• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Discussion Qualcomm Snapdragon Thread

Page 106 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
It’s possibly also the SLC that was making the difference, like with A15 it has 32MB lmao. (A14, 16MB. M base chips? 8.)

Look, everyone knows it’s perf/GHz but it’s just a colloquial term now, it’s kinda similar to the “nanometer” process naming. Not entirely, because that’s a corporate name that can’t be replaced, whereas we can choose different descriptors for the actual “IPC” values (perf/GHz), but still. Most of us know by now that IPC isn’t really a proper term lol.

I mean I agree, but for absolute performance reasons for example people get sloppy and will shift from “huh interesting IPC” to “what do you mean, AMD and Intel are like 20% ahead on perf vs [insert mobile laptop core from like QC or speculated future one, and I’m sure they’ll do this when MediaTek/Nvidia have a laptop chip too etc]” and cite charts “8@3 this when it’s practically parity or a smaller margin on mobile. And mobile is most of the client market and a majority of the money as well. You cannot have your cake and eat it too on that, lmao. If you want to talk desktops-only — fine, but that’s less and less of the discourse thankfully and deservedly. It’s just a humongous disservice.

Note: nothingness, I don’t mean *you*. I am using it third person/generically.

It’s a pet peeve because neckbeards from the AMD/Intel caucus love playing fast with this.
Don't make me tap the sign.
 
So judging by preliminary SPEC results, Oryon V1 has strong FP performance but weaker INT performance.

So improving INT by a larger amount should be priority for Oryon V2
 
Screw that. I'll do it Excel style!
View attachment 101665
Awesome, thank you! This confirms my previous suspicions that the Omnibook X was efficiency-oriented.

That being said, I have determined that I must be a very heavy battery user. I'm getting between 6h~10hr w/ this Omnibook X, which is better than anything I've ever used before, but I was really hoping to hit ~ 15hr, 16hr AT LEAST. I mean, they claim up to 26 hours - idk if we will ever actually get there for anything more than video playback...
 
So judging by preliminary SPEC results, Oryon V1 has strong FP performance but weaker INT performance.

So improving INT by a larger amount should be priority for Oryon V2
It's a pretty good start. Better than AMD's Zen1 in my opinion. It's interesting to see how they can improve this. If they can increase the clocks a bit and then add some ipc improvements on top, they are in really good spot CPU wise.

GPU, divers and firmware (bit odd behaviour in some units)... Those are problematic.
 
GPU, divers and firmware (bit odd behaviour in some units)... Those are problematic.
All I want is EGPU support with either an Nvidia or AMD card. Then I could finally ditch my Intel MBP. I’m looking forward to V2 as well.

I have nearly zero expectations of Qualcomm making a GPU that is on par with Nvidia or AMD. But hey let’s see 8Gen4 GPU.
 
Last edited:
SPECFP doesn't mean much IMO and, frankly, is best ignored unless you know exactly what you're looking at.
Yeah it's an antique.
Most FP workloads of note will be mem/cache-bw benches anyway.
I have nearly zero expectations of Qualcomm making a GPU that is on par with Nvidia or AMD
Current Adreno is pretty modern, they'll just need to have real cache b/w, less skewed ALU/reg ratio and moar frequency.
 
Back
Top