Does snapdragon soc's gets slowdown after years of usage?

[Big Boar]

Im interested on huawei's new midrange soc the kirin 810. Its GPU is 44% more powerful than snapdragon 730's making it possibly the most powerful midrange soc this year AND they say it won't slowdown, even after several years its still good as brand new. Is the snapdragon slows down after years? Also it was confirmed that samsung exynos chips does slows down so they sucks. Maybe with their rumored new Radeon GPU it won't slowdown now.

 

[mikedt]

Well Kirin is only used in Huawei and Honor phones, and Exynos is only in Samsung phones.

Where did you get this information about apparent slow downs? What's the source? "confirmed" by whom?

 

[lvt]

Kirin, Exynos, or even Mediatek, they are technically all Snapdragon. One of them can rise to the top for a while before falling behind another.

 

[Big Boar]

Well Kirin is only used in Huawei and Honor phones, and Exynos is only in Samsung phones.

Where did you get this information about apparent slow downs? What's the source? "confirmed" by whom?

The new reviews in youtube about the new Kirin 810 and saying exynos chips are slowing down after years of usage but Kirin chips do not.

 

[mikedt]

The new reviews in youtube about the new Kirin 810 and saying exynos chips are slowing down after years of usage but Kirin chips do not.

Well reviews from YouTubers can cover a multitude of sins, facts, opinion, conjecture, truth, lies, and BS.

Do you have any reliable creditable sources? If necessary post some URLs to the sources.

 

[Hadron]

The new reviews in youtube about the new Kirin 810 and saying exynos chips are slowing down after years of usage but Kirin chips do not.

Samsung phones have a reputation for slowing down (fair or otherwise). That doesn't mean that the processor slows down.

And I'm afraid I'm with Mike on YouTubers as a reliable source of information - I'd want something a lot more credible before I'd take such a statement seriously.

Kirin, Exynos, or even Mediatek, they are technically all Snapdragon. One of them can rise to the top for a while before falling behind another.

No, Snapdragon is a Qualcomm brand name. They are all based on ARM architecture and designs, though Qualcomm have used customised versions of the cores and their own gpus for a long time, and Samsung have recently started customising the cores as well (and are reported to finally be moving away from the inefficient Mali gpus).

 

[lvt]

No, Snapdragon is a Qualcomm brand name. They are all based on ARM architecture and designs, though Qualcomm have used customised versions of the cores and their own gpus for a long time, and Samsung have recently started customising the cores as well (and are reported to finally be moving away from the inefficient Mali gpus).

I should have said more correctly that Kirin, Exynos, MediaTek and Snapdragon are all the same CPU with more or less tweaking.

From my observation, be it Snapdragon or MediaTek, the newer always wins. People say Adreno is better than Mali but it depends what SOC do you use. The Mali GPU that comes with the P60 on my Oppo is definitely better than the Adreno with Snapdragon 620 on my HTC phone (smoother graphic, less heat)

 

[Hadron]

But the Snapdragon 620 is an old midrange SoC. Like there are different Snapdragon or Exynos SoCs, there are different Adreno and different Mali gpus.

But when you compare the recent flagship gpus of the two brands the Mali uses more power to deliver the same performance, which in practice limits it. And they've been behind for at least 3 years now. Doesn't mean that every Adreno will outperform every Mali, and whether it will matter at all will depend on your usage. But that's why I referred to the Mali as "inefficient": I was talking about thermodynamic efficiency, i.e. the energy required to do a quantity of work (which for intensive or sustained work becomes a limiting factor as it results in thermal throttling).

 

[lvt]

But the Snapdragon 620 is an old midrange SoC. Like there are different Snapdragon or Exynos SoCs, there are different Adreno and different Mali gpus.

But when you compare the recent flagship gpus of the two brands the Mali uses more power to deliver the same performance, which in practice limits it. And they've been behind for at least 3 years now. Doesn't mean that every Adreno will outperform every Mali, and whether it will matter at all will depend on your usage. But that's why I referred to the Mali as "inefficient": I was talking about thermodynamic efficiency, i.e. the energy required to do a quantity of work (which for intensive or sustained work becomes a limiting factor as it results in thermal throttling).

The Snapdragon 620 and the Helio P60 are both mid-range CPUs with like 1.5 year gap between them.

If you want a Snapdragon that matches the Helio P60, it's the Snapdragon 660. I will post the AnTuTu benchmark results below.

 

[lvt]

 

[lvt]

You can see that the Helio P60 scored higher results despite having less RAM. Its advantage is the use of 12nm process technology resulting in better performance and less heat.

 

[Hadron]

My point was that the Mali architecture is generally less efficient - as you say that can be compensated by a smaller scale fabrication. As I also said there are many variants of Adreno & Mali so it depends which one is in a particular SoC: in 2 chips one manufacturer may choose to emphasise performance and one battery life, and so make difference gpu choices within each range.

So yeah, rules of thumb based on the brand get tricky because each brand produces different SoCs with different design objectives (and the problem with choosing phones based on this is whether anyone makes a phone you like using the SoC you fancy!). My point was that if you removed that factor by looking at their top efforts for at least the last 3 years the Mali has been worse.

I am, for several reasons, not a fan of Antutu. If you want to look at graphical performance what you really should do is run something graphically intensive in a loop and look at fps vs time: then you see the peak it's capable of, how long it can sustain it and how good or bad its throttling behaviour is. Even then remember that you are testing a phone, not just an SoC, so how well the phone dissipates heat will be a factor. So for controlled SoC comparisons the best tests are when a manufacturer produces the same phone with different Socs, which unfortunately means only Samsung flagships - anything else and you've other factors that contribute to the result (which as a scientist I find unsatisfactory ).

We're also getting further away from the original question, which concerns slowdown over time.