Qualcomm and ARM?

[pete6032]

Can someone explain the difference between these two companies? Is it that ARM primarily designs the actual computer chips used in smartphones and that Qualcomm designs SoCs that use ARM chips?

 

[stormkroe]

Qualcomm is a chip designer that licenses instructions sets from ARM, usually designs their own chips but has used ARM-design processors in the past. They have their own gpu department that makes 'adreno' gpus, as opposed to the ARM designed gpu (currently 'mali').
Also, possibly wrong sub forum.

 

[Belegost]

ARM develops IP: this includes the ARM instruction set (a competitor to other instruction sets such as x86 and MIPS) and logic blocks for implementation, from small items like memory crossbars, all the way up to entire CPU layouts, they also have IP for developing GPUs. ARM does not build any physical objects from this IP, they license the designs to other companies.

Qualcomm is an ARM licensee, they license the instruction set, blocks, and for some products the entire CPU cores. They integrate the ARM IP with their own IP (modems for cellular, wifi, bluetooth; DSPs for camera and sensor processing, an in-house GPU design, RF components for connectivity, etc) to produce actual chips for products. They also license much of their own IP for use by other companies.

 

[Ichinisan]

OT?

 

[videogames101]

ARM sells IP, but doesn't actually sell any silicon. Qualcomm both creates IP and creates silicon products out of IP (both ARM's, their own, and others'). Historically, some Qualcomm SoCs have used ARM designed CPU's, some use Qualcomm's own in-house CPUs.

When I say "IP", what I really mean is HDL code that can be turned into part of a computer chip. These days most digital integrated circuits are created from HDL code(i.e. Verilog or VHDL) using automated tools.

Qualcomm is notable because of the strength of it's previous mobile products (CDMA radio technology all the way through Snapdragon SoC's.) ARM is notable because of just how many silicon vendors license from them (like, all of them.)

 

[pete6032]

ARM sells IP, but doesn't actually sell any silicon. Qualcomm both creates IP and creates silicon products out of IP (both ARM's, their own, and others'). Historically, some Qualcomm SoCs have used ARM designed CPU's, some use Qualcomm's own in-house CPUs.

When I say "IP", what I really mean is HDL code that can be turned into part of a computer chip. These days most digital integrated circuits are created from HDL code(i.e. Verilog or VHDL) using automated tools.

Qualcomm is notable because of the strength of it's previous mobile products (CDMA radio technology all the way through Snapdragon SoC's.) ARM is notable because of just how many silicon vendors license from them (like, all of them.)

So do current Snapdragon SoCs use Qualcomm CPUs or ARM licensed CPUs?

 

[destrekor]

So do current Snapdragon SoCs use Qualcomm CPUs or ARM licensed CPUs?

Both.

Those that are currently in fashion, like the 810 and 808, are ARM CPU designs in a Qualcomm SoC.

The 820 that is being released now/soon is going back to custom Qualcomm CPU designs utilizing ARM IP.

 

[CZroe]

ARM designs and licenses processors but does not build any. Qualcomm uses those licenses to design their own, usually very different from ARM's designs but compatible none-the-less. Qualcomm is one of many building ARM-compatible CPUs. Apple is another. There are many more. Both Apple and Qualcomm's designs are usually heavily customized but others out-right produce pretty much the exact CPU ARM designed and licensed to them.

 

[CZroe]

So do current Snapdragon SoCs use Qualcomm CPUs or ARM licensed CPUs?

As a shortcut to remain competitive while they customize their next-gen design the current gen CPU core is mostly ARM's design. The rest of the SoC package including the GPU is pretty much all Qualcomm.

 

[pete6032]

So basically ARM and Qualcomm are competitors but also benefit from one anothers technology? It seems like ARM has somewhat of a monopoly on mobile CPUs?

Snapdragon, Exynos, Mediatek, and Apple all use ARM instruction set CPUs?

 

[Ichinisan]

So basically ARM and Qualcomm are competitors but also benefit from one anothers technology? It seems like ARM has somewhat of a monopoly on mobile CPUs?

Snapdragon, Exynos, Mediatek, and Apple all use ARM instruction set CPUs?

Yeah. I don't think anyone wants to make a mobile CPU that isn't ARM-compatible because all the existing mobile apps are compiled for ARM.

 

[poofyhairguy]

As a shortcut to remain competitive while they customize their next-gen design the current gen CPU core is mostly ARM's design.

They have been using stock ARM cores in lower-end SoCs for years now. That is what the Moto G 1 has inside.

 

[pete6032]

Is the use of ARM instruction sets on mobile devices basically the same as the use of x86 instruction sets on computers? Both of them account for virtually all of the market?

 

[poofyhairguy]

Is the use of ARM instruction sets on mobile devices basically the same as the use of x86 instruction sets on computers? Both of them account for virtually all of the market?

No, it's not the same.

The way Android is designed the programs are somewhat abstracted from the underlying arch thanks to basically the same technology that drives Java. So within the Android ecosystem there are ARM devices and Intel x86 devices because they can all use the same software.

 

[CZroe]

No, it's not the same.



The way Android is designed the programs are somewhat abstracted from the underlying arch thanks to basically the same technology that drives Java. So within the Android ecosystem there are ARM devices and Intel x86 devices because they can all use the same software.

It doesn't seem to work so well in execution. I've seen plenty of apps that had to get x86 ports/fixes and many more with users begging for x86 support. They are usually root apps or high-performance apps (optimized games, low-level utilities, etc).

 

[CZroe]

It doesn't seem to work so well in execution. I've seen plenty of apps that had to get x86 ports/fixes and many more with users begging for x86 support. They are usually root apps or high-performance apps (optimized games, low-level utilities, etc).

It's kinda like Win8 and WinRT: sure, you can make universal Windows apps that run on ARM and x86, but not everyone bothers.

 

[poofyhairguy]

It doesn't seem to work so well in execution. I've seen plenty of apps that had to get x86 ports/fixes and many more with users begging for x86 support. They are usually root apps or high-performance apps (optimized games, low-level utilities, etc).

Well sure there are some apps on Android that aren't written in Java to get better and closer to the metal performance. Games are most of them. I have read that the Intel devices can still use 80% of apps in the Play Store as-is which is damn good compared to any other multi-arch OS.

It's kinda like Win8 and WinRT: sure, you can make universal Windows apps that run on ARM and x86, but not everyone bothers.

If you used Java to build your app, the same exact binary should work on either uarch. It isn't at all like the OSX/Windows universal binaries which are almost two apps in one.

 

[videogames101]

So basically ARM and Qualcomm are competitors but also benefit from one anothers technology? It seems like ARM has somewhat of a monopoly on mobile CPUs?

Snapdragon, Exynos, Mediatek, and Apple all use ARM instruction set CPUs?

Yes, it's a strange situation where Qualcomm is both a customer and competitor for ARM. (Although even when Qualcomm designs their own ARM compatible CPU they still have to pay ARM.)

Oh and btw the same is true for Intel, who is both a customer and a competitor for ARM. http://seekingalpha.com/article/3229806-intel-becomes-an-arm-chip-maker

Strange times.

 

[Mayne]

you are fucked.

 

[pete6032]

you are fucked.