Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 specs leaked, it could power the Galaxy S8


Samsung and Qualcomm have already announced the next chipset that will be embedded in some of the most powerful smartphones next year, the Snapdragon 835.

However, aside from the fact that it's made using Samsung's 10nm FinFET process and a few other details, the companies did not reveal important aspects about the chipset.

Well, it looks like a document showing the alleged Snapdragon 835 specifications has just leaked from China. According to this document, Qualcomm's new chipset will accommodate eight cores instead of four, so the Snapdragon 835 will actually be an octa-core processor unlike the Snapdragon 820/821.

A new graphics processing unit will be part of the Snapdragon 835 chipset as well, the Adreno 540. Also, the SoC is supposed to support UFS 2.1 technology, the next iteration of the Universal Flash Storage.

Universal Flash Storage version 2.1 has been confirmed to offer major improvements over earlier versions, and it's supposed to provide data security through the use of inline cryptography between the SoC and UFS Storage device.

The leaked document also mentions that the Snapdragon 835 chipset will be commercially available starting Q1 2017, and that Samsung's Galaxy S8 might be one of the first phones powered by Qualcomm's new processor.

It's also worth noting that the document mentions another unannounced Qualcomm chipset that's supposed to land in Q2 2017, the Snapdragon 660. This one will come with eight cores as well, along with an Adreno 512 GPU and UFS 2.1 support. However, the Snapdragon 660 will be manufactured using the 14nm process, not the 10nm.

source: Vr-Zone via SamMobile

Related phones

Galaxy S8
  • Display 5.8" 1440 x 2960 pixels
  • Camera 12 MP / 8 MP front
  • Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 835, Octa-core, 2350 MHz
  • Storage 64 GB + microSDXC
  • Battery 3000 mAh(30h talk time)

FEATURED VIDEO

39 Comments

2. CreeDiddy

Posts: 2134; Member since: Nov 04, 2011

The question will this beat the Apple A9 chipset and not the A10.

4. jove39

Posts: 2143; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

In single core CPU score...no.

6. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

On A multi-threaded IS, single score don't even matter. As no app even uses a single . Watching to even bring it up, shows you don't know anything but a number.

11. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Whatever you say "Tech Expert"........lol XD.

18. Plasticsh1t

Posts: 3094; Member since: Sep 01, 2014

Don't forget he's an "IT consultant" XD.

19. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Then we should all go dodeca-core A7 then to save power and own all those big wasteful cores...

27. 47AlphaTango

Posts: 715; Member since: Sep 27, 2015

You're saying that all of the time I used my android smartphone. Whenever I'm using an app such as music/ video player, messaging, calls, or just looking at the pictures I've caught. I used the multi core? No wonder my battery on my phone drains fast.

56. medicci37

Posts: 1361; Member since: Nov 19, 2011

Wrong

7. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

It should beat the A9 in single core pretty easily. Anything else would be a shame.

10. marorun

Posts: 5029; Member since: Mar 30, 2015

SD820 single core is just a tad lower than A9 single core. With 27% improvement alone with the 10 nm its will be minimum a bit better.

26. Khyron

Posts: 397; Member since: Sep 28, 2015

I hope Sd835will come close in thecore range of A10 singlecore with a superb multicore score a well balanced cpu and a new well implemented multithread technology

31. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

It's a good bit under the A9. In geekbench 4: SD820: 1750 A9 : 2500. That's a good 40% better, not just a tad.

40. trojan_horse

Posts: 5868; Member since: May 06, 2016

You mean that GeekBench 4 which rigged it's scoring procedure in favor of Apple's SoC, right? The SD820 single-core score was already head-to-head with the A9 in GeekBench 3.

41. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

They didn't rig s**t. They just standardized the algorithm across mobile and desktop and gave lesser weightage to faster RAM. Faster RAM doesn't give higher performance in most workloads, hence the higher weightage was meant to go. Do you have any objective evidence to back up your claim. Because I do. I can prove that geekbench 4 is way more accurate than geekbench 3. It's a bad benchmark, yes, but it's better than geekbench 3.

42. Joms_US

Posts: 200; Member since: Oct 02, 2016

That is BS. Compare AMD or Intel with DDR3-1600 vs DDR3-2400, you will see a huge performance gap. These monkey devs are plain retarded for trying to equalize desktop and mobile platform.

43. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

DDR4 is much faster than DDR3 and yet has no performance impact in real life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utWnjA4NzSA Heck, even dual channel memory has very low impact vs single channel, while doubling the bandwidth: http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/does-dual-channel-memory-make-difference-in-gaming-performance/ Even in heavy RAM swapping scenarios like gaming, faster RAM makes very little difference. The only scenario where RAM speed matters is when you have a very low amount of L3 cache.

44. Joms_US

Posts: 200; Member since: Oct 02, 2016

That is BS. Compare AMD or Intel with DDR3-1600 vs DDR3-2400, you will see a huge performance gap. These monkey devs are plain retarded for trying to equalize desktop and mobile platform.

45. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

DDR3-2400 is very rare to get. Also, you didn't give any links to prove your point. So I'm not going to believe you.

46. Joms_US

Posts: 200; Member since: Oct 02, 2016

47. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

That's a really starved APU, not a fast CPU with ample cache. You probably won't even understand the difference between APU and GPU. So I shouldn't waste my time. But here it goes. CPUs don't benefit from faster RAM, GPUs do. That's why GPUS use much faster GDDR5x or HBM memory while CPUs use DDR3 or DDR4. These APUs have the GPU on die and use the system RAM. Obviously that will get as fast as the memory goes. But when you switch to CPU load, like the winrar test at the end, the difference evaporates.

48. Joms_US

Posts: 200; Member since: Oct 02, 2016

Either you are retarded or the one who knows nothing about APU. Same with mobile SoC, graphics is closely integrated with the processor and memory. Have you ever seen a mobile SoC die shot? Here, I will help you.. http://images.anandtech.com/doci/9552/Snapdragon_820_Diagram2_678x452.PNG

55. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

How ironic since you are the one being stupid here. I know that. However, faster RAM still won't benefit in CPU tasks. GEEKBENCH IS SUPPOSED TO BE A CPU BENCHMARK, NOT A GAMING BENCHMARK. Hence the reduction in weightage of RAM speed makes sense. Heck, higher RAM speed increases CAS latency which sometimes decreases speed in single threaded tasks. Oh, and BTW modern phone have separate VRAM allocated for the GPU. So your point is invalid anyway.

5. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Does it matter? You really into benchmarks? The A10 may bench better on paper than the SD820, but devices using the 820 do far more than devices using the A10. On paper it's means nothing. Side by side the thinh s that matter is, the Sd820 is pushing 1440p vs the A10 at 1080p. My phone handles multiple tasks better and more efficiently. Benchmarks are dumb. It's as dumb as comparing race cars on a track. All cars on the track are setup to be virtually die rival as far as engineering, buts it's the driver behind the wheel who is willing to push the limits that wins. In this case, Samsung pushes it devices while Apple doesn't.

9. marorun

Posts: 5029; Member since: Mar 30, 2015

CreeDiddy go back to your cave troll. A10 is not twice faster than SD820 its indeed faster but not by thats much. So if this thing is twice faster than SD820 ( wich its should be because of twice core thats not even including the major improvement of 27% just for the 10 nm alone ) its will easily beat it.

22. WPX00

Posts: 511; Member since: Aug 15, 2015

The brute force on these chips definitely will. The question is whether the optimization in the software will.

24. dazed1

Posts: 789; Member since: Jul 28, 2015

LOL pathetic iFanboy

29. iushnt

Posts: 3083; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

What do you mean by beating? Like bringing few numbers more in Geekbench?

35. Joms_US

Posts: 200; Member since: Oct 02, 2016

Where is A9 better in single score? Geekbench? Only an iDiot will believe in iCrap's result from that benchmark. GB4 scoring system was designed to pull down non-Apple SoC. On GB3, SD820 was already head-to-head in single-core versus A9 then became 50% weaker because of the scoring changes made by monkey devs of GB.

3. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

A full octacore vs a dual quad-core. As Nintendo use to say, "Now you're playing with power!"

8. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

It's a dual quad core. Full octa designs are stupid.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.