Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 Capable Of Running Full Windows 10

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If this leaked press release is genuine, that means the rumors we've been hearing for weeks are true. Qualcomm's Snapdragon 835 is actually capable of running full Windows 10, not Windows 10 mobile or RT, the real deal.

As we embark on a new era of intelligent, connected experiences, our mobile devices are going to need a new, one-of-a-kind processor that’s smaller, faster, and more energy-efficient than any chipset in history. Meet the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835. Our newest mobile processor is designed to meet every one of these rigorous requirements while setting new standards in mobile performance. Using a new 10nm design with more than three billion ultra-efficient transistors, Snapdragon 835 is 30 percent smaller than Snapdragon 820. This pivotal size reduction and efficiency boost allow OEMs to manufacture thinner phones with larger batteries that run on less power and last longer. All told, Snapdragon 835 uses 40 percent less power than the previous generation and provides up to a 27 percent performance increase.
 
Cool stuff.

finally might be able to carry a desktop around with you. I'll switch to windows when that happens.

Apple should have done the above years ago.
 
Was this a test to see if we actually read your links?

Keyword Windows isn't even in the "press release". Nor is laptop or x86.

Which brings me to bigger question. One does not just make an x86 compatible processor. There are golden tickets for these things. And Intel is very very very very critical about who gets to have them. As far as I have ever heard, only AMD and VIA have these golden tickets.....and the only reason AMD got to keep one because they held Intel hostage with the AMD64 cross licensing.

So, I will risk looking like a jackass, to say I doubt Qualcomm is going to be producing x86 CPU's any time soon. Emulation, maybe.....but that has it's own issues (practical and legal).

(I will fully beg for mercy if proven wrong)
 
I think the big takeaway hear is x86 days are pretty limited ARM seems to be the architecture of the future. In many ways it allready is by being the number one CPu powering the majority of consumer computers (Yes I am including phones and tablets here, because they are computers).
 
:p The demo MS and Qualcomm made clearly show it was running an ARM build of Windows 10 on a Snapdragon 820 processor.



I'm not sure what this "leaked" nonsense is since it contains information that contradicts information in the official demo MS posted. IOW, the 835 is not the "first" ARM processor (or even the first Snapdragon processor) to run Windows 10 for ARM.

Clickity-click-click bait.
 
Meh, arm win10 is still not windows rt or mobile.
Didn't they say the new nokia was using this new cpu? With android. :)
 
I like Jello. And nothing will change that. Ever.
 
I read those press releases like this:

Some press release said:
The new what-the-fuck-ever is <insert number here> more efficient than the previous generation and <however smaller it is> means companies can make thinner and more fragile devices with larger batteries that don't really fit all that well and cause a lot more problems because of that aspect <see Note7 for more information>..." and so on and blah blah fucking blah.
Click to expand...

All I know is that we've been increasing efficiency and lowering power requirements while putting bigger larger monstrous capacity batteries in said devices and people still can't get through a day without a top-up charge at least once in my experience. And I've owned some devices like the Droid MAXX with the claimed 48 hour battery life, and others - the best actual real world battery life I've had in the past decade was a Galaxy S7 Active recently and it has a 4000 mAh battery in it and I literally did get 2+ days of use overall with 8-10 hours of SOT aka screen on time which is an important aspect of device usage. Amazing product, outstanding power and performance with the Snapdragon 820 in it, and that battery was awesome.

When some company makes me a smartphone of any shape, size, or price and I can turn it on and leave it on - screen enabled - for 24 solid hours in a row even at a high brightness if needed and with all the other aspects working as well (cellular/LTE/Wi-Fi/Bluetooth/Location services/etc) then I'll give a shit. Until that happens (it might never to be honest) I don't give a damn about these small incremental updates.

I want a laptop and a smartphone that works for 24 hours non-stop if I chose to leave it running non-stop on the internal batteries - yes it's a pipe dream but one would think given our state of technology this could be done by now without having to resort to external batteries, etc. Just got a used Galaxy Note 4 with a ZeroLemon 10,000 mAh battery - yes, seriously, it's a 10,000 mAh external battery in a funky big huge almost an inch thick case and so far I've been somewhat disappointed in the battery life. It's not brand new, no, and the previous owner probably used fast/quick/rapid charging with it when ZeroLemon expressly tells people not to do that so the potential battery life has been crippled over time. I may get a brand new replacement 10,000 mAh cell for this and see how it works out but I don't expect miracles nor the "3x the battery life of the original battery" either.

It might surprise me, who knows. ;)
 
Windows isn't even in the press release. Regardless, 99.999999% of Snapdragon 835 SoC's produced will be powering Android. And these things will be powering the expansion of Android to desktop presence, not the shrinking of bloated, full fat Windows 10 x86 running emulated on mobile devices.

Microsoft keeps trying to find that silver bullet, that easy shortcut to mobile relevance without doing the hard work of actually innovating and creating a compelling mobile UI and apps:

- Metro start screen in Windows 8 was supposed to get everyone into the Store and jumpstart windows phones. Didn't happen.

- iOS and Android app converters/emulators were going to fill the app gap by bringing overnight app parity. Scrapped. MS couldn't figure out how to do it.

- "Continuum" was the buzzword you couldn't get away from on WMobile blogs and every 5th word out of zealots' mouths as the savior of the platform. Overpriced, limited to metro apps, dead on arrival.

Now the latest pipedream is bloated x86 Windows running on an expensive, flagship ARM SoC at some point in 1.5 years from now is what's going to save windows portables. It'll be the latest exercise in watering a dead plant.
 
Last edited:
DeathFromBelow said:
Who cares, Windows 10 is dead.
Click to expand...

Well Windows Mobile certainly is. Microsoft has done nothing to advance the platform meaningfully in about 3 years.

10 desktop isn't dead, but uptake is anemic now since the malware distributed upgrade tactics ended, but it'll ride the inertia and built up goodwill of predecessors like 7 until the next rebrand (just plain "Windows" with the version number dropped I'm guessing).
 
Last edited:
Windows-on-ARM isn't a bad idea from Microsoft's perspective. It allows them to leverage existing silicon to possibly make headway into a market that's been all but completely closed off to them in the past. They can't make a Phone worth more than a paperweight and X86 tablets have flopped but good, but stick full Windows into an Apple or Samsung form factor that works and businesses will flock over in droves. Remember Apple's move to X86 many moons ago, the same problems exist here and now they too are trying to unify desktop and portable OSes across architectures. (Granted their main contribution was Siri on your Mac, but...)

Of course that means this is yet another story of Microsoft as an also-ran, but as Windows is the gold standard for most businesses and the prospect of native Office support and compatibility with existing software on cheaper silicon is a possibility this is an idea that might work out for them. Where I work, 95% of users could get by on the same hardware my $100 Android TV box uses and yet they've all got $1,200+ laptops instead. The driving force for this move is probably that market far more than home users. If OEMs could hit a similar price point to current Android devices that would certainly make it an attractive option.

I'd at least also assume that most native X86 Windows code wouldn't be hard to port over once the tools are released. For VB it'd be a recompile and a good night's sleep, whatever your thoughts on the language it is very common in internal apps. Java would run natively and even the worst cases things would either be ported or replaced.

Also let us not forget, clusterfuffles in migrations keep us employed. Hope for teething problems early on so all of us hard up IT nerds can find honest work.
 
Windows is slowly creating a hardware layer that is really software that can run on different hardware. The embedded version years ago ran on the first arm chips to run displays on refrigerators and stove displays. Not the simply rheostat ones but the ones they joked about watching tv on. An arm device runs on 4 amps and a windows machine runs on 600 watts to 2500 watts at 12vdc, 3.5vdc... so 600 divided by 12 is 50 or fifty amps for the most power efficient lap tops and desktops. So that means twelve phones can use the power of one desktop. So mixing linux and windows code as they look into the devices that make linux work with less watts, likely windows running on arm is the same but slower. Meaning that if you need to count from one to million x86 hardware is going to be faster because that is what it is designed to do. But if you need it to randomly grab a number someone where in the middle and say is lower or higher than the number I want that is register store function and compare. That is cheap processor in processor cycles. It is the difference between a for loop and a basic sort.

Most of the x86 code is c based or similar language compiled into machine code. Porting it requires the compiler you are using supports other hard ware not special instruction sets. So if the compiler uses the MMX extensions to compare colors faster then the new hardware would have to write special instructions to do that fast or use default syntax. It is the difference between knowing assembler and knowing that most of it like basic language and writing tools in a high level language and not understand how to replace a library that is giving too many errors in your code. Basically there is no native x86 code and has not been in a long time. replacing a process that can do a ten thousand compares a second with ten that can do twenty compares a second means 10,000 compares per cycle verse 200 minus the over head of sorting to ten cores. Intel clearly has an edge in faster hardware until someone build a better cpu, the odds are good that the x84 style cores are here for a good number more years. You can no predict the weather past four days so I am not going to guess what Intel may or may not do five years from now. So running a full version of windows 10 on an arm style processor that can play your music and videos I can see that because my S5 from a couple years ago already does that. Will it be able to play videogames? avengers was really low end as a videogame but simply did not run on anything but the tegra and Adreno 330 or better. We had a bunch of devices that QA said it worked on that used the 240 chip and trying to play the game simply did not work. The chip did not have enough power. I remember because upper management simply said after we looked into the issue to just refund the guests money if they bought it on a device that could not run the game but we said it could. So sure the windows ten code is likely running but you still need more power to do some things.
 
Presbytier said:
I think the big takeaway hear is x86 days are pretty limited ARM seems to be the architecture of the future. In many ways it allready is by being the number one CPu powering the majority of consumer computers (Yes I am including phones and tablets here, because they are computers).
Click to expand...

Remember PowerPC? Same deal with ARM. Good arch for what it's good at, but it's never going to reach x86 performance levels without loosing all it's current advantages that make it attractive. x86 is absent in mobile because of all those extra bits that make it performance king. Make ARM perform like x86, and it will cost just as much while consuming just as much, if not more power.

Now throw in the lack of Windows app support, and you see why ARM is going to be stuck in mobile/embeddded devices, just like PowerPC was before it.
 
drakken said:
... a windows machine runs on 600 watts to 2500 watts at 12vdc, 3.5vdc... so 600 divided by 12 is 50 or fifty amps for the most power efficient lap tops and desktops...
Click to expand...

What the fuck are you on about? A Typical Laptop runs under 65w, and most Desktop PCs are under 250w.
 
Um. The zenfone 2 could do this for awille and I have never had any issues with battery life so how is this new or important. I believe you could also hyoervise full 10 on a rpi
 
sirnephilim said:
Windows-on-ARM isn't a bad idea from Microsoft's perspective. It allows them to leverage existing silicon to possibly make headway into a market that's been all but completely closed off to them in the past. They can't make a Phone worth more than a paperweight and X86 tablets have flopped but good, but stick full Windows into an Apple or Samsung form factor that works and businesses will flock over in droves.
Click to expand...

I've got a 7" Windows 10 Tablet and a 10" Windows Tablet. You can go buy them right now for $60 and $100 respectively. They work. They are full Intel x86 processors. They can run anything within their RAM and storage limitations. The problem IS the form factor. Windows desktop just isn't a small form factor OS. And Android and iOS aren't desktop OS's. I also wouldn't want to run a Linux desktop on a 7" tablet.

Intel makes x86 chips that are super battery friendly. The problem is having a full fledged OS that needs to do lots of things in the background.

I have found ChromeOS to be a decent attempt at a crossover, it's somewhat better then a touch orientated OS for doing some real work. But it's still shitty enough you can't do most real work. But it uses a honest to god x86 Quad Core Intel processor and gets fantastic battery life. In fact there isn't that much a of a battery life difference between the x86 Chromebooks and ARM Chromebooks.

I'm the opposite of most of you, I'm struggling to see ARM's future (outside of specialized applications like integrated systems or Pi type devices...which Intel also competes against).
 
Paul_Johnson said:
Transmeta was able to overcome them with fewer resources. So, if they wanted to, they probably could as well.
Click to expand...

Hadn't heard of them....looks like what they couldn't overcome was Intel's legal strongarm on x86. Intel owns their ass now (patent wise).
 
westrock2000 said:
Intel makes x86 chips that are super battery friendly. The problem is having a full fledged OS that needs to do lots of things in the background.
Click to expand...

Which is why ARM chip that's battery friendly + bloated legacy OS that isn't battery friendly = trying to stuff a fat chick into a size zero.

Windows x86 requires a beefy CPU to run all that legacy code and background garbage and create the perception that its a smooth, modern, highly optimized OS. Even on decent Celerons its a slug.

I'm just not seeing the point to emulating x86 Windows on expensive ARM SoC, let alone the kind of game-changer MS needs right now to stay relevant. They need a new, pure-ARM OS with a UI that wasn't designed by fischer-price. WindowsRT was not a real effort, not even a half effort - they didn't really try.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
Which is why ARM chip that's battery friendly + bloated legacy OS that isn't battery friendly = trying to stuff a fat chick into a size zero dress.

Windows x86 requires a beefy CPU to run all that legacy code and background garbage and create the perception that its a smooth, modern, highly optimized OS. Even on decent Celerons its a slug.

I'm just not seeing the point, let alone the kind of game-changer MS needs right now to stay relevant. They need a new, pure-ARM OS with a UI that wasn't designed by fischer-price. WindowsRT was not a real effort, not even a half effort - they didn't really try.
Click to expand...

and separate the tablet os from the "desktop" one so i can get a workstation that dosnt feel like a tablet/phone and a phone that runs smothly
 
cdabc123 said:
and separate the tablet os from the "desktop" one so i can get a workstation that dosnt feel like a tablet/phone and a phone that runs smothly
Click to expand...

Bingo. Respect your existing customers, don't abuse and alienate windows loyalists by regressing the desktop through forced mickeymouse phone UI elements and crappy mobile apps. The "just deal with it" arrogance turns people off.
 
Last edited:
westrock2000 said:
Hadn't heard of them....looks like what they couldn't overcome was Intel's legal strongarm on x86. Intel owns their ass now (patent wise).
Click to expand...

Not really. It wasn't the x86 issue it was Transmeta's financial flows at the time that lead them to accept a payoff to stop using their workaround.
 
Jorona said:
What the fuck are you on about? A Typical Laptop runs under 65w, and most Desktop PCs are under 250w.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my gaming system (SB-E Xeon and R9 Fury) *might* pull 600W under full load. My old Kabini system used to pull less than 30W from the wall at full load.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top