POST A COMMENT

30 Comments

Back to Article

  • xTRICKYxx - Monday, March 10, 2014 - link

    Thank you for this article. Now I'm frustrated with Qualcomm's naming schemes. Reply
  • blanarahul - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    So, Z2 has 8974AB v3 and S5 is using 8974AC v3.

    One question. Why in the world does the 8974AB v3 exists?? Is 190 MHz that huge a difference??
    Reply
  • blanarahul - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    I know that the main difference b/w 8974VV v2 and 8974 AA v2 wasn't of 110 MHz but of voltages and power efficiency. So I guess the same difference applies to 8974AA v3 and 8974AB v3 as well with 8974AC v3 being an overclocked 8974AB v3.

    Stupid Qualcomm. Was it really hard to just call it 8975 and get away with it??
    Reply
  • jerrylzy - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    Actually there's never a 550MHz 8974ab in the market. All 8974abs' GPUs are clocked at 578MHz.

    Qualcomm's naming is a total mess. It's so confusing.

    Here are the source codes:

    "
    static struct pvs_table pvs_v2[NUM_PVS_REVS][NUM_SPEED_BINS][NUM_PVS] __initdata = {
    /* 8974v2 2.0GHz Parts */
    [0][0][0] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs0, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs0) },
    [0][0][1] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs1, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs1) },
    [0][0][2] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs2, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs2) },
    [0][0][3] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs3, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs3) },
    [0][0][4] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs4, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs4) },
    [0][0][5] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs5, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs5) },
    [0][0][6] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6) },
    [0][0][7] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6) },

    /* 8974v2 2.3GHz Parts */
    [0][1][0] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs0, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs0) },
    [0][1][1] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs1, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs1) },
    [0][1][2] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs2, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs2) },
    [0][1][3] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs3, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs3) },
    [0][1][4] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs4, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs4) },
    [0][1][5] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs5, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs5) },
    [0][1][6] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs6) },
    [0][1][7] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p3g_pvs6) },

    /* 8974v2 2.2GHz Parts */
    [0][2][0] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs0, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs0) },
    [0][2][1] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs1, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs1) },
    [0][2][2] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs2, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs2) },
    [0][2][3] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs3, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs3) },
    [0][2][4] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs4, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs4) },
    [0][2][5] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs5, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs5) },
    [0][2][6] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6) },
    [0][2][7] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6) },
    };

    static struct pvs_table pvs_pro[NUM_PVS_REVS][NUM_SPEED_BINS][NUM_PVS] __initdata = {
    /* 2.0 GHz is not used on 8974Pro */
    [0][0][0] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs0, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs0) },
    [0][0][1] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs1, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs1) },
    [0][0][2] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs2, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs2) },
    [0][0][3] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs3, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs3) },
    [0][0][4] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs4, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs4) },
    [0][0][5] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs5, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs5) },
    [0][0][6] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6) },
    [0][0][7] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2g_pvs6) },

    /* 8974Pro AB 2.3GHz */
    [0][1][0] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs0, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs0) },
    [0][1][1] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs1, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs1) },
    [0][1][2] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs2, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs2) },
    [0][1][3] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs3, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs3) },
    [0][1][4] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs4, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs4) },
    [0][1][5] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs5, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs5) },
    [0][1][6] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs6, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs6) },
    [0][1][7] = { pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs6, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p3g_pvs6) },

    /* 2.2GHz is not used on 8974Pro */
    [0][2][0] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs0, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs0) },
    [0][2][1] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs1, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs1) },
    [0][2][2] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs2, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs2) },
    [0][2][3] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs3, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs3) },
    [0][2][4] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs4, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs4) },
    [0][2][5] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs5, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs5) },
    [0][2][6] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6) },
    [0][2][7] = { acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6, sizeof(acpu_freq_tbl_2p2g_pvs6) },

    /* 8974Pro AC 2.5GHz */
    [0][3][0] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs0, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs0) },
    [0][3][1] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs1, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs1) },
    [0][3][2] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs2, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs2) },
    [0][3][3] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs3, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs3) },
    [0][3][4] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs4, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs4) },
    [0][3][5] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs5, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs5) },
    [0][3][6] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs6, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs6) },
    [0][3][7] = { pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs6, sizeof(pro_rev0_2p5g_pvs6) },

    /* 8974Pro AB 2.3GHz */
    [1][1][0] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs0, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs0) },
    [1][1][1] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs1, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs1) },
    [1][1][2] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs2, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs2) },
    [1][1][3] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs3, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs3) },
    [1][1][4] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs4, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs4) },
    [1][1][5] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs5, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs5) },
    [1][1][6] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs6, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs6) },
    [1][1][7] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs7, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs7) },
    [1][1][8] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs8, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs8) },
    [1][1][9] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs9, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs9) },
    [1][1][10] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs10, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs10) },
    [1][1][11] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs11, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs11) },
    [1][1][12] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs12, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs12) },
    [1][1][13] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs13, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs13) },
    [1][1][14] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs14, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs14) },
    [1][1][15] = { pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs15, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p3g_pvs15) },

    /* 8974Pro AC 2.5GHz */
    [1][3][0] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs0, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs0) },
    [1][3][1] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs1, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs1) },
    [1][3][2] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs2, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs2) },
    [1][3][3] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs3, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs3) },
    [1][3][4] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs4, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs4) },
    [1][3][5] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs5, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs5) },
    [1][3][6] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs6, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs6) },
    [1][3][7] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs7, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs7) },
    [1][3][8] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs8, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs8) },
    [1][3][9] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs9, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs9) },
    [1][3][10] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs10, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs10) },
    [1][3][11] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs11, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs11) },
    [1][3][12] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs12, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs12) },
    [1][3][13] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs13, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs13) },
    [1][3][14] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs14, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs14) },
    [1][3][15] = { pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs15, sizeof(pro_rev1_2p5g_pvs15) },

    "
    So:
    1. 8974Pro = 8974ab/ac.
    2. There are revised and non-revised 8974Pro.
    3. No S800 8974ab or S801 8974aa.

    The difference between the revised and non-revised ones is the binnings and voltage tables: the revised s801 chips have 16 binnings and non-revised ones have 8 binnings.

    I think Anand can use these source codes to clear up the confusion.
    Reply
  • keshav - Thursday, August 28, 2014 - link

    Where did you get the codes from Reply
  • Fidelator - Wednesday, March 12, 2014 - link

    Higher GPU clock, eMMC 5.0, faster ISP, did you even read the article? Reply
  • kenansadhu - Monday, March 10, 2014 - link

    Considering Samsung always boast about any minor increase they have over the competition, I'm curious about their decision not to say the S5 has S801 in them. I think, there are 2 possible explanation for this:

    1. They don't want the S5 to look better than the Note 3 (make sense, cause probably they decided to put 2GB of RAM on the S5 for this reason)

    2. They are past gimmicks and want the actual performance to do the talking (unlikely, but will be one of the best things that happened to samsung)
    Reply
  • dylan522p - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    They did talk about it having a S801...... Reply
  • TenshiNo - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    That's *probably* "burst" transfer rate, not sustained. Even still, you have to remember that transfer rate also very dependent on what the device is plugged into. The 5400RPM in your average laptop is not going to be able to compete with the speeds of your mobile device's NAND memory. Reply
  • TenshiNo - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    Um.... sorry about that. For some reason, it posted my reply to the wrong message. Weird... Reply
  • kenansadhu - Wednesday, March 12, 2014 - link

    You are forgiven. Go and live in peace Reply
  • tipoo - Monday, March 10, 2014 - link

    I wonder if there are also improvements to average power dissipation and thermal hotspotting, so that higher clocks can actually be sustained for longer periods of time. Reply
  • Gigaplex - Monday, March 10, 2014 - link

    "On a smartphone equipped with USB 3 that means you could feasibly copy large movies or files off of your smartphone at up to 300MB/s. Without eMMC 5.0 support you'd be limited to somewhere south of 200MB/s."

    Meanwhile my Galaxy S4 manages around 2MB/s...
    Reply
  • TenshiNo - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    That's *probably* "burst" transfer rate, not sustained. Even still, you have to remember that transfer rate also very dependent on what the device is plugged into. The 5400RPM in your average laptop is not going to be able to compete with the speeds of your mobile device's NAND memory. Reply
  • madmilk - Tuesday, March 18, 2014 - link

    Even cheap 2.5" 5400rpm drives can easily manage 40MB/s, and the densest 2TB 9.5mm drives can do over 100MB/s. Much better than the <10MB/s you see from most smartphones. Reply
  • HardwareDufus - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    DSDA will help those of us splitting time equally between Sonora Mexico and Arizona USA. Both states use metric on the highways, english/spanish interchangeably and neither follows daylight savings time. But, I absolutely have to have to cell pone providers for my phone to keep it all affordable (AT&T USA, TelCel Mexico). DSDA will be fantastic for so many of us living along borders! Reply
  • HardwareDufus - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    sorry, run away auto spell checking.... two cell phone providers (two SIMs). Reply
  • Penti - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    Given or considering that the US has many regional providers I could guess many people who only cross state lines or just work/live in different cities would have use for dual-sim devices too, maybe at least people who tries to use pre-paid. Not that many would buy unsubsidized devices in the US. The thing with DSDA is that you could receive calls from both numbers/sims. Not terribly useful in my country as all providers has a or shares their national network and plans are pretty equal, if your an expat / immigrant living here that has a card/provider to call your home country with (that is cheaper) it might be useful here. In the developing world there are obviously different needs and conditions were it might make sense. These are high-end chips though, so it's not exactly for the rural Indian. Reply
  • hrrmph - Wednesday, March 12, 2014 - link

    Exactly!

    The entire USA media is afraid to let us in on the advantages of Dual-SIM Dual-Active for domestic consumption.

    Having experienced it overseas, I'm a big fan of it. It is touted as a cheapo feature, but in my mind it is a high-end feature for people who need / can afford to have two providers SIM chips (or in some cases, more than 2 providers, especially on pay-as-you-go plans where you only pay for what you use when you need to use it).

    Since all USA telecoms have some coverage gaps and some areas where weak signals can hamper connectivity, I could really see this as a benefit for traveling business people.

    The first step is to always buy an unlocked device, preferably *not* from your telecom. Being able to do that is still sadly a premium market, although the situation is getting better as the cost of unlocked phones comes down.

    The second step is a bit harder: finding flagship premium devices that have the requisite Dual-SIM slots.

    Once you have a Dual-SIM capable device, then you buy SIM chips (typically AT&T and T-Mobile in the US, and various others for other countries if you need them).

    Then you load the appropriate short-term (for your target travel area) SIM-Chips into the device's Dual-SIM slots and activate them.

    You'll enjoy much better coverage by being able to easily get the telecom that has the best (or in some cases, only) signal without having to do much fussing with changing chips frequently (just leave them in the device - the Dual-SIM Dual Active features means you will very likely always have good signal and you are able to easily choose which signal you would like to use).

    For more complex trips, you simply carry with you, or buy-as-you-go, spare SIM chips for your more distant travel sectors. Just fit them into the device later on in the trip when they are needed.

    When your labor / time is money and / or when you just absolutely have to be connected to the best connection if at all possible, then DS-DA is actually a high-end feature...

    It's about time we start recognizing it as such. You pay more, but you get more capability.

    How much more you pay (if any) varies. The SIM chips and pay-as-you go schemes are fairly reasonable. But the high-end flagship devices that are DS-DA capable are hard to find and typically are built for the uber high-end Asian market.

    These high-end models (like the DS-DA variants of the Samsung S5 and Note 3) aren't to be confused with the low-end Asian and Indian models. The low-end models are economy products often used for families and friends who share a device, but who still want separate billings, and thus want multiple SIM chips.

    The high-end models are for people who want maximum mobility and the ability to seamlessly catch the best signals no matter who the provider is. Some people at the high-end also like having two separate phone numbers that they can easily switch on and off at will through the menu on a DS-DA device.

    A fly in the ointment in the US now is getting the telecom systems built-out with reasonably standardized telecom frequencies and bands, and even more importantly, getting DS-DA devices for sale that have sufficient frequencies and bands to travel widely.
    Reply
  • HardwareDufus - Thursday, March 13, 2014 - link

    Some people at the high-end also like having two separate phone numbers that they can easily switch on and off at will through the menu on a DS-DA device.

    That's me right there. I'll be doing the clumsy SIM Swap at the border on Sunday and Monday. Of course if I'm in the US for more than a few hours... I also have to swap out from time to time to check my email. Would love to just be dual active for the time I need it.

    I'm on a plan on the Mexican side.... and a pay as you go on the USA side.... I don't mind a small amount of Data Roaming to continue to recieve my emails on the USA side, but I like making all of my US calls with my US SIM.
    Reply
  • En1gma - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    btw, where MSM8974 v1? Reply
  • jerrylzy - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    V1's max frequency is 2GHz. I don't see any device coming with a 2.0G s800. Reply
  • jerrylzy - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    Sorry 8974V1's max frequency is 1.7G. Reply
  • phoenix_rizzen - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    Now, if only a phone manufacturer would take the time to optimise the hardware around the SoC.

    Keep the screen resolution at 1080p (or maybe something a little wider like 16:10 ratio). Keep the size under 5". Make it a mm or two thicker. Make the battery a little bigger.

    Or, stick this SoC into a 4", 720p setup and watch it scream!

    And, add a friggin' hardware keyboard! I want to be able to use my pocket computer like a computer again! And not just as a video watching machine.

    Then tweak the software and drivers to match.

    IOW, do to a 1080p phone what Motorola did to the X. There's no reason to push resolution beyond 1080p or screen sizes beyond 5", thus taxing these SoCs near their limits.
    Reply
  • TenshiNo - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    Finally, somebody speaking sense in comments. All these people demanding 2K and 4K screens on their cell phones were beginning to drive me nuts! ;) Reply
  • Mondozai - Monday, March 17, 2014 - link

    His comment makes zero sense. Optimise "the hardware around the SoC"?
    Then he mentions getting the phone bulkier and thicker. Hardware keyboard? Like a stunted netbook?

    Pure idiocy.
    Reply
  • crazysurfanz - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    what I want to know is how you know which SOC a phone is going to come with... checking something like gsmarena.com or indeed reviews here on AT I guess.... but what's to stop a company from advertising a device with a Snapdragon 801 at 2.3ghz CPU freq and shipping it with either of the variants which could result in you getting a lower GPU freq than expected? (i.e. review models come out with the higher freq. gpu and then 3 months after release they quietly ship to the slower/cheaper variant without telling anyone). Reply
  • TenshiNo - Tuesday, March 11, 2014 - link

    I guess the hope is that somebody, somewhere would notice. I think to call what would likely happen after that a "PR nightmare" would be putting it mildly. Reply
  • Systems Analyst - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    You have to consider the big picture (sorry). ARM are aiming for a single standard across mobile phones, tablets, all-in-ones, STBs and DTVs. This will enable the delivery of a single standard of content, presumably 4k, to all devices. This is all mapped out years in advance. It is coming. Reply
  • paul_59 - Tuesday, March 25, 2014 - link

    Even though 4K would be pointless on a phone with screen size of between five and six inches ? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now