When you consider the node, don't forget costs. Oh and SD675 is on 11nm so just Samsung's marketing beating 12nm. Anyway, will be hard for anyone to care much about a solution without A76 but this one seems to aim to be affordable so maybe it's at the right price.
Not to forget how Mediatek is notorious for not releasing Source and GPL violation which puts a barricade, to develop and optimize. All these SoCs will end up in junk phones, despite stepping up the bar they stay irrelevant while Qualcomm ravages ahead with their CAF.
Useless junk. Huawei is also in the same boat, not allowing Bootloader unlock but demanding ID proofs for their Honor/Huawei India division. The worst shame is XDA fanboyism for that corp.
Mediatek saving some cash by choosing not to, really pathetic.
You said it; there's no wonder why you can find so many custom ROMs for Qualcomm based phones and so few for Mediatek based phones. Also, AFAIK Qualcomm modem & RF solutions are top notch (if not the best), while Mediatek is more on a second tier modem quality.
Yeah the whole point in buying those cheap Chinese phones was to play around with custom ROMs. Mediatek ruins it for any phone they are in. Snapdragon 636 and up is a better buy in this case.
Were GPL violations set by any courthouse decision? I don't think?
Using standard essentiel patents unfair fees to prevent any competitor's developpement isn't pathetic? I think it is! Qualcomm does that kind of things according to many courthouses decisions in China, South Korea, Taiwan, European Union, USA. This is abusing of dominance. This leads to stop competition. NVIDIA, Intel, Texas Instruments, Broadcom, ST-MICROELECTRONICS already stop making soc for smartphones. This is facts!
What do you want? Monopoly? Exynos on Samsung Kirin on Huawei And Qualcomm for all the others? I don't!
You think an uncondamnded company is pathetic... ...and treat a multicondamned one like god! How strange it is!
The situation may not be the same if patents fees were fair, more serious brands may use Mediatek and release sources.
>Were GPL violations set by any courthouse decision?
What the, what?
Using standard essential patents unfair fees to prevent any competitor's development isn't pathetic?
FRAND patent fees are rather reasonable, much more than what companies might've have to pay to someone like Apple for their stupid touch (UI) implementations!
>What do you want? Monopoly?
What monopoly? You yourself quoted other SoC makers, all of them use SM as well, what are you even talking about?
>The situation may not be the same if patents fees were fair, more serious brands may use Mediatek and release sources.
No, if the competition were fair & not ripping of IP or patents (looking at you China!) we wouldn't even be hearing about such complaints! MTK is kinda bargain basement because they don't spend as much customizing the ARM IP in their SoC, don't have their own GPU & spend little to no heed or $ supporting their own hardware through custom ROMs & what not! To put it mildly ~ they're cheap, so is Hisilicon!
Judges think patents fees are too high...not only in Asia but in Europe and USA too! Facts!
Fees kill competitors : - Samsung is unable to sell Exynos. - Huawei is unable to sell kirin - X30 was a commercial fail Competition doesn't exist on high end.
On the others side, Qualcomm was able to sell even deficient soc (410, 412, 415, 615, 616, 808, 810...)
Tsss, the only Kryo that was a true custom core is the one used on SD820. Kryo 2x0 are copied/pasted A73/A53...they behave nearly exactly the same according to cores and ram frequencies. I'm ok with you about GPU.
Mediatek developpes enhanced core management : corepilot Mediatek developpes dual camera before Apple and Huawei Mediatek decodes/encodes h265/vp9 before Qualcomm Mediatek developpes AI with heterogeneous multiprocessing before Apple, Huawei and Qualcomm... Mediatek allows dual-volte before Qualcomm.
Just as computers costs are separate from the licensed software that runs on it (and may often cost much more), the specialized compute elements that implement parts of Qualcomm's patented cellular interfaces (all of 3G and most of 4G) have separate implementation costs from the licensed interfaces themselves. The way Qualcomm assesses fees for using their cellular interfaces is actually a discount for most manufacturers besides Apple, and multiple players do indeed implement SoCs or modems for third party sale, like Marvell, Intel, Samsung, Mediatek, and Huawei, and you haven't proved that many of the dropouts were simply less efficient than the companies still standing today.
These cellular interfaces are non trivial btw (far more complex than UI elements or software APIs) and they cost billions in R&D to develop and greatly advanced the state of the art in the industry; far bigger empires were built off of much less technical sophistication as in the case of Intel's x86 instruction set. There is also much more vibrant competition in the cellular phone market due to these licensing practices market when compared with bigger laptop / desktop CPU manufacturers where your choice is basically x86 and only between Intel or AMD (which falters and leaves just Intel once or twice a decade.)
Condamnations are there, even in western countries. This simple argument is enough! How can people denie the problem?
Your comparison is not the same at all.
First, You are free to use a different software. For exemple, if you don't want to pay licence to Microsoft for Windows, you can use Linux. In case of standard essential patents, you can't make a smartphone without them. You're (OEM) forced to pay Qualcomm...no choice.
Second, that's not the same company who sell the licence and the hardware. About Windows, Microsoft sells it and Intel or AMD make the processor.
Third, Microsoft doesn't use his licence to force you to buy one unique hardware. Qualcomm refuse to sell his licences to competitors. Sell them directly to OEM...they can sell their licences with high price. Make a lot of benefits. And reduce the price of the soc to kick out competitors.
I only have some numbers from 2016. Licence cost 1.1billions dollars and generate 7.6billions dollars revenu. That makes 6.5billions dollars benefits. Soc generate only 1.8billions dollars benefits for 15.4billions revenu
In 2016, marging on patents were 600%. Marging on soc...15%. 80% of the whole benefits was made with patents. Only 20% with products.
I'm not saying, there is no problem with Microsoft. But these situation is different and far more dangerous.
Corepilot is nothing new, they don't customise ANY hardware parts so it could only be software scheduler, and it DOESN'T work well at all, considering MTK have to shutdown cores more often than their competitors
MTK did NOT "developpes" dual camera before Huawei, P9 had already launched actual Dual Camera when the first Helio X20 phone hit the market - with SINGLE camera setup. MTK's dual camera software wasn't ready in 2016, but Huawei's was. So Huawei developed dual camera BEFORE MTK.
MTK's first H265 enabled phone launched mid-2014, Qualcomm's launched Q3'14, only a couple of months later, and with 4K/UHD support, they were announced around the same time as well.
MTK's P60 is their first heterogeneous AI engine launched in 2018, while Qualcomm enabled 835/660 launched in 2017 with heterogeneous AI engine at the same time.
MTK first demonstrated dual VoLTE mid-2017, AFTER Qualcomm's demo with SDM835, and Qualcomm enabled dual VoLTE for SDM660/835 late 2017 with Oppo updated their phone on 6/Jan/2018 to enable dual VoLTE, in the mean time, NO MTK phone with dual VoLTE launched until months later.
So out of ALL the claims, ONLY 1 was true, MTK did support VP9 ahead of Qualcomm, that's all.
Corepilot 3.0 allows tri-cluster, traditionnal big.LITTLE can't. It shows that hardware is obviously involved. It's customised design, so you're wrong. Have you ever seen it working. Medias spread heating problem, but did they do any test? 810, 808 or even 652 shutdown far far more often! My own shows only 6% perfs drop (Vernee Apollo Lite) You can find a french youtuber compare X25 and SD652...SD was crushed!
Mediatek demontrated dual camera in february 2016 (at MWC)...P9 was released in April. ImagIQ is able of both dual Color+Black&White (like P9) and dual multifocal (like Apple). But Mediatek doesn't release commercial phone, it takes more time...(and sometime it's badly done by OEM). They demonstrated first with prototype, but real phones comes later...so it depends if you consider working soc or working phone.
Mid-2014, mt6595 allows both 4k h265 decoding/encoding...SD805 allows only decoding, 4k recording use H264 codec, not hevc!
Mediatek demontrated AI on Helio X20 in february 2016 (MWC). Qualcomm presented their version a few monthes later...Snapdragon 820 allows heterogeneous multiprocessing.
Mediatek shows Dual-core...on entry-level mt6739 in september 2017 (India Mobile Congress) But true, phones were released later.
I'm not wrong, but Mediatek has problem to sell, delays between availability of soc ans availability of devices.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
17 Comments
Back to Article
ToTTenTranz - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
Despite calling it "premium", the specs put it closer to the Snapdragon 660/710 than actual premium SoCs.Andrei Frumusanu - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
For MediaTek "Premium" is one tier below uncompromising flagship SoCs.R0H1T - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
Arm’s new Cortex A76 "GPU" 🤔jjj - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
When you consider the node, don't forget costs. Oh and SD675 is on 11nm so just Samsung's marketing beating 12nm.Anyway, will be hard for anyone to care much about a solution without A76 but this one seems to aim to be affordable so maybe it's at the right price.
Quantumz0d - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
Not to forget how Mediatek is notorious for not releasing Source and GPL violation which puts a barricade, to develop and optimize. All these SoCs will end up in junk phones, despite stepping up the bar they stay irrelevant while Qualcomm ravages ahead with their CAF.Useless junk. Huawei is also in the same boat, not allowing Bootloader unlock but demanding ID proofs for their Honor/Huawei India division. The worst shame is XDA fanboyism for that corp.
Mediatek saving some cash by choosing not to, really pathetic.
LiviuTM - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
You said it; there's no wonder why you can find so many custom ROMs for Qualcomm based phones and so few for Mediatek based phones. Also, AFAIK Qualcomm modem & RF solutions are top notch (if not the best), while Mediatek is more on a second tier modem quality.bubblyboo - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
Yeah the whole point in buying those cheap Chinese phones was to play around with custom ROMs. Mediatek ruins it for any phone they are in. Snapdragon 636 and up is a better buy in this case.Plumplum - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
Were GPL violations set by any courthouse decision? I don't think?Using standard essentiel patents unfair fees to prevent any competitor's developpement isn't pathetic?
I think it is!
Qualcomm does that kind of things according to many courthouses decisions in China, South Korea, Taiwan, European Union, USA.
This is abusing of dominance. This leads to stop competition. NVIDIA, Intel, Texas Instruments, Broadcom, ST-MICROELECTRONICS already stop making soc for smartphones.
This is facts!
What do you want? Monopoly?
Exynos on Samsung
Kirin on Huawei
And Qualcomm for all the others?
I don't!
You think an uncondamnded company is pathetic...
...and treat a multicondamned one like god!
How strange it is!
The situation may not be the same if patents fees were fair, more serious brands may use Mediatek and release sources.
R0H1T - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
>Were GPL violations set by any courthouse decision?What the, what?
Using standard essential patents unfair fees to prevent any competitor's development isn't pathetic?
FRAND patent fees are rather reasonable, much more than what companies might've have to pay to someone like Apple for their stupid touch (UI) implementations!
>What do you want? Monopoly?
What monopoly? You yourself quoted other SoC makers, all of them use SM as well, what are you even talking about?
>The situation may not be the same if patents fees were fair, more serious brands may use Mediatek and release sources.
No, if the competition were fair & not ripping of IP or patents (looking at you China!) we wouldn't even be hearing about such complaints! MTK is kinda bargain basement because they don't spend as much customizing the ARM IP in their SoC, don't have their own GPU & spend little to no heed or $ supporting their own hardware through custom ROMs & what not! To put it mildly ~ they're cheap, so is Hisilicon!
Plumplum - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
Judges think patents fees are too high...not only in Asia but in Europe and USA too! Facts!Fees kill competitors :
- Samsung is unable to sell Exynos.
- Huawei is unable to sell kirin
- X30 was a commercial fail
Competition doesn't exist on high end.
On the others side, Qualcomm was able to sell even deficient soc (410, 412, 415, 615, 616, 808, 810...)
Tsss, the only Kryo that was a true custom core is the one used on SD820.
Kryo 2x0 are copied/pasted A73/A53...they behave nearly exactly the same according to cores and ram frequencies.
I'm ok with you about GPU.
Mediatek developpes enhanced core management : corepilot
Mediatek developpes dual camera before Apple and Huawei
Mediatek decodes/encodes h265/vp9 before Qualcomm
Mediatek developpes AI with heterogeneous multiprocessing before Apple, Huawei and Qualcomm...
Mediatek allows dual-volte before Qualcomm.
Raqia - Monday, December 17, 2018 - link
Just as computers costs are separate from the licensed software that runs on it (and may often cost much more), the specialized compute elements that implement parts of Qualcomm's patented cellular interfaces (all of 3G and most of 4G) have separate implementation costs from the licensed interfaces themselves. The way Qualcomm assesses fees for using their cellular interfaces is actually a discount for most manufacturers besides Apple, and multiple players do indeed implement SoCs or modems for third party sale, like Marvell, Intel, Samsung, Mediatek, and Huawei, and you haven't proved that many of the dropouts were simply less efficient than the companies still standing today.These cellular interfaces are non trivial btw (far more complex than UI elements or software APIs) and they cost billions in R&D to develop and greatly advanced the state of the art in the industry; far bigger empires were built off of much less technical sophistication as in the case of Intel's x86 instruction set. There is also much more vibrant competition in the cellular phone market due to these licensing practices market when compared with bigger laptop / desktop CPU manufacturers where your choice is basically x86 and only between Intel or AMD (which falters and leaves just Intel once or twice a decade.)
Plumplum - Tuesday, December 18, 2018 - link
Condamnations are there, even in western countries.This simple argument is enough!
How can people denie the problem?
Your comparison is not the same at all.
First, You are free to use a different software.
For exemple, if you don't want to pay licence to Microsoft for Windows, you can use Linux.
In case of standard essential patents, you can't make a smartphone without them. You're (OEM) forced to pay Qualcomm...no choice.
Second, that's not the same company who sell the licence and the hardware.
About Windows, Microsoft sells it and Intel or AMD make the processor.
Third, Microsoft doesn't use his licence to force you to buy one unique hardware.
Qualcomm refuse to sell his licences to competitors. Sell them directly to OEM...they can sell their licences with high price. Make a lot of benefits. And reduce the price of the soc to kick out competitors.
I only have some numbers from 2016.
Licence cost 1.1billions dollars and generate 7.6billions dollars revenu.
That makes 6.5billions dollars benefits.
Soc generate only 1.8billions dollars benefits for 15.4billions revenu
In 2016, marging on patents were 600%.
Marging on soc...15%.
80% of the whole benefits was made with patents. Only 20% with products.
I'm not saying, there is no problem with Microsoft. But these situation is different and far more dangerous.
levizx - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
You need spell checkerlevizx - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
Corepilot is nothing new, they don't customise ANY hardware parts so it could only be software scheduler, and it DOESN'T work well at all, considering MTK have to shutdown cores more often than their competitorsMTK did NOT "developpes" dual camera before Huawei, P9 had already launched actual Dual Camera when the first Helio X20 phone hit the market - with SINGLE camera setup. MTK's dual camera software wasn't ready in 2016, but Huawei's was. So Huawei developed dual camera BEFORE MTK.
MTK's first H265 enabled phone launched mid-2014, Qualcomm's launched Q3'14, only a couple of months later, and with 4K/UHD support, they were announced around the same time as well.
MTK's P60 is their first heterogeneous AI engine launched in 2018, while Qualcomm enabled 835/660 launched in 2017 with heterogeneous AI engine at the same time.
MTK first demonstrated dual VoLTE mid-2017, AFTER Qualcomm's demo with SDM835, and Qualcomm enabled dual VoLTE for SDM660/835 late 2017 with Oppo updated their phone on 6/Jan/2018 to enable dual VoLTE, in the mean time, NO MTK phone with dual VoLTE launched until months later.
So out of ALL the claims, ONLY 1 was true, MTK did support VP9 ahead of Qualcomm, that's all.
Plumplum - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
Sorry, spell checker is set on an other langage.Corepilot 3.0 allows tri-cluster, traditionnal big.LITTLE can't. It shows that hardware is obviously involved. It's customised design, so you're wrong.
Have you ever seen it working. Medias spread heating problem, but did they do any test?
810, 808 or even 652 shutdown far far more often!
My own shows only 6% perfs drop (Vernee Apollo Lite)
You can find a french youtuber compare X25 and SD652...SD was crushed!
Mediatek demontrated dual camera in february 2016 (at MWC)...P9 was released in April.
ImagIQ is able of both dual Color+Black&White (like P9) and dual multifocal (like Apple).
But Mediatek doesn't release commercial phone, it takes more time...(and sometime it's badly done by OEM).
They demonstrated first with prototype, but real phones comes later...so it depends if you consider working soc or working phone.
Mid-2014, mt6595 allows both 4k h265 decoding/encoding...SD805 allows only decoding, 4k recording use H264 codec, not hevc!
Mediatek demontrated AI on Helio X20 in february 2016 (MWC). Qualcomm presented their version a few monthes later...Snapdragon 820 allows heterogeneous multiprocessing.
Mediatek shows Dual-core...on entry-level mt6739 in september 2017 (India Mobile Congress)
But true, phones were released later.
I'm not wrong, but Mediatek has problem to sell, delays between availability of soc ans availability of devices.
I Hope it will change next year
oRAirwolf - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
The powervr GPU is intriguing. Does anybody know what the total single precision GFLOPs will be?Andrei Frumusanu - Thursday, December 13, 2018 - link
124GFLOPs.