Qualcomm reportedly delays Snapdragon 836 chipset until early 2018


New rumors concerning Qualcomm's upcoming lineup of SoCs continue to surface. Shortly after a report claiming the US chipset maker has no plans to launch a Snapdragon 836 processor this year made headlines, new information about Qualcomm's portfolio leaked out.



Although Qualcomm's Snapdragon 836 processor was supposed to power the forthcoming Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL that are expected to hit the shelves later this fall, it turns out the Google's flagships will have to do with the current Snapdragon 835 SoC (system-on-chip).



According to Evan Blass, Qualcomm did promise Google that a Snapdragon 836 processor will be launched at some point, but then the company delayed the chipset for unknown reasons. Apparently, the Snapdragon 836 is still in the cards for an early 2018 release, but it might be launched under a different branding/name. 


The bottom line is Qualcomm's lineup for 2017 will include a single high-end mobile chipset, as the Snapdragon 836's market launch has been moved to early next year. On the flip side, the Snapdragon 835 is still a decent choice for smartphone companies, so there's reason to try and switch to a new SoC for at least several months from now.


source: Evan Blass





FEATURED VIDEO

33 Comments

1. tedkord

Posts: 17356; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Wasn't there an article here a couple of days ago with the headline that there would be no SD836?

2. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

Did you even read this article? They mentioned the other article, it's even hyper linked.

15. tedkord

Posts: 17356; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Nope, I didn't really care.

18. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

I don't doubt that, you just come here to be a Samsung fanboy in the comments and accuse Apple fans of the same thing LOL. Admitting you don't even care about reading the article LOLOLOL. Gold. Can't wait till you trashWiz replaces Android with Tizen underneath. Android needs to rid itself of the infection that is Samsung.

23. JohnR

Posts: 151; Member since: Sep 08, 2017

Yeah right. Android needs Samsung dumb ass. Now go deal with your bitter hate somewhere else!

29. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

Got that the other way round buddy, Samsung is nothing without Android, if Google stopped giving it to them, they would be screwed. However If Samsung stopped using Android, their fans would realise how trash Tizen is with support, and the plethora of OEM's that use Android will just gain all of Samsung's market share. Not only would Google not be affected negatively, In fact it would help Google as most of the OEM's have started using stock Android and follow the Android design language. More people would have the latest version and be familiar with the actual design of Android.

24. tedkord

Posts: 17356; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Son, you just went full retard. Never do that. Where did I fanboy anything here, or bash anything or anyone? I saw a headline that contradicted a previous headline, and asked a question. I didn't read either article, because the existence or non existence of the 836 means nothing to me. I don't give a rat's ass what OS they use, so long as they continue to pump out the best phones on the market. As soon as they stop, I'll move on to whomever does. Right now, Android is the best mobile OS, and Samsung makes the best phones. But, your pain about it will amuse me in the meantime. Fool.

28. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

"I saw a headline that contradicted a previous headline, and asked a question. I didn't read either article" LMAO hahahaha, you just provided a live demonstration of exactly what I said you are: Calling other people retarded when you are making judgements based off of just headlines and not even reading the articles? And even admitting to doing it LOLOLOL. Wow, the word retard doesn't even cover that ridiculousness, you're beyond that.

33. tedkord

Posts: 17356; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Wow, it's like talking to a wall. I provided a live demonstration of you talking nonsense. The fact that you're not smart enough to realize it just reinforces it.

17. you_sukk_it

Posts: 219; Member since: Apr 11, 2017

this is pa making up shet as they go along then correcting things after. thats their tactic. nonstop rumor ads they make up as they go along saying a "source" said this and that. this one specifically said a "report" said so. what report? what source..? none. cause they make up shet as they go along for ratings and traffic.

19. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

LOLOLOL they report the news just like all other outlets.

3. Kil4thril

Posts: 80; Member since: Oct 05, 2016

Wouldn't this delay the 845? Or at least, make one of them irrelevant?

7. sgodsell

Posts: 7365; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

This isn't Apple. Qualcomm makes all kinds of different SoCs, and at different prices. You forget that Android has thousands of different smartphones at all different price tiers. It's one of the reasons why Android overall sells around 1.5 billion smartphones a year. So no it won't make one of them irrelevant.

4. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

Would barely make a difference if the 836 did come out and power the end year devices. Honestly they should just focus on perfecting one flagship/mid range/low end chip per year. Having multiple SoC's within the same teir muddies the water for no reason.

20. Back_from_beyond

Posts: 1420; Member since: Sep 04, 2015

I think Qualcomm is hard on its way to making itself irrelevant. Google is rumored to be designing its own SoC, Samsung's Exynos SoC's are arguably better than what Qualcomm has delivered the past few years, Hisilicon's Kirin SoC's are getting very impressive, even Mediatek is catching up to them. Qualcomm hasn't delivered a truly impressive SoC in years now, the competition is breathing down its neck, not to mention all the legal trouble they're in for unfair practices. One must fall, so others may rise.

21. vincelongman

Posts: 5692; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

Doubtful, Samsung/Google may leave, but its highly unlikely the rest of the OEMs will Qualcomm still have the best GPUs and arguably best DSPs The 835 is better than the 8895http://www.anandtech.com/show/11540/samsung-galaxy-s8-exynos-versus-snapdragon Despite not really improving the GPU this year (other than overclocking it) they still have a 39% efficiency advantage over the 8885

27. Back_from_beyond

Posts: 1420; Member since: Sep 04, 2015

When you look through the results, all of them, you'll see they're very equally matched, the SD835 wins some here, the Exynos 8895 wins some there. I think the more interesting result of that test is how well the Kirin 960 does, compared to the other two.

30. Zylam

Posts: 1816; Member since: Oct 20, 2010

I'd agree to a certain extent, however even if the bigger guys did start going fully in-house for their SoC's, the smaller, less wealthy Oems would still need an independent supplier. Qualcomm may have fallen from grace to a certain extent, but they are still a force in the industry, I'd argue their mid range SoC's are best in class and that segment is booming. Also I was almost certain Microsoft would buy Qualcomm to help them make an efficient transition to Arm for Windows, but looks like Microsoft lost interest in Windows on Arm. I'm pretty certain even with the loss of Google and Samsung, Qualcomm would be fine.

31. Back_from_beyond

Posts: 1420; Member since: Sep 04, 2015

Their midrange and entry level SoCs are pretty good, but their high end SoCs have been less then inspiring. The SD660 has a single core performance nearly identical to the SD820 last year, and the SD835 barely tops that. That does kinda show that they're not on top of their game anymore, at least not in the high end section. I can see Hisilicon's Kirin beat Qualcomm in performance by end of next year. And if Samsung indeed adds their own custom GPU cores into the mix, what little advantage Qualcomm had over the Exynos series is gonna disappear too. And all this legal trouble talk about supposedly forcing manufacturers not to use other SoC vendors like Samsung and such, Qualcomm's in for difficult times. Maybe Microsoft could've at one point considered acquiring Qualcomm, but with the decrease in power consumption that x86/x64 processors have undergone since they released the ARM Surface tablet, there really is no point anymore as power efficiency was the primary reason for use of ARM.

32. vincelongman

Posts: 5692; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

In terms of CPU All Android SoCs are barely faster than the SD660 in single core. The SD660 a weird chip, thats not quite a flagship, but definitely not a mid range either. That's why we don't see many phones withthe 652/653/660. Hisilicon are using stock ARM cores like Qualcomm, so they both will be very very close Samsung is currently using custom CPU cores, they will potentially have better or worse CPU perf/efficiency compared to Qualcomm/Hisilicon In terms of GPU Hisilicon are still are cheaping out on GPU. The 960's GPU had 810 levels of power consumption. The 970 seems like it be that bad but still significantly behind Samsung (not to mention Qualcomm) Samsung are trying to complete with Qualcomm on GPUs. The 8895 has a wider GPU with a lower clockspeed than the 835, yet the 835 is still 39% efficient as mentioned before. ARM's GPU architecture is simply inferior at the moment, so we will have to see if Samsung's custom GPU can help close in on Qualcomm's dominate lead All the legal talk is OEMs trying to jump on Apple's bandwagon and reduce the fees they pay to Qualcomm. Which is understandable, don't blame them at all since I agree some of Qualcomm's fee are huge But note that its not from Qualcomm introducing new fees or new measures

5. Furkan

Posts: 552; Member since: Feb 25, 2017

S9 with sd836 meh

6. torr310

Posts: 1659; Member since: Oct 27, 2011

Because Samsung is the maker and they don't wish Pixel 2/2XL have better CPU to compete with either Note8 or S8.

8. mikehunta727 unregistered

The A11 is gonna >> S836 IMHO

13. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

The A10 was already gonna >> the S836 anyhow. No real need to rub salt in the wound Mike.

14. Guaire

Posts: 886; Member since: Oct 15, 2014

Correct one is Hurricane > Kryo 280. It will beat next gen Kryo too which is based on Cortex-A75 at single core raw power and probably will beat again Qualcomm's 2019 flagship CPU unless they will come up with a radically different design. But A10 is a SoC just like Snapdragon 835, not a stand alone CPU. Has A10 supports any kind of fast charge? MicroSD support? Has it embedded LTE modem, WiFi and RF chip? ISP? GPU? Power efficiency? Area efficiency? The list goes on and on. One is tailored for a couple of device and a single OS, another designed for a wide range of devices and operating systems.

22. vincelongman

Posts: 5692; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

He doesn't want to hear about GPUs until Apple catch up Manhatten 3.1 long termhttp://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph10685/83895.png A10 - 24.9 fps at 1080p 820 - 30 fps at 1080p Note: its on screen, hence why the SE, 7 and 6S are above both the OP3 and 7 Plus Maybe we'll hear him speaking about the GPU this year since its Apple's best chance of taking the lead since the 835's GPU is just the 820's overclocked Yet they still have a 39% efficiency advantage over the 8885's GPU That's how far ahead Qualcomm has been in terms of GPU

9. trojan_horse

Posts: 5868; Member since: May 06, 2016

I miss the years of proper flagship SoCs, when there was one for the first half of the year, and an even stronger one for the second half of the year... Too bad.

10. getyourfreechicken

Posts: 2; Member since: Sep 08, 2017

Pixel 2 would still be trash.

12. BLUEBLASTER

Posts: 930; Member since: Feb 23, 2014

So I guess Samsung wont bring out the Galaxy S9 in Jan with the SD845 now?

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.