Related
How believable do this this article is?
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/samsung-galaxy-s3-complete-guide-50006020/
Need to get close to the facts on the new Samsung Galaxy S3? Here's what we think we know:
4.6-inch Super AMOLED Plus screen at 1,280x720-pixel resolution
1.8GHz chip with 2GB RAM for zippy multitasking and games
Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich with a refreshed TouchWiz skin
Camera-quality 12-megapixel photos
Styled like the Galaxy Nexus
And here's what we're hoping for:
A flexible OLED screen on a jaw-dropping curved chassis
TouchWiz mini apps that put social networking front and centre
Ultra-high ISO photography so we don't even need to use the sickly built-in LED flash
About as real currently as Father Christmas tho isn't it?
Reads more like a geeks favourite spec. than a real phone...
Neville.Holland said:
Reads more like a geeks favourite spec. than a real phone...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
barring the processor, the rest doesn't seem to unreasonable!
I found one minor aspect that could explain, why this thread was opened in the "Galaxy Nexus General" forum:
Styled like the Galaxy Nexus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously, what's that got to do with the Galaxy Nexus?
Well they would be really stupid to go for a 1.8 dual core instead of a Quad core, they are already building the A6 so it's not hard to imagine an Exynos quad core to come out of them. Also i really hope it has the specs listed i think i might pick up the SII instead of the nexus...
gokpog said:
I found one minor aspect that could explain, why this thread was opened in the "Galaxy Nexus General" forum:
Seriously, what's that got to do with the Galaxy Nexus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. there is no sgs3 thread ;-)
2. more than likely that some of the nexus owners will upgrade and may find this useful
The only perk about the SGSIII is the quad core. If they gimp out with a dualcore, then I'd rather just have the Nexus.
The only quadcore chip that is out is the Tegra3 and it JUST was announced. It was a year before we started seeing tegra2s in the wild.
Asus Transformer Prime is shipping first of the year with a Tegra3 but who knows how long it will be before phones pick it up.
I could care less about the super amoled plus vs HD. At those high resolutions, the difference doesn't matter anymore.
And the camera is a camera. 90% of my photos are thrown on Facebook. As long as they look good then I'm good. Higher MP cameras produce such a large image that you have to compress and resize them for online uploads. I'm fine with 5-8mp on my phone. My G2x has a sweet 8mp camera... but I'd trade it in for a 5mp with instant shutter. Instant shots > higher Res shots IMO.
G2x - 2.3.7 CM7
Transformer - 3.2 Revolver OC/UV
Rumors with the dual core was that it would pack a ridiculously faster GPU for I'm guessing more hardware acceleration etc...
12mp camera would be nuts but Galaxy phones always try to have the best specs at the time and future proof a little. SGX 540 on the original Galaxy S was worlds ahead of everyone else when it came out.
Quad-core should be coming soon on phones......I say a few months. Plus, every things moving so much faster now, only a year 1/2 ago 1ghz single core was ridiculous =/
But, quad-core is really overkill on a phone, improved dual-core with a vastly faster GPU makes more sense
And samsung is offering financing on that phone right?
Sent from my samsung gt i9250 which is in the wrong country.
It's not about being overkill, it's the fact that barely anything is optimized for Dual-Core, and absolutely nothing for Quad-Core. Also, there is storage device that is always gonna be a bottleneck so what's the point of buying a quad-core phone before the software gets optimized?
Do you plan on running research laboratory 24/7 out of your phone's CPU or wtf?
Eldar Murtazin has said months ago that specs similar to these are indeed true.
Even with that in mind, I'm still planning to buy the Nexus. The SGS3 likely won't be announced until February and then won't be shipped until April. Even then it will be at an astronomical price, probably around the £700 mark I'd imagine.
Are you prepared to wait five months for the phone? I'm not. Even if these rumoured specs turn out to be 100% true, I'd rather just buy the Nexus now and then sell it in five months.
TL;DR: The rumoured SGS3 shouldn't affect your Galaxy Nexus purchasing decision.
I think we can say with a fair degree of confidence the GSIII will have an exynos 4412, which is a quad core A9 soc. Also pretty certain it will contain a Mali T604 MP4 GPU.
The T604 can output 68 gflops and 2 gigapixels/sec texel fill rate in its MP4 configuration. By comparison the sgx 543MP2 in the 4S manages something south of 12.8 gflops and 800 megapixels/sec texel fill rate. So yeah, the T604 is pretty beastly.
I think screen wise we will see the same 4.65 samoled HD that we see in the Nexus. It's likely too soon for the plus version.
pewpewbangbang said:
Quad-core should be coming soon on phones......I say a few months. Plus, every things moving so much faster now, only a year 1/2 ago 1ghz single core was ridiculous =/
But, quad-core is really overkill on a phone, improved dual-core with a vastly faster GPU makes more sense
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The LG Optimus 2x was a dual-core phone and was out around this time last year. Other Dual-Core phones didn't arrive until much later. And I agree with your quad-core overkill statement. It is. But I wouldn't upgrade my Nexus One for another single core when dualcore was ALREADY out. In this case QuadCore is NOT out and probably won't be for a while. We'll probably start seeing a few Quadcore's in March/May... followed by a few more in the Summer... but probably not coming state-side with subsidy till Winter/Q1 2013.
Well, plus version isn't really even needed. As reviews stated.....at such a high resolution, the problems pentile usually had are irrelevant.
Would love to see that mali and quad-core in the SGS III........feel like wouldn't even need to upgrade for years and years, but of course that won't happen. Will always want the next best thing
I don't mind pentile. At a given subpixel density, pentile will always be better than non-pentile imo. You get a higher resolution display with minimal side effects.
It's a very clever technology actually. I liken it to PowerVRs graphics technology where they only render the surfaces which can actually be seen by the viewer, thus saving on bandwidth and fillrate. It's about making the most from whatever resources you may have.
Why do people think those specs are far fetched? The SII will be coming up on it's year anniversary from being unveiled.
They got about three months to prototype the SIII, it sounds a little underwhelming if you ask me.
Last Samsung rep I spoke to said only details he had was that it would be 1.5 quad core or 1.8 duel core with 1gb ram
Either way, the GS III will be a beast of a phone just like the GS II still is. It should be launching around the same time as the iPhone 5 from rumors and go head to head.
milan03 said:
It's not about being overkill, it's the fact that barely anything is optimized for Dual-Core, and absolutely nothing for Quad-Core. Also, there is storage device that is always gonna be a bottleneck so what's the point of buying a quad-core phone before the software gets optimized?
Do you plan on running research laboratory 24/7 out of your phone's CPU or wtf?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But see the thing is, just like in the Windows desktop OS, even if the program itself isn't capable of utilizing all of the cores, the OS at least balances the apps out on the least busy core.
Granted, apps like high end games will run much better on Android if they are SMP aware.
Another thing is that I remember when dual core phones were announced, a lot of doubters were saying battery life will be terrible. Well that turned out to be the furthest thing from the truth.
So if quad core does for battery life what the dual core did then we are in for some rockin battery life and smooth UI like never seen.
Joe
Hello there, I had been eyeing the beauty that is the HTC One X and im currently trying to decide which variant to go with; The AT&T HTC One XL, or the Internation HTC One X
On the domestic AT&T side we get the S4 Krait with 28nm Duo-Core archetecture with 16 gb of internal storage
While in the international version we get the Nvidia Tegra 3 45nm Quad-core with 32 gb of storage.
From what I hear the CPU on the Krait has faster i/o process and generic speed while the Tegra 3 has much better graphical ability.
I do play alot of emulators on my devices and I was wondering if the Tegra 3 would affect video game emulation? The reason why I asked is because I am not sure if these emulators are designed for the Nvidia chipset.
Another factor is battery life.. Would the companion core from the Tegra 3 chipset save me more battery life than the energy efficient 28nm S4 chipset?
I need a second opinion to sort this in my head, any help would be appreciated.. Thank you
I'm in the same boat... 'actually had been pondering preordering an Internal HTC One X. I'd heard good things about the graphics performance of the Tegra quad core from an Asus prime owner..
Between NVidia and 32G.. it seemed like a good idea. With LTE roll-out so slow in the U.S, I don't see the bonus of the AT&T variant...
I don't know.. maybe I'll just wait. The AT&T route would be cheaper for me anyway...
Since I'm in a LTE market, I'm probably going for the AT&T variant. Otherwise the extra storage and quad core would seem to be worth the extra $$$ (for unlocked international version) for many people. Of course, if you are not in a LTE market at present, and don't know when the rollout will happen in your area, it can be a tough call . . .
Despite there is some info stating that XL with S4 is a bit faster than X tegra, I already pre ordered the One X with tegra
search in the next Time.........
If you're for LTE, get the S4 version.
For gaming, get the International version.
I can't comment on battery life but I think both phones have pretty good battery stats.
an LTE One X+ with Tegra 3 enhanced is coming very soon
the CPU benchs from the One X+ already appeared on most benchmark and its winning them all
don't fool urself the dual snapdragon 4 is no match for Tegra 3 in games
the tegra 3 has better standby battery life
the snapdragon 4 one x has better screen on battery time
all claims that dual krait cores are faster than a quad a9 were just marketing hype from Qualcomm, also the GPU is faster on the T3
tons of info in the mega thread (link in my sig)
comparison thread http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1810186&highlight=xl
Activzwerk said:
search in the next Time.........
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You bumped a 6 month old thread that predates the release of the phone to say that?
Open your eyes in the next Time..........
Activzwerk said:
search in the next Time.........
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not get your 10 posts by being useful instead of bumping threads that are 6 months old?
loooool
I felt like once phones hit the 1 ghz mark the cpu race kicked into over drive....the dual core phase was short lived and just about old news with quad core phones hitting shelves. Is there anything left after quad core phones? Will this be standard for awhile? I just hope its not a gimmick. Like the whole 4g deal....especially LTE....i still dont feel like the benefit of the slight boost in data transfer is worth the crappy battery life. Hspa+ seems to be a good sweet spot for data transfer.... and instead of improving networks and creating quality broadband services companies waste millions on trying to be the company with the latest inadequate tech. Most people dont even understand what they have or what they are using....if only i had a dollar for everytime i heard....."i love my iphone 4g"
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I don't know, but as I can't see how there would enough multi-tasking to make more than four cores worth sacrificing features, I would love to see improvements in battery life instead.
Doesn't Moore's law apply to more than just processing speed? Like, we could see improvements in cost, speed, or energy efficiency, but we just keep going for speed? Because I'd really love to have double the battery life.
I doubt that they will be the standard for a while. Look at how amazing the HTC ONE S is performing compared to the ONE X and the transformer prime.
I think that the dual core still has a lot of life in it. Quad core phones may be in all the flagship phones pretty soon, but I don't think that they will be "standard" for quite some time.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
I hope so.....id rather have a high performance dual core than quad.....unless quad core phones will start flying planes
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Don't worry about core counts. Just worry about overall performance.
Quad core is a meaningless number of cores.
Quad-Cores will remain flagship for at least another year. I predict the 2014 standard for lower-end phones will be quad-core. Dual-Core won't die out, however, because of low-power consumption and prices. Most changes we will likely see in the coming years:
1. Size (Probably a move to smaller 10nm chipsets, thinner screens and phones, Larger displays)
2. Optimization of Current Technologies (Software improvements, thinner AMOLEDS, power consumption)
3. BATTERY IMPROVEMENTS (It's needed the MOST)
Quad-Core phones will be short lived. Right now quad core chips are based on Cortex A9, Cortex A16 is around the corner. The A16 dual-core chips perform faster than current quad core chips and will use much less power than Cortex A9 dual cores we have now. Due to the initial expensive production costs of the A16 it will be a while before we see A16 quads hit the market.
Edit: Of course cheap phones may use the old cheaper Quad Core Cortex A9 in their phones but by no means will it be the flagship thing to have in a phone, just standard like the 1 GHz processors have become.
theherodrownd said:
Quad-Core phones will be short lived. Right now quad core chips are based on Cortex A9, Cortex A16 is around the corner. The A16 dual-core chips perform faster than current quad core batteries and will use much less power than Cortex A9 dual cores we have now. Due to the initial expensive production costs of the A16 it will be a while before we see A16 quads hit the market.
Edit: Of course cheap phones may use the old cheaper Quad Core Cortex A9 in their phones but by no means will it be the flagship thing to have in a phone, just standard like the 1 GHz processors have become.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Smokeey said:
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 has 1.4 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore
Smokeey said:
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sure? I looked a few places to check and saw it is still based on A9. Seems to be stamped on the same 40nm dye as the Tegra2. Its ghost core seems to have a different architecture however.
Edit: Valynor posted one of the links I was reading, thanks!
Valynor said:
Tegra 3 has 1.4 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The next generation (Wayne) has 2 A9 and 2 A15 (est. Q4-Q1 13 release).
More efficient cores seems to be what people really want vs more cores. Along those lines, battery life is more a concern than just raw computing power.
I'm waiting to see what next gen processors bring rather than focusing on if it is quad core or not.
systemf said:
More efficient cores seems to be what people really want vs more cores. Along those lines, battery life is more a concern than just raw computing power.
I'm waiting to see what next gen processors bring rather than focusing on if it is quad core or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely, definitely too early. I mean it's cool and all but QUAD CORE on a phone right now really? If we keep going this fast we will have 16 cores by 2014. But in all seriousness google and oems should just focus on battery life improvements, software, skins like sense and touchwiz refinements and user experience. Once those things are perfected you can bring new crazy features that would require a quad core powerhouse but for now it really is not needed. Just upgrade the current dual core architecture to A15 based SoC.
Someday:thumbup:
Sent from my i9250 [GSM) Galaxy Nexus
The galaxy tab s products that are available to me have an octa-core processor, with the high speed cores being 1.9ghz. I can't really understand why Samsung chose to use that instead of a 2.3ghz quad-core like in the tab pro.
See Wikipedia for an explanation of the concept: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_...multi-processing_.28global_task_scheduling.29
Because the Exynos 5 Octa-core is the one processor that Samsung has to be able to compete with Snapdragon 800, and is cheaper to implement since it's their own processor. I don't buy the Octa-core hype, I'd be happier with the Snapdragon 800 honestly like on the Tab PRO 8.4.
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
ssuper2k said:
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And yet I am getting 35,300 on Antutu using Shaheers t800 rom which is higher than any other current tablet or phone. (Shaheer's rom should go out of beta today - don't flash until final has been posted).
The Tab Pro 8.4 Antutu is 32,806.
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
I can see the argument that you don't always need full power, thus the four slow cores, but since all cores can't run at once, it seems a cheat to have 1.9ghz as the top speed for the faster four cores. Since, or at least I assume, cores step up and down as needed, it seems to me a snapdragon 800 or higher at 2.3ghz or higher would have been just fine. I mean, if you are going to put in 3gb of RAM, then you should put in a great cpu also and not pretend less (1.9ghz) is a better contribution to what is supposed to be a premium tablet.
And yet I don't think samsung is doing enough to utilizing this hardware capability. In theory it should run at least 4x faster and 6x more effecient then the snap dragon and apple current A8 chip. It has failed to outshine the competitors because samsung software department sucks. Samsung hardware is still great though.
sku|| said:
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blame the developer for not making it compatible. Tegra powered Htc one x is incompatible too so not sure that is exynos issue..
i wish my t805 had Full HD screen resolution :cyclops:
Funny. Was just browsing the web a bit on my i5 ultrabook and it occurred to me that the browser on my Tab S is actually faster. If gaming is your primary thing, I'd buy the Nvidia Shield, not the Tab S. This tablet is designed for eye candy media consumption (internet and video) not for gaming enthusiasts. Try running your PC video card at 2560 x 1600 on ultra and see what you get.
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
You cannot compare the clock speeds from two different processors. For instance, you can't compare the 1.9GHz quad-core of the Exynos to the 2.3GHz quad-core of the Snapdragon 800. This doesn't mean anything. If you compare the clock speed of two Snapdragon chips, that's ok, or if you compare the clock speed of two Exynos chips, then that's ok too. Comparing the clock speed of an Intel chip against the clock speed of an AMD chip, is the same as comparing the clock speed of an Exynos chip to the clock speed of a Snapdragon chip.
The Exynos chip in this tablet has been shown to compete very well/close with the Snapdragon on every level except GPU. The Mali GPU in this chip just doesn't match the Adreno GPU from the Snapdragon. However, the RAM is faster in the Exynos than the Snapdragon.
That said, I am a fan of the Snapdragon chip, of course. I was holding off to see if the LTE variant of this tablet would have the Snapdragon 800, but instead they shipped with an Intel LTE modem. Besides apps/games not being optimized for Exynos, I am fairly satisfied with my purchase. I'm just anxious to get CyanogenMod(or any other AOSP ROM installed on it).
fletch33 said:
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could also mean increased battery consumption,don't know. Overall I am satisfied with this Tab including battery life.
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
pibach said:
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
UpInTheAir said:
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's impossible.
AndreiLux said:
It's impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What and why?
pibach said:
What and why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...ta-can-use-eight-cores-simultaneously-267316/
I've found a few articles saying it should support it, then a couple Deva saying they had to goto the 5422 for a working implementation of HMP.
Here is a post from odroid
http://forum.odroid.com/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=5651
That's weird. The (newer) 5422 supports HMP but not 3gb RAM.
Can Exynos 5 OCTA 5420 use all 8 cores at same time?
How is Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T700 performance compared to Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T705( with Qualcomm Snapdragon 800)?
The Exynos cpu performs admirably against my htc one m8 snapdragon cpu and ranks highly with other top performing cpu's.
Even better with Skyhigh kernel.
Worth mentioning these Exynos units suck the battery dry much faster than the Qualcomm S800 without delivering more performance.
mrcet007 said:
Can Exynos 5 OCTA 5420 use all 8 cores at same time?
How is Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T700 performance compared to Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T705( with Qualcomm Snapdragon 800)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to the wikipedia article, the Linux kernel does have a scheduler mode that allows to use all cores or switch between them as needed. I don't know if the Samsung stock kernel or others actually use that mode.
One important issue is that you should not be carried away with the idea that having more cores is always better for performance. It takes a lot of work to write software that can actually load four or eight cores. Moreover, a lot of algorithms are still bottle-necked by one core and there is no way to change that. As a result, a typical PC with a quad core Intel i5 CPU is usually faster than a PC with a six or eight core AMD CPU, thanks to intel's much better individual core performance. This truth is even more relevant on tablets, which are effectively single-user machines, usually running only one big application at a time. I wouldn't lose a minute of my sleep over having only two working cores instead of four or eight.