• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Will the Snapdragon 835 be able to run practically on 5" devices?

D

Deleted User

Guest
Manufacturers of Android phones seem to be ignoring their primary competition (the iPhone) by increasing the standard size of their premium (chipset) phones to around 5.5" now, and with the Pixel the only modern phone premium squarely at 5", I wonder if it's impossible for these manufacturers (or they think it's impossible) to make a modern premium phone at 5" without what they consider to be an impractical battery size.

My argument is it is possible, because phones are so thin now I think they're impractical. I miss the days of a thicker phone like the Droid or Moto X because they're just easier to hold. Nothing rumored to come out around 5" is going to be less than 4 tenths of an inch bigger, which is getting annoyingly big.

Apple has premium iPhones at 4.7" and 4" screens with the latest processors and adequate batteries, why don't Android manufacturers compete with these anymore? I think there's a market for people wanting at least 4.5" and 5" phones with the latest processor and good-to-steller battery life... hell we have 5.5" phones with varying 1- to 2-day battery life specs where some are thicker than others and I don't think anybody fell off a cliff because of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andMego
(don't tell him about the iphone 7 plus anyone....)

I thought the iPhone Plus 5.5" models were implicit in my message... I'm talking about iPhone 4.7" and 4" Android premium phone competition (meaning with the latest processors), of which there exists none unless you consider the Pixel/S7/G5/HTC 10 to be competing with those, all bigger screen sizes. I think you missed the point of my post.

Does anyone get my points in my original post here? The standard premium Android phones are all hitting 5.5"... what will it be next year, 5.7"? How about the year after that, 6"? Then 7"? Can anyone understand why an Android premium phone competing directly with the iPhone 4" and 4.7" might be a good idea? Or are manufacturers unwilling or too terrified to even try? With them tossing different large sizes all over the wall, I'd think they'd at least try some smaller phones with the latest processors, but maybe they haven't realized that people are OK with more battery power in thicker phones.

Please reply only if you get what I'm talking about and can reply with an opinion worth thinking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andMego
Upvote 0
I thought the iPhone Plus 5.5" models were implicit in my message...

I'm talking about iPhone 4.7" and 4" Android premium phone competition


Does anyone get my points in my original post here?


.

you're missing the implicit point here... Iwhich was your original thesis was flawed. Its not a simple case of Android ignoring the competition,. in fact Apple are increasing the size of their devices due to the android competition here... At the premium end of the market everyone is chasing customers who seem to want larger devices..

As to the point around 7 or 8" phones... there Asus and Samsung have already tried them.... but they didn't seem to capture the public's imagination..... Hell, samsung are famous for throwing as many form factors to the wall and seeing which ones stick....

Sony's Z compact series (https://www.sonymobile.com/gb/products/phones/xperia-z5-compact/) is an attempt to capture the demand for smaller premium phones. The problem is, that as the services offered on all of these devices have changed, screen size is highly desireable by people, for facebooks, email, office, gaming, movies.....

Now, if the paradigm changes, and we do move to a more oral interface/wearable/AI/brainwaves..... and the screen isn't the big be all and end all, then there is massive scope for smaller devices... Possibly instead of a single phone, a personal hub of small devices that you carry around and all connects through whatever portable connection device you have.
 
Upvote 0
In any event, the SoC is irrelevant. Of course you can build a 5" or even a 3.5" device using the 835. If it does what Qualcomm says it will use less power than the s820 and much less than the s810, so it would fit better in a smaller chassis than the older SoCs. Sony have been the hold-out for high-spec compact phones the last few years with their Z Compact ranges, but the downgrading of the X Compact from flagship to mid-range SoC was purely a matter of economics, as the s820 would definitely have worked better in a small chassis than the Z5 Compact's s810.

As Andy says, the trend to larger phones is driven by sales, and that means that they target the largest market and people with other preferences tend to get short-changed. I'm also speaking as someone who would prefer a smaller device, but the problem is that margins are not large and niche markets are only profitable if you can charge a premium for them, while people expect a smaller phone to be cheaper. Apple have less competition since anyone who wants iOS has nowhere else to go, but do you remember Apple's marketing for the iPhone 5, insisting that this was ergonomically the perfect size, that people didn't want bigger phones than that? The fact that this was replaced by the 4.7" and 5.5" iPhone 6 models is a clear sign that they are not immune to this trend, and I wouldn't bet against them getting larger again (BTW the 4" iPhones' processors don't generally have the latest chips: they are normally a generation behind the larger models).

That said, it's becoming increasingly misleading to judge devices by diagonal screen size. For example, in recent years I've read a number of reviews praising Samsung for fitting large screens in small devices, but that's because they've rolled-up the sides of the display, while the diagonal dimension is quoted for the screen when laid flat. The LG G6 will apparently have a 5.7" display (flat), but because that's a 2:1 aspect ratio (a simpler way of saying 18:9) it will be no wider than a 5.2" 16:9 (and if they shrink the bottom bezel the phone need not be taller either). So the diagonal dimension of the screen is only part of the story. But that's the old problem with marketing: it likes to pick a single number (screen diagonal, number of MPix, number of cores in a processor) and use that to tell a story, even though the story can be incomplete or downright misleading without other information (aspect ratio, sensor size and technology, core architecture+fabrication process+gpu+modems). But I'm sure the next trend will be for the display to cover a larger part of the font panel, with top and bottom bezels shrinking and buttons disappearing, which will make old rules of thumb about screen dimensions obsolete.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
you're missing the implicit point here... Iwhich was your original thesis was flawed. Its not a simple case of Android ignoring the competition,. in fact Apple are increasing the size of their devices due to the android competition here... At the premium end of the market everyone is chasing customers who seem to want larger devices..

Not sure what you think my original thesis was, but what you're saying here just basically feeds more into my "thesis" which is ultimately just a question of "WHY are they ignoring the competition and not making premium phones where Apple has them at 4.7" or 4"? Fine I'll accept that manufacturers are chasing customers who seem to want larger devices, but again WHY, when iPhones at 4.7" and 4" sell great? Or do they? Would have been nice to see you address the WHY not just the WHAT.

As to the point around 7 or 8" phones... there Asus and Samsung have already tried them.... but they didn't seem to capture the public's imagination..... Hell, samsung are famous for throwing as many form factors to the wall and seeing which ones stick....

They didn't stick back then when phones were around 3.5-5"... now they're up in the 5.5" standard and the LG G6 will be a 5.7" and the Samsung Galaxy S8 will be a 5.8"... not a 4.7" or 4" with the same processor (like in iPhones)!

Sony's Z compact series (https://www.sonymobile.com/gb/products/phones/xperia-z5-compact/) is an attempt to capture the demand for smaller premium phones. The problem is, that as the services offered on all of these devices have changed, screen size is highly desireable by people, for facebooks, email, office, gaming, movies.....

Yes, Sony's compact series are the perfect example of a smaller phone that competes with modern iPhone sizes, but are they available on Verizon like the iPhone is? You know, the largest carrier in the US? That kind of matters. I don't know anybody with a Z phone, and the ones I did didn't have them for long, so are they really premium phones?

Now, if the paradigm changes, and we do move to a more oral interface/wearable/AI/brainwaves..... and the screen isn't the big be all and end all, then there is massive scope for smaller devices... Possibly instead of a single phone, a personal hub of small devices that you carry around and all connects through whatever portable connection device you have.

If screen size doesn't matter than this thread is moot, so let's stick within the parameters of screen size mattering, or just move on to a thread about something else.
 
Upvote 0
In any event, the SoC is irrelevant. Of course you can build a 5" or even a 3.5" device using the 835. If it does what Qualcomm says it will use less power than the s820 and much less than the s810, so it would fit better in a smaller chassis than the older SoCs. Sony have been the hold-out for high-spec compact phones the last few years with their Z Compact ranges, but the downgrading of the X Compact from flagship to mid-range SoC was purely a matter of economics, as the s820 would definitely have worked better in a small chassis than the Z5 Compact's s810.

OK, so by "purely a matter of economics" it seems like you're saying that manufacturers (at least Sony) is afraid that the investment in a smaller phone with a modern SoC will not pay off... so what I'd like to know is, if you're correct, what is driving this? Actual sales based on screen size? Do we have useful data on that?

As Andy says, the trend to larger phones is driven by sales, and that means that they target the largest market and people with other preferences tend to get short-changed. I'm also speaking as someone who would prefer a smaller device, but the problem is that margins are not large and niche markets are only profitable if you can charge a premium for them, while people expect a smaller phone to be cheaper. Apple have less competition since anyone who wants iOS has nowhere else to go, but do you remember Apple's marketing for the iPhone 5, insisting that this was ergonomically the perfect size, that people didn't want bigger phones than that? The fact that this was replaced by the 4.7" and 5.5" iPhone 6 models is a clear sign that they are not immune to this trend, and I wouldn't bet against them getting larger again (BTW the 4" iPhones' processors don't generally have the latest chips: they are normally a generation behind the larger models).

The 5.5" market didn't exist before it was created, and the "niche" market of 4.5-5" phones is only "niche" now because of... what? The drive by Android manufacturers to make their premium phones 5.5", or sales based on screen size? Do manufacturers see the same sales lists we do?

That said, it's becoming increasingly misleading to judge devices by diagonal screen size. For example, in recent years I've read a number of reviews praising Samsung for fitting large screens in small devices, but that's because they've rolled-up the sides of the display, while the diagonal dimension is quoted for the screen when laid flat. The LG G6 will apparently have a 5.7" display (flat), but because that's a 2:1 aspect ratio (a simpler way of saying 18:9) it will be no wider than a 5.2" 16:9 (and if they shrink the bottom bezel the phone need not be taller either). So the diagonal dimension of the screen is only part of the story. But that's the old problem with marketing: it likes to pick a single number (screen diagonal, number of MPix, number of cores in a processor) and use that to tell a story, even though the story can be incomplete or downright misleading without other information (aspect ratio, sensor size and technology, core architecture+fabrication process+gpu+modems). But I'm sure the next trend will be for the display to cover a larger part of the font panel, with top and bottom bezels shrinking and buttons disappearing, which will make old rules of thumb about screen dimensions obsolete.

All the stuff outside the screen is as subjective as anything else in relation to anything else (say, fingerprint scanner size compared to sensitivity), so I'm just using screen size as a general comparative when it comes to SoC... my only question really is why are Android manufacturers not competing with the iPhone 4" and 4.7" phones that have premium processors (meaning not putting out at least something 5" or below with a modern processor besides the Pixel)... but your statements, regardless of all the subjective stuff around the screen that makes us like/dislike the phone's handling, imply that larger phones just sell better...

So if that's true, my question would be: Why? Because they're advertised as the new awesome thing, or because people just want bigger screens? If it's the latter, then that begs the question of why the Samsung 7" (original Galaxy Tab, which was a phone) didn't sell better than the iPhone back then, or why the 6" Nexus didn't sell better than its 5" comparables.

I'm sure there's all kinds of "obvious" answers (which are probably based on overly-simplistic thinking), but I'd really like to know whether this ever-increasing phone screen size standardization is based on a hype feedback loop or actual market forces.
 
Upvote 0
Well my point about the aspect ratio was very simple: a phone with a 5.7" 2:1 screen is the same size as one with a 5.2" 16:9 screen, so the screen diagonal is only useful as a proxy for device size when the aspect ratio is the same.

And yes, of course the manufacturers base their decisions on their own sales data (as well doubtless as their own market research, other people's sales where they can get the info). It's also not surprising if trends develop over time: quite apart from the message about big screens taking time to settle in the public's minds/for people to decide they have a use for such things, people are also always comparing to what they consider to be "normal". So in a world where most phones were 4", a 5.5" phone would be a freak and hence be less likely to have mass appeal. But a 4.5" one could be a more reasonable step. Then if manufacturers find that 4.7" wins some sales over 4.5", and 5" over 4.7", things will creep up for a while. And there is a limit for most people, the question is really where? In the last couple of years there has been clusterings around 5-5.2" and 5.5", and while 6" phones have been around for a while they've not become mainstream (in Western markets - more popular in SE Asia). And there are some trends that suggest this is settling. For example, LG have been reducing the sizes of their main flagships: the G4 was 5.5", the G5 5.3", and the G6's aspect ratio makes it effectively 5.2". Samsung have been bending down the edges of their flagship's screens, so while the screen diagonal may sound large the width of the phone is actually that of a smaller-screened device. And the S8 will have both of these features, longer aspect ratio and curved edges, so the 5.8" S8 will probably be no larger than the 5.1" S7. So while to naive blogs and marketing hype it may appear that screen sizes keep growing, it's not quite so simple a story.

Apple aren't immune either: although the 6 outsold the 6 Plus comfortably (the 6 already being a big step in size for the Apple market, as well as cheaper) according to what I can find on the web the 7 Plus is outselling the 7.

But that doesn't mean that a smaller phone won't be less profitable. Remember that I don't like large phones either, I'm just describing what I've been watching for a few years now.

The Nexus 6 is an example that shows that screen size is just one variable: it was the largest Nexus ever, beyond any mainstream handset, and also the most expensive - and a big step up in cost from the Nexus 5. It's hard to disentangle two effects like that in one device. (If you think I ever said that a big phone will automatically sell better you should re-read).

Also this is a global business, and while manufacturers do target devices at markets it also helps if the flagships can sell globally, which means that you will tend to look at trends in all markets. The spread of the 5.5" phone is probably at least partially driven by Asian markets, where larger phones have long been popular.

As for Verizon and Sony, VZW may be the biggest carrier in the US, but the US is not Sony's biggest market by a long way - I'm not sure it's anyone's apart from maybe Apple, but Sony more or less pulled out of the US phone market for a couple of years and it remains small for them. You'd have to ask Sony for reasons (not that they'd tell you), but remember that CDMA networks only exist in North America, so serving them requires extra costs compared to the rest of the world. If Verizon didn't offer Sony a good enough deal (and Sony wouldn't be negotiating from a position of strength given their near death in the US) I could quite understand Sony deciding that it wasn't worth bothering with them. Remember when asking why a phone isn't available on a particular carrier that the carrier is involved in that as well as the manufacturer.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Well my point about the aspect ratio was very simple: a phone with a 5.7" 2:1 screen is the same size as one with a 5.2" 16:9 screen, so the screen diagonal is only useful as a proxy for device size when the aspect ratio is the same.

A phone with a 5.7" 2:1 screen isn't the same size as one with a 5.2" 16:9 screen, it's bigger (it has more area in real physical space). It may have the same width, but it's still more area to cover with my thumb, and for me therefore more area is out of reach. The iPhone's 4.7" has more area I can cover, but I prefer Android, so why will the manufacturers not make a 4.7" Android phone with a Snapdragon 820 processor and comparable battery life?

And yes, of course the manufacturers base their decisions on their own sales data (as well doubtless as their own market research, other people's sales where they can get the info). It's also not surprising if trends develop over time: quite apart from the message about big screens taking time to settle in the public's minds/for people to decide they have a use for such things, people are also always comparing to what they consider to be "normal". So in a world where most phones were 4", a 5.5" phone would be a freak and hence be less likely to have mass appeal. But a 4.5" one could be a more reasonable step. Then if manufacturers find that 4.7" wins some sales over 4.5", and 5" over 4.7", things will creep up for a while. And there is a limit for most people, the question is really where? In the last couple of years there has been clusterings around 5-5.2" and 5.5", and while 6" phones have been around for a while they've not become mainstream (in Western markets - more popular in SE Asia). And there are some trends that suggest this is settling. For example, LG have been reducing the sizes of their main flagships: the G4 was 5.5", the G5 5.3", and the G6's aspect ratio makes it effectively 5.2". Samsung have been bending down the edges of their flagship's screens, so while the screen diagonal may sound large the width of the phone is actually that of a smaller-screened device. And the S8 will have both of these features, longer aspect ratio and curved edges, so the 5.8" S8 will probably be no larger than the 5.1" S7. So while to naive blogs and marketing hype it may appear that screen sizes keep growing, it's not quite so simple a story.

The issue beneath your comments here is that people's hand size are not increasing with the average Android premium phone size. Apple makes a range of sizes (4-5.5") with the same modern processor yet Android phones with top-level processors (Android's equivalent of "modern processors") are rare at 5" or less. To me this is an issue because anything above 5" was called a "phablet" by phone reviewers and in polls people have said on average they prefer between a 4.7-5" phone. I see no reason to have a good battery in a phone with a top-level processor with a 4.7-5" screen, and the new phones with premium processors coming up are mostly 5.5". The Nexus 5X was a sub-standard phone compared to the 6P which was completely unnecessary considering the Pixel now has the same processor as the Pixel XL...

My fear is Android will get to a point where it can't have good battery life and speed on anything less than a 6" or 7" phone, and now I'm wondering if the Pixel 2 will be 5.2" but sub-standard compared to a Pixel 2 XL at 5.7"... *sigh*

Apple aren't immune either: although the 6 outsold the 6 Plus comfortably (the 6 already being a big step in size for the Apple market, as well as cheaper) according to what I can find on the web the 7 Plus is outselling the 7.

So what have you seen on the 6s and 6s Plus sales?

But that doesn't mean that a smaller phone won't be less profitable. Remember that I don't like large phones either, I'm just describing what I've been watching for a few years now.

Again I can't tell if big-phone sales are due to hype (trendiness/advertising/next-big-thing) or people actually want a bigger screen for practical reasons.

The Nexus 6 is an example that shows that screen size is just one variable: it was the largest Nexus ever, beyond any mainstream handset, and also the most expensive - and a big step up in cost from the Nexus 5. It's hard to disentangle two effects like that in one device. (If you think I ever said that a big phone will automatically sell better you should re-read).

The Nexus 6 could simply be an example of a too-big-step-forward for the hype-mongers; as far as I know it didn't sell well, as far as I know, for this reason, but if your point is just that the Nexus 6 is an example that shows screen size is just one variable, well that's not much more than an obvious point that I think everyone knows. Sales figures would have pointed more to a poignant point, but my point, for or against (or regardless of), what those figures may have indicated was already stated at the beginning of this paragraph.

Also this is a global business, and while manufacturers do target devices at markets it also helps if the flagships can sell globally, which means that you will tend to look at trends in all markets. The spread of the 5.5" phone is probably at least partially driven by Asian markets, where larger phones have long been popular.

I know it's a global business, I don't think anyone thinks otherwise (and I would only be amused if they do), but manufacturers don't have to target all of their phones to every country; they already don't to begin with, and I haven't seen news stories stating bigger phones only were being released in Asian countries (my news feeds includes rumors of new phones in non-US countries), so I'm not sure this is an argument. Every bigger phone rumor I've seen at best had a release in a non-US country only weeks or months before a US release or concurrently with a US release under a different model name or slightly different model hardware. The trend has been global essentially concurrently, not just the business.

As for Verizon and Sony, VZW may be the biggest carrier in the US, but the US is not Sony's biggest market by a long way - I'm not sure it's anyone's apart from maybe Apple, but Sony more or less pulled out of the US phone market for a couple of years and it remains small for them. You'd have to ask Sony for reasons (not that they'd tell you), but remember that CDMA networks only exist in North America, so serving them requires extra costs compared to the rest of the world. If Verizon didn't offer Sony a good enough deal (and Sony wouldn't be negotiating from a position of strength given their near death in the US) I could quite understand Sony deciding that it wasn't worth bothering with them. Remember when asking why a phone isn't available on a particular carrier that the carrier is involved in that as well as the manufacturer.

Sony is just an example of a manufacturer making a 4.7-5" phone with a premium processor, and I didn't ask why they're not available on Verizon, but that's a pretty big market to be out of.
 
Upvote 0

BEST TECH IN 2023

We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.

Smartphones