• hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    Do they even offer something of value? I mean for that they’d need to have something like a good and open SDK to appeal to developers, who then use the specific advantages of those chips. Which in turn does something for the consumer to chose their chips over their competitor’s ones. And as far as I’m concerned, the camera app is the only thing using the NPU and GPU parts of the chip. So I really don’t care if it’s a Tensor or a Snapdragon. As long as it’s fast enough for what I do and efficient with the battery power.

  • seang96A
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Who needs that much performance over battery / heat / stability loss? Also I’m all for cheaper phone. Googles line used to be midrange and I alwwys was fine with it. We don’t need Intel troubles happening in phones let them go for the other improvements first then they can focus on power.

  • delticus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    You could probably call it a lot of things and criticize it but I don’t think failure is one of them. Also, android authority pls, that sub-title lol

    • henfredemars@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Definitely not a binary situation. Did it live up to all expectations? Certainly not, but I hesitate to label it a failure if they use the chip in an appropriately-priced device.