Question What do you think is most important when considering a mobile phone CPU?

[SHaines]

The new, lower cost iPhone has been capturing headlines and pushing smartphone tech to the forefront of the news again. If someone does need to upgrade their smartphone, they'll want to find something that'll last for a while.

When you're considering picking up a new phone what do you think is most important when considering a smartphone CPU?

 

[JWMiddleton]

Third, I think that typing with one's thumbs on a tiny touch-screen device is . . . .ridiculous.

Aaaarrrrgghhh....I started with a TRS-80 in the Fall of 1980 and have preferred full size keyboards since. I am actually in awe of some of the kids I see that can type as fast on their phone as I can on a keyboard. With my fat thumb, I am constantly hitting the wrong key.

well i'm not a giant phone maker so i don't buy smartphone CPUs.

Hi ElFenix, Glad to see another old timer still around. When I read the title of this thread I was thinking who cares what CPU it is, I am buying the features of the whole package. Last year we switched from AT&T to T-Mobile. It was right after the Galaxy S10s came out. We opted for the S-10e for the features and because they spread the cost over 24 months and got one free as long as we stayed with T-Mobile. We traveled a lot in Europe and it was great to be able to use my phone without paying extra when out of the U.S. I've also be able to get some great travel pics with this phone.

John

 

[ericlp]

I switched from an Samsung S8 to a Pixel 3a XL. Even tho, some say the 3a is better than the S8, it's hard to say, but for me, I don't really do anything on my phone to tax it out, other then, I use it for GPS mostly, and stream somaFM to my van stereo over bluetooth. So, taxing out GPS, Cell Tower and bluetooth for long 4 to 5 hour drives, usually in the hot sun...gives it a run for its money. While I did the same thing with my S8, the S8 would overheat a lot, esp charging with the screen on and sun beating down on it, even tho, the AC was on.

I think, efficiency, not in just battery but, keeping the "HEAT" down so the phone doesn't throttle down and slow down to not overheat. I also had samsung phones overheat when doing VR, esp, if there was a phone cover on them. Since the CPU and GPU plus Ram are all on the "CPU" SoC. Some CPU's integrate security and AI processors.

So, really, everything as to be optimized and work well together.... seamlessly and effient.

 

[judasmachine]

It's barely even a consideration to me. I'm so into Google's software that if it runs in a timely fashion I probably won't mind them going to the SD 700 series CPUs.

 

[pyjujiop]

Truthfully, it's not something I give much thought to. I don't do anything fancy on my phones and usually just buy the cheap prepaid phone with the best specs. I've had a $100 Moto e5 Cruise for close to two years now and it still gets the job done.

If I were ever going to buy a flagship phone, I would look up the specs and benchmarks and get the best CPU and GPU combination, but I'm practical and I've never needed anything like that, so I've never bought one.

 

[nisryus]

1. CPU
2. RAM
3. Storage

My Moto E4 has limited RAM (2 GB), 16 GB of storage, and an older lower range CPU, so if I am switching between apps it gets slow. Also I constantly have to clean up the storage, even after moving files off to micro-sd.

 

[ksec]

That is a rather strange question.

Why would you choose a phone solely based on its CPU?

Or put it another way, if another Vendor has a Smartphone CPU ( the post said CPU and not SoC ) that is 2x faster than Apple's iPhone in every way but doesn't get Software update past 2 years.

Would I buy it? No.

It is not the CPU that makes the phone last longer, it is the software. And unless you are picking up a Sub $100 phone ( and depending on where you are, even $100 phone could be vastly different say from US to China / India ), most Smartphone's CPU should be fast enough for majority of consumers.

( The Keyword here is consumers, if you are on Anandtech you are already classified as prosumer / enthusiasts )

 

[misuspita]

0. Price - can't afford 1000€ phones, most I've paid was 400€, would be happy to get closer to 250€.
1. Camera quality.
2. Snappiness (can be mid HW but great SW, don't care)
3. Battery - can last a full heavy day.
4. Screen size no less than 5.5, no more than 7.

 

[Doug S]

What a silly thread. You can't choose your phone's CPU, you choose a phone and it has whatever CPU it has. People choose their phone by first deciding whether they want iPhone or Android, and then go from there based on price/features/brand/whatever. I really doubt there are very many people who have switched between the two more than once (not counting trying a switch and deciding it was not for them and going back as a "switch")

Even if CPU performance was remotely a contest between the two you'd be in for a lot of annoyance if you were constantly switching based on whoever happened to have the fastest phone at the time you were ready to buy.

Imagine if Windows was Intel only and Linux was AMD only. Would AMD having faster CPUs now induce very many people to switch to Linux to get them? I rather doubt it.

 

[southleft]

The most important consideration is the combined cost of the phone and the calling plan. Many of us don't need the features or capabilities of high-end phones, nor do we wish to pay high prices for a new phone. The same may be said for a calling plan. Let's face it, a new budget price phone has much of the performance that high-end models had two years ago. That means the Samsung A10e for $89 and a $15/month plan with 2GB/month data is perfectly adequate for my needs and, i daresay, for millions of others who don't "live" on their phone.