Qualcomm Details The Snapdragon 888: 3rd Gen 5G & Cortex-X1 on 5nm
by Andrei Frumusanu on December 2, 2020 10:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Mobile
- Qualcomm
- Smartphones
- SoCs
- 5G
- Cortex A78
- Cortex X1
- Snapdragon 888
Conclusion & First Impressions
The new Snapdragon 888 is overall a very impressive package from Qualcomm, advancing the most important areas for which today’s smartphones are being used. 5G connectivity was the big new feature of 2020 SoCs and smartphones, and the new 888 platform represents the evolution and maturing of the new technologies that had been introduced in prior generations.
The big focus point of the Snapdragon 888 were clearly AI and cameras. The new Hexagon 780 IP block looks immensely impressive and to me seems like a major competitive advantage of the new SoC design – other vendors which aren’t as vertically integrated with their accelerator IPs will have to respond to Qualcomm’s new advancements as it seems like a major performance advantage that will be hard to mimic.
Today’s flagship smartphones have diminished ways of differentiating themselves from one another, with the cameras still being the one aspect where vendors still have very different approaches to their designs. Qualcomm’s push for a triple-ISP system in the Snapdragon 888 pushes the upper limits of what vendors will be able to do on their smartphones, allowing for a continued push for the smartphone camera ecosystem. Even for still-picture camera experiences, it seems that Qualcomm is expecting a more notable technology jump in 2021 as we see the introduction of new sensors and imaging techniques, enabled by the new SoC.
The new CPU configuration gives the new SoC a good uplift in performance, although it’s admittedly less of a jump than I had hoped for this generation of Cortex-X1 designs, and I do think Qualcomm won’t be able to retain the performance crown for this generation of Android-SoCs, with the performance gap against Apple’s SoCs also narrowing less than we had hoped for.
On the GPU side, the new 35% performance uplift is extremely impressive. If Qualcomm is really able to maintain similar power figures this generation, it should allow the Snapdragon 888 to retake the performance crown in mobile, and actually retain it for the majority of 2021.
The new Snapdragon 888 to me looks like a continuation of Qualcomm’s excellent execution over the last few years. Striking a balance between performance, power efficiency, and features is something that may be harder than it sounds, and Qualcomm’s engineering teams here seem to be focused on being able to deliver the overall best package.
Much like the Snapdragon 865, and the last couple of generations of Snapdragon SoCs before it, I expect the new Snapdragon 888 to be an excellent foundation for 2021’s flagship devices, and I’m looking forward to experience the new generation.
Related Reading:
- Qualcomm Tech Summit 2020: Day One LiveBlog (10:00 ET, 15:00 UTC)
- Qualcomm’s New 3rd Generation Snapdragon X60 5G Modem, Built on 5nm
- Qualcomm Announces Snapdragon 865+: Breaking the 3GHz Threshold
- The Snapdragon 865 Performance Preview: Setting the Stage for Flagship Android 2020
- Qualcomm Announces Snapdragon 865 and 765(G): 5G For All in 2020, All The Details
- The Snapdragon 855 Performance Preview: Setting the Stage for Flagship Android 2019
- The Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 Pre-Dive: Going Into Detail on 2019's Flagship Android SoC
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
123 Comments
View All Comments
ZolaIII - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
Well based on the QC claims, 20% more power efficient = same number of GPU clusters and same alignment as the power saving is from process improvement, they made a new pipeline to include additional functions but fundamental blocks remain unchanged (actually ALU's didn't change from Ati days).This is just based on my assumptions and logic. Upon which I don't think it's enough to be stated as new gen.
I don't have problem with numerology including additional make believes tied to the name change, at least that's not a snake oil like the rest.
Given in mind rest of the story (trade wars) actually the QC naming thing is pathetic.
Who ever makes a real flagship SoC (not saying on the die size), even if based on reference IP's based upon 5 nm TSMC has the opportunity to rip this abomination without to much hustle.
Raqia - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
Transistor count and die size haven't been revealed yet; I have my doubts many other companies could integrate all those subsystems with the PPA that Qualcomm achieves. Even Apple doesn't get there as they don't integrate a modem which is far far trickier than you might expect.ZolaIII - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
Well you are right about that (modem, RF and cetera) and thing's won't get better any time soon, call it democracy.Rest is IP license available. If you raise a bar to actual manufacturers (in their own menagement) list goes to none as ironically Samsung is by far most adequate. I guess things will get boring until GAA.
melgross - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
Apple hasn’t been allowed to integrate a modem. It’s likely that a major reason they bought Intel’s work is so that they can have their own, so that they can do that. But Apple seems to have no problems with efficiency, even with an external modem. I suspect that it’s the Android OSs known efficiency problems, among others, such as the requirement for double the RAM, that’s causing these problems, which is why those phones require batteries that are so much larger.Raqia - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
It's a fallacy that an external modem is any less power efficient than an on SoC one, and in fact fab process can be further optimized for a totally separate modem die which really does have different requirements than CPUs and GPUs. The reason Qualcomm, Samsung, Mediatek and Huawei do it is to reduce cost and complexity. Apple simply doesn't the IP necessary and the purchase of Intel's money losing unit was primarily for IP, some talent rather than design or implementation; it still won't get them a competitive modem in house for several years to come.ZolaIII - Thursday, December 3, 2020 - link
It's a fact how it isn't a one peace to start with. RF analog-mixed part & processesing part which can be integrated. RF part didn't progress regarding it's manufacturing processes in very, very long time & in best case scenario is built upon SOI. In the world of mobile SoC high density libs are commonly used for everything already (excluding analogue, MOSFET's and cetera of course).KusheYemi - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
Qualcomm updated their processor the right way. They improved all of the main day to day functions that ordinary people use frequently. Tech savvy people might be disappointed about the raw compute power but the SD865 was already great.halcyon - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
If they wanted to improve the day-to-day, they would have made it much more power efficient and replaced those ageing A55 cores that are used for mosts daily simple tasks.melgross - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
Great compared to what, other mediocre SoCs?The Hardcard - Wednesday, December 2, 2020 - link
I don’t know why people only see great or horrible with nothing in between. This is a good competitive chip - only people desperately aching for someone to overtake Apple can be seriously disappointed.The single X1 is a solution to having good singlethread speed and the UI responsiveness that comes with that while giving good multicore combined with efficiency. Is it the best solution? I don’t know, but it’s not a bad one.
The clock speed is interesting however. I have to think that there are process limitations there. ARM targeted 3 GHz, which would’ve given it some floating point wins over the A13 based on Andrei‘s estimates. The 5% shortfall will put them pretty squarely behind the A13, I’m sure they wouldn’t have excepted that unless they had no choice.