Why no manufacturer uses a Snapdragon 8cx SoCs inside their TABLETS?

[WhiteSkyMage]

Hey I'm just curious. The Snapdragon 8cx platform is a 7W SoC correct. There are tablets that use 8000+mAh  battery. So why not use this instead of the mobile phone "efficient" SoCs? Afterall the 8cx is meant for thin and light Notebooks and a tablet is just like a notebook no? Make it thicker, put a fan on it, and you got enough cooling even for an overclocked 8cx SoC.

 

If Apple can put an M1 chip inside an iPad, why can't Samsung (or someone else) install a Snapdragon 8cx, overengineer a tablet and sell it with some premium price tag? I would bet that the M1 is actually larger chip than the 8cx. So why is Apple doing it and noone in the Android ecosystem is taking the risk? Are they incapable? Or am I missing something?

 

I'd be so happy so see someone stick an Nvidia MX550 or some Navi24 chip inside a tablet size device alongside an SoC with beefed up CPU and no iGPU. Nothing more is required - just make the device THICKER and HEAVIER with double the battery and cooling and an active fan that goes 50dbA and there you have it. Id buy a device like that and pretty sure most of you who are looking for a high-performance pocket device will too.

[BobVonBob]

Probably because the 8Cx is expensive, and Android tablets have much less support, functionality, and market share than iPads. The high end Android tablet market almost doesn't exist, and entering it is risky.

28 minutes ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

Id buy a device like that and pretty sure most of you who are looking for a high-performance pocket device will too.

I think this is a misconception. It wouldn't be a high-performance pocket device, it would be a midrange laptop replacement, and a bad one at that. Android developers have all but given up on Android tablets because Google isn't propping up tablet support like Apple did. The ecosystem is in shambles, and trying to be the company that brings it back from the brink is probably not a wise business decision. Samsung is trying with it's latest tab lineup, but only time will tell if their attempt pays off.

[WhiteSkyMage]

3 hours ago, BobVonBob said:

Probably because the 8Cx is expensive, and Android tablets have much less support, functionality, and market share than iPads. The high end Android tablet market almost doesn't exist, and entering it is risky.

I think this is a misconception. It wouldn't be a high-performance pocket device, it would be a midrange laptop replacement, and a bad one at that. Android developers have all but given up on Android tablets because Google isn't propping up tablet support like Apple did. The ecosystem is in shambles, and trying to be the company that brings it back from the brink is probably not a wise business decision. Samsung is trying with it's latest tab lineup, but only time will tell if their attempt pays off.

DeX is really amazing at what it can do. If only it had the power of the M1. If only Samsung could design an SoC like the 8cx and use Radeon RDNA, it will be a powerhouse! I am surprised how i managed to run a php/mysql webserver on my Galaxy Tab S6 with an editor which allows coding in many different languages.

 

The fact that you can have a phone and plug it to a screen and use it as a desktop is amazing. Why would anybody buy a laptop when you've got a computer in your own pocket? With just 7W of power...ok 15W if you buy a big fat tablet with powerful SoC... you can game and do your work on the go. Laptops are old tech. 

[Donut417]

6 hours ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

Or am I missing something?

I think a lot of people who buy Android tablets buy the cheap ones. Samsung needs to manage costs so they can be competitive. Those who are willing to spend the most on a tablet are probably going with an Apple or some kind of Windows tablet. Not saying there's no market for high end Android tablets, but after Google gave up and LG gave up and such most companies are going to focus on the price points that tend to sell. 

 

A lot of people have this thought that if Apple can do it, any one can. The thing is Apple has been designing its own chips for at least a decade or more. While the M1 is based on ARM, from what I have read, a lot of Apple's own "Special Sauce" is in their chips. Apple probably had decided to switch to its own silicon in its own computers YEARS before they did the switch. 

 

2 hours ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

Why would anybody buy a laptop when you've got a computer in your own pocket? With just 7W of power...ok 15W if you buy a big fat tablet with powerful SoC... you can game and do your work on the go. Laptops are old tech. 

Well most gaming is done on Microsoft Windows. While an ARM version of Windows does exist, its not exactly popular. Most games are also designed to run on x86, thats not changing any time soon. The other issue is emulation has limits. While Apple has done well with Rossetta 2, thats partly because of how they designed the M1 chip. In my opinion Qualcomm doesnt have incentive to be competitive in the Windows tablet market. I mean its probably a very small segment of their business. Now a company like Samsung or Nvidia could potentially take Windows on ARM to the next level, but its hard to say if that will happen. 

 

That all being said. I dont agree that laptops are old tech. But I do agree that smaller devices like tablets do have their place. I was kinda excited for that ROG Z13 tablet from ASUS. The price tag however is more than its worth and the battery life its atrocious from what I have read. Devices like the Steam Deck or any of the competing systems also seem cool. I do hope that we get more competition in the ARM CPU space to help with more innovation. 

[Commodus]

18 hours ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

Hey I'm just curious. The Snapdragon 8cx platform is a 7W SoC correct. There are tablets that use 8000+mAh  battery. So why not use this instead of the mobile phone "efficient" SoCs? Afterall the 8cx is meant for thin and light Notebooks and a tablet is just like a notebook no? Make it thicker, put a fan on it, and you got enough cooling even for an overclocked 8cx SoC.

 

If Apple can put an M1 chip inside an iPad, why can't Samsung (or someone else) install a Snapdragon 8cx, overengineer a tablet and sell it with some premium price tag? I would bet that the M1 is actually larger chip than the 8cx. So why is Apple doing it and noone in the Android ecosystem is taking the risk? Are they incapable? Or am I missing something?

 

I'd be so happy so see someone stick an Nvidia MX550 or some Navi24 chip inside a tablet size device alongside an SoC with beefed up CPU and no iGPU. Nothing more is required - just make the device THICKER and HEAVIER with double the battery and cooling and an active fan that goes 50dbA and there you have it. Id buy a device like that and pretty sure most of you who are looking for a high-performance pocket device will too.

To add to what others have said... Qualcomm's PC-oriented chips just aren't that good. From what I've seen, the Apple M1 chip trounces the Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 despite having launched a year earlier. You'd sacrifice efficiency to still get walloped by a chip from late 2020, and the gap is large enough that overclocking might not help. M2 is apparently a few months away at most, I'd add.

 

This illustrates something that has been generally true for a few years, but has become increasingly clear since M1 arrived: Apple is kicking Qualcomm's ass. It's overall faster in phones, and has growing leads in computers, tablets and watches. If Qualcomm is the overconfident sports star who only occasionally shows up to practice and wonders why they're struggling, Apple is the 'hungry' athlete who wins simply by showing up every day.

[WhiteSkyMage]

On 4/21/2022 at 4:39 PM, Commodus said:

To add to what others have said... Qualcomm's PC-oriented chips just aren't that good. From what I've seen, the Apple M1 chip trounces the Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 despite having launched a year earlier. You'd sacrifice efficiency to still get walloped by a chip from late 2020, and the gap is large enough that overclocking might not help. M2 is apparently a few months away at most, I'd add.

 

This illustrates something that has been generally true for a few years, but has become increasingly clear since M1 arrived: Apple is kicking Qualcomm's ass. It's overall faster in phones, and has growing leads in computers, tablets and watches. If Qualcomm is the overconfident sports star who only occasionally shows up to practice and wonders why they're struggling, Apple is the 'hungry' athlete who wins simply by showing up every day.

I guess the only other competitor who has any chances of competing against Apple is Nvidia. They are working on their own CPUs with ARM uarchitecture and they have a 20 year contract with ARM. The moment these 2 start competing, Qualcomm will have 2 choices - specialized ASICS or bankrupsy. Nvidia's chips will end up in mobile phones, tablets and thin, light notebooks. Nvidia has demonstrated that they are capable in this area. And while AMD and Intel dominate in the x86, Nvidia will go ARM and have their own APU.

I didnt think that Qualcomm is this bad and I thought that the 8cx is fast enough znd efficient enough to use in tablets like the M1 inside iPad. Well, I was wrong. I am not really liking this Apple monopoly. And why is Qualcomm not using Nuvia's engineering talent to jump ahead?

[Imbadatnames]

35 minutes ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

I guess the only other competitor who has any chances of competing against Apple is Nvidia. They are working on their own CPUs with ARM uarchitecture and they have a 20 year contract with ARM. The moment these 2 start competing, Qualcomm will have 2 choices - specialized ASICS or bankrupsy. Nvidia's chips will end up in mobile phones, tablets and thin, light notebooks. Nvidia has demonstrated that they are capable in this area. And while AMD and Intel dominate in the x86, Nvidia will go ARM and have their own APU.

I didnt think that Qualcomm is this bad and I thought that the 8cx is fast enough znd efficient enough to use in tablets like the M1 inside iPad. Well, I was wrong. I am not really liking this Apple monopoly. And why is Qualcomm not using Nuvia's engineering talent to jump ahead?

Don’t know the 3000 series is essentially just a space heater version of the 2000 to improve performance and the 2000 isn’t much better than the 1000

[Commodus]

On 4/23/2022 at 4:45 AM, WhiteSkyMage said:

I guess the only other competitor who has any chances of competing against Apple is Nvidia. They are working on their own CPUs with ARM uarchitecture and they have a 20 year contract with ARM. The moment these 2 start competing, Qualcomm will have 2 choices - specialized ASICS or bankrupsy. Nvidia's chips will end up in mobile phones, tablets and thin, light notebooks. Nvidia has demonstrated that they are capable in this area. And while AMD and Intel dominate in the x86, Nvidia will go ARM and have their own APU.

I didnt think that Qualcomm is this bad and I thought that the 8cx is fast enough znd efficient enough to use in tablets like the M1 inside iPad. Well, I was wrong. I am not really liking this Apple monopoly. And why is Qualcomm not using Nuvia's engineering talent to jump ahead?

I don't know that Qualcomm is in that dire a situation, particularly as NVIDIA doesn't seem to be in a hurry to offer phone chips again. However, Qualcomm definitely needs to rethink its overly complacent strategy. It needs significant improvements every year, in every category, without exceptions — this approach of half-hearted PC, tablet and watch chip updates isn't going to fly.

 

Google and Microsoft are also part of the problem. Google doesn't know how to properly support Android on anything that isn't a phone; its solution is a handful of UI tweaks, a few lines of code to kinda-sorta optimize apps and token efforts to highlight tablet-native apps on the Play Store. Samsung is generally the only major Android tablet maker willing to commit the needed effort. And Microsoft... well, it prioritizes neither Windows for ARM nor third-party app development. There's a vicious circle where Microsoft's lack of support discourages Qualcomm and developers, which leads to poor sales, which fuels Microsoft's weak support.

[WhiteSkyMage]

On 4/25/2022 at 5:59 PM, Commodus said:

I don't know that Qualcomm is in that dire a situation, particularly as NVIDIA doesn't seem to be in a hurry to offer phone chips again. However, Qualcomm definitely needs to rethink its overly complacent strategy. It needs significant improvements every year, in every category, without exceptions — this approach of half-hearted PC, tablet and watch chip updates isn't going to fly.

 

Google and Microsoft are also part of the problem. Google doesn't know how to properly support Android on anything that isn't a phone; its solution is a handful of UI tweaks, a few lines of code to kinda-sorta optimize apps and token efforts to highlight tablet-native apps on the Play Store. Samsung is generally the only major Android tablet maker willing to commit the needed effort. And Microsoft... well, it prioritizes neither Windows for ARM nor third-party app development. There's a vicious circle where Microsoft's lack of support discourages Qualcomm and developers, which leads to poor sales, which fuels Microsoft's weak support.

So basically, Apple has effectively a "monopoly" over the tablet market and although every single android company is competing against them, nobody has an Apple-like comparable expertise to make themselves an ecosystem out of android with their own tweaks and software (and custom ARM SoC architecture) other than Samsung (who seem to be the only ones actually trying in this market). Lenovo has gone into light Chrome devices... Guess android is best for phones, and for anything bigger...somewhat meh... but at least DeX works quite well. I aplaud Samsung for making this desktop environment for android. Ipads dont have macOS...

[Commodus]

On 5/6/2022 at 7:23 PM, WhiteSkyMage said:

So basically, Apple has effectively a "monopoly" over the tablet market and although every single android company is competing against them, nobody has an Apple-like comparable expertise to make themselves an ecosystem out of android with their own tweaks and software (and custom ARM SoC architecture) other than Samsung (who seem to be the only ones actually trying in this market). Lenovo has gone into light Chrome devices... Guess android is best for phones, and for anything bigger...somewhat meh... but at least DeX works quite well. I aplaud Samsung for making this desktop environment for android. Ipads dont have macOS...

Certainly in the higher end one the tablet market. I'm not even sure I'd say Android is uniformly best in phones, since there are issues there as well... but at least there's a clear argument to make for Android in phones (more choice, better prices in some cases, more customizability).

 

I often use a sports metaphor to describe how many non-Apple companies handle mobile devices beyond phones. Google, Microsoft, Qualcomm and others are the once-great athletes coasting on their former glory; they still have a lot of talent, but they're so overconfident that they only occasionally show up to practice and have difficulty accepting responsibility when their team loses. Apple is that veteran athlete who takes their team to the championship simply because of a strong work ethic; they show up to practice every day, they know they can always do better, and the team's goals are more important than personal accolades.

[Donut417]

On 5/6/2022 at 7:23 PM, WhiteSkyMage said:

Guess android is best for phones, and for anything bigger...somewhat meh

 

On 5/6/2022 at 7:23 PM, WhiteSkyMage said:

Apple has effectively a "monopoly" over the tablet market and although every single android company is competing against them, nobody has an Apple-like comparable expertise

Keep in mind Apple has been designing its own chips for at least a decade at this point. They design both hardware and software. Also considering that Apple is slow to add in new features. A lot of the time features come out on Android and it might take a generation or two for Apple to implement them. Also consider that Apple has always commanded a high price for its devices. Android on the other hand has always offered cheaper devices. Im going to bet that most people buy cheaper Android tablets because they are cheap. Those who want a premium device will most likely buy an iPad or Surface tablet. 

[WhiteSkyMage]

On 5/9/2022 at 1:19 AM, Donut417 said:

 

Keep in mind Apple has been designing its own chips for at least a decade at this point. They design both hardware and software. Also considering that Apple is slow to add in new features. A lot of the time features come out on Android and it might take a generation or two for Apple to implement them. Also consider that Apple has always commanded a high price for its devices. Android on the other hand has always offered cheaper devices. Im going to bet that most people buy cheaper Android tablets because they are cheap. Those who want a premium device will most likely buy an iPad or Surface tablet. 

It would be such a great thing if another competitor with lots of cash and experience in building ARM chips could challenge Apple in the premium/high end...

I'm talking obviously about NVIDIA. They've got enough engineering prowess to design an ARM CPU and use their own GPU. Obviously it's gonna take time to design their own OS, and the way they've been doing things proprietary, I'll be surprised if they just took an Android kernel (or a Linux kernel) and just made a simple flashy GUI like everybody else in the Android industry...

Honestly I thought that Microsoft was serious enough to go ARM with their new Windows 11 and begin their journey away from x86, but guess that's not happening any time soon. 

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

25 minutes ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

It would be such a great thing if another competitor with lots of cash and experience in building ARM chips could challenge Apple in the premium/high end...

I'm talking obviously about NVIDIA. They've got enough engineering prowess to design an ARM CPU and use their own GPU. Obviously it's gonna take time to design their own OS, and the way they've been doing things proprietary, I'll be surprised if they just took an Android kernel (or a Linux kernel) and just made a simple flashy GUI like everybody else in the Android industry...

Honestly I thought that Microsoft was serious enough to go ARM with their new Windows 11 and begin their journey away from x86, but guess that's not happening any time soon. 

You mean Nvidia Tegra? They're still going, but you rarely hear anything about them. Honestly outside of the Nvidia Shield the Nintendo Switch, I'm not even sure what uses a Tegra chip these days. And the aforenoted examples are ancient at this point. 

[WhiteSkyMage]

1 hour ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

You mean Nvidia Tegra? They're still going, but you rarely hear anything about them. Honestly outside of the Nvidia Shield the Nintendo Switch, I'm not even sure what uses a Tegra chip these days. And the aforenoted examples are ancient at this point. 

Well there is one thing you did overlook though - Grace. Yes I know, it is for datacenters and HPC, but before you toss it out, not buying ARM doesn't mean they can't make ARM SoCs... https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-big-cpu-plans-with-20-year-arm-license That is why I'm expecting them to become an Apple competitor in the coming years. I'm certain that Grace is just one chip of many that they are playing around with. They know the danger forming in the x86 market. Both Intel and AMD will be producing APUs and NVIDIA will likely be losing marketshare. For NVIDIA to have an APU - they have to go ARM. They have the engineering talent and are already building ARM chips. What stops them from putting together a Desktop, Laptop, Tablet and Phone chip with ARM CPU cores along with their GPU-architecture and AI? NVIDIA has enough cash and expertise to go and compete in mobile. Can they beat Apple? That's a different story.

[Donut417]

5 hours ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

Both Intel and AMD will be producing APUs and NVIDIA will likely be losing marketshare.

Nope. Nvidia still makes some of the more power GPU's currently. To be clear Intel has been offering on iGPU's forever. They just suck balls. Its not clear yet how well their dGPU's will do as of yet. Also you have to consider that Nvidia makes tones of money in the enterprise space. 

 

5 hours ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

they have to go ARM.

I have feeling everyone at one time will go ARM. AMD I know was working on its own chip. Wouldn't doubt it if Intel is working on its own. 

 

5 hours ago, WhiteSkyMage said:

What stops them from putting together a Desktop, Laptop, Tablet and Phone chip with ARM CPU cores along with their GPU-architecture and AI?

People not buying it. Sorry to say, but the reason Apple is successful is because their computers run a full desktop OS. Android is NOT a full desktop OS. For them to be successful they need Microsoft. The problem is too much Microsoft software is tied to x86. So who ever wants to get Windows on ARM needs to engineer a chip that has great emulation capability. 

[Commodus]

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

I have feeling everyone at one time will go ARM. AMD I know was working on its own chip. Wouldn't doubt it if Intel is working on its own. 

That might be tricky in the consumer space. As you've implied, most of the PC industry has chained itself to a Windows/x86 duopoly that's difficult to escape. One can't advance until the other does, and neither side seems particularly willing to move on.

 

At the same time, it increasingly looks like they need to do something. I'm not so naive as to think Apple will dominate the computing landscape, but there is a concern that Apple will create a wide-enough capability gap that an increasingly large number of users will have a clear reason to buy a Mac over a Windows PC. Apple has already been gaining market share since M1 Macs arrived in 2020; I wouldn't be surprised if M2 keeps that momentum going.

[Zodiark1593]

6 hours ago, Commodus said:

That might be tricky in the consumer space. As you've implied, most of the PC industry has chained itself to a Windows/x86 duopoly that's difficult to escape. One can't advance until the other does, and neither side seems particularly willing to move on.

 

At the same time, it increasingly looks like they need to do something. I'm not so naive as to think Apple will dominate the computing landscape, but there is a concern that Apple will create a wide-enough capability gap that an increasingly large number of users will have a clear reason to buy a Mac over a Windows PC. Apple has already been gaining market share since M1 Macs arrived in 2020; I wouldn't be surprised if M2 keeps that momentum going.

Apple has proven that, albeit at significant investment, it is very much in the realm of possibility to move to a new ISA, and still maintain fast emulated performance with the outgoing ISA.
 

For Nvidia in particular, having an ARM part with fast x86 performance is vital in surviving a transition, as games are probably the single most greatly impacted segment of such a transition. Games are performance sensitive, requiring fast performance, but also high accuracy to avoid crashes. And gamers make up a lot of revenue for Nvidia. Granted new games will have probably moved on to ARM, very many older games will not be updated. 

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, Zodiark1593 said:

very many older games will not be updated. 

Gives studios the ability to release remastered versions for $60. 

 

8 hours ago, Commodus said:

most of the PC industry has chained itself to a Windows/x86 duopoly that's difficult to escape.

Yes and no. You forget the cloud. I think thats why they keep pushing game streaming services and other could services. Also, Im sure one of the big boys like Nvidia, AMD or Intel can come up with a solution to Apple silicone, at least something thats equivalent enough. Its just going to take time. And as you said Apple will gain more market share as a result, but its that really a bad thing? Competition breeds excellence. 

 

I think if Microsoft actually tried and worked with with hardware guys they could come up with something nice. The issue is Microsoft choose wrong in Qualcomm. They should have seen about working with Nvidia instead, mainly because Nvidia has a stake in the PC market, Qualcomm on the other hand not so much.  

[Zodiark1593]

17 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Gives studios the ability to release remastered versions for $60. 

 

 

The entire reason I left console gaming is to escape scenarios like this. No need to pay multiple times when my machine, and whatever machine I get years later, happily runs the original just fine. 

[Commodus]

16 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Apple has proven that, albeit at significant investment, it is very much in the realm of possibility to move to a new ISA, and still maintain fast emulated performance with the outgoing ISA.
 

For Nvidia in particular, having an ARM part with fast x86 performance is vital in surviving a transition, as games are probably the single most greatly impacted segment of such a transition. Games are performance sensitive, requiring fast performance, but also high accuracy to avoid crashes. And gamers make up a lot of revenue for Nvidia. Granted new games will have probably moved on to ARM, very many older games will not be updated. 

Apple was able to make the leap so well because it controls both the CPUs and the OS. It switched to ARM with all the pieces in place at the same time. Microsoft could make Windows as ARM-friendly as it wants, but would still be dependent on vendors like Qualcomm and NVIDIA making decent chips; Qualcomm and NVIDIA could make outstanding ARM chips, but they'd still have to wait for Microsoft to offer adequate ARM support. And since both sides of the equation seem to be waiting for each other to move... not much happens.

 

That and it's important to remember that Microsoft's old "legacy support at all costs" mindset is coming to bite it in the ass. The company trained at least a generation of users to assume their apps would run forever — see those companies still using Windows 7 because they need XP mode to run a work app written for NT 4.0. Apple's switch was helped not just by good x86 handling, but because it's nudging (or sometimes pushing) developers to stay current. It'll be hard for Microsoft/Intel/AMD to persuade gamers to buy ARM PCs when those players expect their entire Steam libraries to run flawlessly.