Apple and Qualcomm agree to become BFFs for next 6 years, Intel officially exiting out of 5G modem development

[xentropa]

Thr kiss and make up with qualcomm was surprising but ditching Intel wasn't.

 

Samsung Huawei and Qualcomm are going to offer integrated 5G modem and ARM CPU/GPU/NPU SOCs soon.  Having all that on a single chip is a huge cost/performance booster.  An Apple Intel alliance wouldn't have delivered that.  It would have still been separate and discrete chips.

 

Though what remains to be seen is if the qualcomm apple alliance will help apple deliver that single chip solution, or whether the alliance is only a temporary truce while apple develops that on their own.

[RedRound2]

2 hours ago, xentropa said:

Thr kiss and make up with qualcomm was surprising but ditching Intel wasn't.

 

Samsung Huawei and Qualcomm are going to offer integrated 5G modem and ARM CPU/GPU/NPU SOCs soon.  Having all that on a single chip is a huge cost/performance booster.  An Apple Intel alliance wouldn't have delivered that.  It would have still been separate and discrete chips.

 

Though what remains to be seen is if the qualcomm apple alliance will help apple deliver that single chip solution, or whether the alliance is only a temporary truce while apple develops that on their own.

I don't think the modem will be integrated with the ARM CPU. I'm pretty sure it's going to be a separate module, until Apple develops their own which according to experts will take time

[Taf the Ghost]

5 hours ago, xentropa said:

Thr kiss and make up with qualcomm was surprising but ditching Intel wasn't.

 

Samsung Huawei and Qualcomm are going to offer integrated 5G modem and ARM CPU/GPU/NPU SOCs soon.  Having all that on a single chip is a huge cost/performance booster.  An Apple Intel alliance wouldn't have delivered that.  It would have still been separate and discrete chips.

 

Though what remains to be seen is if the qualcomm apple alliance will help apple deliver that single chip solution, or whether the alliance is only a temporary truce while apple develops that on their own.

The 6 years with 2 renewable points to Apple wanting to take its time anyway. 5G isn't really settled tech yet, so there's actually more logic in keeping it off the SoC for now.

3 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

I don't think the modem will be integrated with the ARM CPU. I'm pretty sure it's going to be a separate module, until Apple develops their own which according to experts will take time

Modems aren't the easiest chips to design, but they're nothing compared to a full SoC. What takes time is regulatory approval. Without Apple having anything in the pipeline already, it'll probably be 3 years before it'd be approved. They'll put them in everything that isn't the iPhone until they're ready to add it there.

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

The 6 years with 2 renewable points to Apple wanting to take its time anyway. 5G isn't really settled tech yet, so there's actually more logic in keeping it off the SoC for now.

Modems aren't the easiest chips to design, but they're nothing compared to a full SoC. What takes time is regulatory approval. Without Apple having anything in the pipeline already, it'll probably be 3 years before it'd be approved. They'll put them in everything that isn't the iPhone until they're ready to add it there.

Qualcomm already have 5g modems,  the standard may not be finalized, but the list of key capability targets has been set and is already being achieved by commercially available hardware.  In fact even thought they don't expect to finalise the standard until next year, a few manufacturers will be providing 5g hardware this year.  

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, xentropa said:

Thr kiss and make up with qualcomm was surprising but ditching Intel wasn't.

 

Samsung Huawei and Qualcomm are going to offer integrated 5G modem and ARM CPU/GPU/NPU SOCs soon.  Having all that on a single chip is a huge cost/performance booster.  An Apple Intel alliance wouldn't have delivered that.  It would have still been separate and discrete chips.

 

Though what remains to be seen is if the qualcomm apple alliance will help apple deliver that single chip solution, or whether the alliance is only a temporary truce while apple develops that on their own.

Apple has no problem using a separate modem in their phones. They have done so for 10+ so I don't think they'll have a problem doing so for another few years. 

[Bouzoo]

On 4/17/2019 at 12:17 PM, RedRound2 said:

Plus 4G/4G+ today are plenty fast enough for basically 99% of the things you'd do with your capped data plan, unlike 3G. So, I'm in no hurry for 5G, and quite frankly I don't really understand the industry's over the top excitement about 5G

Apart from what Lawlz already wrote, there is 1 big improvement with 5G for crowded areas that was not mentioned. According to a buddy in Ericsson who is working on 5G development, 5G will be able to "prioritize users". Meaning that in cities, where the base station is congested and all users per instance get 5 Mbps (optimistically), things will change a lot. Instead of 100 users getting those 5 Mbps, if someone is using a VOIP service for chatting like Viber or Wapp, they might get only 1-2 Mbps which is more than adequate for text messages, but someone else who is watching Youtube might get those 3x2 Mbps that have not been used by first two users. And so on and so forth, if you are downloading something on Netflix, you might get 50 Mbps from other 10 users that don't need the speed, there is no more "pre-dedicated traffic", per se. 

[Nena Trinity]

Apple does not have the guts to pick the Huawei`s Balong 5000 cause they are afraid the state will use that as a excuse to ban the iPhone, also some say that Huawei cannot make enough of the modems tough I doubt that is a issue in reality...

[RedRound2]

3 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

Apart from what Lawlz already wrote, there is 1 big improvement with 5G for crowded areas that was not mentioned. According to a buddy in Ericsson who is working on 5G development, 5G will be able to "prioritize users". Meaning that in cities, where the base station is congested and all users per instance get 5 Mbps (optimistically), things will change a lot. Instead of 100 users getting those 5 Mbps, if someone is using a VOIP service for chatting like Viber or Wapp, they might get only 1-2 Mbps which is more than adequate for text messages, but someone else who is watching Youtube might get those 3x2 Mbps that have not been used by first two users. And so on and so forth, if you are downloading something on Netflix, you might get 50 Mbps from other 10 users that don't need the speed, there is no more "pre-dedicated traffic", per se. 

Isn't that inherent to the 4G already? Like if I'm texting through whatsapp, my phone hardly uses 2-3 KB uplink and downlink while there's more bandwidth available for the other user (up till a certain point). But if I suddenly start downloading, the other person's speed also reduces (obviously not a two person scenario, but you get the point)

 

All I know is that 5G has ultra low latency, which I don't think is something applicable to us normal users unless you're gaming, or for things like driverless cars and IoT (but I feel that's a long way away right now)

[Bouzoo]

21 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Isn't that inherent to the 4G already? Like if I'm texting through whatsapp, my phone hardly uses 2-3 KB uplink and downlink while there's more bandwidth available for the other user (up till a certain point). But if I suddenly start downloading, the other person's speed also reduces (obviously not a two person scenario, but you get the point)

 

All I know is that 5G has ultra low latency, which I don't think is something applicable to us normal users unless you're gaming, or for things like driverless cars and IoT (but I feel that's a long way away right now)

Afaik it's not? I might be wrong though.

[Bouzoo]

Rumor is Apple paid $5-6 billion to settle the dispute and QC might receive $8-9 for every phone in the future.

 

https://www.macrumors.com/2019/04/18/apple-qualcomm-estimated-settlement-terms/

[RedRound2]

14 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

Afaik it's not? I might be wrong though.

Yeah, if it's a crowded area, the speed is significantly slower than if it's not.

 

For example, we have terrible speeds in my apartment at peak hours, like evening, even though we have good reception. But the speed significantly increases overnight.

 

In other words, generally, if there are less users and/or usage the more speed you get

[Blade of Grass]

On 4/18/2019 at 9:00 PM, xentropa said:

Thr kiss and make up with qualcomm was surprising but ditching Intel wasn't.

 

Samsung Huawei and Qualcomm are going to offer integrated 5G modem and ARM CPU/GPU/NPU SOCs soon.  Having all that on a single chip is a huge cost/performance booster.  An Apple Intel alliance wouldn't have delivered that.  It would have still been separate and discrete chips.

 

Though what remains to be seen is if the qualcomm apple alliance will help apple deliver that single chip solution, or whether the alliance is only a temporary truce while apple develops that on their own.

Why would you build the modem into the SoC?  Doesn’t make sense from a design, power, packaging, or performance standpoint.

On 4/19/2019 at 9:04 AM, Bouzoo said:

Afaik it's not? I might be wrong though.

This sounds like bog standard Quality of Service which I’m sure every network around the world uses. When sharing resources you need some kind of scheduling, less you want to starve access to the resource. 

On 4/19/2019 at 9:15 AM, Bouzoo said:

Rumor is Apple paid $5-6 billion to settle the dispute and QC might receive $8-9 for every phone in the future.

 

https://www.macrumors.com/2019/04/18/apple-qualcomm-estimated-settlement-terms/

Interesting, this is supposedly higher than their old per modem cost, but I wonder if they negotiated the % of device sale price away. 

[hayden1881]

 

[Commodus]

20 hours ago, Blade of Grass said:

Why would you build the modem into the SoC?  Doesn’t make sense from a design, power, packaging, or performance standpoint.

It could theoretically save space in the chassis, and might allow for less transit time for data.  But I don't think it's as necessary in a world where many mainstream phones now have screens over 5.5 inches.  Certainly not if you're Apple and your current strategy has you out in front in terms of performance.

[Blade of Grass]

3 hours ago, Commodus said:

It could theoretically save space in the chassis, and might allow for less transit time for data.  But I don't think it's as necessary in a world where many mainstream phones now have screens over 5.5 inches.  Certainly not if you're Apple and your current strategy has you out in front in terms of performance.

The transfer time is only relevant if the modem can send data faster than the internal data links can handle, which they’re no where near. We’re a long way out before the modem’s distance to the processor provides any meaningful performance boost.