Snapdragon 1000 Suggests Qualcomm Is Serious About the PC Market

Posted on June 25, 2018 by Mehedi Hassan in Hardware, Microsoft, Windows 10 with 71 Comments

When Microsoft and Qualcomm launched the first set of Always Connected PCs, the performance of most early devices was a bit disappointing. Both the companies obviously saw this coming, with Qualcomm already working on a new ARM processor that’s custom tailored for powering PCs. The company introduced the Snapdragon 850 earlier this month, which promises 30% faster performance and graphics performance, 20% better battery life, and up to 20% improvement in LTE-Advanced speeds than the Snapdragon 835. That’s a solid upgrade, but Qualcomm is already working on what seems to be the next-gen ARM processor for Always Connected PCs.

Meet the Snapdragon 1000 — a powerful new laptop chip from the chip maker to take on Intel’s Y and U series Core processors. The Snapdragon 1000 seems like a major upgrade from the current gen Snapdragon processors, possibly capable of powering desktop systems. WinFuture reports that Qualcomm is currently testing the new chip on a developer platform with up to 16GB of LPDDR4X RAM, two 128GB memory modules connected via UFS2.1, and gigabit LTE. The SoC — possibly socketed — comes in at about 20x15mm, which is bigger than the usual size we have come to expect from Qualcomm but it’s still smaller than Intel’s systems. With a total power draw of 12 watts for the entire SoC, the processor may even need active cooling depending on the maximum power draw and the device design.

WinFuture also spotted a job listing from Qualcomm that’s looking for a project engineer to manage test operations of the new Snapdragon 1000 and Snapdragon 845 for desktop systems, HoloLens, and…Andromeda. It’s unlikely Andromeda and HoloLens v2 — codenamed Sydney — will be powered by the powerful Snapdragon 1000, but the fact that Qualcomm is already testing the processor for real desktop systems shows Qualcomm is here to snatch the crown from Intel.

Tagged with , , ,

Join the discussion!

BECOME A THURROTT MEMBER:

Don't have a login but want to join the conversation? Become a Thurrott Premium or Basic User to participate

Register
Comments (71)

71 responses to “Snapdragon 1000 Suggests Qualcomm Is Serious About the PC Market”

  1. Avatar

    dsharp75

    With the already obsolete 835 and the upcoming 850, it would seem that Andromeda, which is the most highly anticipated unconfirmed project in years would be powered by the latest and greatest - the 850, but...

    earlier reports show the upcoming entry level Surface (Libra) device being power by Intel chips to protect the Surface brand. Why then would MS power the most anxiously awaited product in years with an un proven less performant chipset?

    The 1000 seems ideal, but too large and draws too much power requiring heat sink/active cooling.

    So, to keep awesome internet speeds and battery life, we need Qualcomm's power management and modem expertise. We need the dual antenna layout/engineering expertise MS has will Surface products and we need full x86 compatibility and performance that only Intel provides; and we need to protect the Surface brand.

    Unless there is a SnapDragon 900 with 25% increases (or more) across the board built for Andromeda, I don't see how this could be done in version 1.



    • Avatar

      HellcatM

      In reply to dsharp75: The 1000 chips are just being tested so they could get smaller. Remember when Microsoft first tested the Hololens and it was huge and now its smaller? We can't say what the 1000 chips will be until it actually comes out.

      Also the 850 is 30% faster and has 20% better battery life than the 835, now say the 900 gets a 25% increase and another 10% better in battery life and its only for the phone (it will be going against the 845 chips not the 850). So say the 1000 drops 10%-20% in battery life but keeps increase in speed, that might be a good trade-off compared to Intel processors which still get bad battery life. In other words till still get over 20 hours of battery life compared to Intel chips that get maybe 10? Also they may make it so it doesn't need a fan to cool it.

      This article is just talking about the 1000 but we don't know what the future will bring when it comes out.
      • Avatar

        damanman

        In reply to HellcatM:

        Hmm, the 850 is 30% faster in what tasks? Are these PC transferable tasks? Or are they special to mobile tasks? This SoC isn't the savior to the PC platform. Its just clocked a little higher than the equivalent mobile part.


        www.pcper.com/reviews/Mobile/Snapdragon-850-Mobile-Compute-Platform-Qualcomm%E2%80%99s-first-dedicated-PCs


        "Technically, the Snapdragon 850 uses the same core IP as SD 845 SoC for smartphones. That includes the Kryo 385 CPU, Adreno 630 GPU, Spectra 280 ISP, Hexagon 685 DSP/vector processor (a new naming shift), and the Snapdragon X20 LTE modem. The difference in naming is mostly to separate the chip options for mobile PCs from mobile phones and tablets, though there are modest performance changes because of higher clock speeds on the Kryo CPU. (2.8 GHz on the SD 845, 2.95 GHz on the SD 850.)"

  2. Avatar

    Lauren Glenn

    The only problem I ever have with built in cellular modem chips built into a laptop is that unless you buy it new, the tech is out of date when it becomes secondhand. You're paying for the same data plan but not getting the same speed so you need an external one anyway. Not that I say never include one, but if it adds enough to the price of the unit, getting an old one may not give you much benefit of built-in LTE.


    But until they fix the inability to use x64, I'm going to pass.

  3. Avatar

    madthinus

    By the sound of it, Snapdragon 1000 is the first real CPU for windows PC's. The 835, 850 are stop gap measures.

  4. Avatar

    rameshthanikodi

    The real problem with ARM windows devices so far is the price. I think users don't mind putting up slightly less performance for the incredible battery life. But ARM devices at Intel Core i5 prices.......that's not going to work.

  5. Avatar

    skane2600

    I think the origin of the excitement about Windows on ARM came from the hope that the Windows Phone and Windows tablets would succeed in the marketplace. Now I think people are just coasting on the initial excitement and IMO it's hard to find a compelling reason for why WoA is important.

    • Avatar

      roastedwookie

      In reply to skane2600:

      Well, Windows Phone failed (I was a fan of WP, not Winmobile 10, which was a total junk). Windows tablets will be tablet-ish until MS decides to build a proper touch UI mode. The current tablet mode in win10 is a joke. I honestly see no point of WOA if they keep going with the same insane pricing for which you can get an Intel device that does not need to emulate common apps and you don't need to rely on that joke app store.

      • Avatar

        skane2600

        In reply to roastedwookie:

        The dirty little secret is that ARM-based PCs aren't really any cheaper than Intel based ones. The CPU cost isn't the dominant factor in the cost of the integrated product, particularly at the low end. Once you throw emulation into the mix, however, the overall cost is going to rise significantly if you want to support native-like performance. In the specific case of WoA, it's not the implementation that's the problem because the compromised performance is inherent to emulation schemes in general.

  6. Avatar

    nbplopes

    I think it is great that more OSs support ARM. More choices for the consumer ... but they need to be good choices. Just more choices does not benefit necessary the consumer/professional, in fact it can hurt.


    Having said this, Qualcomm in my opinion is playing a risky gamble to take on Intel with Windows. Windows its a value diluter when it comes to hardware as it is created to power and promote one entity software and services whose strategy is to minimize the value of hardware towards software, and further differentiate both. Case in case the first Windows ARM based PCs. They are indistinguisheble from Intel PCs, meaning no different use cases that are being powered by these machines, to the point they are perceived to be less powerful due to legacy constraints and people thing that should be cheaper than Intel PCs by a noticeable margin to be worth it. This is a direct effect of value dilution in Windows.


    Better connectivity and more battery beyond 10 hours in my book its not a strong differentiator if not for niche use cases and tech lovers. But if they focus on much better graphics and AI on the metal capabilities, they might stand a chance, who knows. But this requires commitment from OS makers to ARM and MS is too volatile in that regard. Just the dichotomy between Edge and Core, you know were this vision pointes the value to, right? If Qualcomm hopes that Windows will give them any merit and credibility in innovation, just look at the the OS's history ...


    Will see how this evolves.

    • Avatar

      skane2600

      In reply to nbplopes:

      "Windows its a value diluter when it comes to hardware as it is created to power and promote one entity software and services whose strategy is to minimize the value of hardware towards software, and further differentiate both."


      In what way has Windows "diluted" hardware? What great ARM-based desktop platform is out there that makes Windows a hardware "diluter" by comparison? I think a more credible argument is that ARM dilutes the value of Windows by limiting which Windows programs that run and running them slower.


      I think WoA is a bad idea, but it doesn't have anything to do with diluting hardware.

      • Avatar

        nbplopes

        In reply to skane2600:


        "I think a more credible argument is that ARM dilutes the value of Windows by limiting which Windows programs that run and running them slower."


        Some questions:


        1 - How is the speed of the Android/ARM emulator on an SP4? Not very good right in comparison with the real deal? So why are you implicitly expecting that ARM runs x32 apps as well as its native CPU?


        2 - Do you think MS move on ARM is down to piss off Intel or there lies a deeper technical truth? Such as an iPad Pro surpassing in performance laptops in tasks such as photo and videos editing PC devices (MacBook Pro 13" and SP4 even when armed with high end Core i7s)?


        3 - Do you think that you "run the web" better on a PC than on ARM?


        The case of a PC is more and more versatility than speed in my opinion. If you don't need that versatility most of the time you might as well have conveniency, speed and endurance.


        Windows 10 S Mode removes that versatility and as people are saying, it kind of mutes the value of using a PC.

        • Avatar

          skane2600

          In reply to nbplopes:

          "So why are you implicitly expecting that ARM runs x32 apps as well as its native CPU?"


          1) I was not expecting that implicitly or explicitly. I expect all emulation schemes to be inferior no matter which platforms are involved, that's why it's best to avoid them.


          2) I think MS started down the ARM road when they thought they were going to be a player in mobile and inertia is continuing that strategy. I don't know much about iPad Pro vs MacBook Pro or SP4 (are the latter 2 PCs considered state-of-the-art? I doubt it.) but I'm generally skeptical about these sorts of claims.


          3) I don't think one can answer that question broadly. It depends on the configuration of the machine, the implementation of the particular browser used, the nature of the website visited, the operating system used and possibly the CPU used.



          • Avatar

            nbplopes

            In reply to skane2600:


            On 1)


            Ok. But the common man will not because he will not know that its emulating an x32 environment. All he will see is a Windows 10 machine that performs worst than the other at the same price. He will not understand why it should stick to UWP apps, he does not even know what is UWP.


            The conclusion to him is natural, "An Intel PC is simply more powerful, period".


            On 2)


            "I don't know much about iPad Pro vs MacBook Pro or SP4 (are the latter 2 PCs considered state-of-the-art? I doubt it.) but I'm generally skeptical about these sorts of claims."


            I gave you mine from my direct experience. I don't have such constraint.


            3) I think in practical terms we can. If we consider either iOS, Mac or PC, even Android. Simply put yes lower end ARM processors will run the web worst than higher end. The same for Intel processors. But I have not found one single site that runs badly on a $320 ARM tablet such as the iPad due to lack of device capacity. $320 would be a low price for a Windows 10 PC minus the versatily at that price, don't you think? I mean, you could run Photoshop on a PC at this price, but it does not make it practical.


            Here is a guy talking about something more sophisticated than web. This guy is a non tech kind of person. He is actually a professional photographer well known for making reviews and tutorials on the subject of photography. I've never heard him talk about tech if not photography ....:


            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDvsNRa13CI


            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtH9ME18Fc8


            They guy of course is not a tech guy, you can see how imprecise he was. IMHO is is being a bit more rosy in describing it, of course an overclock desktop class is way faster in most situations. But for his workflow, and he is a professional photographer and videographer ... there you go.

            • Avatar

              skane2600

              In reply to nbplopes:

              1) I think a sufficiently ignorant user like you describe might not know the difference between Intel and ARM either. They might simply conclude that they got a lemon. In any case, I don't know what question #1 had to do with anything I said in the first place.


              2) Sorry, but I consider anecdotal evidence with even more skepticism than I do benchmarks. I have no reason to deny your personal experience, but whether it applies broadly to other people or their activities is unknown.


              3) Again, what you personally experience isn't all that convincing as proof of the general case, but you may be right. If you're talking about a $320 iPad it must be a mini with about a 7.9 inch display. Obviously it doesn't have the same performance as the iPad Pro you mentioned earlier. You can get a 11 inch Windows laptop with similar specs for $139.



              • Avatar

                nbplopes

                In reply to skane2600:


                1) Exactly. Don’t you think he or she will know after taking it to support? Has you said he got a Lemon.


                I used this to sustain my argument that the value of ARM with Windows in the current form is being diluted. The drawbacks outweighs the benefits of this approach given other options. The consumer will understand that it’s an hardware problem, not a software as it always the case with Windows .... unfairly!!!!!


                Your conclusion was spot on. He or she got a $1000 Lemon


                2) I purposely have not mentioned benchmarks because I thought you knew them. Look for Geekbench. I’m not interested in discussing benchmarks. But you have anecdotal evidence and you have benchmark evidence, both easy to find.


                3) We are going sideways here with details. In the context of performance it does not matter the size of the display, but the resolution, $320 is not an iPad Mini but an iPad (9 inch model). Case in case more than twice 1080p equipping a lot of Windows laptops. Good luck with those $130 PC.


                I am trying to honestly inform as you seam a bit uninformed. This and qualifying based on hands on experience. That is all.


                What you require is, clear and honest hands on experience. You may not like the user experience. You may prefer the versatility of a PC (more ports, more convincente keyboard, mouse support, external display support, ability to install whatever even if in practical terms does not work well in a specific machine .... etc), but in honesty you will conclude that the performance is up there in practice.


                This is counter intuitive for multiple reasons. I understand. Once I started really looking at it I was surprised too. But it’s nevertheless happening. It’s extraordinary when software is built with full hardware affinity, no compromises!!!!


                Top MS engineers see this, I’m sure. That is why ARM makes sense. The question is if they will bite the bullet of going full hardware affinity. But even there they have still to convince developers to rebuild their x32 apps with modern technology and approaches. Including their own.


                Good luck to Qualcom in showing the world it’s amazing technical achievents with Windows in the current form.


                Cheers.

                • Avatar

                  skane2600

                  In reply to nbplopes:

                  I didn't claim any relationship between the size of the display and performance. You started talking about price even though it also has no technical relationship to performance but I wouldn't accuse you of being "uniformed" on that basis because you didn't actually state that claim any more than I claimed a relationship between display size and performance.


                  Always dangerous to assume the level of knowledge that a stranger has.

                • Avatar

                  nbplopes

                  In reply to skane2600:


                  I am lost about what you are skeptical about and why. I am trying to follow your reasoning.


                  You mentioned display and performance in the same line. I than made the error of assuming that you were thinking that display size and performance, as of speed, was somehow related from an technical perspective. I said that is not. My mistake. You correlated $320 with the. Mini, I corrected it, it’s the latest iPad. The tools mentioned work well on a regular iPad. Furthermore whatever comes to Pro will come to the regular in a split of time. That is why I have not made so much of a distinction. Of course in the iPad Pro works faster in a particular moment in time, and the bigger screen is more convenient for work.


                  Yes, a $700 iPad Pro is in practical terms faster than an MacBook Pro 13", Surface Pro or whatever PC in that class, and it costs less. But it’s also less versatile. That is the trade off.


                  Using these devices as examples of ARM.


                  This is why Qualcomm is taking on the fight to Intels turf now. This is why MS is placing some bets with Windows 10 on ARM.


                  Price is important, because not only its there in performance is it is cheaper if we take performance in consideration. The trade off is versatility already. Not performance.


                  Note these devices and most PC laptops in the market are not Workstation Class as they are not particularly designed for technical or scientific applications. You can use them to do it but it does not mean it does it well, sometimes and not so few its even impractical. But are lighter, nicer to use and more portable, that is the trend as most professionals do not have technical or scientific concerns at work. That is the turf ARM makes sense if we put aside legacy driven constraints!


                  Anyway, I think this medium is not a good one to deeply discuss this matters while keeping an holistic mindset. I personally quickly get lost sometimes, and may misread what is written.


                  Nice exchange of perpestives. Thank for your patience.


                  Cheers.

                • Avatar

                  skane2600

                  In reply to nbplopes:

                  Yes, I jumped to the conclusion that it was an iPad mini when I checked its price because I didn't expect the standard iPad to cost about the same. Over time I expect incremental performance improvements but don't expect those improvements to be much different from one CPU family to the next.


                  The only Mac I've ever owned is a used Mac Mini when it was given to me to support a development effort I was doing as a contractor years ago. I haven't owned a high-end Windows PC in over 15 years and I've never owned an iPhone or iPad. So I have no experience to share that would contradict your own. I'm just generally skeptical of broad claims because I believe that performance is a complex issue that depends on multiple factors and it's difficult to measure it comprehensively.


                  Although simplicity and flexibility are often traded-off, flexibility and performance aren't in natural opposition. That doesn't mean that such a trade-off can't be the case with respect to an iPad and a Windows PC, but it isn't inevitable in general.


                  Perhaps my standard of proof is unrealistically high.

                • Avatar

                  nbplopes

                  In reply to skane2600:


                  1) Understood. This medium has its limits for good communication. ARM architectures are yet improving in performance at a faster pace than Intel. That might change in the future, but at the moment is what I see. That is why I wrote what I wrote.


                  2) Yes performance its a difficult thing to measure. Especially when systems are built and named for deceiving purposes. It is used to be far simpler. Today we have Core i5 way faster than Core i7 for instance. Core i3, i5, i7 means little. What matters is what comes after this labels, but it usually hidden and are highly cryptic! This is done to confuse buyers with the aim of selling cheaper CPUs at a high price, or to induce the perception that you bought a high performance CPU at a low price. In comparison GPU's labelling are most trustful, higher numbers means more performance. Than you need to see the RAM and the SSD used. All these little things impact performance in a big way in practice.


                  In this discussion I'm focusing just on the ARM / Intel CPU performance in real life for a class of devices.


                  In my mind we have when it comes to PC/Intel laptops we have


                  Mobile Workstation Class (built for technical and scientific purposes): Offers that go from $1100 up to $2200 base line (without upgrades).


                  The lower you go the bulkier, heavier hotter is the laptop (transportable?). There is compromises in the chassis and in the display. Durability. But you do get a fast machine.


                  If you don't want this "inconveniences". be prepared to pay $2200 and up.


                  Mobile Gaming Class: Similar to Workstation Class.


                  Mobile General Use Class: Here you can find stuff from $700 up to $2200. The same has the Workstation the lower the bulkier, heavier, hotter ... but still way more mobile than Workstations or Gaming systems at similar prices. Don't upgrade choosing the highest GPU or CPU here. Because of throttling due to termal conditions you don't get the benefit of such upgrades, just money down the drain.


                  Mobile Web Use Class: $100 up to $700.


                  How did I came to this?


                  I'm a software engineer and sometime ago bought the SP3 maxed specked (1700 euros), all in all with the dock and keyboard I may gave spent over 2100 in this setup. Windows 10 and MS messes apart, I learned that there are no thermal miracles. What I was looking for was really a mobile workstation, what I did is buy a mobile general use class device maxed out to be a mobile workstation, big mistake. I bought this for good reasons that turned out to be wrong approach:


                  - I wanted a machine that I could develop software with. You know, Visual Studio, Docker, work with Azure ....


                  - I'm also an amateur photographer. I wanted a machine that could edit my photos, you know use stuff like LR and a bit of Photoshop.


                  - I wanted a machine that could replace my iPad. You know, I did not wanted to carry both the iPad and the Laptop. Being able to detach the keyboard and sit on the couch sounded like a good idea etc.


                  - I was not interested in gaming. I use XBOX and to be honest, I'm no longer a gamer ... that would be another story,


                  None of that the machine did very well! I could use it to do all those things, but past the novelty the inconveniences were evident. This became even clearer when I decided not to think in terms of wanting it all on the same machine.


                  Once I stopped thinking in those terms I had several options, that turned out to be better and cheaper in practice. Because I take my mobile workstation everyday from home to work and back, than clients etc. I wanted something light and durable in such class. A lot of people but laptops and leave them on the desk and occasionally take them out of the desk, that is not my case.


                  Because of my eyes I wanted also a good display, good resolution, and a good keyboard. Not a gamer so integrated graphics would be fine in the mobile workstation (my software is not graphics intensive). I thought that even if I did not go for a full on graphics workstation it could handle my photography (mistake, more on that later).


                  Did some research, and because of my prior excellent experience with Macbook Pro's (2009 and still working today even though its all smacked), decided for a MacBook Pro 15" from 2015, prior to the redesign. Heaven in comparison at levels. I use a VM to work with Visual Studio when I need to do stuff in C#.


                  Spent the same has I spent overall with the SP3. This machine, already 2 years in use, will do me for another 3 coping with technical pressure in my context (after than general productivity).


                  I could have gone for another laptop PC, I'm sure I could buy one (not Surface Book later on that) for the same price, probably a bit better in performance. But I also have an iPhone, and for work integration I get is something that still Windows / Android is dreaming about, that was important for my choice (no, I don't give a dime for AI for personal use at the moment, some is just enough).


                  Meanwhile, with my iPad from 2012 dyeing and no more SP3 (gone to my wife), I did misroducs a tablet. Bought the iPad Pro entry level. Ok, costs rosed in comparison to the SP3 from 2100 Euros to 2920 euros. But the all pack just works, Works extremely well.


                  So what I learned with the iPad Pro.... ARM is changing the General Use and Web Use Classes quite a bit. This came to me when I realize that could edit my photos on this machine way faster than an Workstation with integrated graphics (and by transition anything else PC with integrated graphics). In fact, it rivalled my friends desktop workstation with medium end discrete graphics for this purpose. I do all amateur photography in the iPad Pro now. For other productivity tasks while on the desk the drawback is the lack of mouse support, this as nothing to do with ARM but with Apple choice. Also my screen is too small work to be perfectly convenient for general work, my fault, should, have have gone for 12.9". That would be perfect in that regard. Mark this, $800! entry beating any PC system with integrated graphics in performance, any and rivalling general use class in performance, check geek bench something I did to further understand what was going on.!!!!! You get an excellent display, good graphics, tablet, so on and so forth. Drawback: versatility starting with the lack of mouse support. The software choice is brilliant at all levels and from that its getting better year on year.


                  Which gets me thinking. What if we have a machine like this with mouse support and we could attach a better keyboard?


                  It would not solve my Workstation need, but here this.


                  I'm thinking in 2 to 3 years, when my laptop stops fitting the bill, actually go for a workstation desktop focused on processing power, RAM and disk speed not GPU. Hopefully those two drawbacks in ARM devices will be gone by than. Than no more laptops for me in the traditional sense. Leave the desktop workstation at the office. At any other place use this "future" device (its almost there). When I need to do workstation work on the go, just connect to the desktop remotely, this is getting to be like one is just there!


                  I do predict that soon, for General Use people will have everything up to $1200 tops. with ARM. All this review on General Use laptops up to $2200 (Premium) will be gone!. Most none technical and scientific work do not need the versatility of a PC. Up from that, is mobile workstation stuff and or desktop. In case of Apple, its price structure already reflects this notion, but its still not delivering the iPad Pro that fits the bill, but what they need to fix does not look like a big technical challenge. You already have iPad that go from $320 up to $1200 (maxed). The Mac laptop are priced from $1500 and up for this reason. Than you have the desktops that as you know, a mid range desktop surpasses a Mobile Workstation Class device in performance.


                  They are already talking about a major iOS redesign called iOS 13 towards better support for productivity. This year, was all about the Laptop and Desktop workstation OS, mainly because of errors they have been making in the MacBook Pro line and the iMac Pro line that started to drain developers and studio professionals away, you know the guys that need Workstations.


                  All this seams to be a bit off from our discussion. But it has all to do with ARM and its potential. You see, the price structure of Apple reflects their belief in ARM architecture and its potential. They rose the prices of MacBooks to create space (probably too soon). The Macbook and MacBook Air will be gone with this new iPad Pro comes with mouse support and all (maybe in two years or less).


                  You also have MS trying to get the real Windows into ARM with Qualcomm. Notice the MS bets on Multiplatform for its software and the Cloud moving out of Intel only software. Windows with its Intel centric architecture is now a weakness and MS does not seam to have the technical hardware expertise build something on par with ARM, and they have Intel centric legacy constraints that Apple or Google do not have (merit to Apple and Google has they built an entire new ecosystem from the ground up, while MS was still going in circles with Windows everywhere). Qualcomm because they don't want to be at the mercy of only iOS and Android, they are helping MS to bring stuff to ARM, but I feel that is too late really.


                  Both companies have brilliant people working there. This is happening for a reason that go deep into technology, its not just marketing. You just have to read the signs to understand this. Google is kind of an hybrid between ARM and Intel still, they are focusing all bets on AI.


                  Intel is in big trouble when it comes to general use devices (handheld and laptop). Maybe that is the real reason why he resigned!!! Maybe the new Quads change the trend. Maybe their bets on integrated graphics change the trend. Maybe they focus on improving connectivity works well. That seams to be their way out of this mess they got into. We just have to wait and see. But the trend does not run on their favor at the moment in my opinion. Because if this Intel miracle happens, it will prove Apple, Google and MS have placed their bets on the future wrong when it comes to general use devices, but even MS is not so sure at the moment considering it is the one that has the longest tail of legacy with Intel!


  7. Avatar

    Tony Barrett

    WoA and Windows x86 will just lead to huge confusion in the market for the average consumer. WinRT died in disgrace, and consumers steered well clear. Qualcomm though want a piece of the desktop pie, and MS are just there to be abused by them to get it. If WoA fails dismally - and there is a strong chance it will, then Qualcomm will just try something else, but mobile is still their core market, so they won't lose much, yet MS would as they strive to take Windows into places nobody asked for.

    WoA performance is not good, compatibility though emulation is poor and many programs just won't run. I know it's early days, but people have little patience, and yet MS still want everything to go through their app store, and 'S mode' to be the default setting, but it's not a foregone MS will ever get there.

  8. Avatar

    roastedwookie

    Very good, but I will never buy a wincrap device. Windows on ARM is simply junk, same mediocre crap like windows 10, poor optimizations, poor emulation of x86, no x64 emulation. And fanboys, don't give me the store apps crap all over again...that store is a ghost town filled with junk. And don't get me started with the simply catastrophic tablet mode...worst touch UI and UX ever seen in an OS.

  9. Avatar

    Brandon Mills

    This is Microsoft's best bet for the upcoming (or already here) iPad / Chromebook apocalypse. Workplaces are going to start replacing complex mobile devices with simples ones that don't need as much maintenance, have better battery life, etc. Since third party apps are pretty much MIA (again), MS needs to focus on the apps it can control. Improve Edge to the point that it is par with Chrome and make the Office 365 experience on a Windows devices smooth as silk. Get the x86 compatibility to tolerable levels for legacy apps, but emphasize native apps for the most part.


    Now, I don't think MS has the best hand to play here. Even though its a business device, as we've seen with phones, consumer app demand does factor into what people want to use. I know my organization is already becoming reliant on several iOS apps over the years.


    You'll always have Pro level devices still for developers, IT, etc.. These ARM devices are not for those people. For the vast majority of workers who just need Office 365 and a good web browser, this is a good solution, and the goal that Windows 10 S has. Sure, you can run S on x86 / x64 chips, but the whole point of S is to get you off the x86 / x64 architecture.


    I think Apple has the best vision here. Start with a mobile OS that everyone is using, and start converting tablets, tablets with keyboards, and eventually desktops. Google is a close second, but I disagree with the Chromebook / Android split. MS well. Best of luck guys. I'll be rooting for you, but not betting my job on your success.

    • Avatar

      roastedwookie

      In reply to BrandonMills:

      Ipad/Chromebook aprocalypse? :)) Based on what? Ipad is a tablet, Chromebooks are laptops. Windows offers laptops and 2in1s, NO tablets, and don't give me the tablet thing again...tablet mode in windows is JUNK, the entire touch UI and UX is below mediocrity.

      I can never trust MS these days in succeeding...their proven history is enough. I do not know who and how will change the trend, but for sure it won't be Microsoft.

  10. Avatar

    efewffsd

    So its an 845 clocked a few hundred megahertz faster than a stock SDM 845 but now called an SDM 1000. Not seeing a ton of customization here over their generic 845 offerings. You PC guys read way too far into this and are grasping at straws.

    • Avatar

      Chris_Kez

      In reply to efewffsd:

      No. Please go back and re-read the article.

      • Avatar

        damanman

        In reply to Chris_Kez:

        If you read other sites with more in depth information, you would know this. This article lacks pertinent info.


        www.pcper.com/reviews/Mobile/Snapdragon-850-Mobile-Compute-Platform-Qualcomm%E2%80%99s-first-dedicated-PCs


        "Technically, the Snapdragon 850 uses the same core IP as SD 845 SoC for smartphones. That includes the Kryo 385 CPU, Adreno 630 GPU, Spectra 280 ISP, Hexagon 685 DSP/vector processor (a new naming shift), and the Snapdragon X20 LTE modem. The difference in naming is mostly to separate the chip options for mobile PCs from mobile phones and tablets, though there are modest performance changes because of higher clock speeds on the Kryo CPU. (2.8 GHz on the SD 845, 2.95 GHz on the SD 850.)"

  11. Avatar

    Waethorn

    So the Snapdragon 1000 isn't due until next year, meaning devices likely won't be shipping until late into 2H20. That's getting pretty close to the EOL of Windows 10, five years later. Not a good time to be looking at Windows systems. If anything, you should start to look at migrating OFF Windows by that time.

    • Avatar

      HellcatM

      In reply to Waethorn: What you don't get is Windows 10 is the last version of Windows so it will never go EOL. Windows 10 will just keep being up dated hence there won't be an Windows 11. Get it? So I and over a billion people won't be migrating off of Windows unless Microsoft dumps Windows all together or really, really fucks it up, then and only then will I be looking into Linux...will never move to macos.


      • Avatar

        skane2600

        In reply to HellcatM:

        It's possible that Windows will still be around for a long time, but keep in mind that "Windows 10 is the last version of Windows" is a policy that may be reversed at any time particularly if MS gets a new CEO. It's worth keeping in mind that version numbers and version names provide a useful function. Eventually it could happen that peripherals that say they are Windows 10 compatible will stop being so because of changes in Windows 10. It's not as if third-parties are going to print things like Windows 10 Creators Update compatible on their packaging.

      • Avatar

        Waethorn

        In reply to HellcatM:

        It still has a 10-year lifecycle. EOL is 2025. Microsoft already stated that.

        • Avatar

          jrickel96

          In reply to Waethorn:

          Not really. They've changed their policies. Versions have short lifecycles of about 18 months. Build 1709 has service expiring on April 9, 2019. 1803 is November 12, 2019. Enterprise customers are on a different set of dates. The last released LTSB expired in 2026 for long term service, but most Enterprise have moved into subscription service. Microsoft 365 offers more alternatives for businesses to ensure support.


          Microsoft has changed how they service the OS and they usually support each version 18 months after release. They've done a good job moving people forward in Windows 10, so most users are on the current version within 6 months of release.


          So Windows 10 has become the second most up to date OS on the planet behind iOS. It still is much more up to date than Android or the myriad of Linux versions floating all over the place.


          Windows 10 will continue to soldier on. It will get past the billion active devices threshold before Thanksgiving of next year and continue to climb.


          No company is going to leave it when they depend on it for their money. Most lawyers, hospitals, and government offices use nothing else for desktop (they will use iOS for mobile). Creative professionals need it. Production uses it. All the major sports leagues pretty much exclusively use Windows 10 for any of their serious needs.


          Here's a little nugget: Windows 10 is used to make a lot more money than all of the other OSes on the market combined. Seriously. Architects aren't using Linux and most major projects are still primarily managed on Windows and run through Microsoft Project. Any skyscraper you see getting build? Designed on a Windows machine and all the construction is primarily managed on one too.

          • Avatar

            roastedwookie

            In reply to jrickel96:

            Windows 10 and its updates were and are forced on PCs, so the numbers of installs really don't matter...users do not update because they want to, but because its being forced on them. If up to date means to have another broken update installed without your consent..well...nothing else to say.

    • Avatar

      Stooks

      In reply to Waethorn:

      It is actually perfect timing. By the time this chip rolls out in new system there will be lots and lots of native Windows 10 on ARM software in the store :)


      The elephant in the room is the software. With out native Windows 10 ARM based software all this update does is make the emulation suck less.

      • Avatar

        roastedwookie

        In reply to Stooks:

        Lots of ARM apps in the store? :) I remember the same confidence for that app store ever since the first iteration...and ever since then, devs ignored it over and over again. Sorry for you, but it won't happen..UWP is dead and devs give zero to none F*** about that app store, let alone recompiling desktop apps to ARM or, of the most important thing, building drivers for ARM.

        Windows 10 is in a never ending beta stage..buggy, with broken updates tested by guinea pig insiders. Until a new CEO comes to replace that imbecile, nothing good will come from them

  12. Avatar

    longhorn

    The success of Windows on ARM is tied to the success of UWP. Win32 emulation will likely never be good enough.


    • Avatar

      Hougaard

      In reply to longhorn:

      What about win32 compiled for ARM64?

      • Avatar

        longhorn

        In reply to Hougaard:

        That sounds like a lot of work for developers. There isn't a one click solution as is the case for UWP apps. It's rather rewrite than recompile as far as I know. Do proof of concept Win32 apps compiled for ARM exist?


        I'm not saying Win32 for ARM isn't possible, just that developers might not care. I think Windows on ARM is an UWP affair similar to S mode.


        • Avatar

          Hougaard

          In reply to longhorn:

          Well, Windows RT was more than a proof of concept. And Windows on ARM is itself compiled for ARM.

        • Avatar

          evancox10

          In reply to longhorn:


          Unless you're writing a driver, it really should just be a recompile 99% of the time.

          • Avatar

            longhorn

            In reply to evancox10:

            Then Microsoft should promote Windows on ARM to Win32 developers. Without native Win32 ARM programs the WoA platform is going to suffer the same fate as "S". People need Win32, it's the reason they use Windows. No sane person is going to run Chrome or their business programs in emulation mode. Powerful capabilities is a trademark of Windows. If you want something lightweight and limited there are better alternatives.


            Who is going to use Windows on ARM? Imaginary people like "First Line Workers" maybe...


            The reason I'm a little upset is because just as you write I know that Microsoft can bring Win32 to ARM, but MS isn't promoting this. Instead MS stubbornly believes that Windows on ARM will succeed despite that it's basically "S" on ARM. There must be wise people at Microsoft who understand this and can bring Windows out of its current death spiral.


            With 1,6+ billion users Windows isn't going to disappear tomorrow, but given the direction MS is taking nothing is granted anymore. With a solid push for Win32 on ARM there would be some meat on the WoA bones. I feel Microsoft is trying to cut corners, which ultimately leads to a platform without users.


          • Avatar

            IanYates82

            In reply to evancox10:

            Yep. Just look at the wide variety of software that's already cross compiled for Linux, Mac and Windows. Here you can still have your classic Windows-only gui code. So long as you've coded well to handle any x86 vs x64 stuff (rather than just doing x86 always) you're in great shape to recompile and have most things work.


            If you've written in .net, you're even closer.

Leave a Reply