True. His article felt very disjointed and at places. Considering his vendetta against QCOM, wouldn't be surprised if he's straight up lying or exaggerating things.
True. His article felt very disjointed and at places. Considering his vendetta against QCOM, wouldn't be surprised if he's straight up lying or exaggerating things.Charlie says a lot of things. Release is close enough that it will soon become very clear whether they're true or not. Considering he repeatedly refers to the X Plus as the "X Pro", I'm frankly questioning some of his attention to detail on this one.
Probably not by much. Look at Streaming vs. Local Playback, see the diminished gains when device radios are off.Imagine how much these numbers could be improved, when X Elite G2 introduces actual E cores.
Ehhh, Idk why anyone takes Charlie seriously. The guy has the maturity of a teenager with how he comes off. But then again, I’ve seen him taking swigs from a 2L Coke bottle like if he was in a 24-hour Halo LAN party marathon so maybe I’m not far off.True. His article felt very disjointed and at places. Considering his vendetta against QCOM, wouldn't be surprised if he's straight up lying or exaggerating things.
View attachment 97726
This is crazy
Sorry, I meant to say on-package memory
Submitting to War Crimes Court immediately.Snapdragon X naming scheme
View attachment 97730
Even non-modern. Cyrix MediaGX had unified memory nearly 30 years ago.Every modern APU has unified memory?
all modern APUs of note have unified memory, Kaveri (or really the console parts) were the first ones to get there.Something Qualcomm hasn't disclosed yet, is whether these will have Unified Memory.
and I thought core ultra naming was bad.
*Crimes against the Tech CommunitySubmitting to War Crimes Court immediately.
This is a good naming scheme.Snapdragon X naming scheme
View attachment 97730
L2 and SLC.Does it include L2? L3? SLC?
Nope!Does this CPU even have an L3 cache??
Qualcomm is like Apple, that's itEverybody seems to be talking about the cheating allegations Charlie makes in his article, but is nobody willing to discuss the other point? That Qualcomm has been incredibly sparse in disclosing the technical details of their chips. For the CPU, other than the clock speeds and core count, we hardly know anything else. They have vaguely mentioned "42 MB Total Cache". What does that mean? Does it include L2? L3? SLC? Does this CPU even have an L3 cache?? What about the microarchitectural details of the Oryon CPU?? With regards to the GPU, the only information they have given us is the TFLOPS figure. No mention of clock speeds, ALU count or cache setup. This is in striking contrast to Intel and AMD, who do reveal such details in their presentations. But then, does Qualcomm have an obligation to disclose such technical details? Because Apple for instance, hardly discloses anything too, and are arguably worse than Qualcomm in this aspect.
We may be nerds but we're still human.*Crimes against the Tech Community
Both employ former Anandtech writers. But I still am hopeful Qualcomm will talk about this chip at HotChips.Qualcomm is like Apple, that's it