At least without Qualcomm models of the iPhone, I don't even have to consider it as an option anymore, and I can go ahead with the Note 9 with no regrets. I simply can't buy a phone that isn't going to get good reception. I got an SE on sale, so I have a toy phone, and I could use it on AT&T, but it lacks B30, much less B66 or B14, so it's not the greatest, but at least it does have a Qualcomm radio in it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Without Qualcomm, at least I don't have to consider the iPhone anymore
- Thread starter BiggAW
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Right.... because only Qualcomm modems get "good reception." Hey... I am looking for a good price on tin foil hats. Where did you get yours?
Did you look at the specs? The intel radio supports B14, 30 and 66. Are there some other bands you're looking for?
I'd rather have working data (and voice and text) than not when I'm an area with weak signals, which is fairly frequently.
Intel is YEARS behind Qualcomm on reception. The Qualcomm iPhone 8/8+/X outperformed Intel iPhone 8/8+/X significantly, and Qualcomm has since rolled out the X20, which is even better.
I have an S7 with the Qualcomm X12, and it is considered to have excellent reception, but the X20-equipped S9/S9+/Note 9 blows it out of the water. The X20 is absolutely tenacious.
If you don't like the new iPhones, then get something you do like and enjoy it.
Even so... it is funny... you are willing to jump ship on an assumed marginal difference in modem performance... even though you will be going to a CPU performace and RAM management situation that is FAR WORSE than what you will get on the iPhone! The A11 chip from LAST YEAR outperforms the Snapdragon 845... so you can imagine that the A12 will DESTROY it! And despite these Android phones have more RAM, they still experience far more app reloading in tests than the iPhone.
The iPhone SE lacks B30, B66, and B14. The 8+ SIM Free has the Qualcomm X16, but it is limited to 2x2 MIMO, and while it has B30 and B66, it lacks B14.
[doublepost=1536861859][/doublepost]
Having service and not having service is NOT a marginal difference in modem performance. Intel's iPhones consistently have signal issues in weak, congested, or intermittent signal areas. I've seen several situations where just an X16 had usable service but an X12 didn't, so to go backwards from there to Intel versus forwards to the Qualcomm X20 makes absolutely no sense.
It really doesn't matter what fancy CPU and RAM the phone has if it's can't get a signal and has no data. Plus, while Android's RAM management objectively sucks, throwing 8GB of RAM, a Qualcomm SD845, and a 4000mah battery at the problem effectively solves it.
Not sure what kind of improvements have been made with the Intel modems with the new models, but the two modems with last year’s model definitely have different performance in weaker areas. The Qualcomm chip gave me a better signal and performance while the Intel model lost service often. Tested both at same location with Verizon (both iPhone 10), side by side. Qualcomm consistently held an LTE signal.
Yes but the new phones do support that band and the radio is significantly better than last years Intel radio.
I have an 8+ using the intel radio and I have no issues with it. We also travel frequently in no and poor frequency areas and it hasn't been noticeably different than any of our friends phones(android and various carriers).
The biggest difference was just download speed when comparing to QUALCOMM. But then on a phone why do I need 70mbps over 30mbps? It's not giving me anything useful. On my desktop that's different as I need the bandwidth there but certainly not on a phone.
Some info on the new intel radio, not sure how it compares to qualcomms latest:
https://wccftech.com/intel-xmm-7560-announced/
Some specs on the newer chips:
https://www.macworld.com/article/3293018/iphone-ipad/2018-iphones-may-drop-qualcomms-modems.html
Last edited:
The fair comparison is the 8+ versus the new iPhones. The 8+ uses the Qualcomm X16 in the SIM-free models. I was simply noting that I have an iPhone to play with, and it has a Qualcomm radio, but it can't be a daily driver on AT&T due to it's lacking most of the important capacity bands AT&T is using, particularly B30. I'll most likely just use it on Wi-Fi, as I like to stay fluent in iOS, Android, and FireOS, so I have devices on all 3, as well as MacOS, Windows, and ChromeOS.
An Intel iPhone Will NOT hang onto LTE as long as a Qualcomm iPhone, or Qualcomm-based Android phone with the X12 or newer. It just won't. The X20 is more than twice as good (4-5dB) as the X12 in terms of reception, which is an astounding improvement over a radio already considered to be excellent.
You are right that you don't need 70mbps versus 30mbps. But that's not the issue here. The issue is when you're in a heavily congested area, and the Intel iPhone has no usable data, and the Qualcomm X20 phone is pulling a few hundred kbps. Or when you're at the edge of a cell, and the Intel iPhone has no service at all, and the Qualcomm X20 phone is pulling 2mbps on B12 LTE at -122 dBm. I've experienced just that with the Qualcomm X12 versus the Qualcomm X16, so why would I want to go back to something that won't perform as well as a Qualcomm X12 versus something that will perform significantly better than the Qualcomm X16?
Yes but why compare the old intel radio to a new QUALCOMM radio and then use that as an excuse to get a new note 9 rather than a 2018 iphone which no longer uses that older intel radio? If talking about getting a new phone one should compare the x20 and the xmm7560 and on paper they're virtually the same.
We'll have to wait and see but what if in real world tests the intel radio performs just as well as the QUALCOMM? Or better?
We'll have to wait and see but what if in real world tests the intel radio performs just as well as the QUALCOMM? Or better?
If the articles never came out showing that Apple uses two different modems, these threads would not exist and people would be none the wiser.
Actually, I was comparing an older Qualcomm radio to a newer Intel radio. Intel is many years behind Qualcomm. This is nothing new, it's been going on for over 7 years, when the iPhone 4 with it's crappy Infineon radio got replaced by the 4s with it's tenacious Qualcomm radio, and all the sudden the iPhone could actually get decent service. Intel bought Infineon, and the crappy radios became Intel radios.
On paper, the specs look the same, until someone takes one somewhere and finds it gets much weaker service than the X20.
[doublepost=1536865717][/doublepost]
Let's be real here. People are going to figure it out when one iPhone is significantly better at getting a signal than another.
watch this and tell me which phone reloaded more apps? the iphone x opens the apps quicker by 6 seconds but when it comes to opening them the 2nd time, it got absolutely embarrassed....
But you don't know. You're making assumptions here which is pointless. The tests may show it's better than the QUALCOMM. Who knows. Until then there's zero point in making assumptions.
And why is that? You don't provide any sort of useful information.
The other aspect of this is that a $250 Android phone provides perfectly adequate app launching and general performance. I've been using my Moto G6 on Sprint for a while, and it's delightful for everyday use with 3GB of RAM and an SD427. Samsung's bloatware requires some more muscle, but still, it's not like any of the flagship devices are hurting for CPU or RAM performance. What differentiates phones is stuff like the screen, storage, etc, but more than anything else, actually having a network connection. A smartphone loses 75%+ of it's functionality when it doesn't have a reliable LTE or 3G connection.
I already saw one set of tests from Sprint, and while it has HPUE, the power/receptivity levels are lousy compared to other devices.
Intel has a long track record with lousy modems, they're not going to magically catch up 3+ years in a single year.
"Years"? Laughable. And you refer to the SE as a "toy phone" that's for sale. Please tell us you're finished posting on this forum after your "toy" is sold. See 'ya,hopefully.
Because throwing more RAM into the phone doesn’t “effectively” solve the Android problem of terrible software integration. It could have 16GB of ram and without good software integration it will still suck.
Additionally, if those phones work so well for you why are you so concerned about what the iPhone is lacking for you? Move on.
Well, you know, it's sprint.
Can you post a link to these tests?
Sprint's coverage and network is a mess, that is true, but the performance of the iPhone is also poor.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/9fborl/iphone_xs_and_xs_max_both_support_band_41_hpue/
If you actually read my post you would see that I said that *I* got an SE as a toy phone, not that it's a toy phone in general. However, it's usefulness on AT&T and T-Mobile has pretty much run it's course, given how many LTE bands it lacks.
I got two from the AT&T Prepaid sale, they were about $90 each after the Prepaid SIMs I had to buy with a month of service- not a bad deal at all.
Qualcomm modems have been outperforming Intel modems for at least 7 years, so this isn't anything new. Further, Intel iPhones can't even perform as well as several generations old Qualcomm iPhones or Android phones, so clearly they have a ways to go performance wise.
[doublepost=1536868593][/doublepost]
I'm not debating that iOS is better with RAM management, but at some point, you will overcome the differences if you throw enough RAM at the problem. It does depend somewhat on the flavor of Android too, and how it's optimized. Near-stock Android works great on 3GB of RAM on my Moto G, while my S7 with 4GB is a laggy mess due to BloatWiz, although it's gotten much better with new BloatWiz a.k.a. Samsung Experience on the S8 and newer.
I'm not that concerned, as the Android phones have gotten much better, but I do like to keep a toe in the water on each side... for the foreseeable future, that will have to remain the iPhone SE on the iOS side, as there's nothing out there that's adequate to be my daily driver.
Regarding the SE,a distinction without a difference. But you didn't address my last question. Will you still be posting on this forum due to your toy phone ownership?