Bleep Qualcomm right in their Qualcomm-hole


Hey @wumpus, I passed you in your Buick on the way into work today.


Weird I heard he drove a BMW


That car has a 4 (or 6?) cylinder engine, he clearly rides a single cylinder dirt bike.


Awwww yeah, snipped grills FTW


I lost it. (laughing)


Maybe if you had used a less attention grabbing title… like “Qualcomm dominance in the Android CPU market saddles consumers with less than impressive real-world performance gains on each upgrade.”




Did you just call the whole point of what you are saying… “BORING”? =)


Just saw a commercial for the Apple Pencil and I yelled: STYLUS you fuckers! It’s a STYLUS!

Sorry. Drunk.


Let the wagering begin @jsnell

So the 2017 iPad pros were on 10nm… fascinating. That explains the long delay!


Interesting, thanks for the link. A10x being on 10nm was the rumor a while back, but those rumors died down quickly after the first benchmarks got out.

I’m a bit puzzled that you’re taking this as a positive sign for the A11. That’s now two cases of 10nm not giving the projected frequency improvements. First 835 totally missed the boat on Samsung 10nm, and now Apple seemingly got no benefit from TSMC 10nm.

If you’re really intent on betting and your over/under for single core GeekBench is 4422, I’m happy to take the under. Loser donates $20 to Tom.


Fuck yes I will and I already did.

I’m saying A11 will be over 4100 and closer to 4400. Let’s say if it is 4300 or higher then I’m right, otherwise I was just “close”.

4100 kinda sucks since it’d be barely faster than the 2017 iPad Pro.


You repeatedly asked for a bet, but did not actually propose one. So I turned your estimates into the obvious fair bet. You did not accept it. Then 2.5 months later you’re walking down those estimates, since some random dude on Twitter guessed at a 20% improvement?

(Still happy to take the under on 4422, terms as per previous post).


Mostly I was trying to define an “area of suck” where it clearly isn’t that much faster than what came before it, which is what you’re saying will happen. To me that is around 4100, e.g. barely faster than the 2017 iPad Pro.

(As a reminder if we were talking about Android, “only” getting to 4100 would be fucking amazing, considering the suck that is Qualcomm… Samsung S7 achieves 1803, Samsung S8 achieves 1965… yay whee awesome a 9% improvement, here’s your participation badge. To put things in context, a measly 9% improvement would mean the iPhone 8 achieves 3624 against the 3325 of the iPhone 7.)

Sorry, I missed your last para in this post. Way to bury the lede. We can make the bet 4422 if you’re not confident enough about your claims that Apple has gotten all the performance they’re ever going to get since they have reached modern manufacturing limits ;)


If they are really going to start the pricing at $1000 for the lowest storage model, it damn well better have some standout performance.

Too bad Apple doesn’t sell a dock like Samsung so you can just use your phone as your desktop.


Unlikely, I think that’s only referring to the iPhone X special edition, not the iPhone 8. I believe they’ll all have the same identical CPU / SoC.


Every time I feel like updating my slow old Android phone, I just come in here and read stuff. It cures my desire immediately, as whatever I’d spend would still make me a miserable techno-serf.


It is depressing, I really want Android / Qualcomm to catch up.

Ye Olde 2014 iPad Air 2 is gonna be basically indistinguishable from the hottest new Android device in performance … and we’re still waiting for an Android device that’s even as fast as the iPhone 6s, much less faster :(


Picture this imagery: I am no longer at the head of the human centipede of the iphone upgrade train. I will be modestly buying my friend’s 7+ when he goes to 8 or X.


A used iPhone is a great choice actually and would be what I recommend to most folks.