Asset or Albatross: Will Qualcomm’s mobile supremacy slow down its PC drive?

The past few months have been quite a happening time for Qualcomm. The most famous chip manufacturer in the world, this side of Intel and Lay’s, has been making headlines in tech circles, this time in the PC processor space rather than its habitual mobile phone zone.

Qualcomm is pretty much the boss when it comes to perceptions of quality and performance of mobile processors, so much so that there was outrage in India when Samsung decided to release the Galaxy S24 and S24 Plus in India with Exynos processors rather than Snapdragon chips as in other markets. Vivo was quizzed as to why it went with Dimensity chips instead of “real” flagship chips for its X100 Pro series. It might have had its stutters from time to time, and its rival MediaTek might have a larger market share, but by and large, Qualcomm’s Snapdragon series enjoys the sort of equity in the mobile phone and tablet space that Intel enjoys (or at least once enjoyed, depending on whom you speak to).

This logic should make it easier for Qualcomm to move “a step up” into the PC processor space. After all, if you like a certain brand’s processor on your smartphone and/or tablet, you surely would like to have it on your notebook or desktop, too, right? Shouldn’t the brand’s terrific track record in the mobile phone zone be the X-factor in the brand’s X series of PC chips?

If only it were that simple. In fact, Qualcomm’s mobile phone mastery milestones could well turn into millstones around its PC neck if not handled and leveraged carefully.

Those who fell into the PC-smartphone chip divide: Intel, Nvidia, and Moto…

If that sounds illogical, then do consider the fact that brands have found it very difficult to cross the tech Rubicon that flows between smartphone processors and their PC counterparts. Perhaps the most telling example of this was when Intel, which enjoyed something close to a monopoly in the PC space, tried to get into the mobile phone zone in 2012. The brand had been making chips for mobile phones in the past, but the Xolo 900 in 2012 was the first time it tried to transfer the “Intel Inside” equity from computers to smartphones.

The years that followed saw the chip behemoth try to make a space for itself in the smartphone market and even be a part of some very highly acclaimed devices, including the Asus ZenFone range, but in spite of many positive reviews and impressive benchmark scores, and even playing the ultimate “flagship performance at a much lower price” card, Intel had to largely exit the mobile phone market within five years. Not too many know that this was not Intel’s first attempt at conquering the mobile phone zone – in 2006, it ended up selling its communications unit, which was “specifically of our handheld business, making cellular and application processors” to the Marvell Technology Group for USD 600 million.

Intel is not the only processor brand that has tried to make a presence for itself in both mobile and PC markets. Graphics card wizard NVIDIA had tried very hard to get into the mobile phone market with its Tegra series and even tied up with Microsoft to launch the chip on its high-profile Kin smartphones in 2008. Although the Kin failed, the Tegra appeared on a number of high-profile devices, such as HTC, Google, LG, and Asus.

Still, again, in spite of garnering very positive reviews and turning in good performances, it, too, has quietly stepped away from the smartphone game and is now mostly identified as being the chip on the Nintendo Switch console. While it was not known for its mobile phone processors, Motorola was a brand more known for mobility than processors when it launched the 6800 (1974) and 68000 (1984) chips that many believe paved the way for the PC revolution of the eighties and even made Apple a force to reckon with – the much-hyped Macintosh actually ran on a Motorola processor. However, Moto had to stop saying hello to the PC world after a while.

So clearly, the path from mobile phone to PC might be paved with good intentions but is also populated by perils. And perhaps the biggest of these are public perception and the presence of well-entrenched rivals. While reviewers and analysts might be impressed by Qualcomm’s PC processors’ performance and benchmark scores, swaying consumers who have associated “Intel Inside” with processor quality is going to be a different matter altogether. “Look, it is sometimes difficult to make people buy AMD processor notebooks ahead of Intel ones, no matter how many reviews and benchmarks or even demos we show,” a salesperson at Croma, one of India’s leading electronic goods retailers, told me. “Asking them to try a notebook with a Qualcomm processor would be an additional task.”

The “PC is more powerful” perception

It is also interesting to observe that while most people are comfortable carrying out PC-like tasks such as web browsing and even some reasonably high-end gaming on their smartphones, they generally perceive even a mid-segment notebook to be more powerful than a premium, high-end smartphone. If we had a Rupee every time we hear people complain, “But I can get a laptop for that much,” when hearing the price of a premium smartphone, we would have made a fair deal of money. Indeed, a salesperson at an Imagine Apple retailer in Delhi said that most of their consumers thought that a MacBook Air running an M1 processor was more powerful than an iPad Pro running the much more powerful M2 chip!

It might make reviewers wince, but the simple fact on the street is that a computer is seen as being way more powerful than a smartphone – perhaps because of its larger size, or as one salesperson wearily put it, “A computer simply SOUNDS more complex, and powerful than a phone. It is the legacy of all those films and comics that always showed the computer as something that was incredibly powerful. Have you ever seen a villain using a super phone to destroy the world? No, it was always a computer!”

It is this perception that can make Qualcomm’s biggest asset – its mobile phone expertise – seem like a liability in the PC business. Yes, Qualcomm is seen as one of the benchmarks in the mobile phone business, but PCs are seen as being more powerful, so a part of the public might doubt the brand’s ability to move up the power ladder. A huge example of this is seen in Chromebooks, where a lot of people prefer devices running on old and sluggish Intel chips rather than newer and faster ones from MediaTek. Intel itself found its Atom range of processors being tagged as being “inferior” because it used them mainly in netbooks, smartphones, and tablets. In all these cases, public perception often overrules product performance.

Also See: Snapdragon X Elite vs X Plus: Which Processor is Right for You?

Convincing a settled industry to think differently (without being Apple)

The presence of well-entrenched competitors like Intel and AMD for years also means that Qualcomm will have to reckon with manufacturers who are already accustomed to certain procedures and processes, whether in terms of manufacturing or marketing. It was this that played a big role in Intel’s withdrawal from the mobile phone space, as per one internal source, as brands refused to change set procedures to accommodate a new player unless they paid a massive premium to do so. Even managing something as basic as a software update proved challenging for Intel. The fact that the number of phones running Intel chips was relatively limited made things even more difficult. That is a challenge that Qualcomm is likely to face as well – manufacturers, as a rule, tend to give greater importance to devices associated with larger volumes, and newcomers seldom get big numbers fast. In fact, some say that Microsoft’s inability to optimize its hardware and software with the Tegra and its absence of a good update system played a big role in the demise of the Kin.

In spite of all this, Qualcomm has a very good chance of rattling a few PC processor cages. It has the resources – intellectual, marketing, and financial – to go toe to toe with the best. For all we know, the brand might be able to forge a totally different identity for the computers powered by the X range (mind you, comparing them to Intel chips does not help) or might be able to work out a whole new ecosystem that enables seamless transitions between smartphones and notebooks on Qualcomm chips – though again, Qualcomm chips seem to work decently with Intel machines too (as Samsung shows through Dex!). Indeed, that may present its own complications, as smartphone manufacturers insist that Qualcomm make its chips equally synergistic with other processors (which initially, at least, would be on more computers) as with its own. Google has been discovering that, having to extend its initial Pixel-only features to other devices too!

Qualcomm has a PC Everest to climb, and it is at Base Camp. And its reputation as a mobile phone supremo might give it resources and visibility. Still, it could also end up being less of an asset and more of an albatross in the PC space, thanks to the “computers are more powerful” perception that prevails in many parts.

That does not mean Qualcomm will fail – the Ancient Mariner did get back to shore. And is now immortal. There is space in the PC market for a new chip. But Qualcomm’s challenge lies not just in beating or matching the likes of Intel but in breaking past the “mobile phones are less powerful than computers” mindset in many parts of the public mind.

To paraphrase Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke, “What we have got here…is a need to communicate.” Qualcomm has the chips, the benchmarks, the expertise, and the legacy…now it needs to get its messaging right to get the brands as well as consumers to chip in for its PC voyage. It could be a titanic player. Or a Titanic one.

Watch this space for more X-related news and analysis.