English

Why the Snapdragon 632 processor choice?

Is it even guaranteed, that the lagging of the phone is caused by the SoC?
Otherwise this whole discussion is missig the point; though I fully agree with @AnotherElk and @Ingo!

2 Likes

The fact is the PF was introduced in his time with a highrange processor (the 801) in my opinion that’s why 4 years later it’s still able to run correctly. And when I say correctly it mean badly in my experience with a 801 in 2019 (and I’m not a gamer, i just use basic app, texting, mail, google map). BUT oviously a complete different choice has been made for the PF3 because it run out with a midrange processor. So there’s is a difference, it’s not just my experience.

In this case @BertG is right. This is not because of the SoC and can be fixed with finding the culprit App(s), with a factory reset, or with installing the phone from scratch.

2 Likes

Yep, that looks more like an apps problem, than one of the SoC.
The demand for SoC performance by these apps can hardly have increased enough to make the phone perform badly.
Even older SoC do manage that well.
New hardware with higher demand can be excluded as well.

1 Like

No, it wasn’t. Please, check the dates, the 801 was at the time an “old” SoC (Samsung S5, 2014; Sony Z3C, 2014; HTC M8, 2014; OnePlus One, 2014; FP2, with an older revision, not the MSM8974AC, 2015). Fairphone was criticised for that choice at the time, in fact.

People were wrong, in my opinion. Even with an unstable kernel, FP2 still runs fine today for a lot of users.

7 Likes

If you’re interested in more discussion details regarding this question then please first read the following topic:

3 Likes

Google started “project treble” with Android 8. The driver support for any chipset is now an obligation, even for those cheap, crappy Chinese Mediatek processors.
Supporting a device over a five years time period with updates shouldn’t be a problem anymore.

In terms of power consumption it’s been a good decision not to choose an Snapdragon 845 or 855, but…

  1. Gaming is even now in 2019 no fun on this phone. Top games like “Fortnite” and “Grid Autosport” aren’t supported, even so you payed 450 € for this device.
  2. 4 GB RAM and 64 GB internal storage. Still enough in 2019, but in 2023?
  3. Internal storage is not UFS 2.0 or higher.
  4. No fast 5 Ghz WiFi ac, even a Galaxy S5 in 2014 supported this, and WiFi range/ quality isn’t the best on Fairphone 3
  5. Missing 4G frequencies. LTE Bands 28 and 32.

On the positive side we find: Bluetooth 5.0, a really good 4G signal and an impressive battery life considering the small built in 3.060 mAh battery.

2 Likes

Is this a definitive No? Source?
Looked more like a bug to me, and bugs might get fixed.

2 Likes

No, it’s not a bug. No 5 Ghz WiFi ac, because of the Snapdragon 632.

Data on Qualcomm’s website available: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon-632-mobile-platform

It’s Fairphone’s fault, that the FM-radio isn’t activated on FP3. You could call this a “bug”. :wink:

4 Likes

Thanks, I missed that.
I wonder why it did try to connect using ac then with my router … pfft … WiFi :woman_shrugging: .

2 Likes

This was discussed in the speculation thread already.

Yes, Qualcomm’s page says 632 does not support ac.

Wikipedia says 632 supports ac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Qualcomm_Snapdragon_systems-on-chip#Snapdragon_632,_665,670_and_675(2018/19)

Wikichip as well:

IIRC even Geekbench entries suggested it was supported. Just Qualcomm’s page says it does not.

(Calling it ac is out of date naming scheme anyway :wink: )

I don’t think it matters either way. You won’t saturate the bandwidth anyway.

3 Likes

The question is why did they choose a qualcomm SoC in the first place.
The question is easy to answer. They offer complete packages using their components, which apart from the SoC and the wireless all suck horribly (charging IC almost charged my battery to 4.7V, because of simple taking out the battery).
I would like to see a iMX. 8 QuadMax with it’s 8 cores in the FP4.

3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Lineage-16.0 (Android Pie) Nightly

My Fritz Box says: "FP3-Wolfgang - 192.168.1.73 - 5 GHz - ↓433 - ↑292 - ac/ 80 MHz, WPA2, 1 x 1, 11k, 11v

6 Likes

Thanks for this.
I set my Fritz!Box to allow ac again, and now the connection seems to be successful and stable, which it wasn’t at all before.

1 Like

The Snapdragon 632 is a fairly good processor, but the Snapdragon 710 would be a much better choice. The processor is faster than the younger model by more than 80% in AnTuTu and half in Geekbench 5. Just look at the memory bandwidth (14.9 against 7.46 GB/s). The production technology is also better (10 nm vs. 14 in 632).

If I read your posting correct, the 632 is the newer one.
Than an explanation might be, that the support period for an older SoC likely ends sooner than that for a newer model? And - as I understand it - support by the manufacturer might be vital for software updates etc.

4 Likes

Looking at that detailed comparision the two SoCs were announced one month apart, probably not relevant in terms of support duration.

The comparison also states that the 710 has 76 instead of 66 for “Efficiency of battery consumption”.

Couldn’t find anything on the prices, though…

2 Likes

Regarding the cost-factor, I found this statement online.
No idea, how reliable or accurate that is.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-real-cost-of-a-Qualcomm-Snapdragon-710-processor

SD 7XX series cost for 5K to 7K.
SD 6XX series cost for 4K to 6K.

The currency would be INR (Indian Rupie). As of now, 1K INR equals about 11.8 EUR. If that would be correct, the decision in fact is cost relevant; and most likely even more so, when buying lower quantities.

7.49GiB/s sounds unreasonably slow for a 2018 SoC, I’d like to hear a second opinion on this. I tried looking around for sources, but couldn’t find any reputable documentation neither on the Qualcomm website, nor on the Samsung MCP page used in the FP3. At least one page hints at the DRAM bus on this SoC being 64-bit wide, two channels of 32-bits each, doubling the bandwidth to a more reasonable 14.9GiB/s. Meanwhile Wikipedia mentions a DRAM bus of 7.46GiB/s under the Adreno 506 GPU, but without a source.