**** The Official Google Pixel 4 Thread ****

[_Jimlad_]

It's good spec for the money. I have never used wireless charging on my 4XL !

 

[neoboy]

Wonder if they will throw in a freebie this time too.

 

[Mekrel]

Latest rumours are stating that Samsung could be producing a custom Exynos SoC for the Pixel 5 and whilst Exynos SoCs have been panned historically, it's important to remember that going forward, Exynos SoCs are supposed to be sticking to ARM reference core designs and not the custom Mongoose cores.

The rumour is suggesting new A78 cores being used and a new Mali MP20 GPU, but Google will design the ISP and NPU. That sounds promising considering the Pixel visual core has yielded great results so far and having it integrated into the SoC rather than a separate chip will be better for efficiency.

Hopefully it's all true and Google actually increase the battery size to something in the 4,000mAh range.

 

["andy"]

Single camera is dissapointing for the pixel range imo

There are phones with the same CPU and bigger battery available for ~£200 . I'd happily pay extra for the Google experience and pixel camera but double is pushing it when it's not even getting it in full

 

[dragonslayer]

Not sure if this has been shared already so sorry if it has but thought it was interesting I hope it's true it would also explain why Google isn't going with the top end Snapdragon on the next phone

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...-launch-smartphone-soc-as-early-as-next-year/

 

[neoboy]

I think they'll fare far better in general if they go more upper midrange anyway.

 

[kona786]

Since when does having the top SoC make the phone automatically expensive. The pixel is overpriced because of Google and their odd choices. Pixels have middling hardware in general.

All my Pixel 3 needs is a bigger battery, brighter + higher refresh screen and a wide angle camera. I'd be a very happy person. The simple things are lost on all these OEMS these days.

 

[_Jimlad_]

Guys anyone recommend a fast wireless charger that's not as pricey as the official one ?

 

[BMox81]

Not that I'm really spending anything at the moment what with what's going on, but if the Pixel 5 is reasonably priced (Sim Free or on contract) given that they are going mid-range, then that could be the clincher for me to move back over.

 

[Mekrel]

I know there will be a lot of people jumping on criticising the Pixel bandwagon if they do go with a 765 chip (and rightfully so if the price doesn't reflect this), but it'll be interesting to see the actual performance of that chip vs the 865. Do we really need more and more SoC performance increases for the sake of it? Wouldn't it be better to keep performance flat and bank the silicon size reduction each year?

I understand it on PCs where GPUs have to get better as new technologies such as ray tracing half the FPS in some instances. Especially when mobile phones have specific cores for tasks such as ISPs and neural processing units, i.e. these areas can still see improvements without the main SoC cores needing performance increases.

It honestly seems to me that phone companies are just increasing the spec sheets every year and aren't researching what people want. Look at Samsung and their larger physical phone sensors - surely they would have known that shallow DoF would have decreased the ability to get accurate focus? It's ludicrous if you think how people want to use their phone for ease/just snap and go.

 

[Squink]

I know there will be a lot of people jumping on criticising the Pixel bandwagon if they do go with a 765 chip (and rightfully so if the price doesn't reflect this), but it'll be interesting to see the actual performance of that chip vs the 865. Do we really need more and more SoC performance increases for the sake of it? Wouldn't it be better to keep performance flat and bank the silicon size reduction each year?

I think putting the 765 chip in the Pixel 5 is a good idea, though I doubt it'll encourage Qualcomm to improve its business practices in future. The question re: SoC performance is a reasonable one, but Apple manage to achieve both performance and efficiency pretty well. If other SoC manufacturers could keep up, there'd be no need to trade one off for the other.

 

[Mekrel]

I think putting the 765 chip in the Pixel 5 is a good idea, though I doubt it'll encourage Qualcomm to improve its business practices in future. The question re: SoC performance is a reasonable one, but Apple manage to achieve both performance and efficiency pretty well. If other SoC manufacturers could keep up, there'd be no need to trade one off for the other.

I believe the Qualcomm problem is because they have zero competition and in my opinion, have questionable business practices that allow them to abuse that fact. Even other behemoths within the semiconductor sector have failed to compete such as Intel with x86 (as in compete within the mobile space, despite Android supporting that architecture), or Samsung which found out that it's hard to create custom designs with their Mongoose cores. There's a few other players such as MediaTek who very much play in the low end and Huawei who are only suppling themselves from the looks.

Google has definitely been planning and/or trying to create custom silicon based on the fact they've hired top level personnel with such backgrounds from competitors before. Clearly some results have come from that such as the Visual core and Titan M chips, but in reality, they need someone other than Qualcomm especially when WearOS' biggest issue is the SoC availability. Even Samsung's Exynos SoCs within their wearables is better than Qualcomm's wearable SoCs which is saying something when you consider how bad Exynos is compared to Snapdragon within phones.

Apple very much seem the exception for being able to get it right, and to do it profitably. It's crazy to think that despite Imagine Technologies' Rogue series GPUs beating anything else on the market from Qualcomm etc at the time, Apple eventually ditched them for their own GPU designs (although I believe an agreement was reached recently for them to work together again).

Basically Qualcomm is the biggest issue for Android right now and the platform needs another supplier. However, even if Google do create their own chips, I don't see them supplying anyone else.

 

[_Jimlad_]

Sounds like this will come and then in Jan / Feb we get the pixel ultra

 

[LiE]

ignore

 

[unwashed potato!]

Sounds like this will come and then in Jan / Feb we get the pixel ultra

tbh a [insert model] ultra version of any phone is an idea i like.

you then have their top of the range fairly normal priced model, and a stupid price, with stupidly good features if you want them.

 

[Squink]

you then have their top of the range fairly normal priced model, and a stupid price, with stupidly good features if you want them.

They used to cram in the stupidly good features at £699 not many years ago.

 

[_Jimlad_]

I've been a loyal Google fan boy for many a year now. After having every nexus device bar 1 and each pixel phone in the XL format.

It's time they up their game. Either top top spec or reduce the price dramatically. I keep seeing sexy phones with more memory than my PC and I get envy

 

[LiE]

I keep seeing sexy phones with more memory than my PC and I get envy

The only logical thing to do is upgrade PC

 

[Vita]

I am thinking about jumping back onto the pixel 4 ship. This time the XL. What is the battery life like now? Has it improved with software updates at all?

It’s either this or wait for the Sony Xperia ii, but I actually think the pixel will be the better bet.

 

[_Jimlad_]

XL battery has always been good. Was just standard ,4 that was short of juice