Qualcomm says it expects $4 billion in PC chip sales by 2029, as company gets traction beyond smartphones
Posted by TwelveSilverSwords@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 98 comments
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
$4 billion for an entire year is about 1/4 what Intel makes in client revenue yearly. Meanwhile, Automotive is and will continue to be a big growth driver. Qualcomm is diversifying.
DerpSenpai@reddit
This means selling 20M laptop chips each year at an average price of 200$ each. If we increase average price to 300$, it means 13M units.
mach8mc@reddit
this prediction ignores the entry by nvidia and mediatek
Tradeoffer69@reddit
And further developments by already existing AMD and Intel.
auradragon1@reddit
Given what we've seen from Qualcomm's first gen X Elite and their Snapdragon 8, you don't think Qualcomm can get 11% of the laptop market in 4-5 years?
Artoriuz@reddit
I think the main problem here is precisely that we still have AMD and Intel producing new (x86) chips.
There's essentially no pressure for third parties to release native ARM binaries and as long as Qualcomm needs a translation layer for things people want to run this is going to be a tough fight.
...Unless the chips are good enough to brute force through it, although that's probably a bit unlikely.
auradragon1@reddit
There’s no pressure for macOS developers to released ARM versions either. Yet, in 2024, there are hardly any Intel apps left.
Artoriuz@reddit
Except all new Macs have ARM CPUs. That's simply not the case with Windows PCs.
auradragon1@reddit
App developers have to compete against other apps. If Adobe has all their apps optimized for ARM, anyone who wants to compete against Adobe will also.
Adromedae@reddit
Qualcomm pissed off royally a lot of OEMs.
auradragon1@reddit
Yes. I’m sure OEMs are pissed at more competition for AMD and Intel and a chip that has a chance of actually competing against Apple eventually.
Adromedae@reddit
LOL. That's not how business works.
This SOC was 1 year late. Severely underwhelming initial execution is not a good way to engage your OEMs, when your product has a harder value proposition to crack than the competition.
MarioNoir@reddit
No it wasn't Qcom started work on the new Oryon core in August 2021, after the Nuvia acquisition. So it took less than 3 years, that's quite the performance. 8 Elite, uses Oryon 2 cores and perf/efficiency improved greatly. Oryon 3 is looking very good.
Not al all, you're exaggerating.
Adromedae@reddit
You're uniformed.
QC Roadmap with OEMs had Hamoa SKUs delivery on Q3/23, volume Q4/23. It didn't reach volume until Q3/24. It was that late.
QC planned on having Elite SKUs on market for more than year before WoA exclusivity runs out.
MarioNoir@reddit
Not at all. "Hamoa SKUs" rumors said they were always meant for 2024. Developing an entirely new platform in 1.5 years would simply be crazy.
First X Elite laptops were launched in June, so end of Q2, claiming it reached volume prod in q3/24 doesn't make sense.
Very unlikely. Qcom's chips were also dependent on Windows support for example.
Adromedae@reddit
Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
MarioNoir@reddit
LoL 🤣
Adromedae@reddit
I'll assume English is not your first language so you really are not comprehending what concepts like "roadmap" and "exclusivity" mean.
MarioNoir@reddit
Roadmaps are always subjected to change, OEMs know it very well. And I haven't seen any contractual commitment or obligation by Qcom to start delivering X Elite in Q3/2023 so OEMs start mass production of their laptops. Like I said, it would have been impossible, even in the current conditions its quite the performance to launch a completely new platform as fast as Qcom did(and taking in consideration they were dependent on Microsoft's support). Claiming X Elite is late is disingenuous.
Adromedae@reddit
Unless you actually work for QC's PR team, it is very bizarre for you to go out of your way to come up with these sort of damage control for free or that you would have access to these contractual details.
That roadmaps change all the time does not change the fact that Hamoa was late and OEMs weren't/aren't thrilled.
MarioNoir@reddit
Buddy, you didn't bring any proof and don't even make sense, you were also wrong about the dates you gave. I just have to belive you based on your wrong assumptions?
Show me OEMs that said that.
Adromedae@reddit
Again, unless you're on QC's payroll your emotional reaction to something as random as a SKU being late makes no sense whatsoever.
MarioNoir@reddit
So nothing. As expected.
Adromedae@reddit
To be fair, it is you who has failed to produce the internal communication and contractual details that disprove what I originally said.
Cheers.
MarioNoir@reddit
Fascinating. You can't come with any proof but you accuse me 🤣😂 . The burden in the one that made the claim and you can't, because it's not true.
Adromedae@reddit
No. The burden of meeting standards first is on the people introducing them as expectations into the conversation.
MarioNoir@reddit
Still nothing. I mean you obviously made that up, so its expected you can't come up with anything in support 😂🤣
DerpSenpai@reddit
MTK will fight with lower margins so it will be a tough market to crack overall. That's why they are conservative
auradragon1@reddit
It's hard for AMD/Intel to fight with lower margins in the laptop world. Qualcomm's SoC is more area efficient. And compared to LNL, it's a lot cheaper to produce.
Qualcomm already sells their X Elite for half the price as Intel's chips based on leaked Dell documents.
DerpSenpai@reddit
No they don't. Because of Nvidia and MTK is why they are being cautious with revenue.
Strazdas1@reddit
11% of market share in a year isnt being cautious. Its being too optimistic.
mach8mc@reddit
qc has not advantage in areas where there are no modems involved
auradragon1@reddit
Arguably, Qualcomm benefits more from Mediatek's entry than not.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
11% is considerable.
Exurbain@reddit
Honestly if they capture the low end/Chromebook market that seems feasible? Not sure if sales for that sector have plateaued or cratered in the last few years though but there always seems to be pretty steady demand for glorified word processors for enterprise and educational markets.
ZigZagZor@reddit
What about the data center? What is stopping Qualcomm from making server CPUs? Everyone knows ARM neoverse cores are mediocre.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
Qualcomm may have superior core IP, but that's not enough to be successful in the server market.
PastaPandaSimon@reddit
It's also very arguable as to whether they've got the superior core IP. It's the first time in a decade that they're using their own core, there are pros and cons to it as is, and there's no evidence that it'll continue being competitive against Intel's and AMD's coming designs, which are also x86.
psydroid@reddit
Let's assume Intel and AMD have the superior core IP and will be competitive against current and future designs from Qualcomm, Nvidia, Ampere, ARM, Apple and others and also that x86 is more desirable than any non-x86 ISA.
Why are these companies then wasting their time designing chips that aren't competitive and even worse why are customers spending money porting their workloads to and running them on those chips? Does that make any sense?
So there must be something compelling that causes developers and companies to invest in solutions that aren't built on platforms from Intel and AMD, or they wouldn't do it in the first place.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
Yes, there's a reason why the hyperscalers (Amazon, Google, Microsoft) are building their own custom Server CPUs based on ARM cores.
psydroid@reddit
I've put an ARM developer's response as a response to my post with his permission.
Adromedae@reddit
Because they can license off the shelf ARM cores and not x86 ones.
psydroid@reddit
An ARM Linux kernel developer has responded to this post of mine:
When you make (an) Arm SoC then you can integrate whatever you want into chip. On x86-64 you need CPU + chipset for it.
So if you make SoC for cloud (like AWS Graviton) then you want many cores, (a) good memory controller and some way to get to the network (either by integrated network controller or some link (like pcie) to connect (an) external chip from other company).
And you can not make (your) own x86-64 SoC because neither Intel nor AMD sell core designs to other companies.
And if you start making (your) own x86-64 core then you quickly realize that you need to pay Intel and AMD for patented parts of (the) ISA or your chip will be good only for very specific uses.
Also I would not say that Ampere chips "are not competitive and even worse". Most of (the) major clouds have huge numbers of them.
Having no hyperthreading means you do not have a chance that other instance will share core caches (like it can on x86-64).
NVIDIA Grace SoC feels like beast built for specific uses. HPC, AI etc.
It has 72 cores with 480GB of local memory and fast (NVLink and PCIe) connections to companion chips (GPUs and DPUs).
Sure, if you compare Arm SBCs with current x86-64 desktop cpus then they may look weak. But (the) SBC is just a part of (the) Arm market.
ZigZagZor@reddit
Qualcomm doesn't need to make better cores than AMD and Intel. The role of cpu in AI and HPC is decreasing and shifting to custom accelerators. Nowadays a cpu just has to be good enough like in the Nvidia Grace Blackwell chip. Qualcomm just has to steal ARM's lunch and Qualcomm can easily do that.
RegularCircumstances@reddit
We already know what Gen 2 looks like. They can run 4.32GHz at standard yields (instead of 3.4GHz with the laptops and then 4GHz and 4.2GHz bins) for peak ST in smartphones.
Which is also possible because iso-performance it offers a 57% power improvement over Oryon V1, or up to 30% more performance at the same power.
Peaks at 7-8W, instead of 13-15W.
Lunar Lake and Oryon V1 were fairly similar in ST performance and ST performance/W except Lunar Lake had a much more costly implementation due to the absurd area they used for 4 P cores and all the cache, even on N3B.
V2 (in the 8 Elite only right now) shows already they can match LNL’s peak ST at about half the power (same as compared to Oryon V1) just by basic deduction.
V3 is what’s confirmed to be coming in the X Elite 2 and 8 Elite 2 this next fall/winter of 2025, which will be yet another performance/W improvement and peak performance improvement over Oryon V2.
I like Qualcomm’s odds.
trololololo2137@reddit
Why would anyone buy chips from Qualcomm when neoverse is good enough and most likely WAY cheaper? All hyperscalers already have their custom neoverse chips so going back to a third party makes no sense
ZigZagZor@reddit
May be Qualcomm can give their Oryon cores as a TL like ARM and get a royalty per device.
ZigZagZor@reddit
Because Qualcomm can make better chips than ARM garbage cores.
Adromedae@reddit
" What is stopping Qualcomm from making server CPUs? "
Their company culture. They've tried a couple times before to enter DC.
animealt46@reddit
Server ARM has a lot of players already trying to find their place with the giant monster known as Nvidia pretty much guaranteed the big wins.
sixpointnineup@reddit
The market doesn't believe it though.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
The market is irrational.
6950@reddit
That's about 60% of a quarter sale for Intel
battler624@reddit
or 10 bananas
LemonRigamarole@reddit
Those are some big bananas, gabongananas even.
hey_you_too_buckaroo@reddit
Are people actually buying Qualcomm PCs? I mean if I wanted a CPU that has compatibility issues with games, I'd probably just get a Mac.
psydroid@reddit
Once you look outside of the Windows on ARM niche there are few if any compatibility issues. These laptops aren't meant for games either.
So if you're interested in running x86 applications and games without emulation, you're better off buying an x86 system.
For the rest that value mobile performance and battery life these are excellent systems. The next generation will be even better and will hopefully have a similar pricetag.
Strazdas1@reddit
What are those laptops meant for? Because they are priced like premium machines, but perform closer to what chormebooks used to do. except chromebooks did it at a 200 dollar pricepoint.
The rest that dont expect to run any x86 software? Yeah, thats a nonexistent market.
psydroid@reddit
They're meant for running software, of course. Even on Windows more and more applications are becoming available in native form. I expect this problem to solve itself within 5 years.
So it's a non-issue to keep asking questions about the usefulness, unless you have an x86 agenda going.
Software is getting ported as we speak, so the assumption that that market is nonexistent is entirely yours. Yet these machines are still being sold, so the market is clearly there.
Also as a Linux user everything is available in native form and the little software that isn't can be made to work using translation layers. Not that I ever need to run x86 software on my ARM systems anyway.
Strazdas1@reddit
I dont expect this problem to solve itself any time soon because of how much legacy software people use on windows.
It is an issue and we see this be an issue in real time.
As a linux user you must be familiar with having to jump through 10 hoops just to get things run at close to windows performance for a lot of software. You are also probably a lot more tech savy than an average user.
psydroid@reddit
I don't have to run through any hoops to get things to run on Linux. If anything it's the other way around with Windows requiring a lot more handholding than I have time for.
So once a year or two I install everything from scratch on the latest release of the operating system to get rid of whatever cruft may have accumulated over time. All data is stored on the network, so it's easy to wipe and replace.
There is also no way for me to compare performance of applications running on Linux to those on Windows because I only use it for development and specialised applications.
Particularly legacy applications don't need the highest performance, so those will be easier to get running. It's the latest software that will cause most of the problems, but in that case the ISV should be working on dual-architecture support.
That is made easier by the emulation support included in Windows on ARM, so you only need one instead of two machines. I will probably pick up one of those $600 machines to see how Windows and Linux run on it before I make any hard conclusions.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
Yes. Check out:
r/Surface
r/SnapdragonLaptops
r/Snapdragon
Strazdas1@reddit
Thousands? This article supposes they will sell 20 million+ per year. Thousands isnt anywhere close.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
20 million in 2029.
djashjones@reddit
I can this happening, Loads of dumb people out there.
PAcMAcDO99@reddit
nothin wrong with an efficient arm laptop for those looking to just do some powerpoint slides and send emails
Strazdas1@reddit
Nothing wrong with an efficient ARM laptop in theory. Plenty of wrong with Qualcomm both as a company and the products it has (so far) made.
djashjones@reddit
The issue I have is the shitty software and more so the OS. I'm probably alone here but the reason we have no innovation is because the many spoil it for the few.
I can spend laptop money on a phone but web browsing is still no way near a desktop experience. Same with a tablet with a nice big screen.
democracywon2024@reddit
Yeah so what you're complaining about is easily solved in like literally 25 seconds but for whatever reason nobody wants to do it.
djashjones@reddit
I've given up on a decent windows tablet. Was there when the tablet edition was out and then when the Dell Venue's was popular and the Asus Transformers. The stylus was great, all passive
But since then I've closed the chapter on windows ever doing a decent tablet os. Heck, they can't even get sleep sorted out.
I got really excited when Asus brought out the padfone, where the phone docked into a tablet but that never took off.
So, I'll stick with whatever low/mid range Samsung phone with sd card until a device comes out with full linux support.
vhailorx@reddit
I also expect $4Billion in revenue for myself in 2029, so I am also accepting investments!
Why should anyone believe Qualcomm over me? I think i could construct a colorable claim that Qualcomm's revenue is just as likely to go down with their ARM license on the brink of cancellation.
Strazdas1@reddit
Well, how many chips have you designed? Whats your portfolio?
SherbertExisting3509@reddit
More competition is always good especially from large companies like MediaTek and Qualcomm. they will really turn the screws on Intel and AMD to produce more efficient and powerful chips.
Qualcomm and Mediatek need to help microsoft with running x86 code at close to full speed. native AVX-2 and eventually AVX-512 support is going to be important in helping with compatibility. There's also future x86 instructions like Intel's APX instructions (GPR 16-32) and AVX-10 that need to be emulated
psydroid@reddit
I'm going to be studying SSE and AVX in the near future but only to learn how it works in order to port code to ARM Advanced SIMD (NEON) and SVE2 and SME as well as to RVV 1.0 for RISC-V.
Almost all code that has been written for AVX is fairy recent and should be set up for making portability easy. It's the older binaries that are causing trouble and with emulation support for them most real-world scenarios will be covered.
camel-cdr-@reddit
Imo, SVE and RVV often have/require other ways to look af the problem, so I wouldn't recommend doing a 1 to 1 port.
psydroid@reddit
That is true of course, but often there is only SSE or AVX code and not much in the way of documentation. So it's useful to decode what exactly the code is doing, so you can write tailored SVE and/or RVV code that does something equivalent without doing a 1-to-1 port.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
APX introduced 32 GPRs, something which ARM Aarch64 already has.
DerpSenpai@reddit
AVX512 support is not coming. Patents but they also dont need it as new Intel cpus also don't support AVX512
AVX 2 is in beta
reddit_tiger800@reddit
Didn't ARM cancelled their license to make ARM cpu?
x4nter@reddit
Wall Street seems to not have liked this. Down 6% this morning. I feel that this stock is way oversold.
auradragon1@reddit
Wallstreet, collectively, is really really bad at projecting long term. They're good at projecting quarter to quarter. That's it.
To project long-term, they actually need to understand the products, roadmaps, technology, theories, and they need to be on the ground in these industries.
Adromedae@reddit
Keep telling yourself that.
hardware-ModTeam@reddit
Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, your submission has been removed for the following reason:
NeroClaudius199907@reddit
Wallstreet is better at projecting long term than everyone on this sub
auradragon1@reddit
Not everyone. But on average, yes.
People on this sub are not motivated by projecting long-term. They're motivated by cool tech, gaming value, supporting their favorite tech companies.
NeroClaudius199907@reddit
Qualcomm themselves are projecting 4B rev in 2029 while intel does 30B. Plus their cpus are just going to be for light notebooks while amd/intel target entry, med, premium, workstation, servers etc.
Long term projections is next to impossible because of the amount of variables that come into play.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
If so, that 4B may be a conservative projection. Note that Qualcomm isn't going to be the only ARM CPU vendor for PCs, starting from 2025. Nvidia, Mediatek and others will also make ARM chips for PCs.
NeroClaudius199907@reddit
You wouldn't believe who's projecting a 30% share. I can't wait for more people to realize that market share isn't just about the hardware itself.
Im going to predict hardware will reach a place where more performance doesn't really matter for the average consumers. All that will matter is how much volume can be supplied.
Adromedae@reddit
That had more to do with Qualcomm's loss of Apple MDM business.
noiserr@reddit
What happened to the 50% of PC sales in 5 years claim from not that long ago? https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/1d7mrag/qualcomm_ceo_says_arm_taking_50_of_the_windows_pc/
chx_@reddit
Wasn't there a Digitimes report a few months back saying these thins don't sell what well?
constantlymat@reddit
My entire workflow works best on x86 but I am really jealous how much better the webcam looks on all those Qualcoom laptops.
They make my 2k Euro business laptop's webcam look really dated.
TwelveSilverSwords@reddit (OP)
It is thanks to Qualcomm's expertise in making ISPs for mobile photography.
seatux@reddit
If that ISP works through external webcams, they can have a niche of being meeting machines.
Davester47@reddit
Is this a troll post or are you serious?
SherbertExisting3509@reddit
More competition is always good especially from large companies like MediaTek and Qualcomm. they will really turn the screws on Intel and AMD to produce more efficient and powerful chips.
steinfg@reddit
2029 is so far away that those kind of prediction become really useless
steinfg@reddit
4 billion? Assuming a 300-500 dollar chip price, they expect OEMs to sell 8 to 13 million snapdragon laptops. I am not sure how feasable it is.