Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Qualcomm Announces the Snapdragon 855 and Its New Under-display Fingerprint Sensor (techcrunch.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

Qualcomm announced its new flagship 855 mobile platform today. While the company didn't release all of the details yet, it stressed that the 855 is "the world's first commercial mobile platform supporting multi-gigabit 5G." From a report: The 855 also features a new multi-core AI engine that promises up to 3x better AI performance compared to its previous mobile platform, as well as specialized computer vision silicon for enhanced computational photography (think something akin to Google's Night Light) and video capture. The company also briefly noted that the new platform has been optimized for gaming. The product name for this is "Snapdragon Elite Gaming," but details remain sparse. Qualcomm also continues to bet on AR (or "extended reality" as the company brands it).

31 comments

  1. You see police upset about strong encryption & by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But I sure haven't seen any complaining about the trend towards fingerprint unlocking on phones. Anyone wonder why that is?

    https://medium.freecodecamp.org/it-is-easy-to-trick-the-mobile-phones-fingerprint-scanner-d8d7f509d128?gi=9780ac3566d5

    1. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption & by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because we are pragmatic, I'm not worried if a hacker views my porn collection, I'm worried if my family or colleagues do.

    2. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption & by reanjr · · Score: 2

      That's not why at all. It's because the police can just grab your hand and unlock your phone with fingerprint unlock.

    3. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption & by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not going to be as feasible as just using the master pre-printed keyset that can basically unlock ANY print, because there's so much room for error in these systems by design.

      From there your strong encryption doesn't matter, you put a cheap $3 lock on the door.

    4. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption & by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      So when a hacker gets your porn collection and uses it to blackmail you, threatening they'll show it to your family, that's fine?

    5. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption & by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rofl that is extra amazing. I might literally expire from laughing

  2. 3x better AI by zlives · · Score: 1

    so... 12 touchdowns a game... in highschool?

    1. Re:3x better AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh Polk, you're the best of all the schools
      For you we'll always cheer
      By day, we learn to read and write
      By night, our team will fight, fight fight
      No matter where we are
      We will always give a rah

      For P-O-L-K
      P-O-L-K
      Polk, Polk, Polk

  3. I'm thinking... by BringsApples · · Score: 2

    Qualcomm announced its new flagship 855 mobile platform today.

    I'm thinking, "Cool!"

    The 855 also features a new multi-core AI engine...

    I'm thinking, "Not cool"

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    1. Re:I'm thinking... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Qualcomm announced its new flagship 855 mobile platform today.

      I'm thinking, "Cool!"

      The 855 also features a new multi-core AI engine...

      I'm thinking, "Not cool"

      Why? Lots of stuff in phones today makes use of neural network models... stuff like voice recognition, text translation and image content identification to name some prominent ones. Dedicated hardware can perform these calculations faster and with lower power consumption -- and in some cases that will be the difference between making it feasible to do on-device and having to send the data off to the cloud for processing, which is better for privacy.

      In what way is this a bad thing?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:I'm thinking... by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      I, and probably others, don't want things like voice recognition, text translation or image content ID. Besides, I was that guy 10 years ago, telling people to cover the camera on their phones, so maybe I'm just pessimistic toward the powers that be, but all the data gathered so far, has been used in ways that worry me. Seems like today, the powers that be want to use technology as a corral-trap.

      Anyway, I don't like the idea of an AI chip being a part of my life.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  4. Qualcomm Sucks Balls by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    So, if Qualcomm's SoC history is any indicator, this will have 240 CPU cores running at 6 GHz, and will require a Series 24 car battery for 4 hours of operation; but still have performance not quite as good as Apple's A8 CPU from 2014.

    1. Re:Qualcomm Sucks Balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Eh, Qualcomm CPUs are not slower. Apple needs less than half the CPU speed to get the same performance due to the simple fact apps run native on iOS while Android is Java. Sure, the Android Java VM is very fast - but very fast FOR A VM. You could see that if you had a Nokia N9 back in the day (2011). It had a single core OMAP 3 1GHz CPU which was rather slow on Android devices, but with Nokia's MeeGo Harmattan OS running native apps on the N9 it was as fluid as an iPhone.

    2. Re:Qualcomm Sucks Balls by sexconker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Modern Android is Google "apps and services" (spyware) on top of Java (but don't call it Java or else we'll get sued - we wrote a compatible API from scratch and just reused the signatures, OKAY?), on top of Linux on top of shitty Qualcomm SoCs that, for some reason, require a support contract for the OEM / Google / carrier to update the Linux OS or system services running on top of it, jammed into a case with inadequate heatsinks and no way to cool the thing so it overheats and throttles almost instantly.

      And if you get an Android device that isn't a Nexus^W Pixel, you ALSO get spyware/bloatware installed by the OEM. And if you get it through your carrier you ALSO get their shit injected too.

      Android needs to be scrapped at this point.

      1: Ditch the Java approach. I don't care if you don't call it Java. I don't care if your JVM is better than Oracle's / IBM's / whatever. Ditch Java. Run native.

      0: Did the last bit above scare you? It should have! Secure your fucking shit and that means isolating processes properly and giving users transparent control over applications! Notice how I labeled this one 0 and not 1?

      2a: Tell Qualcomm to fuck off. If their shit doesn't come with 5 years of firmware/driver support for the SoC and various other bits they produce, screw em. Samsung is eager to step forward and will commit to updates if for no other reason than the fact that their phones run their shit (in certain markets). Alternatively, Intel is always desperate for a shot at entering the mobile market, and Google can outright buy almost whatever ARM design / designer it wants.

      2b: Tell OEMs to fuck off. Android is already locked down hard and tight (Android is NOT AOSP), and OEMs have to sign away their souls to get the latest version or to market their shit as the first "Android <Stupid Dessert Name>" device or to include the Play Store & Google's apps and services. Tell them they need 5 years of timely security updates or they can fuck right on off to the Kindle Phone landfill. Tell them that all bloatware and modifications have to be fully uninstallable by users.

      2c: Tell carriers to fuck off. No preinstalled bloatware at ALL! If a user wants whatever shitty carrier app you're trying to infect them with, let them download it from the store. Also tell carriers to fuck off regarding updates. Updates should come from update.android.com , not the carrier. If OEMs want to provide updates for their specific shit (their app that supports 22 cameras or their butthole scanner or whatever else) let them push it via the store. If they need a lower level firmware/driver update to support that specific shit, let them submit it to Google for review, certification, and inclusion via update.android.com (like WHQL,but actually review them and do so in a timely manner).

      3: Give users control. Users should be able to manually install apps, drivers, firmware, and updates from anywehre if they accept the risks. Maybe Google's slow at approving an update for your phone's 22 camera shit. Maybe we're 10 years in the future and update.android.com is dead / incomplete / hostile . Users should be able to flash custom images. Users should be able to get root access. Users should be able to perform a FULL backup and restore with or without root access. Users should not have to look for hacks or exploits to do what they want with their hardware or figure out how to not blow e-fuses. Samsung Knox and Google Safety Net can fuck right off. If I root my phone, I can't use the app for my bank. Yet I can do everything that app does, and more, from the browser by going to my bank's website and logging in.

      Don't worry! Fuchsia will save us all!!

    3. Re:Qualcomm Sucks Balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're worried about securing their network. They could give 3 fucks about what you want their product to do on their network. You get a sandbox, theirs. They will never, ever, give that up willingly.

      But I like what you're saying, and if you only talked semi-realistically like this and never strayed into borderline nazi politik, you'd be 1000% more respectable for it.

    4. Re:Qualcomm Sucks Balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL apple is shit. Why would you use that crap?

  5. Does privacy not concern you any more? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I, and probably others, don't want things like voice recognition, text translation or image content Ids

    Laying aside better voice recognition which is very popular, do you also not want:

    * Better portrait modes that can accurately blur backgrounds in photos.

    * Amazingly improved low light photos for things like Night Shot (that Google has for Android now).

    * (most important) Random AI work various apps do to be done on your phone rather than sent to a server?

    Besides, I was that guy 10 years ago, telling people to cover the camera on their phones

    And now you are railing against technology that moves more processing back onto device instead of being sent off to servers. Who would have thought you would do such a 180!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Does privacy not concern you any more? by BringsApples · · Score: 1
      No I don't need those things that you mentioned. See, these things SEEM helpful and that, and I'd LOVE to believe that there are developers out there that are willing to spend their time on projects that purely make my life easier. But that's simply not the case. These AI apps aren't there for you, they're there for the people that wrote the software that employ AI. Its literally as simple as that.

      blah blah blah... Who would have thought you would do such a 180!

      I didn't do a 180. Do you really believe that your phone doesn't send data back to it's servers? You don't know what other things that AI is doing, and you certainly don't know if that AI is sending data about your personal ways, back to a server in another part of the world.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    2. Re:Does privacy not concern you any more? by swillden · · Score: 1

      No I don't need those things that you mentioned.

      You're a member of a tiny, tiny minority. Most people want their phones to do more stuff.

      See, these things SEEM helpful and that, and I'd LOVE to believe that there are developers out there that are willing to spend their time on projects that purely make my life easier.

      Why says they're doing it purely to make your life easier? They're doing it to make their devices more competitive, to make you want to shell out your money for their phone rather than a competitor's phone.

      These AI apps aren't there for you, they're there for the people that wrote the software that employ AI.

      How are any of the things mentioned not there to benefit the user?

      Who would have thought you would do such a 180!

      I didn't do a 180. Do you really believe that your phone doesn't send data back to it's servers? You don't know what other things that AI is doing, and you certainly don't know if that AI is sending data about your personal ways, back to a server in another part of the world.

      The AI stuff is going to happen, regardless, because it creates value for the users, value that most people really like. The only question is where it's going to be done. Sure, developers may ignore the AI hardware and continue sending the data back to the server, but AI hardware on the device at least makes it possible for developers who want to make privacy a part of their value proposition to keep the data local.

      I can see (though not really agree with) your argument that you don't like this AI stuff. But there's absolutely zero sense in your argument that you would prefer it can only be done in the cloud, rather than locally.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Does privacy not concern you any more? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Dear Qualcomm,

      How about shipping some silicon that actually covers all the 4G bands before you start going on about how great your support for nonexistent 5G is? At the moment I don't think there's anything that offers full coverage of 4G bands for global use, so why not deal with that issue first?

      (Signed) Angry of Rudman.

    4. Re:Does privacy not concern you any more? by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      I appreciate your response. But you're incorrect about my argument being that I'd rather these things be done in the cloud, rather than on my device. I'd rather AI not be anywhere.

      At work, I'm forced to use gmail (Google is tied into our corporate system, all over the place). When I receive an email from someone, gmail has 3 suggestions at the bottom. These suggestions show a very high level of accuracy in interpreting the email to me. I'm ok with that, because it's work related (although I can't understand how my corporate overlords feel like their company secrets are secret). But knowing that the same thing reads my personal email that I send to others that use gmail, in my personal life... I mean, what's the difference between AI interpreting our emails, vs some government entity interpreting our emails?

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  6. Re:You see police upset about strong encryption &a by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    That's an article about how scanning two different fingerprints when the phone is expecting one means both fingerprints can unlock the phone.
    The phone thinks the two prints are different parts of the same finger.

    Sure, you could probably lift a fingerprint off a glass, 3D print a mold and make a fake one. But you only get 5 attempts to get it right. Then you need to enter the unlock code. Zero attempts if the phone is power cycled, or it randomly decides to disable fingerprint unlock, or it's been too long since the last unlock.
    That's how it works on Android anyway.

  7. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given my family knows I'm a perv and likes odd shit. Um. Yes. It doesnt bother me.

  8. Yes I KNOW by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    No I don't need those things that you mentioned. See, these things SEEM helpful and that, and I'd LOVE to believe that there are developers out there that are willing to spend their time on projects that purely make my life easier. But that's simply not the case.

    Dude, I gave you two examples where it is the case already, in phones people use today.

    Do you really believe that your phone doesn't send data back to it's servers?

    Yes because I am writing apps that use local machine learning models PRECISELY so that we do not have to send data to servers and back. If the model is local it frees you from having to write an API, write a database schema, and secure the whole thing and manage storage/backups.

    You don't have to trust developers will avoid sending data to the servers from any kind of altruism. Trust they will use local only models because it is much CHEAPER.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Yes I KNOW by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      You are writing apps that people like me would approve of (not sending data back to a server), whereby you're not mining people's data - thank you. Hearing your argument of this situation actually gives me hope.

      But that's not the case for every developer, and certainly not the case for most corporate entities:
      iPhone
      Android
      Huawei

      If our privacy laws here in the US were comparable to those of the EU, I'd be more relaxed about AI everywhere. In the meantime, we'll have to depend on developers and corporate entities to have the same morals as you appear to have. It's just that they don't have a good track record of having any morals whatsoever.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  9. Under display by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    Qualcomm doesn't make displays. Hate on QC all you want, this is a collaborative effort.

    1. Re:Under display by phalse+phace · · Score: 1

      Qualcomm doesn't make displays.

      Where in the summary or article does it state that Qualcomm does? Both state it's an (improved) Qualcomm sensor.

      With its new 3D Sonic Sensors, Qualcomm promises an enhanced ultrasonic fingerprint solution that can sit under the display. In part, this is a rebranding of Qualcomm’s existing under-display sensor, but there’s some new technology here, too.

  10. THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES NAZI KEN DOLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES NAZI FAGGOT KEN DOLL

    Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error:

  11. Re: You see police upset about strong encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But you just said that it would. Contradictory much?

  12. gaming phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's hilarious. What kind of masochist wants to game on a phone?