Should Samsung try to move in-house for all their processors?

[Michael Goff]

Imagine it, they're able to use various Exynos for everything from their lowest end phones to their highest end phones. All of them are varying degrees of optimized for the processor and thus run better than they would otherwise. They also take out some supply chain issues that might occur as well as having another differentiator.

 

[maflynn]

They have the production ability to do so, but how's the actual performance. I've really not followed up or read about the Exynos, so I don't know how it measures up.

 

[Michael Goff]

They have the production ability to do so, but how's the actual performance. I've really not followed up or read about the Exynos, so I don't know how it measures up.

I've only used an Exynos myself once. It was the first ARM Chromebook. It was alright, but the RAM hungry nature of Chrome made the experience a little ... tab-reloady. I'm going to get an S6 this week, so I'll know more about modern Exynos chips.

According to benchmarks, though, Samsung is doing pretty good.

 

[MRU]

I can only presume that Samsung would have already moved all their devices to exynos - if it was profitable / economic to do so. The fact they haven't suggests that its still more economically sound to use a mixture of snapdragon and exynos.

 

[skratch77]

It's weird they will be making snapdragon chips now too.I think the reason before was for licensing on modem patents and was cheaper for samsung to buy a snapdragon with built in modem that had everything paid and set to go vs there exynos modem.

Like on the gs6,some USA phones have a qualcomm modem along with the exynos cpu instead of the exynos Shannon modem that supports the same bands and technology but it was most likely cheaper for samsung to just buy qualcomm modems vs paying licensing for CDMA and certain patented technologies