#Login Register
Technical Specifications
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average


02-05-2016, 12:26 PM #11
Yousif The guy people go to for help w/ IT/ICT

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:12/122 Joined:Jan 2016
(02-05-2016, 12:24 PM)Little Kitten Wrote:  
(01-25-2016, 06:55 PM)KingKode Wrote:  Grabbed this from the KS page so it will be readily available to the community.
  • Snapdragon 400
  • WIFI 802.11 b/g/n
  • Bluetooth 4.1 (BLE)
  • 512MB RAM
  • 4GB Flash (ePOP)
  • 1.35" Full Round Display
  • Gorilla Glass
  • AMOLED Screen
  • Accelerometer / Gyro
  • 360 x 360 Resolution
  • Power On / Off Button
  • 400 mAh Battery
  • Microphone
  • Vibration Motor
[Image: 6a238902a5a6bcc5a0e42f2133959272_origina...08e526fa45]

It might be a good idea to update these specs to the new update.

The processor isn't confirmed though



02-05-2016, 05:15 PM #12
Georgio New Member

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:0/5 Joined:Jan 2016
Hopefully the new processor will be a 64 bit arm cortex-a35 based SoC

02-05-2016, 09:08 PM #13
PippiMD Junior Member

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:2/28 Joined:Jan 2016
I know there are tradeoffs with everything, and I am pretty happy with the improvements noted in the update, but there is one thing I am unsure about and that is the reduction in the battery capacity for the core. I know this will make the watch a bit sleeker, but does anyone know what the difference in size will be, and what the difference in battery life would be? I would be willing to accept a little bulk for significantly longer battery life...

02-05-2016, 09:20 PM #14
Alessandro G. Developer & Designer

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:11/183 Joined:Jan 2016
(02-05-2016, 09:08 PM)PippiMD Wrote:  I know there are tradeoffs with everything, and I am pretty happy with the improvements noted in the update, but there is one thing I am unsure about and that is the reduction in the battery capacity for the core. I know this will make the watch a bit sleeker, but does anyone know what the difference in size will be, and what the difference in battery life would be? I would be willing to accept a little bulk for significantly longer battery life...
The 100mAh redutction in battery capacity should (that's what the team claims) be balanced out by the decrease power consumption of the new chipset, which is currently still -top secret-. It might seem an exaggerated claim, but it isn't that strange if you consider how much Qualcomm and other companies have been investing into R&D for ultra-low consumption processors. Time will, tell, but I'm confident they wouldn't have gone that far if they didn't believe they could do what they claim. The real power issue for me is the battery modules limited to one, but that might change in the future, without having to get a new Core.

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand / And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, [...]" (W. Blake, "Auguries of Innocence", 1-2)

02-05-2016, 11:32 PM #15
jateijeiro New Member

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:1/5 Joined:Jan 2016
I agree with PippiMD. I prefer longer battery life rather than core size reduction. Instead of reducing the 20% of battery (expecting that would be balanced by the 20% power consumption reduction), keep the same core size and extend the battery life this 20%.

02-06-2016, 12:21 AM #16
Little Kitten New Member

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:0/14 Joined:Jan 2016
in the text might add that there will be android 6.0 which also includes better battery savings. and a new processor also gives some savings i guess. we wont for sure on the proc till we know which one. if it says in the 400 serie.



Snapdragon 400 CPU
Up to 1.7 GHz dual-core CPU

Snapdragon 410
Up to 1.2 GHz quad-core CPU
32-bit and 64-bit capable

Snapdragon 412
Up to 1.4 GHz quad-core CPU
64-bit capable

Snapdragon 415
Up to 1.4 GHz octa-core CPU
64-bit

Snapdragon 430
Up to 1.2 GHz octa-core CPU
64-bit

02-07-2016, 02:18 PM #17
Alessandro G. Developer & Designer

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:11/183 Joined:Jan 2016
Well, the 400 series is Qualcomm's wearables (and lower end smartphones) oriented one, so it would make sense that their new processor would still belong to that series. IMHO, the only processors that would represent a real upgrade over the previously used 400 are the new-er 415 and the new-est 430. I really hope they'll manage to put the latter into BLOCKS. It is the latest processor of the series, it has the Adreno 505 GPU, can support any SIM (it supports the latest LTE standards) or camera (up to 21Mp!) module we might ever use, and it has the latest version of their Quick Charge technology, which should be 38%(!) faster than the one used on the 400 processor. The use of this processor would also justify their secrecy about it, as the 415 has already been implemented by a couple of manufacturers, so there would really be no need to keep it that secret. Well, let's hope for the best. I'd be ok with the 415 too, but I honestly wouldn't see any reason for keeping it a secret.
This post was last modified: 02-07-2016, 02:18 PM by Alessandro G..

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand / And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, [...]" (W. Blake, "Auguries of Innocence", 1-2)

02-07-2016, 03:15 PM #18
Yousif The guy people go to for help w/ IT/ICT

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:12/122 Joined:Jan 2016
(02-07-2016, 02:18 PM)Alessandro G. Wrote:  Well, the 400 series is Qualcomm's wearables (and lower end smartphones) oriented one, so it would make sense that their new processor would still belong to that series. IMHO, the only processors that would represent a real upgrade over the previously used 400 are the new-er 415 and the new-est 430. I really hope they'll manage to put the latter into BLOCKS. It is the latest processor of the series, it has the Adreno 505 GPU, can support any SIM (it supports the latest LTE standards) or camera (up to 21Mp!) module we might ever use, and it has the latest version of their Quick Charge technology, which should be 38%(!) faster than the one used on the 400 processor. The use of this processor would also justify their secrecy about it, as the 415 has already been implemented by a couple of manufacturers, so there would really be no need to keep it that secret. Well, let's hope for the best. I'd be ok with the 415 too, but I honestly wouldn't see any reason for keeping it a secret.

It won't be 415 or 430 http://postimg.org/image/mpoyzuvy1/



02-07-2016, 03:45 PM #19
Alessandro G. Developer & Designer

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:11/183 Joined:Jan 2016
(02-07-2016, 03:15 PM)Yousif Wrote:  It won't be 415 or 430 http://postimg.org/image/mpoyzuvy1/

I read KS comments too . But the 430 is Qualcomm processor of the 400 series for 2016, so unless the team is changing series (but as I told before, 400 is the series for wearables) I don't see which other processor they might be using. Unless Qualcomm provides them with the successor of the 430, as they usually reveal new processors in late Q3 - early Q4, when BLOCKS is supposed to start shipping. Well, let's wait and see what the team will come up with. Everything we might say is just pure speculation at the moment.
This post was last modified: 02-07-2016, 03:46 PM by Alessandro G..

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand / And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, [...]" (W. Blake, "Auguries of Innocence", 1-2)

02-07-2016, 04:33 PM #20
Yousif The guy people go to for help w/ IT/ICT

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:12/122 Joined:Jan 2016
(02-06-2016, 12:21 AM)Little Kitten Wrote:  in the text might add that there will be android 6.0 which also includes better battery savings. and a new processor also gives some savings i guess. we wont for sure on the proc till we know which one. if it says in the 400 serie.



Snapdragon 400 CPU
Up to 1.7 GHz dual-core CPU

Snapdragon 410
Up to 1.2 GHz quad-core CPU
32-bit and 64-bit capable

Snapdragon 412
Up to 1.4 GHz quad-core CPU
64-bit capable

Snapdragon 415
Up to 1.4 GHz octa-core CPU
64-bit

Snapdragon 430
Up to 1.2 GHz octa-core CPU
64-bit

Only the 400 is a wearable processor, the rest are mid-high smartphone SoCs








Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)