Trending December 2023 # Why Android 7.0 Won’T Officially Come To Snapdragon 800/801 Devices # Suggested January 2024 # Top 13 Popular

You are reading the article Why Android 7.0 Won’T Officially Come To Snapdragon 800/801 Devices updated in December 2023 on the website We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested January 2024 Why Android 7.0 Won’T Officially Come To Snapdragon 800/801 Devices

Snapdragon 821 is official: the chip that will power this fall’s flagships


Unfortunately, it looks like some popular devices will miss the party. For example, Sony’s announcement didn’t include the Xperia Z3, HTC’s announcement didn’t include the One M8, and Google isn’t planning to release Nougat for the Nexus 5. These three devices have two things in common. First, their age: they were all released in 2013/2014, making them at least two years old. Secondly, they all use the Snapdragon 800 or Snapdragon 801 processor.



From that it seems that Google is to blame. So what is the Google CTS? For OEMs to get Google’s seal of approval (and have access to things like the Play Store) each OEM needs to conform with the Android Compatibility Definition Document (CDD), which basically sets down the rules about the software and hardware requirements of a compatible Android device. Then the device needs to pass the Compatibility Test Suite, the CTS.

So, just to recap before we go on. LlabTooFeR says that Qualcomm won’t release the graphic drivers. Qualcomm says that the OEMs are calling the shots. While Sony, which had Android 7.0 running fine on the Snapdragon 801-based Z3, says that Google is to blame. Clear so far?

The devices cover a range of GPUs including Adreno 306, Adreno 430 and Mali-T860.

The devices have a broad performance range from the Helio P10 and the Snapdragon 410 right through to the Snapdragon 820.

Most of the devices have 64-bit processors.

The GPU coverage implies that it isn’t a GPU problem. Devices with the Adreno 306 will get Android 7.0 Nougat and from what I have been told by the Mali GPU group at ARM, Android 7.0 does not mandate the use of Vulkan. Open GL ES is still supported and used in parallel with Vulkan. As for ARM’s GPUs, Vulkan is supported by the Mali-T760 onwards, not just on high-end devices based on the Mali-T880 or Mali-G71. So the assertion that “Qualcomm will not release graphics drivers” is a bit of a red herring.

The assertion that Qualcomm will not release graphics drivers is a bit of a red herring.

Secondly, performance doesn’t seem to be an issue. Devices with the low-end Snapdragon 410 will get Nougat and so will devices with the MediaTek P1, as will high-end devices with high-end SoCs. Nothing here indicates a specific level of performance that the Snapdragon 801 can’t achieve. In fact, my own testing has shown that the Snapdragon 801 is faster than the Helio X10.

But, notice that most of the devices receiving an upgrade are 64-bit devices, or more specifically, ARMv8 devices. So what is it about these 64-bit devices that would mean that the Snapdragon 800/801 is disqualified, but the Snapdragon 805 (the 32-bit processor in the Nexus 6) isn’t? It isn’t the GPU. It isn’t performance. It isn’t any imaginary 4GB of RAM limitation. So what is it?

ARMv8 and the Advanced Encryption Standard

Here is my theory. Google is increasingly keen to mandate the use of storage encryption. For Android 6.0, the CDD stated that, “If the device implementation supports a secure lock screen… then the device MUST support full-disk encryption” and that “the full-disk encryption MUST be enabled by default at the time the user has completed the out-of-box setup experience.”

However, there were some exemptions which allowed older devices to run without storage encryption. The CDD also stipulated a performance level for this encryption “for device implementations supporting full-disk encryption and with Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) crypto performance above 50MiB/sec.”

Android 7.0 Nougat implements file-based encryption, meaning that individual files are encrypted rather than the whole file system. File-based encryption allows Android to use more fine-grained encryption policies and it also enables Direct Boot. At the time of writing this article the CDD for Android 7.0 isn’t available, but you can pretty much guarantee that there is an AES crypto performance level specified and that the CTS will test for it.

One of the extra bits of functionality that comes with ARMv8 is the addition of extra instructions for performing hardware encryption. This means that all ARMv8 SoCs like the Helio P10, the Snapdragon 410 and the Snapdragon 820 can use special hardware in the processor to encrypt data using AES, and that is much faster than using a software-based solution.

So the reasons “both technical and legal” that Sony mentioned could well be that the Snapdragon 800/801 couldn’t match the AES encryption speeds of the ARMv8 chips because it doesn’t have hardware encryption. It seems that the Snapdragon 805 does have the right hardware needed, something Qualcomm added on specifically for that chip. The benefits listed for the Snapdragon 805 include: “full disk encryption and cryptographic functions for Android applications”. This could be why the Nexus 6 is getting Android 7, but other 32-bit Snapdragon based devices don’t seem to be.

The bottom line is this: there is no technical reason why the Snapdragon 800/801 can’t run Nougat. Sony proved that and both ARM and Qualcomm are essentially saying the same thing. But because of Google’s requirement for high speed encryption the Snapdragon 800/801 can’t pass the CTS and don’t comply with the CDD. At least, that is the theory anyway.

The bottom line is this: there is no technical reason why the Snapdragon 800/801 can’t run Nougat. The lack of Android 7.0 is more likely due to Google’s requirement for high speed encryption.


You're reading Why Android 7.0 Won’T Officially Come To Snapdragon 800/801 Devices

I Hate Android: Why? – By A Hardcore Android Lover!

Like millions of people around the world, I am an Android fanboy. Recently I though about sharing some of my  aspects which I don’t like about Android.  Eventhough being Android has gotten better over the years but there are still many things I dont like about it. To put it bluntly, I hate Android, at least some of its features. I have used Linux for a few years since Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon and fell in love with the open source movement. Ive come to realize that all the hype about being open and portraying Apple and RIM as the evil closed platform was all a deception. . Theres a list(I love lists). Lets go through them. I hate some of the UI. Customization is nice but it allows for more things to break. These include themes and design. At first, the UI was cool and beautiful. I felt like I had a computer in my hands, literally. Icons were nice to touch and scrolling was smooth(at first). After using it for a while, I started to experience the pains of using the touch screen. Mistypes, and mistaps were frequent. The Android experience varied depending on manufacturer. All the different flavors of Android pushed by their respective hardware developers all look different. OneUI, TouchWiz, and MotoBlur are all different. OneUI is probably the best(IMO) out of all these. TouchWiz makes me feel like Im using an iPhone and MotoBlur is a mess with all their social networking widgets. These skins load on top of Android making it slower than its vanilla stock core. When I get my phone, I hate all the bloatware that comes with it. All carriers seem to do it. They push Vcast, SprintTV and other bloatware that I dont want. The Chinese manufacturers Xiaomi,Oppo,Vivo are the notorious ones feeding bloatware just to compnsate for the cheap price they offer in some countries. Not only that, but I hate that I cant delete them. I hate knowing that they are on my phone and the only way for me to get rid of them is by rooting my phone. Why do I have to jump through hoops just to get rid of this crapware? Im not scared of rooting my phone. In fact, Ive done so and install a few custom ROMs but there is always a risk of bricking your phone and leaving it useless. Average users dont want to risk the warranty by rooting their phone. Not only are there crapware on the phone, but there is/was malware on the Market. I hate Andoid memory management, being an old Symbian OS user.Symbian was the most efficient Mobile Os in memory management, followed by iOS. My old Nokia 808 Pureview had just 512MB RAM which was handling the Mammoth Camera, the 41MP beast with Xenon flash. I know that comparing a Symbian Phone with very limited apps and strict developer requirements with Android which has an ocean of apps and simpler developer standards is not fair. But are these crazy RAM of 12GB,16GB etc etc in many high end Android Phones really necessary? Or are they worth the performance they offer compared to iOs? Expanding from the 1st and the 3rd reasons, I hate Androids software fragmentation. I hate that Motorola’s flavor is different from Samsung’s. I hate that the buttons are different in all manufacturer, and even sometimes, within the same manufacturers. And I hate that I cant install certain apps because I my phone doesnt have the latest and greatest version of Android. Notoriously all my Samsung Phones from Galaxy S3 to Galaxy S9 Plus started showing sluggishness after 1 year of usage. The problem being whenever I update an app, the hardware is not able to cope with newest software. Android isВ recognized as the open platform and that unadulterated Android experience does not come standard. It only comes standard on Googles Nexus phones  and Selected flagship phones from other manufacturers. But most people dont own these flagship devices. Most people get their Droids from their carriers. Not only are these phones locked down with carrier bloatware but they are also locked down from performing specific tasks. People have gotten around this issue by a process called rooting. This grants the user superuser status allowing him to do anything he wishes with the phone. The Nexus phones are relatively easy to root but carrier phones are harder. Android phones are great if you want the phone to be your hobby, if you dont mind tinkering with the device, rooting it, or if youre just a techno buff.  

Leveraging Sql Server 7.0 Stored Procedures

By Sanjiv Purba


Last week I introduced you to stored procedures, database objects that the American National Standards Institute defines as part of the Transact-SQL extension. If you missed part one of this article, I suggest reading it over before you move forward. If you’re already familiar with stored procedures and get busy using them, let’s get started!

Creating and Dropping Stored Procedures

Stored procedures are database objects that include the name of the stored procedure, input parameters, local variables, control-of-flow statements, DML statements, DDL statements, some DCL statements, global variables and a return statement. Stored procedures are created with the CREATE PROCedure statement. A stored procedure must be dropped with the DROP PROCedure statement before it is re-created.

The syntax to create a stored procedure is as follows:

USE database_name CREATE PROCedure [owner.] name [@input_parm_list dtype =default OUTput] [options] AS Transact SQL Statements GO

The syntax to remove a stored procedure from a database is as follows:

USE database_name DROP PROCEDURE proc_name GO

Executing Stored Procedures

Stored procedures can be executed using the following syntax:

EXECute proc_name [optional_parameter_list]

This command can be executed at the SQL Server command prompt, inside the Query Analyzer, from inside another stored procedure, or from a client.

User-Defined Variables

Variables are defined in stored procedures using a DECLARE statement, and a mneumonic variable name that is prefaced with ‘@’. Some examples of this are as follows:

DECLARE @last_user_name char(30), @first_user_name char(30), @years_of_experience int, @promotion_date datetime

Global Variables

Global variables can also be inspected inside stored procedures, for example, with the SELECT or PRINT statements. Commonly used global variables are @@VERSION, @@CONNECTIONS, @@ERROR, @@FETCH_STATUS, @@IDENTITY, @@NESTLEVEL, @@ROWCOUNT, @@SERVERNAME, @@TOTAL_ERRORS, and @@TRANCOUNT.

Control-of-Flow Language

The control-of-flow extensions that are available in SQL Server to build sophisticated stored procedures include the following statements: chúng tôi IF..ELSE, IF EXISTS, CASE chúng tôi WAITFOR, GOTO LABEL [label:], COMPUTE, WHILE, CONTINUE, BREAK, and RETURN. These are described in more detail in this section.

chúng tôi

This command block is used to surround multiple Transact-SQL statements in stored procedures so that they are executed as a single statement. The syntax for this command is as follows:

BEGIN Statements Statements Statements END


The chúng tôi command block supported in the Control-of-flow dialect is the classical third-generation if-else construct. When the condition belonging to the IF evaluates to true, the statement immediately following the IF statement is executed and the statement belonging to the ELSE is skipped. If the condition belonging to the IF is false, then the statement corresponding to the ELSE is executed. chúng tôi constructs can also be nested. The syntax for this command block is as follows:

IF Condition Statements ELSE IF Condition Statements ELSE IF condition Statements ELSE Statements


The IF EXISTS test is used to determine if a specific object exists within a database. The statement can be used to inspect the sysobjects sytem table that contains a row for every object in the database. An example for doing this is as follows:

IF EXISTS (select name from sysobjects where name = 'value_of_name' AND type = 'INITIAL') drop table table_name go

chúng tôi

In this statement, a condition is evaluated at the start of the command block and a branch that matches the condition is then executed. Statements belonging to other conditions are skipped. Control is passed to the statement immediately following the chúng tôi block after the statement is executed. The syntax for this command is as follows:

CASE condition WHEN condition THEN statements WHEN condition THEN statements WHEN condition THEN statements ELSE statements END

GOTO LABEL [label:]

The first component of this construct consists of the GOTO LABEL code that forces an unconditional branch to the LABEL. The second component of this construct is a label: that marks a spot somewhere in the same stored procedure batch. Use of a GOTO is always controversial as a programming technique. It should be used consistently and clearly to avoid countless or untraceable branches. The syntax for this command is as follows:

GOTO label_name label_name:


The WAITFOR statement pauses active processing of the batch until a specific statement is true. This command is generally used in conjunction with a timer that stops the processing for a specified time increment before continuing. The syntax for this command is as follows:


The COMPUTE statement is used to calculate results and save them in a declared variable. The following example demonstrates use of the COMPUTE statement:

COMPUTE salary = base + bonus


The WHILE statement is used to execute a set of statements until a condition is met. The condition can be a compound statement that combines multiple conditions using AND and OR. The syntax for this command is as follows:

WHILE condition BEGIN Statements END


The CONTINUE statement is used to pass control to the start of a WHILE statement where the condition is evaluated again. The syntax for this command is the word itself:


BREAK The BREAK statement is used to immediately and unconditionally exit a WHILE statement block. Control is passed to the statement immediately following the WHILE block. The syntax for this command is the word itself:



The RETURN statement is used to send a status back to the calling program and exit from the current program (e.g. RETURN 0).


The Raiserror statement generates an error message from a stored procedure. An example of this is as follows:

raiserror 60200 'testing raiserror', 3 select @@error


sp_addmessage 60200, 11, 'this is a message' raiserror (60200, 11, 1)



Stored procedures have been critical to the growing popularity of SQL Server since 1987. Despite the availability of other techniques, stored procedures continue to be popular in application architecture due to their power, performance boosts, security augmentation, and support for n-tier architecture. Stored procedures support sophisticated language constructs including a rich control-of-flow language, DDL statements, DML statements, DCL statements, global variables, and functions.

About the author:

Sanjiv Purba is a Senior Manager with Deloitte Consulting. He is the author of five books published by John Wiley, the most recent of which is Building Microsoft SQL Server 7 Applications with COM.

Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 Review: A Low

The Galaxy Tab 2, in contrast, runs Android 4.0. That means it can handle standard Android phone and tablet apps in the Google Play store. It also offers features that neither the Kindle Fire nor the Nook Tablet does, such as an infrared port and a rear-facing camera. Samsung sacrificed built-in storage capacity (just 8GB, same as the other two value tablets and half of the 16GB provided on the Tab 7.0 Plus) to achieve the Tab 2’s low price, but that doesn’t detract from the Tab 2’s widespread appeal.

Galaxy Tab 2: Design and Performance

The Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 is an evolutionary step over the extremely similar Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus. Both models weigh 0.76 pound, and they feature a similar design and build quality, plus similar dimensions. Both measure 4.8 by 7.6 inches, but the Tab 2 is slightly thicker at 0.41 inch, versus the 7.0 Plus’s 0.39 inch. The balance and weight are such that this tablet isn’t onerous to hold one-handed, though I’d like to see the weight become lighter still.

Only subtle tweaks distinguish the two. For example, the Tab 2’s plastic bezel curves around to the front of the screen, giving the front face of the tablet a pleasing look. The Tab 2 also has a larger infrared port, located at the top edge of the tablet when you’re holding the slate in landscape mode; the port now wraps around the back of the device, presumably to improve communications between the tablet and your entertainment components. The power button and volume rocker, positioned along that same edge, have a more rounded, easier-to-press shape. The MicroSD Card slot door is slightly (by millimeters) wider, too, and just a bit easier to open, but you’ll still need to do so using a fingernail. You can add up to 32GB of storage via MicroSD, a big benefit over the Kindle Fire, which lacks any expansion slot for local storage.

The back of the Tab 2’s case is a light, “titanium”-hued plastic, as opposed to the darker brushed gray of the earlier model. And although the rear camera is the same at 3 megapixels, the Tab 2 lacks the flash found on the 7.0 Plus.

The flash is just one thing that the Tab 2 sacrificed to achieve its low price. Inside, the Tab 2 has a 1GHz dual-core processor, down from the Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus’s 1.2GHz dual-core processor. The processor change might account for why, in PCWorld Labs tests, the Tab 2 took 14 seconds longer to boot up than the Tab 7.0 Plus did; it also turned in a noticeably slower frame rate on the two GL Benchmark tests we run.

Samsung’s Plane to Line Switching (PLS) display is 1024 by 600 pixels, the same as on the Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus before it. These days, this display is merely average, as several 7-inch tablets with 1200-by-800-pixel resolution are now available. I noticed that colors were slightly off on the Tab 2 compared with how they appeared on the older 7.0 Plus model; detail in images I viewed in the native Google Gallery app seemed slightly worse, too, although the tablets still scored closely on our subjective tests of the displays. I’m currently investigating this issue. Some of the differences may be attributable to the display itself, or they may have some foundation in how Google has changed Android’s image handling between Android 3.2 (which shipped on the Tab 7.0 Plus) and Android 4.0.3 (which ships on the Galaxy Tab 2).

As a bonus over its Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet competition, the Galaxy Tab 2 adds Bluetooth and GPS, too. Overall, the Tab 2 is ahead of the Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet when it comes to features.

Galaxy Tab 2: Software

In addition to the Samsung-branded apps, the Galaxy Tab 2 comes with a handful of useful Android apps preinstalled. Among them are Dropbox (with a year of 50GB Dropbox service included), the Peel Smart Remote app for use with the infrared port, and Polaris Office. The Peel app is a mixed bag, though: While it allows you to discover content visually, configuring the settings can be frustrating, and browsability could be improved. Ultimately, Samsung would do far better to write its own, more basic remote-control app, as Sony has done on its Tablet S.

If you own a Samsung Wi-Fi camera or HDTV, you may be able to benefit from some additional capabilities of the Tab 2 that tie in to Samsung’s product stable. Remote Viewfinder, which works with Samsung’s Wi-Fi cameras, could have some interesting applications for group photos, for example; with this capability, you can use Wi-Fi Direct to form a connection between the tablet and the camera, and together with an app on the tablet, you can then use the tablet to control the viewfinder, shutter, zoom, and flash of the camera. Meanwhile, Smart View lets you mirror content from your TV on the tablet, but this function works only with Samsung 7000 series LED HDTVs, circa 2011 and later.

Bottom Line

Even though the Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 has some nifty features like the infrared port and Wi-Fi Direct, it is neither a premium tablet nor a pure budget tablet. The big question is whether full Android compatibility and those extras are worth paying $50–or 25 percent–more than what you’d pay for an Amazon Kindle Fire or a Barnes & Noble Nook Tablet. The answer: A resounding yes, but with a catch.

Apple @ Work: Why Wi

Apple @ Work is brought to you by Kolide, the device trust solution that ensures that if a device isn’t secure, it can’t access your cloud apps.  If you have Okta, Kolide can help you get your fleet to 100% compliance.  They’re Zero Trust for Okta. Learn more or request a demo today.

For IT professionals, supporting remote workers can be a difficult task when it comes to Wi-Fi connectivity. In many cases, employees may run into Wi-Fi issues that are nearly impossible for IT professionals to diagnose and resolve. This is because IT professionals don’t have insight into the radio frequency (RF) environment of the employee’s home, making it difficult to determine the source of the problem. Since Wi-Fi is a shared medium, there are plenty of other issues that can crop up for end users.

One example of this is when an employee’s Wi-Fi connection is slow or drops frequently. This could be due to interference from other devices in the home, such as a microwave or a smart home device that operates on the same frequency as the Wi-Fi network. It could also be from overlap with other Wi-Fi signals in the area – especially in a multi-dwelling environment. Without access to the employee’s home environment, IT professionals may have a hard time pinpointing the exact cause of the problem and finding a solution.

Another example is when an employee’s Wi-Fi network is not providing enough coverage throughout their home. This could be due to a weak Wi-Fi signal or a lack of access points in the home. IT professionals may not be able to determine the exact cause of the problem without visiting the employee’s home or having access to information about the layout of the home and the design of the Wi-Fi network. These challenges demonstrate the need for a solution that provides a reliable Wi-Fi connection for remote workers that is free of interference.

How Wi-Fi 6E and the latest Apple Devices Solve the Problem

IT professionals can now support remote workers with confidence, knowing that their Wi-Fi networks will provide the speed and reliability needed for work-related tasks. By making Wi-Fi 6E routers the standard for remote employees along with devices that support Wi-Fi 6E, IT professionals can ensure that their remote workers have the best possible home Wi-Fi experience.

Wi-Fi 6E and the latest MacBook Pros and Mac minis provide a solution to the challenges faced by remote workers and IT professionals. With improved performance and reduced interference, remote workers can now work from home with confidence, knowing that their Wi-Fi networks will provide the speed and reliability they need to be productive. Wi-Fi 6E is a brand new day for Wi-Fi, and in my 15 years of IT experience, it’s the biggest upgrade to Wi-Fi since it originally launched.

What Apple devices support Wi-Fi 6E?

To access a Wi-Fi 6E network, you’ll need one of the following Apple devices:

To set up a Wi-Fi 6E network, you’ll need a Wi-Fi router like the eero Pro 6E or a similar product that supports Wi-Fi 6E and has both 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands enabled. For optimal performance, it’s recommended to use a single network name (SSID) across all bands, including the 6GHz band.

For the best experience with Apple devices, your Wi-Fi router should have a single network name that covers all wireless bands: 2.4GHz, 5GHz, and the 6GHz band for Wi-Fi 6E. This ensures that the network provides seamless and consistent performance.

Apple @ Work is brought to you by Kolide, the device trust solution that ensures that if a device isn’t secure, it can’t access your cloud apps.  If you have Okta, Kolide can help you get your fleet to 100% compliance.  They’re Zero Trust for Okta. Learn more or request a demo today.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Why You Should Care About Lossless Bluetooth Audio (And Why You Shouldn’T)

Lily Katz / Android Authority

With the introduction of Qualcomm’s aptX Lossless technology, Bluetooth headphone customers will finally join their wired audiophile brethren with the option to listen to lossless quality audio. The promise, as always, is superior sound. But whether this is really a game-changer for your future listening habits depends on who you ask.

On the one hand, existing wireless products are some of the best-sounding headphones on the market, packing in powerful noise canceling, virtual assistants, and customization options you’ll seldom find in the wired space. Plus, there are solid-sounding Bluetooth codecs already on the market, including LDAC and aptX HD. However, audio purists will tell you there’s no substitute for the sound quality of lossless audio. It’s a debate that’s raged since the development of the MP3, but who should you believe, and is lossless Bluetooth audio really that important?

Bluetooth’s limitations regarding lossless audio

Robert Triggs / Android Authority

Why does Bluetooth use lossy, rather than lossless, compression to begin with? The problem is that Bluetooth’s data rate is too low for lossless Bluetooth audio.

Even though Bluetooth’s Enhanced Data Rate (EDR) can hit above 2Mbps, sustaining that rate for real-time data transfer is not feasible. In reality, 1Mbps, or often well below, is a more realistic and sustainable maximum transfer rate. That’s not enough for 1.4Mbps CD, let alone 4.6Mbps Hi-Res audio. This limited speed is due to radio and object interference, packet overhead and loss, and oftentimes, less than optimal antenna placements.

As a result, Bluetooth audio codecs have historically targeted lower, more sustainable bit rates using lossy compression. Another way to think of this is prioritizing playback that’s free from skips and dropouts at the expense of some audio fidelity.

Bluetooth audio is historically a trade-off between sound and connection quality.

Compounding the problem is the fact that the original low-bit-rate SBC codec was designed for voice compression rather than high-fidelity music. Despite subsequent revisions, third parties have stepped in to fill the void with codecs specifically designed to transmit music over Bluetooth. But AAC, aptX, and the LC3 still target lower, sustainable bit rates around 300kbps and below. Qualcomm’s aptX HD pushes the envelope with high-end sound, but it’s still capped at 576kbps.

Sony’s LDAC was the first codec to attempt to tackle the quality and scalability problem head-on with its 330, 660, and 990kbps quality options. The codec also claims Hi-Res support and promises “same as CD quality” playback (note, not bit-perfect playback). After testing, we found the 990kbps mode is indeed virtually transparent for CD-quality audio. However, there are still some small elements of lossy encoding, and more importantly, some devices struggle to offer a glitch-free playback experience at this bit rate. LDAC can achieve near-lossless CD playback, but you’ll often find quality called back to 660kbps, although we’d argue that’s still good enough for all but the pickiest listeners.

LDAC can already achieve near-lossless CD playback, but sustained connectivity can be a problem.

aptX Adaptive is Qualcomm’s alternative approach to solving the connection dropout problem. This codec dynamically scales its bit rate based on the radio environment, reducing quality in congested areas to avoid glitches. Before aptX Lossless, aptX Adaptive still targeted a more conservative 420kbps but will now scale up to greater than 1Mbps for lossless CD-quality audio. Qualcomm’s aptX Lossless is the first codec to claim fully lossless Bluetooth audio, bit-exact playback of CD-quality files, and it also appears to have the hardware setup to sustain this high data rate. For now, lossless Hi-Res (24-bit, 96kHz) tracks remain out of reach for all Bluetooth codecs currently on the market.

Quick reference bit rates:

SBC — 200 to 328kbps

AAC — 128 to 256kbps

LC3 — 160 to 345kbps

LDAC — 300kbps, 660kbps, 990kbps

LHDC-V — 1.2Mbps

Samsung Seamless Codec — 88 to 512kbps

aptX — 352kbps

aptX HD — 576kbps

aptX Adaptive — 279 to 420kbps

aptX Lossless is a hardware and software solution to Bluetooth’s bit rate problem.

In addition, aptX Lossless falls under the aptX Adaptive tool suite, meaning devices will benefit from Qualcomm’s other codec features too. For example, audio bit rate scales from lossless right down to 140kbps without interruption if you wander into an area with high radio interference, so there are no glitches or dropouts. aptX Adaptive also supports 24-bit 96kHz playback, albeit with lossy compression, and a dynamic low latency mode for gamers and voice calls.

There are a few caveats, though. For starters, existing aptX Adaptive products won’t automatically receive Lossless support — at least not without a firmware update. You’ll also need Snapdragon Sound-certified devices on both the transceiver and receiver end to benefit from lossless audio. So it will take a while for devices to permeate the market with a sizable portfolio. Unfortunately, not all Snapdragon Sound devices will necessarily support aptX Lossless, so knowing exactly what you’re getting might not be as crystal clear as it should be.

Customers with a lossless music collection stand to benefit from CD-quality Bluetooth audio.

With lossless CD quality, radio-aware scaling, low latency gaming and voice, and Hi-Res support, aptX Lossless is the industry’s most robust Bluetooth audio option. However, there’s still likely to be some debate about whether Qualcomm’s standard offers a perceivable improvement to audio quality and which Bluetooth audio codec is the best pick for consumers with a Hi-Res library. Plus, whether the proprietary nature of Qualcomm’s technology will limit consumer adoption versus more universal support for SBC and the upcoming LC3 codec.

Ultimately, the best Bluetooth codec is the one supported by both your headphones and smartphone or music player. aptX Lossless has some rather steep requirements on the hardware side compared to existing standards. Some headphone companies are investing in this now, like Nura with the True Pro Wireless earbuds. What do you think?


Yes, aptX Lossless can send lossless Bluetooth audio, but this requires a Snapdragon Sound device like the ASUS Zenfone 9 and compatible earbuds.

To receive lossless audio over Bluetooth, you’ll need a Bluetooth 5.3 device with a modern Snapdragon processor and earbuds with the Snapdragon S3 or S5 chips.

Update the detailed information about Why Android 7.0 Won’T Officially Come To Snapdragon 800/801 Devices on the website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!