Submitted by OutlandishnessOk2452 t3_11uru0e in technology
Comments
LifeIsNotFairOof t1_jcs6uxk wrote
wait for 3 months and qualcomm will have something stronger than m2
DBDude t1_jcscpsj wrote
Qualcomm is aiming for M1 performance levels with Oryon. It will be somewhere around the Pro or Max, but slower than Ultra.
It’s running quite late, so it’ll be shipping in devices after Apple already has the M3 on the market.
LifeIsNotFairOof t1_jcshahr wrote
Qualcomm is aiming 2000+ gb5 minimum which is not m1 level, many reports are already there of it being very much better than m1 series and a lil bit better than m2. They are not ofc releasing an ultra competitor but just the base and pro version and ofc the m3 will be better since it will use 3nm vs Qualcomm which decided to use 4nm due to cost.
DBDude t1_jctp25a wrote
What we know of it so far looks about like an M1. It’s unlikely it will match an M2, and it will show up on the market after the M3 (not just a few months). Don’t they know you’re supposed to lead a target? They aimed at two years behind.
Their big problem will be heat. Apple’s M are throttled by heat in small devices, and so will theirs. If you see a big score, find out what kind of device it was on. Don’t compare a desktop Q chip with an Apple laptop or tablet.
LifeIsNotFairOof t1_jcxvmwg wrote
"what we know of it so far" source? gb5 2000+ at similar power levels fo m1 was the roadmap first created by nuvia even before they got acquired by qualcomm, there are many leaks about very high potential scores. Also its definitely wayy more than m1, even the arm cortex x4 sampling in 8 gen 3 mobile processor with mobile power limit and gimped cache scores 1800+gb5 which is higher single than m1 with stock arm cores. No way in hell nuvia custom cores will be scoring as much since even x4 with higher caches and clock speed for laptop will easily hit 1900 gb5 single
squeevey t1_jcppmwn wrote
The article mentions that some party has the chance to reinvent the car, and that qualcom is really making the fully connected digital chassis.
Here's my problem with it all - I don't car about your chassis if you can't figure out how to replace batteries easily. Inevitably, EVs will take over. I want a way to change the battery in a few hours, not weeks.
By extension, this also means that hopefully you would be able to purchase a new cabin of a vehicle and swap it onto your existing platform. Sick of your interior? Keep your platform but buy a new cabin.
That's my pipe dream. A few sled types (small medium or large) that you then, can then add cabins to. Future cars will be more like horse carriages.
0pimo t1_jcpq639 wrote
I'm no car engineer, but I don't think it's possible to build something like this and have it structurally safe without it weighing an awful lot.
Modern cars, the body is the chassis and the cabin is integral to the structural integrity of the car.
MrStayPuftSeesYou t1_jcqca2r wrote
There are a lot of exotic materials that definitely fit the bill but we need economies of scale to make it viable financially.
squeevey t1_jcpr9xw wrote
I don't disagree that it requires some engineering. I believe it is possible though. The cabin would be the safe zone. The sled would have the battery, motor, and wheels. The battery would like be in a non-crumple zone to prevent it from taking damage. Whereas the cabin would have crumple zones and could detach more easily.
Instead of thinking of the car as a complete unibody. You would compartmentalize the passenger cabin from the drive train.
0pimo t1_jcps1g6 wrote
Yeah pretty sure having a non-crumpling frame is how you transfer a whole lot of energy to the driver and kill people when they crash.
squeevey t1_jcptbb2 wrote
Yep it is. However, in an EV you still have to reinforce the battery so it does NOT crumple. And the battery has most of the mass.
So it is a matter of design to create crumpling for passengers while reinforcing the sled. Hence decoupling the two. Would be great to just have to purchase a new cabin instead of a whole new drive train.
peadith t1_jcps5sy wrote
You know what would be funny is if the Chinese came out with a simple and cheap plain old electric vehicle without all this digital bull shit and it wipes the market.
peadith t1_jcpqq0b wrote
If they're going to put the billboards on the windshield I think I really will go for a horse and carriage. Do the Amish take lare-comers?
DBDude t1_jcr0c01 wrote
They tried this with the Fiero using snap-on plastic body panels. The panels ended up being expensive and few people took advantage of it.
Silly-One7351 t1_jcpkp2s wrote
Apple comes late, but they brings better optimization then rivals.
Note: Haven't read the article, responding based on the title.
typesett t1_jcpr2r3 wrote
They include Apple but why? So many companies who make cars right now
yes I know the rumors
Silly-One7351 t1_jcprmgb wrote
To be accurate Qualcomm will never dominate EV. It may be either NVIDIA or AMD.
DBDude t1_jcr06pv wrote
Apple demanding to do everything itself when it doesn’t have a car is going to keep it out of the market. Qualcomm doesn’t have anything close to an M1 chip, which Apple could already be selling to car makers.