Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–109 of 109 posts

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#101

Post by jsjohnst »

ksec wrote: post #99
jsjohnst wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just as data point and prospective Apple spend more TDP budget on its mobile CPU core than any current ARM Server CPU core. Are you talking TDP per core? Because there are many ARM server processors with much higher total TDP than Apple's A/M series processors. Even per core, I find it hard to believe that's true for even most ARM server chips, let alone all, given the total TDP of an M1 (10-15W, 4/4 big.LITTLE cor…

Per Core, The Max TDP per core of M1 pushes to 5W. All current ARM server based on N1 has a per core maximum of 3W max. You have specialised core like those on Fujitsu A64FX but they dont push to 5W either with when running with SVE. i.e What ever core Google decide to work on tensor could easily be used on Server as well. Whether they are the best for it would be a different question though.

> All current ARM server based on N1 has a per core maximum of 3W max.

The N1 based Altra Q80-33 and the Q64-33 both have a per core max over 3W, with the Q64-33 approaching 3.5W/core. Still way under your figure for M1 of course.

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#102

Post by unethical_ban »

one_off_comment wrote: post #3

Yikes. I'm not a fan of the design because I like my phone to be able to sit flat on surfaces.

I never have my phone outside of its case other than dusting - I always have a Spigen of some kind.

I agree with you, but at this point I'm used to cases anyway. If nothing else, I like being able to flip the phone over on its screenside without the screen touching the surface.

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#103

Post by unethical_ban »

evdkush wrote: post #89

Please, some manufacturer: - slate form factor Is this just impossible now? Think Galaxy S9, but just with upgraded hardware and maybe smaller bottom bezels.

There are very few things holding me to Android besides familiarity. I'm glad they exist and I think sideloading/3P app stores are important to have "in the world", but the iPhone 12 Mini is just amazing. If it had OLED/high refresh, I wouldn't question my next purchase at all.

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#105

Post by skavi »

brundolf wrote: post #76
crazygringo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? What's the useful advantage to a flush back? I don't really see any. As long as I can hold the phone, and it can lie on a table or stand without wobbling, it seems to do what it needs to. It's not like you're stacking phones on top of each other the way you do books or magazines. (And heck if you work in repair or provisioning and actually do stack phones, it's easy enough to turn every other one 180°.) Also I d…

You can set it flat on a table or desk without a weird rocking effect

This design solves that as well. If anything, it orients the phone in a slightly more convenient angle.

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#106

Post by skavi »

Ruthalas wrote: post #92
crazygringo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? What's the useful advantage to a flush back? I don't really see any. As long as I can hold the phone, and it can lie on a table or stand without wobbling, it seems to do what it needs to. It's not like you're stacking phones on top of each other the way you do books or magazines. (And heck if you work in repair or provisioning and actually do stack phones, it's easy enough to turn every other one 180°.) Also I d…

I want to be able to set my phone down on a table and be able to use it without it seesawing and rocking.

This design does not look like it will seesaw or rock more than any keyboard with angled stands. And the bump prevents scratches to the lenses.

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#107

Post by fomine3 »

actuator wrote: post #23

From the Verge article it seems the CPU in SoC would be some licensed spec based on Exynos, so I am guessing we aren't going to see CPU performance close to A series processors, but it does seem like a promising start. Google has an incentive to go all in on CPU design as that helps their data centers and GCP both, so we might see significant gains over time. I had to buy a new phone and I am really happy that Pixel…

It's sad for me because we also miss SoC built with latest TSMC process.

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#108

Post by fomine3 »

dgudkov wrote: post #83
63 wrote: post #22

I imagine I'm in the minority but I'd rather have a phone a fraction of a millimeter thicker that has a flush back. At this point it's getting out of hand.

If that extra millimeter went to extra battery capacity, it would give an extra day of life to the phone. I would appreciate it more than just a flush back.

And better heat spreading

Re: Google Tensor SoC debuts on the new Pixel 6 this fall

#109

Post by Teknoman117 »

matmatmatmat wrote: post #80
Teknoman117 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. My point was that Qualcomm is not doing this themselves. The only snapdragon support in upstream (Linux, Mesa, etc.) is done by dedicated people in the OSS community. Qualcomm (and MediaTek, etc.) fork the latest LTS kernel or android common kernel, hack it up for that SoC, and dump that on vendors as the msmXXXX kernel. They'll rebase on top of upstream or android common kernel patches (of that version) for t…

This seems like such a short-sighted move by Qualcomm, is there some reason that they would do this and risk losing Google as a customer? Or, did they always assume that they would lose Google as a customer and so they thought it wouldn't be worth the investment?

Google really doesn't have much of a choice in the matter. As big as they are, so far it doesn't appear that they've decided that this isn't an important enough problem to make their own phone SoCs. Qualcomm doesn't exactly have many competitors that could be endorsed over them. Huawei/HiSilicon is anathema in US, Samsung uses Qualcomm's Snapdragon over their own Exynos line in the US, Amlogic and MediaTek don't make high-end SoCs, and Apple only makes them for their own phones.

Qualcomm thrives off of the trend of people expecting new phones every year (or every 6 months in some cases). Since they target the mid and high cost devices, all they have to do is make the phone work for a two or so years, and most people buying those phones are going to have gotten bored of their phone by then.

This is one of the main motivations for Project Treble, which is to completely disconnect the phone's userspace from the kernel version it runs on. It's a hard challenge though. Qualcomm and the other vendors for these high turnover products aren't all that interested in supporting it, because they benefit from replacing phones frequently. If you've ever looked at one of the phone kernels, they shove way more into them than upstream would ever accept (the entire radio stack, graphics stack, quick charge logic, etc.). This tends to make the software running on Android phones heavily coupled to the vendor kernel.

Post reply on HN