Database Info

Just wondering..

I am going to be picking up an SGS2 for ATT but was curiouse about a few things.
1: How cross compatible is the SGH-I777 with other carriers SGS2's. I know there is a screen size difference but what else. Is the SGH-I727 more compatible or is it going to be another Infuse.
2: I would like some Pro's & Con's of both phones to compare.
I don't have LTE in my area and won't untill the eoy-12 so the LTE Radio isnt much a worrie for me currently.
Any input is welcome

The first thing is that the at&t skyrocket is a the best version of samsung galaxy S2 u can find. On the software front all the galaxy s2 are the same but the only difference is the hardware. For eg. The infuse is a single core device whereas the at&t skyrocket is a dual core device. In the whole there isn't much of a difference on the software side(Bloat is gonna be there) but the hardware is different. Ohh yeah the international galaxy s2 has hardware buttons whereas the at&t skyrocket and the infuse have capactive buttons. Hope I help and if so hit the thanks button.
Cheers

Is the Exynos a waste of time / money?

The legendary Exynos (formerly Orion) we all read so much about a year and a half ago has been on store shelves for quite some time now. While SAMSUNG continues to develop the Exynos architecture - I don't see it catching on to other phones.
Plenty of phones sold by SAMSUNG don't even use the Exynos. It was even stripped from the T-Mobile version of the GS2...
So, is it a complete failure? Should we expect SAMSUNG to just stop development after the GS3 is released worldwide?

whitecrane said:
The legendary Exynos (formerly Orion) we all read so much about a year and a half ago has been on store shelves for quite some time now. While SAMSUNG continues to develop the Exynos architecture - I don't see it catching on to other phones.
Plenty of phones sold by SAMSUNG don't even use the Exynos. It was even stripped from the T-Mobile version of the GS2...
So, is it a complete failure? Should we expect SAMSUNG to just stop development after the GS3 is released worldwide?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm, how about no?
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2

I hope Samsung will continue to develop their architecture because from what I have seen, it is quite powerful. So do I think it was a complete failure? No.
The thing these days is that it is probably easier and cheaper for companies to just use each other's technology, like the Tegra or TI series, than invest in their own R&D. The majority of phone users are not power users and do not care about specs. If it works well then that is good enough. It is not about pushing boundaries for some.

Exynos is actually one of the best SoC's a phone can have (subject to debate). Samsung doesn't put Exynos in every phone because it's a high-end SoC, so they use it in high-end devices such as the Galaxy S line and the Galaxy Note. Apple's Ax processors are even based on Exynos.
The T-Mobile Galaxy S II, as well as all US Galaxy S III's, have Snapdragons because Exynos does not support LTE nor T-Mobile's HSPA+ 42 and 84 Mbps technology, which US carriers strive to make available to customers. Samsung is working on supporting LTE in future Exynos chips though!
As for other manufacturers not implementing Exynos, I'm just going to make an assumption that Samsung's competitors (Motorola, HTC, etc.) would rather use Nvidia, TI, or Qualcomm's chips instead since they don't sell phones.
So no, Exynos isn't a complete failure at all if you ask me!

But didn't anyone else think that they would be more common by now?
What does the wireless band have to do with SOC? Can't this SOC run any algorithms we want it to?
To me, that's like telling someone they need an AMD CPU to use DSL, and an Intel CPU if they want FiOS. Isn't it just a matter of writing a program to do something?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

whitecrane said:
But didn't anyone else think that they would be more common by now?
What does the wireless band have to do with SOC? Can't this SOC run any algorithms we want it to?
To me, that's like telling someone they need an AMD CPU to use DSL, and an Intel CPU if they want FiOS. Isn't it just a matter of writing a program to do something?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Radio hardware consists of physical transistors. We're not quite at software-defined radio yet.
You DO need different hardware to run DSL vs fios. If Intel built DSL hardware onto its CPU, then you're starting to understand what a SoC is.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda app-developers app

ferrocene said:
Radio hardware consists of physical transistors. We're not quite at software-defined radio yet.
You DO need different hardware to run DSL vs fios. If Intel built DSL hardware onto its CPU, then you're starting to understand what a SoC is.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right. Computers aren't built with DSL/FIOS/VDSL/etc. modems in them. That's why we use a DSL modem box and connect to it via ethernet. However, the Exynos SoC has a modem integrated on to it that supports certain bands and technologies. The Snapdragon SoC found in the GS2 and US GS3s does not contain an integrated modem, so there is a modem chip separate on the motherboard that supports the carrier's bands and technologies.
There's a bit of a gray area with this though. Sprint's GS2 has a WiMax modem built onto it even though it still has an Exynos chip. Why we don't do that for LTE and T-Mobile's HSPA+ 42/84 is something I'd like to know lol.

whitecrane said:
The legendary Exynos (formerly Orion) we all read so much about a year and a half ago has been on store shelves for quite some time now. While SAMSUNG continues to develop the Exynos architecture - I don't see it catching on to other phones.
Plenty of phones sold by SAMSUNG don't even use the Exynos. It was even stripped from the T-Mobile version of the GS2...
So, is it a complete failure? Should we expect SAMSUNG to just stop development after the GS3 is released worldwide?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow. Short-sighted/simple-minded enough? :silly:
1) Exynos is not a failure. It's been shipped in literally millions of phones. In-house consumption alone probably makes it one of the most popular SoC's on the market right now.
2) Samsung is the world's largest manufacturer of phones. I doubt they even have the fabrication facilities to make enough Exynos chips to put in all the phones they make. Also remember that although Samsung Semiconductor and Samsung Mobile are both owned by Samsung Electronics, they don't always have completely overlapping goals or business interests. And Samsung Semiconductor is also busy making many other things... like the SoC for the iPhone 3G/3GS/4/4S. Or say the vast share of the world's NAND chips.
3) Samsung has a vested stake in not relying totally on another SoC manufacturer for all their phones. It allows them better leverage with other SoC companies, and prevents them from being "blackmailed" by any one company as a source of mobile CPUs. Even if they only shipped the Exynos in 5% of their devices, it would be enough to help leverage Texas Instruments, Qualcomm, etc.
4) While many of the U.S. variants of Samsung phones don't have the Exynos chip, that's mostly for technical reasons (lack of LTE support in the currently released chips), and probably also partially to increase total yield of produced phones. That's just the U.S. market. There is in fact a world outside the United States, with people, and people who buy phones.
So... long story short: The Exynos is not a failure. And I very much doubt Samsung will be dropping development anytime soon.

Moving this to a correct board (nothing to do with the AT&T SII)...

marcocore said:
Sprint's GS2 has a WiMax modem built onto it even though it still has an Exynos chip. Why we don't do that for LTE and T-Mobile's HSPA+ 42/84 is something I'd like to know lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is exactly what I was talking about. When something is missing you simply add it on, as with anything else in computing. I just hope this doesn't go the way of Glide from 3dfx.
Anyway, I'm more "put at ease" with the responses here. Thanks xda.

whitecrane said:
But didn't anyone else think that they would be more common by now?
What does the wireless band have to do with SOC? Can't this SOC run any algorithms we want it to?
To me, that's like telling someone they need an AMD CPU to use DSL, and an Intel CPU if they want FiOS. Isn't it just a matter of writing a program to do something?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK here's my understanding. First all quad core processors are having issues with lte. Second SoC stands for system on a chip. Its how cell phones are so small and thin. But for some reason they are not playing nice to gether. Now Samsung was able to release a variant of sgsiii with its quad core and lte in korea because they kept them separate. But because of this the phone is a little bit thicker then usual.
So they did treat it like a PC and added it like a pci card for desktops. If that helps you understand.
The overall goal is to get it all on one chip. That way it eats up less power and slims down your phone but it is not yet possible. It is being looked into.
Sent from my DROID X2 using XDA

marcocore said:
Exynos is actually one of the best SoC's a phone can have (subject to debate). Samsung doesn't put Exynos in every phone because it's a high-end SoC, so they use it in high-end devices such as the Galaxy S line and the Galaxy Note. Apple's Ax processors are even based on Exynos.
The T-Mobile Galaxy S II, as well as all US Galaxy S III's, have Snapdragons because Exynos does not support LTE nor T-Mobile's HSPA+ 42 and 84 Mbps technology, which US carriers strive to make available to customers. Samsung is working on supporting LTE in future Exynos chips though!
As for other manufacturers not implementing Exynos, I'm just going to make an assumption that Samsung's competitors (Motorola, HTC, etc.) would rather use Nvidia, TI, or Qualcomm's chips instead since they don't sell phones.
So no, Exynos isn't a complete failure at all if you ask me!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not true any more seeing as the Korean GSIII will have a quad core Exynos and LTE.

tbaker077 said:
That's not true any more seeing as the Korean GSIII will have a quad core Exynos and LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was true until Samsung produced their new chip within the past month. A quad core exynos with LTE capabilities.
So, his statement as to why t-mobile didn't use the exynos in the GSII and GSIII is 100% correct.

As I understand more, I have more concerns. Let me just say, I know what a SOC is. I'm not that much of a newbie.
I must wonder why the Exynos couldn't handle the T-Mobile HSPA+ network... It's just not that special. It's just 3G on steroids, and from what I see in the real world benchmarks, it is only a hair faster than AT&T's inferior on paper HSPA+ network. I realize it is a technical limitation (by design?), but wonder why SAMSUNG wasn't able (willing?) to design the Exynos SOC to accept it without a magic modem.
I also wonder how serious SAMSUNG is about Exynos if they're ignoring T-Mobile (shipping their flagship phone with an inferior SOC), and completley ignoring LTE up to only recently in one device that will only sell in one market. If SAMSUNG is serious about Exynos, I would think they woulod at least make it available in every market, accepting every type of radio. Traditional 3G, Wimax (we still have a huge Wimax network in the states that isn't going anywhere soon), LTE, and HSPA+. Does any other SOC standard have radio limitations?
I do not expect SAMSUNG to bundle a seperate modem outside the SOC in every market. In fact, I would think they would only do that in Korea and Japan, where they will likely sell more Exynos devices.
I have one more huge concern then. The GS2 i777 was phased out of most AT&T stores (corporate and otherwise) within 2 months of its release in favor of the GS2 "Skyrocket" with its far inferior SOC. Didn't that thing ship with a SOC based on the Cortex A8? Not even an A9?
It almost seems like my carrier did not want me to have a Galaxy S2 (with an Exynos, anyway). I bought mine on clearance at Best Buy... for $50. Within a month of its release, best buy was selling it for just $50 with a contract renewal - down from $200 just a month sooner? I think they wanted to get ride of the GS2 asap so they could order more Skyrockets.
I just don't think companies are taking Exynos seriously in the USA. Ignoring T-Mobile, ignoring Verizon. The only thing they have done right?? Sprint. Adding the Wimax modem without adding bulk to the phone was a brilliant move. That's how they're gonna sell this thing.

whitecrane said:
I have one more huge concern then. The GS2 i777 was phased out of most AT&T stores (corporate and otherwise) within 2 months of its release in favor of the GS2 "Skyrocket" with its far inferior SOC. Didn't that thing ship with a SOC based on the Cortex A8? Not even an A9?
It almost seems like my carrier did not want me to have a Galaxy S2. I bought mine on clearance at Best Buy... for $50. Within a month of its release, best buy was selling it for just $50 with a contract renewal - down from $200 just a month sooner? I think they wanted to get ride of the GS2 asap so they could order more Skyrockets.
I just don't think companies are taking Exynos seriously in the USA. I'm just glad I own one.
Does anyone know if OMAP's are cheaper to produce? It seems to me that there are far more OMAP devices than anything else out there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When it comes to the carrier they don't care about the hardware, because 99% of the consumers have no clue what exynos, snapdragon or tegra mean. What the normal consumer can comprehend is "Hey, this skyrocket has faster internet". So, LTE has become the selling factor.

lowandbehold said:
When it comes to the carrier they don't care about the hardware, because 99% of the consumers have no clue what exynos, snapdragon or tegra mean. What the normal consumer can comprehend is "Hey, this skyrocket has faster internet". So, LTE has become the selling factor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough, I agree with you. But why clearance the GS2? My market has no LTE, and probably won't for years to come.
My post above this has been edited quite a bit... in case you want to give it a second read... it's entirely related to the subject matter here.

whitecrane said:
Fair enough, I agree with you. But why clearance the GS2? My market has no LTE, and probably won't for years to come.
My post above this has been edited quite a bit... in case you want to give it a second read... it's entirely related to the subject matter here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, but the previous generation exynos processors were not compatible with the AWS frequencies which T-mobile uses. That is why there has never been a T-mobile phone with an exynos. The Skyrocket and the T-mobile GS2 were in production at the same time, so it just seemed right to make 2 of the same exact phone (radios can be flashed on both to work on either network) to save money. Then, AT&T (through the eyes of the average consumer) had a GSII that gets slow internet, and a GSII that gets fast internet. They had to phase one out...it just happened to be the I777. It really makes sense from a business stand point, considering chips are so good these days that one can hardly tell a difference between a snapdragon or an exynos, or even quad core from dual core.

Galaxy Tab 2 10.1 AT&T version....

E ..... I'm not sure if anyone else gave any thought to this, but ever since AT&T officially announced they'd be carrying the Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, I was wondering if the internals (processor) would be different? A good example would be how the original Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.9 Wi-Fi version came equipped with a 1ghz Tegra 2 chip, yet when AT&T picked it up, they went with a 1.5ghz S3 chip (with LTE support of course). As someone who played with both models thoroughly, the 1.5ghz AT&T variant did make for a noticeably smoother experience compared to its Tegra 2 counterpart - Both devices completely stock I must add.
So back to the Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, although it has been officially picked up by AT&T, news sources have been very vague on the specs of this particular model. If history provides any clues as what to expect, hopefully the AT&T SGT 2 10.1 will have a 1.5ghz S4 chip which seems to be doing a great job at powering all the other devices its incorporated in.
My ultimate question is has anyone seen or heard anything in regards to this or any other possible changes for the AT&T model???

The variety of galaxy s3's

I'm looking to buy one to use on T-Mobile prepaid network, since they seem to offer the most data (5gb for $30), which models would fully work on T-Mobile? I know at&t is lte, but T-Mobile is starting an lte thing, so that would be cool. Which can I get without unlocking, if any? And if I have to unlock, is that something I can do myself? I have a decent amount of experience rooting, but this is different. Thank you.
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

Bump
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

deadlocked007 said:
Buy a nexus 4 and then you don't have to choose
Sent from my Evo 3D CDMA using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure a lot of people (including myself) would buy a Nexus 4 if the Play Store wasn't sold out all the time
@OP, I personally have never used LTE, but I can't imagine that it's significantly faster in real-world usage than HSPA+. IMO, you should go for an international SGS3 (assuming they work on T-MO US) and live without that ridiculous carrier branding you Americans are used to .

Nickdroid86 said:
I'm looking to buy one to use on T-Mobile prepaid network, since they seem to offer the most data (5gb for $30), which models would fully work on T-Mobile? I know at&t is lte, but T-Mobile is starting an lte thing, so that would be cool. Which can I get without unlocking, if any? And if I have to unlock, is that something I can do myself? I have a decent amount of experience rooting, but this is different. Thank you.
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You would need one specifically for T-Mobile's LTE network. If you want to buy a T-Mobile LTE-capable phone NOW, you should get the Note 2, which has an LTE chip/antenna inside that is disabled for now. Just like 3G frequencies differ across carriers, so do LTE frequencies. No existing LTE devices on other carriers will work on T-Mobile's LTE. I believe they're looking to replace their 1700 MHz HSPA+ with LTE but I could be wrong.

Product F(RED) said:
I believe they're looking to replace their 1700 MHz HSPA+ with LTE but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so. That's crazy.

The nexus 4, gs3 and gnote II on tmobile all have deactivated band 4 lte chips so when tmobile gets it those phones will have access to it. I suggest you get the tmobile gs3 because the s4 is faster than the exynos 4 and the extra gig of ram makes a difference.

sy224048 said:
The nexus 4, gs3 and gnote II on tmobile all have deactivated band 4 lte chips so when tmobile gets it those phones will have access to it. I suggest you get the tmobile gs3 because the s4 is faster than the exynos 4 and the extra gig of ram makes a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're wrong on all accounts:
1. The Nexus 4 has slight LTE capabilities on one or two bands, which are used by AT&T, and they're weak because there's no power amp for the antenna. It happens to be left over from the Optimus G because they share the same motherboard, but it was cheaper to leave it on then to make a totally separate assembly line. There is no T-Mobile LTE compatibility in the Nexus 4.
2. The Galaxy S3 on T-Mobile doesn't have LTE. T-Mobile themselves said that they're releasing a new version of the Galaxy S3 with LTE for their network. The Note 2 HOWEVER, has been proven to have an LTE chip hidden inside.
3. The Snapdragon S4 is not faster than the Exynos 4. I have the i9300, I can tell you this from experience. You can also look up benchmarks online. The GPU in the Snapdragon S4 is junk for gaming, and the processor itself is not faster overall than the S4. It's not all about "Oh the Gigahertz are more on the S4." That's why so many people were disappointed the US version had an inferior processor. Also, the 2GB of RAM doesn't do anything for performance. It's just future-proofing.
Do your research.

Product F(RED) said:
3. The Snapdragon S4 is not faster than the Exynos 4. I have the i9300, I can tell you this from experience. You can also look up benchmarks online. The GPU in the Snapdragon S4 is junk for gaming, and the processor itself is not faster overall than the S4. It's not all about "Oh the Gigahertz are more on the S4." That's why so many people were disappointed the US version had an inferior processor. Also, the 2GB of RAM doesn't do anything for performance. It's just future-proofing.
Do your research.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because the s4 is slower on games ( benchmarks are pointless) doesn't mean its worse. Some will not use the exyons at all anymore so there are benifits to using the snapdragon like more developer support
Batcom2

zelendel said:
Just because the s4 is slower on games ( benchmarks are pointless) doesn't mean its worse. Some will not use the exyons at all anymore so there are benifits to using the snapdragon like more developer support
Batcom2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, I stick away from exynos (and tegra) because of the lack of developer cooperation from them.
And even though the T-Mobile s3 has an inferior processor on paper, (2 vs 4 cores) remember that it is based loosely on the A15 architecture, which is claimed by ARM to be double the performance of the A9 architecture which is in the exynos 4.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

zelendel said:
Just because the s4 is slower on games ( benchmarks are pointless) doesn't mean its worse. Some will not use the exyons at all anymore so there are benifits to using the snapdragon like more developer support
Batcom2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
klin1344 said:
Indeed, I stick away from exynos (and tegra) because of the lack of developer cooperation from them.
And even though the T-Mobile s3 has an inferior processor on paper, (2 vs 4 cores) remember that it is based loosely on the A15 architecture, which is claimed by ARM to be double the performance of the A9 architecture which is in the exynos 4.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said it was worse. I just said it's not faster. Also to add on yo what you said, the S4 has better battery efficiency. It really depends on what you're looking for.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Thanks for the info guys. So....my question. Will all of the s3's work on T-Mobile hspa+ without being unlocked or?
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

P.s. I find a nexus 4 8gb, brand new on Craigslist, but I have to pay $49 to sign on to solavei wireless (uses T-Mobile) should I just get that, pay the month they make me pay up front, then just switch in a T-Mobile card? Solavei is prepaid, so I'm not worried about black listing.
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

Nickdroid86 said:
Thanks for the info guys. So....my question. Will all of the s3's work on T-Mobile hspa+ without being unlocked or?
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like said MOST OF THEM WILL NOT. Google first, ask later. The s3's from other networks will not work with the 4g/hspa network because they do not have the antenna for the aws spectrum we use.
Sent from my Galaxy S III

Nickdroid86 said:
Thanks for the info guys. So....my question. Will all of the s3's work on T-Mobile hspa+ without being unlocked or?
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Only the T-Mobile one will work because it's the only one that supports 1700 MHz (AWS). Most international phones don't support 1700 MHz (T-Mobile is 1700 MHz/2100 MHz), but will work on AT&T's bands (850/1900 MHz). However T-Mobile has been very slowly moving over to the same bands as AT&T, so soon you'll be able to use any AT&T compatible phone on T-Mobile.

I'm probably best off buying the nexus 4
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

I would go with a samsung processor because games are not the only thing people do on the phone. Soon emulators for various desktop OS will be available on the phone and their will be a phone OS race. So because masses have exynos. Devs will be forced to work things on exynos and plus exynos is good in data rendering and executing. Plus encrypting your work is really fast on exynos even better than intel processors.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app

qazibasit said:
I would go with a samsung processor because games are not the only thing people do on the phone. Soon emulators for various desktop OS will be available on the phone and their will be a phone OS race. So because masses have exynos. Devs will be forced to work things on exynos
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See this is where the problem lies. Devs cant work on something without the proper documentation (Which Samsung refuses to release, even after they stated they would.) This is why alot of the CM team has already stated they will not get another samsung device or any device that has this chip in it.

zelendel said:
See this is where the problem lies. Devs cant work on something without the proper documentation (Which Samsung refuses to release, even after they stated they would.) This is why alot of the CM team has already stated they will not get another samsung device or any device that has this chip in it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I have the i9300 and that's the only thing that erks me. We have the more powerful phone, we can modify Samsung ROMs, but we pretty much have (actually stable) nightlies for AOSP/AOKP based ROMs. I would have gone with a US carrier S3 if it wasn't for the S4 Dual. I game heavily (GTA 3/VC, Dead Trigger, NFS:MW, MC4, etc), so I rely on the fastest processor out there. The S4 Dual is capable as a CPU, but the Adreno GPU that comes with it is meh. The 2GB of RAM is just futureproofing and doesn't affect performance. If the US S3's had the S4 Pro (Quad), I'd have bought one. The Note 2 seems enticing but I think it's too big for me.

Gonna buy Note 3. Which one should I get?

I bought an htc one a while ago and it was great for a while until I got fed up with htcs boot loader/s-off crap and now I'm thinking I'm gonna buy a Note 3. My only question is, should I get the Qualcomm or exnyos version? Is the octa-core better or is it just a gimmick?
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app

Also, I'm in the US but want an unlocked version, does this effect what I should get?
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app

Qualcomm everytime just look at the developement pace on each forum

spitfire2425 said:
I bought an htc one a while ago and it was great for a while until I got fed up with htcs boot loader/s-off crap and now I'm thinking I'm gonna buy a Note 3. My only question is, should I get the Qualcomm or exnyos version? Is the octa-core better or is it just a gimmick?
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty much the same as me (cept I'm in the UK) - The Qualcomm version is LTE capable, where as the exy version is only 3G. - Depending if you buy outright or with carrier will determine which you get I guess? - If you are on a 4G plan then obviously you need the 4G model (Qualcomm)

For US get the N900T version which is the T-Mobile variant. If you use AT&T just get it unlocked. It has full bands support for AT&T and T-Mo. You can flash N9005-based ROMs to remove carrier bloat (which is why mine shows as N9005). It has a fully unlocked bootloader just like the international versions as well. If you get the N9005 it is missing LTE and if you get N900A (AT&T variant) it has a locked bootloader. All of these variants are S800 based.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using xda app-developers app

Depends what you prefer - benchmarks or real world use.
The octa core S3 is pretty much the top phone on the market for most benchmarks, it is unstoppable.
In real life use, the S800 version is faster, snappier, has NO lag whatsoever, runs all games smoothly, even the top of the range ones, plus has 4k video and 4G LTE.
There is no real reason not to go for S800 when you have the choice.

The N9005 is IMHO a good choice (or any bootloader-unlocked version available in US, as some people already pointed out).
Two other things:
- vast majority (actually all that I know so far) of N9005 carrier-unlocked versions still have a "region-lock" - meaning that there are some restrictions on the SIMs that you can use
- there is also a "knox flag" which tells Samsung that the phone was "software tampered" and apparently that can void your warranty.
You should read more about the above points in the rest of the posts in this Note 3 forum.

Qualcomm ....
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

Always Remain Loyal to the Snapdragon.

Well, I'm not a fan boy of Qualcomm but there's no reason to go for exnyos
The situation is simple, for a little bit extra $, you get 4G compatibility as well as working flawlessly on existing 3G / 2G. Whereas exnyos you are limited to 3G / 2G. The processing power is marginally better AND it can do 4k video.

Both versions are snappy enough, i doubt you will find any differences in performance in real life use. I personally own an Octa version which I am happy with "much more than the s4 variant" but if you are located in the US S800 version will suit you better because of the higher data speed. Whereby, in less than one year time they will be both outdated :silly: