Arm v10 licensing fees: what reported estimates mean

Notebookcheck reported on October 21, 2026, that figures discussed in closing arguments on October 20 put proposed Arm v10 royalties at 12.8%–29.5% of a $220 Snapdragon reference-chip price. The percentages are estimates tied to that example, not an agreed rate. Notebookcheck said the underlying fee models remained confidential.

What the reported percentages compare

The reported range measures proposed Arm v10 royalties as a share of a $220 reference price for a Snapdragon flagship chip. It does not describe a universal chip price. On the same $220 basis, the current-license comparison is about 0.85%.

The v10 figures are far above the current-license comparison, but the range does not specify a settled charge for each chip. It reflects estimates reported from courtroom figures, while the underlying fee models remained confidential.

How the existing license and hypothetical fees fit in

Qualcomm’s reported 2013 Architecture License Agreement (ALA) caps royalties at $1.88 per chip for processors with at least five CPU cores and runs through 2033. The reported 0.85% comparison divides that cap by the $220 reference price. A separate calculation uses the ALA’s $150 price ceiling: $1.88 against that denominator is about 1.25%.

Those percentages use different price bases. The 0.85% figure compares the cap with the $220 reference chip; the 1.25% figure compares it with the $150 calculation ceiling. Notebookcheck also described an eight-core Snapdragon example at about $0.23 per core, or $1.875 per chip.

The larger per-chip v10 figures are hypothetical calculations using reported multipliers on the $1.88 cap. A 15× multiplier yields $28.20 per chip for 2027–2033; a 34.5× multiplier yields $64.86 for 2034–2040. These calculations illustrate the reported assumptions, not disclosed v10 charges.

Arm argued that the 2013 terms were outdated and questioned whether a cap designed around smaller phone chips should also apply to a 288-core data-center processor. The parties’ disagreement over that cap is part of the licensing dispute. Notebookcheck also reported that Qualcomm offered $250 million upfront in late 2024 to secure v10 terms and settle the litigation, and that Arm rejected the offer.

The jury’s $2 award came from separate claims

Pronetic reported that a jury returned a partial verdict on October 13, 2026, awarding Qualcomm $1 in nominal damages on each of two claims: one contract claim and interference with Qualcomm’s relationship with Meta. The jury found for Arm on five other contract claims.

That jury verdict did not set Arm v10 royalty rates or grant a five-year royalty suspension. A separate bench proceeding before U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika addressed whether Arm negotiated in good faith over a v10 license. Qualcomm’s request to suspend royalty payments for up to five years was another issue in the wider case; NeoTeo covered that request when the Delaware trial opened.