
Intel ends 5G modem alliance with Beijing-backed chipmaker - ishikawa
https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade-war/Intel-ends-5G-modem-alliance-with-Beijing-backed-chipmaker
======
TorKlingberg
I can add a bit of technical context here. High-end phones usually have a
baseband chip separate from the main SoC. There is also an RF chip and some
discrete components in front of the antennas. Qualcomm is quite dominant, but
Apple has switched to Intel over the last few years.

In low- or mid-end phones the baseband is usually integrated in the main SoC.
Taiwanese MediaTek is the biggest supplier. Unisoc clearly wants to compete
with MediaTek, and Intels modem division has trouble getting into low-end
phones as nobody wants complete Intel SoCs in phones. So they agreed to
integrate Intels modem as an IP block in Unisoc chips.

In tablets and the few laptops that have mobile data the baseband + RF are
usually on a modem module, M.2 or similar. The Librem 5 phone also takes this
approach.

~~~
JustSomeNobody
I thought Qualcomm integrated all that onto the SOC after LTE. LTE was a huge
battery drain at first because they weren't integrated.

Am I not understanding something here?

~~~
yaantc
> LTE was a huge battery drain at first because they weren't integrated

No, the modem/SoC integration is not a big factor. Having an internal
communication inside a single SoC will always be a bit better than going
through an external interface, but it's not a significant impact when compared
to the total phone power consumption. As other have said, iPhones have an
external modem and are fine. Qualcomm insisted on this because they had it,
and they're good at marketing.

LTE was a drain at first for the same reason 3G was a drain at first. Cellular
standards are designed to have a long life, and are over dimensioned
initially. Then Moore law and other optimizations kicks in and make things
more acceptable. This is intentional, otherwise the standard would not make
the best use of technology over time. And this is something where we need to
keep an eye for 5G: Moore law, strictly speaking (higher density _for the
least cost process_. One can still get better, for a higher price) is over.
Hopefully 5G will have properly taken this into account.

But then for 5G a big part of the power will be in the RF front-end, with all
those antennas. Here too it'll be interesting to see how it evolves over time.

~~~
icanhackit
> As other have said, iPhones have an external modem and are fine. _Qualcomm
> insisted on this because they had it, and they 're good at marketing._

Addressing the second sentence - I have no knowledge of what transpired but my
assumption would be a combination of Apple didn't want to have their SOC's
fab'd by Qualcomm for the sake of an integrated modem, and Qualcomm didn't
want TSMC fab'ing their modem IP into Apple's SOC's, so the obvious solution
was a discrete modem which was a product they could offer.

~~~
ksec
The wording makes it extremely unclear. Both Company don't "Fab" those SoC.
What you are suggesting is Qualcomm doesn't want to give the IP to Apple for
Modem SoC Integration, and Apple doesn't want to give their IP to Qualcomm's
SoC designed specially for Apple.

While those point are valid they are not the reason Apple have a separate
Modem Chip. The design of iPhone had the Modem literally in a completely
isolated system, and act more like a USB modem directly connected to the
Internal iPhone for security purposes.

And as other have mentioned the integrated of Modem within the SoC have
minimal impact to overall battery life.

------
smaili
Has anyone else been experiencing horrendous data speeds with their iPhone XS?
I only ask because this was the first model shipped with an Intel modem, amd
compared to my 6S this is nowhere near as fast or reliable over 4G and LTE.

~~~
ksec
>I only ask because this was the _first_ model shipped with an Intel modem

7, 8 / X All had a version with Intel Modem. XS is, however the first model to
ship _only_ with Intel Modem.

I don't think it has horrendous Data Speed. But it is certainly has a
different characteristics to Qualcomm Modem. XS is generally weaker with
signals, and we are not quite sure if it was the 4x4 MIMO or the Intel Modem.
XR doesn't seems to be as bad so a guess would be due to Apple's
implementation of 4x4 Antenna. While ALL phones had problems with 4x4 Antenna
in their first generation, that includes Samsung and Huawei, you generally
expect Apple, being a year late to the tech would have ironed out most of it.

But generally speaking, a Qualcomm Modem would still get better signal than
Intel. This is especially a problem in US where the Cell Tower Density is
lower as compared to Asia / EU counterpart.

There has also been 3 to 4 Modem Firmware revision since launch, and likely
more to come in iOS 12.2, let just hope ( pray ) Intel's next Modem 7660 is
actually better. And Apple could actually put a rounding error budget into
their Antenna Design, because as far as Flagship Smartphone is concerned,
iPhone has the worst one.

Or Qualcomm will relent and work with Apple again, but judging from the Court
testimony this seems highly unlikely.

~~~
izend
I've noticed my iPhone 8 (confirmed Intel modem) has a terrible time with
weaker signals compared to my wife's Samsung 6.

I am surprised there hasn't been more buzz about the degraded antenna
performance by the public.

~~~
xxpor
I think people don't switch between iPhones and Android phones enough to
notice.

I certainly noticed when I switched from my iPhone X to a Pixel 3 XL. I went
to known dead spots, and my Pixel 3 worked just fine. I had just chalked it up
to T-Mobile sucking but I guess it was really the phone.

------
mtgx
I assume Intel realized this "partnership" was not worth China stealing all of
its IP and designs only to come up with a competing product that 90% as good
and half the price a couple of years later?

If only more companies realized the same. Not that this means they won't have
to protect themselves against China's _relentless_ IP stealing.

[https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/30/tech/samsung-china-
tech-t...](https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/30/tech/samsung-china-tech-
theft/index.html)

~~~
ishikawa
also worth reading: [https://www.wired.com/story/ai-cold-war-china-could-doom-
us-...](https://www.wired.com/story/ai-cold-war-china-could-doom-us-all/)

~~~
Dahoon
Holy shit, that picture at the top is the most propaganda-brainwashed-picture
I have seen since looking at old cold war pictures. As if the US is in a good
vs. evil fight. Well it might be, but on which side?

~~~
Latteland
Well, the Chinese government is bad but the us is led by people who are
chaotic evil, increasing the chance for the us do immoral things - and it's
not like things such as supporting Saudi Arabia in Yemen started with our
current loser leader. The citizens of most countries would probably like to be
free of concern about the world ending or pointless wars. Unfortunately both
places have sizable groups of nationalistic-oriented people who are hugely
pumped up about saying "their country" is the world's greatest, exceptional,
etc, so bellicose comments have too much support.

While we are tearing apart our democracy in the us step by step, we'll
eventually get a different leader who is more interested in doing useful
things and less interested in a cult of personality and less interested in
doing any venal thing to get support for his base. Meanwhile, China is stuck
with a dear leader for life. The country grows ever more powerful, but also is
increasing in it's terrifying Orwellian oversight. I'm afraid that China will
show it's possible to watch everyone all the time and crush freedom and then
other western authoritarian leaders will follow suit.

~~~
karmicthreat
Lawful evil is still evil.

~~~
z2
I'd argue the US and China have more chaotic/lawful neutral elements, at least
with the former valuing nobody above themselves and breaking the laws when
convenient, and the latter's obsession with stability at the cost of freedom.
It would be hard to say either's political leaders take pleasure in doing and
spreading evil every waking moment. At least per the below anyway, surely
there are counterarguments too:
[http://easydamus.com/alignment.html#theninealignments](http://easydamus.com/alignment.html#theninealignments)

------
cowabungamann
Where can I, a technical person, learn about 5G? I'm interested in what makes
it better? What tradeoffs are being made? What are the implications of those
tradeoffs? etc

------
entity345
Incidently Unisoc has launched its 5G modem today:

[http://www.unisoc.com/unisoc-launches-5g-technology-
platform...](http://www.unisoc.com/unisoc-launches-5g-technology-platform-
makalu-and-its-first-5g-modem-ivy510)

~~~
ksec
So they manage to launch a 2G - 5G MultiMode Modem inline with other Industry
leaders ( Comparatively Speaking ) Like Intel and Qualcomm.

And Intel decide to end the partnership? Something doesn't sound right. Or did
they get IP from other players?

~~~
dis-sys
Unisoc bought Spreadtrum a few years ago and Spreadtrum has been in the modem
business since 2010 with its 3/4G modems doing ok in many medrange to low end
smartphones, e.g. Samsung J1, Samsung Z series.

~~~
ksec
Thx, didn't know Spreadtrum is now UniSoc. I was wondering when did Intel sign
an agreement with a company other than Spreadtrum. I should have looked it up
first.

Now all this makes much more sense. But they had really crappy Modem in the
past, as compared to MediaTek in the low end segment. I guess this 5G IP is
part of the coming XMM 8160.

------
40acres
5G is the new space race and sooner than later we're going to have a Sputnik
moment. Everything coming out of China needs to be taken with a grain of salt
but it definitely seems likely that they will have a head start in 5G
deployments, especially as Europeans seem resistant to US demands to boycott
Huawei.

~~~
jak92
no, 5g is hype. seriously, unless you want to live in a dystopian society
where everything is "connected" it's not really a big deal

~~~
nradov
Every previous "G" was a big deal in terms of opening up new applications and
business opportunities by significantly improving latency, bandwidth, and
power efficiency. Going from 4G to 5G will eventually have just as huge an
impact as going from 3G to 4G did, although rolling out the technology
worldwide will be a slow gradual process.

~~~
dralley
Will it though?

The frequencies are so easily blocked by _anything_ that you need transmitters
_everywhere_ and receivers _everywhere_ \- literally 5G phones will have to
have 3+ separate 5G antennaes in different locations to avoid the signal being
outright blocked by your hand.

5G devices will practically need line of sight to a transmitter.

~~~
casylum
There is 5G and there is 5G mmWave. They are two separate parts of "5G". There
are still advantages to sub 6GHz standard cell phone frequencies such as lower
latency and higher throughput.

The disadvantages you mention only apply to 5G mmWave.

