offering 27 bands of LTE they have more coverage worldwide than any other phone, so it will work in more places meaning another phone would have to drop to 3G or 2G to work at all.

You should probably try seeing again. You did the exact same thing I said Apple did. Deflect.
QC: Our chips are faster than Intel's
Apple: We've got 27 bands

That's not a counter to the assertion of faster chips. That's a "well, yeah but..."

Apple knows QC chips are faster than Intel's. They reportedly neutered them to bring parity with Intel's performance. No amount of quoting band numbers is going to change that. Like I said, the best move was to say nothing at all. Our collective attention span would have soon forgo... wait what are we talking about.

 

[FFR]

Apple fans choose to ignore that very fact. I cant even use an Apple phone at my work if i wanted to, people get no reception with them, even on my S9 i only get 1 bar of 4G. But having bad reception is no big deal hey Apple fans

Wait.
So no one at your work has an iPhone?

 

[FFR]

[doublepost=1532402334][/doublepost]View attachment 772412

I don’t get it. I’ve never gotten below 100Mbs on 4G for the last three generations of A series phones. 31Mbs is something to brag about?

Me either.
I get about 130Mbps on my iPhone X. In Another thread a user posted over 200Mbps on his.

Am I missing something?

 

[iosuser]

Cellular speed is the most inconsistent thing to test. I think for many people we've reached a point where connection speed is good enough for the typical tasks done on the phone, that such tests are pointless unless you're Qualcomm or the carriers. Nevertheless I did my own pointless test just now. Ran it 3 times, the Samsung "won" twice, but I'll post the one with the X winning since this is MacRumors Doing the same things on both phones, the difference really is splitting hairs as far as speed. Just enjoy what you have.