CES 2017: Playing With A Snapdragon 835 Prototype

The Snapdragon 835 processor may be one of the most highly anticipated chips in the past couple of years. With better performance, lower energy footprint and increased capabilities, ARM chips are quickly encroaching on Intel territory.

Windows Intelligence In Your Inbox

Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Tagged with

Share post

Please check our Community Guidelines before commenting

Conversation 4 comments

  • 7191

    06 January, 2017 - 9:55 am

    <p>Now that Intel has abandoned their low-powered Atom chips, they’re going to have a lot of trouble competing with this. The performance of the 835 should be pretty comparable to the formerly-known-as Core-M models, which currently cost hundreds of dollars. The whole Snapdragon SoC (including CPU, memory, radio, etc.) will actually cost less than a similar-performing Intel CPU alone. Intel is going to have to cut Core-M down to Atom prices if they want to compete with Qualcomm. This is assuming Windows-on-ARM actually works well, as I expect it will. After all, the only problem with the now ancient Surface 2 (non-Pro) wasn’t performance, it was simply that you couldn’t install actual Windows software.</p>

  • 127

    Premium Member
    06 January, 2017 - 10:44 am

    <p>Unrelated,&nbsp;but liking the new intro/outro</p>

  • 6210

    06 January, 2017 - 3:55 pm

    <blockquote><em><a href="#34275">In reply to </a><a href="../../users/Bart">Bart</a><a href="#34275">:</a></em></blockquote>
    <p>Ditch the ‘T’ shadow though.It doesn’t look good and makes everything a bit amateurish…</p>

    • 5592

      07 January, 2017 - 5:58 am

      <blockquote><em><a href="#34335">In reply to </a><a href="../../users/Jippa Wip">Jippa Wip</a><a href="#34335">:</a></em></blockquote>
      <p>And there needs to be a short version for short videos. Running 6 seconds intro and 6 outro on a video with only 25 seconds of content (not this one but some of the headset ones) makes it seem that the video is about the site branding more than the content.</p>
      <p>&nbsp;</p>

Windows Intelligence In Your Inbox

Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Thurrott © 2023 Thurrott LLC