SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Qualcomm has updated their Snapdragon Wear SoC to include a low-power co-processor:
It's been two and a half years since Qualcomm last released a major new smartwatch chip, and in the time since, Android smartwatches have languished. But in the coming months, they could finally start seeing some meaningful improvements: Qualcomm is releasing a new processor for watches, called the Snapdragon Wear 3100, that's meant to extend battery life, enhance always-on displays, and offer more versatility when it comes to sports devices and fitness sensors.
The new chip's key feature is the addition of a secondary low-power processor, which is supposed to handle most of the work when a smartwatch isn't in use. This co-processor will power a watch's sensors and ambient display, doing so while using up to 20 times less energy than the main processor would, according to Qualcomm.
[...] For this chip generation, that's about all that's changing. Both the Wear 3100 and the Wear 2100, its predecessor, share the same main processor — so there's no reason to expect major speed gains. The co-processor is the main improvement, and that means almost all of the enhancements enabled by Qualcomm's new chip come from what the co-processor can do.
See also: Montblanc Summit 2 will be the first Snapdragon Wear 3100 watch
Related: Qualcomm Announces New Mid-Range 632, 439, and 429 Snapdragon SoCs
(Score: 3, Informative) by VLM on Thursday September 13 2018, @12:01PM (2 children)
Some info probably assumed by the insiders, for those who aren't into android programming or otherwise are insiders:
That SoC model-line essentially owns the Android watch market, only maybe 99% of android watch sales are Snapdragon SoCs. So aside from corporate ownership and branding, this is essentially "The" android watch hardware. Presumably this will continue and new post-2018 android watches will all use this exact SoC. No clones, no competitors, this exact chip will be used.
The old SoC is from 2016 and was considered a bit ancient at arrival (like 2014, 2015 level of tech) and competitors (apple, etc) update hardware roughly once a year. Of course there isn't much for a watch to actually do, so CPU power doesn't matter much (like comparing microwave oven CPU speeds to see which cooks hot pockets more better...) So this being somewhat new, means it'll be pretty exciting boost if anyone can find a use for a watch.
I have a couple year old moto360 and its battery is slowly dying such that it only runs a half day at best. Mostly I use / used it as a wrist mounted notification display for incoming calls or other notifications, although my wife's fitbit does a better job with maybe ten times the battery life and much smaller/lighter. I can program android stuff (I'm actually pretty good at it) and I'm pretty creative, but I can't think of anything useful to write for my watch, despite having bought it for the purpose of fooling around with watch development. In that way, fancy CPU SoC hardware is a waste of effort, gimme better display larger battery nicer case. So the point of this story is "they" think that watches aren't selling because they're not fast enough so they need fancy coprocessors or WTF, whereas the real problem in my opinion is 5 hour battery life, no real purpose other than being a remote display, etc. I generally don't wear my watch anymore, mostly because the battery is usually dead when I look at it and there's little reason to wear it other than triage notifications if my phone is in my pocket.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday September 13 2018, @12:28PM
Read the story again? The point of the coprocessor is to increase battery life, because the existing processors are more powerful than what people need literally 90+% of the time.
I think the other big battery killer is always-on GPS, for those people who reaaaally need to plot their running route in real time or whatever.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by richtopia on Thursday September 13 2018, @02:58PM
I suspect you are roughly correct with the 99% of watches with the Qualcomm processor. For those who are interested, I looked at 7 watches/fitness trackers randomly on Banggood. The most expensive was ~60USD, but most are under 30. Three watches make no claim on their processor, but none of the four I did find were Qualcomm:
https://www.dialog-semiconductor.com/products/connectivity/bluetooth-low-energy/smartbond-da14580 [dialog-semiconductor.com]
http://www.telink-semi.com/archives/applications/8266 [telink-semi.com]
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mediatek-MT6737-SoC-Benchmarks-and-Specs.178416.0.html [notebookcheck.net]
https://www.nordicsemi.com/eng/Products/Bluetooth-low-energy/nRF52832 [nordicsemi.com]
I suspect Qualcomm is targeting the high end of the smart watch market, and therefore is underrepresented in my research. Disclaimer: I am biased as I strive to carry as little valuables on my person, and I don't understand the demand for high-end smart watches.