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.
Related
http://www.talkandroid.com/65267-fu...xy-nexus-revealed-verizon-exclusive-and-more/
Huge screen. Small battery capacity. I'm sure it feels good in hand.
Edit: please delete if already posted.
Sent from my Google Nexus S 4G via XDA Premium
Battery life is probably gonna suck. But what's up with it being a Verizon exclusive? If that's true, that's terrible. It should be unlocked for GSM like the other two nexus phones. Disappointing
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
I just don't get the data caps. Seems to me, and I'm no genius, if carriers increase capacity, they could charge for unlimited data. A friend with an iPhone(att) is asking me about Sprint and is this || close to switching to the Nexus S 4G. He told me that he doesnt like that he cant use his device the way its meant to be used because of the 2GB cap. Caps just seem so...2005.
But I digress, I'm anxious to see real world performance on this thing.
malikadnanm said:
Battery life is probably gonna suck. But what's up with it being a Verizon exclusive? If that's true, that's terrible. It should be unlocked for GSM like the other two nexus phones. Disappointing
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There almost undoubtedly will be a GSM version. Do you really think Samsung is going to make a device like this and exclude the rest of the world - when both previous Nexus devices shipped as world phones?
Toss in the "confirmed" specs listing LTE/HSPA depending on carrier and you have your confirmation a GSM version will be produced. How or when it's sold within the US is another question. Verizon may have a launch exclusive, but you will see a GSM version. It's possible it may not be carrier subsidized in the US (I doubt that) or that it may merely be delayed to a later release date.
sprint also seems to be the new tmobile, adopting everything google. i cant imagine the prime not coming to sprint. i may pick up a epic touch to hold me off for a while. that is unless we get a leak of ics. that will hold me off till the prime.
krohnjw said:
There almost undoubtedly will be a GSM version. Do you really think Samsung is going to make a device like this and exclude the rest of the world - when both previous Nexus devices shipped as world phones?
Toss in the "confirmed" specs listing LTE/HSPA depending on carrier and you have your confirmation a GSM version will be produced. How or when it's sold within the US is another question. Verizon may have a launch exclusive, but you will see a GSM version. It's possible it may not be carrier subsidized in the US (I doubt that) or that it may merely be delayed to a later release date.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And its rocking the PowerVR SGX540. Frankly, I wanted the OMAP4470 for the SGX544 and the Dual-channel LPDDR2 memory.
I'm going to be disappointed if the phone is that big.... or maybe its a 4 inch phone like the Nexus S but with a bigger screen to accommodate for having no touch sensitive keys..... I hope that's the case... I don't want a tablet, I want a smartphone.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA App
Actually, there's also another rumour for the specs of this phone
- dual-core 1.5GHz Exynos
- dual-core PowerVR SGX543MP2
- 8 megapixels camera
- 2,050mAh battery
http://www.gsmarena.com/source_close_to_google_reveals_real_nexus_prime_specs-news-3239.php
http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/06/samsung-galaxy-nexus-specs-leak-headed-to-verizon-as-an-exclusi/
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.
Although I'm not the biggest contributor on these forums, I have been following the development and release of the S4 over the past few months, mainly because I'm ready to switch from my iPhone 4. That being said, like you all, I have been following all the rumors and tracking the different variants, processors, speeds, etc.... and I believe that I'm up to date on everything thus far.
That being said, I've decided that most likely (90% Chance) I will be buying the AT&T S4 when it comes out. Originally I was planning on buying an international or Korean version S4 but here's what I've realized. Before I post my reasoning, I am a business man with his own business (age 27) and spend a lot of time browsing web, doing emails, and being on the phone. Games are not so much a priority for me as much as stability, call quality, internet speed, and battery life are. So why am I choosing the US S4?
1) Guaranteed Carrier support
2) US manufacturers warranty
3) Lower price
4) Guaranteed stability in my region and network
5) Most likely Higher dev support
6) Most likely higher compatibility with US based products, applications, accessories, etc...
That being said, I consider myself a huge techy and deep down it hurts me that there are better variants of the phone out there, but bottom line is that we really don't know the full extent of carrier support in the US for international variants, and although the speed of a phone is a HUGE factor for me, what's more important is that the phone does what I need it to do within the environment that it is in. It's clear that the other variants are better, but at what cost will the increase in performance be? Spotty service? No guarantee for email and app support? Tough Manufacturer warranty issues? Lack of dev? No guarantee of LTE support? I don't know about you guys, but a 20% speed increase and maybe better audio codecs are a high price to pay for what could result in a daily headache..... just my 2 cents.
97prelude said:
Although I'm not the biggest contributor on these forums, I have been following the development and release of the S4 over the past few months, mainly because I'm ready to switch from my iPhone 4. That being said, like you all, I have been following all the rumors and tracking the different variants, processors, speeds, etc.... and I believe that I'm up to date on everything thus far.
That being said, I've decided that most likely (90% Chance) I will be buying the AT&T S4 when it comes out. Originally I was planning on buying an international or Korean version S4 but here's what I've realized. Before I post my reasoning, I am a business man with his own business (age 27) and spend a lot of time browsing web, doing emails, and being on the phone. Games are not so much a priority for me as much as stability, call quality, internet speed, and battery life are. So why am I choosing the US S4?
1) Guaranteed Carrier support
2) US manufacturers warranty
3) Lower price
4) Guaranteed stability in my region and network
5) Most likely Higher dev support
6) Most likely higher compatibility with US based products, applications, accessories, etc...
That being said, I consider myself a huge techy and deep down it hurts me that there are better variants of the phone out there, but bottom line is that we really don't know the full extent of carrier support in the US for international variants, and although the speed of a phone is a HUGE factor for me, what's more important is that the phone does what I need it to do within the environment that it is in. It's clear that the other variants are better, but at what cost will the increase in performance be? Spotty service? No guarantee for email and app support? Tough Manufacturer warranty issues? Lack of dev? No guarantee of LTE support? I don't know about you guys, but a 20% speed increase and maybe better audio codecs are a high price to pay for what could result in a daily headache..... just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know what the exynos is getting you right now that the SD600 won't. As I've seen recently, the SD600 is running games smoother.
The spec differences between the Exynos and the Snapdragon, at least from what I've seen, aren't too big of a deal. When we're talking about the difference between two smartphones which are already the best in terms of hardware, and much of that hardware won't ever be used to its fullest potential, it's negligible. What interested me most was it appeared that the Exynos with Wolfson will do a fair bit better in audio. Still, I'd rather have LTE compatibility, for the reasons you listed and more.
Sarcron said:
The spec differences between the Exynos and the Snapdragon, at least from what I've seen, aren't too big of a deal. When we're talking about the difference between two smartphones which are already the best in terms of hardware, and much of that hardware won't ever be used to its fullest potential, it's negligible. What interested me most was it appeared that the Exynos with Wolfson will do a fair bit better in audio. Still, I'd rather have LTE compatibility, for the reasons you listed and more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do we actually have proof though? GSM Arena said that the DAC for the SGS4 is pretty close to the HTC One which in turn had the best DAC they ever tested of an Android device.
SlimJ87D said:
Do we actually have proof though? GSM Arena said that the DAC for the SGS4 is pretty close to the HTC One which in turn had the best DAC they ever tested of an Android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know. I've seen benchmarks going up on a couple different threads in which people said the Exynos had clear results with better audio, then others have said "x" tests were outdated. It would be great if there was concrete confirmation with both devices tested side by side with the latest firmware.
SlimJ87D said:
Do we actually have proof though? GSM Arena said that the DAC for the SGS4 is pretty close to the HTC One which in turn had the best DAC they ever tested of an Android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except their results show that the S4 output is better.
none of the audio tests ever test recording at a concert... none of the qualcomm chips I have tested have been able to get a useable recording. only the wolfson in my i9000 with tweaking
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
Laughed at carrier support..who the heck calls those useless carriers? 99% of the time they are clueless.
kirdroid said:
Laughed at carrier support..who the heck calls those useless carriers? 99% of the time they are clueless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I laughed at your laughing, because it seems as if you have an Apple iPhone. With the exception of Apple, other manufacturers don't have retails stores for you to have your phone replaced if something happens to it. Enter "carrier support", where carriers will replace your phone in their retail store if it breaks and is under manufacturer's warranty.
I think you guys are missing the main point of my post, which is simply begging the question:
Is the ~20% increase in speed and what I consider other minor improvements worth the potential ongoing headache of stateside incompatibility and support?
97prelude said:
I think you guys are missing the main point of my post, which is simply begging the question:
Is the ~20% increase in speed and what I consider other minor improvements worth the potential ongoing headache of stateside incompatibility and support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed.
I bought the Intl version of Note 1 back then, thru Amazon Prime. The phone went dead on day 29th. Thank god for Amazon Prime I was able to return.
However, I was phoneless for 1 week while waiting for the new phone to arrive from AT&T.
It may not see much but it was one of the worst week for me because I rely on my phone for everything.
SlimJ87D said:
Do we actually have proof though? GSM Arena said that the DAC for the SGS4 is pretty close to the HTC One which in turn had the best DAC they ever tested of an Android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They S4 US version should be using same qualcomm dac as HTC One.
The only thing different as far as I know is that HTC One has external amp and stereo speakers. And beats audio is basically software mod for increased treble and bass. But HTC also did some in-house mod as well to improve the sound.
The exynos version will definitely use wolfson (wolfson is now primary partner for galaxy line) . In comparing the two, Wolfsons is considered to be best for neutral detailed dynamic sound but then it's your personal choice what is most enjoyable for you.
Also, the models tested in gsmarena weren't the final release models, so keep that in mind.
SlimJ87D said:
Do we actually have proof though? GSM Arena said that the DAC for the SGS4 is pretty close to the HTC One which in turn had the best DAC they ever tested of an Android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We know that the Exynos models are using a Wolfson DAC; I'd presume that the LTE versions are all using Qualcomm's inbuilt DAC.
Also, why are there "carrier models" again? I thought the i9505 was the be-all-end-all for GSM-based band support, whereas we're seeing differentiation (i.e. ATT and Canada's i337)? It's understandable for CDMA carriers, but for GSM?
And that "20%" increase in speed will not be noticed in day to day tasks. Where you will notice it is in games and highly cpu intensive tasks not associated with email or web browsing or anything the average user would run. Unless you are using a app that is really intense you will only notice a very very small difference in speed. Honestly nothing you would even notice side by side. The tests used to show that "20%" speed difference is not real world at all or even close.
Side note...
Not sure who is relying on their phone to record audio at a concert. But being a recording nut its pretty clear that phones are a horrible source for audio recording for music. And lets not get into the problems that surround being in the crowd and recording. Grab a good Shure or Akg or Neumann microphone and try the same thing and you will have issues. So don't base your purchase on audio recording at a concert. lol
Even if you used the HTC One to record at a concert unless you get one of the early models with the NOKIA mic's you will still get bad quality.
And don't forget, The Korean version that has the Exynos and LTE suport will not work on US LTE. And with Sprint putting up LTE towers EVERYWHERE its only going to get better. I'm in Michigan and almost everywhere I go I have 4G LTE on my S3. I live in rural area and I have LTE. The amount of towers that are LTE now is amazing. They might not be official or even turned on over 25% of the range capable but its still growing fast.
mr_sock said:
They S4 US version should be using same qualcomm dac as HTC One.
The only thing different as far as I know is that HTC One has external amp and stereo speakers. And beats audio is basically software mod for increased treble and bass. But HTC also did some in-house mod as well to improve the sound.
The exynos version will definitely use wolfson (wolfson is now primary partner for galaxy line) . In comparing the two, Wolfsons is considered to be best for neutral detailed dynamic sound but then it's your personal choice what is most enjoyable for you.
Also, the models tested in gsmarena weren't the final release models, so keep that in mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TemporaryTester said:
We know that the Exynos models are using a Wolfson DAC; I'd presume that the LTE versions are all using Qualcomm's inbuilt DAC.
Also, why are there "carrier models" again? I thought the i9505 was the be-all-end-all for GSM-based band support, whereas we're seeing differentiation (i.e. ATT and Canada's i337)? It's understandable for CDMA carriers, but for GSM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to let everyone know, GSM Arena got a final production unit that was better in everything. Benchmarks, Sound quality test (and they did the sound quality test wrong) and other things.
The final production version of the SGS4 did better than it did last time which it did well in. This is the i9505.
So the DAC sounds like it's good enough. Wolfson is probably still better for audio mixing abilities and the right kernel.
If given the option between the 9505 or the AT&T model, which is the best route? I do quite a bit of international traveling, but am based on the east coast of the US. I have AT&T, however am giving serious consideration to the 9505 which seems the most "international" model for use across Europe and Japan GSM carriers. Thoughts? Suggestions? Help!? lol
Can't live without LTE now I'm getting speeds of 45-50Mbps everywhere here in Canada
97prelude said:
I think you guys are missing the main point of my post, which is simply begging the question:
Is the ~20% increase in speed and what I consider other minor improvements worth the potential ongoing headache of stateside incompatibility and support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had the same kind of question as you. I did a little research and I am not sure that it is really worth it in your case. but it depends how much you like the phone and if you use it a lot too
jerzyboy2421 said:
If given the option between the 9505 or the AT&T model, which is the best route? I do quite a bit of international traveling, but am based on the east coast of the US. I have AT&T, however am giving serious consideration to the 9505 which seems the most "international" model for use across Europe and Japan GSM carriers. Thoughts? Suggestions? Help!? lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're going to pay full price, get the T-Mobile M919. All the bands of the AT&T, but no bootloader lock and a lot less crapware. You can also get LTE on *some* European carriers (the ones using the 2600 band).
It's not worth giving up LTE at home just to get it while traveling, IMO. AT&T in US cities is just too congested not to want both radios as fallback.
s44 said:
If you're going to pay full price, get the T-Mobile M919. All the bands of the AT&T, but no bootloader lock and a lot less crapware. You can also get LTE on *some* European carriers (the ones using the 2600 band).
It's not worth giving up LTE at home just to get it while traveling, IMO. AT&T in US cities is just too congested not to want both radios as fallback.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you've convinced me to go with T-Mobile ... against my better judgement. I hadn't done any research into that model up until yesterday. But you're absolutely correct.
unlocked bootloader
SIM unlocked
capable of working on AT&T network out of the box
I've never tested or tried T-Mobile's 4G/LTE network in my area though. However, according to data and maps I've looked at, I should have decent service in my area. PLUS the lure of unlimited 4G.
So off I go to the T-Mobile store today ... here we go, hopefully this will be the best option for me
So looking at the specs for the Mate 9, it looks like even though it's advertised as GSM unlocked only, the MHA-L29 model has all the CDMA radios to make it work on a US network like Verizon. This seems similar to the Axon 7. I know it's only just come out in the US, but I'm curious if anybody is planning on trying it on Verizon or another CDMA network. I have Verizon and the Mate 9 looks like an amazing phone, but I don't want to drop $600 on it without being relatively sure it'll actually work.
Have you asked Verizon if they are going to sell or support it?
RR-99 said:
Have you asked Verizon if they are going to sell or support it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even if they don't it would be still usable on their network. That is, IF it has the proper CDMA for Verizon and/or Sprint. Like the Axon 7, it will show "roaming" but will work fine. I think it will be a matter of waiting until someone tries it. I would totally do it but no Best Buy within 250 miles of me has one in stock.
emtownsend said:
Even if they don't it would be still usable on their network. That is, IF it has the proper CDMA for Verizon and/or Sprint. Like the Axon 7, it will show "roaming" but will work fine. I think it will be a matter of waiting until someone tries it. I would totally do it but no Best Buy within 250 miles of me has one in stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
been trying. won't work.
got the axon 7 to work, though call reception wasn't as good as pixel and no data during calls.
Thanks for the definitive info!
Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
emtownsend said:
Thanks for the definitive info!
Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea it's too bad. i'd been looking forward to this phone for a long time.
screen is awesome, really bright, super fast. way more responsive than the pixel.
speaker sucks, but so does the pixel's.
i don't get the point of launching in the US to only half of the potential customers.
I keep pressing sprint to accept it. Otherwise our 2 accounts will be bought out via another carrier. Where i work i get a big discount on Verizon so i can get a huge plan for less, better speeds n service etc.
OR ill have Tmo buy it out
It's not up to Sprint. The hardware is CDMA compatible (and works on CDMA in China), but it has not yet been certified by the FCC to use CDMA in the US. As per Anandtech in their Kirin 960 review:
"It should be pointed out that CDMA certification for the US via the FCC takes 18-24 months, and I was unable to confirm when the process was started, so we may have to wait another year for a US-focused CDMA devices."
dscline said:
It's not up to Sprint. The hardware is CDMA compatible (and works on CDMA in China), but it has not yet been certified by the FCC to use CDMA in the US. As per Anandtech in their Kirin 960 review:
"It should be pointed out that CDMA certification for the US via the FCC takes 18-24 months, and I was unable to confirm when the process was started, so we may have to wait another year for a US-focused CDMA devices."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. So the radio could work but it's restricted somehow? Still a bummer... [emoji16]
Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
dscline said:
It's not up to Sprint. The hardware is CDMA compatible (and works on CDMA in China), but it has not yet been certified by the FCC to use CDMA in the US. As per Anandtech in their Kirin 960 review:
"It should be pointed out that CDMA certification for the US via the FCC takes 18-24 months, and I was unable to confirm when the process was started, so we may have to wait another year for a US-focused CDMA devices."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
really interesting, thanks.
18-24 months is a crazy long time. not sure where they get that.
one of innumerable articles about the Pixel is that it took 9 mos to build, start to finish.
and I think there was also a short timeline for the S6 after Samsung ditched the 810.
not gonna argue w/AnandTech, but I am curious how that works.
beaner_b said:
one of innumerable articles about the Pixel is that it took 9 mos to build, start to finish.
and I think there was also a short timeline for the S6 after Samsung ditched the 810.
not gonna argue w/AnandTech, but I am curious how that works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not about the phone, it's the chipset. Qualcomm has a lot of CDMA technology IP, so phones that use CDMA either have needed to use Qualcomm's chips, or pay them royalties. I believe the Kirin 960 is one of the first non-Qualcomm chips to natively support CDMA. But the FCC has to approve it's use in the US. I believe this is why Samsung has used their own Exynos chips in their phones in other markets, but uses Qualcomm's chips in phones destined to the US... it's cheaper and/or easier to just buy Qualcomm's chips that have already been approved.
dscline said:
It's not about the phone, it's the chipset. Qualcomm has a lot of CDMA technology IP, so phones that use CDMA either have needed to use Qualcomm's chips, or pay them royalties. I believe the Kirin 960 is one of the first non-Qualcomm chips to natively support CDMA. But the FCC has to approve it's use in the US. I believe this is why Samsung has used their own Exynos chips in their phones in other markets, but uses Qualcomm's chips in phones destined to the US... it's cheaper and/or easier to just buy Qualcomm's chips that have already been approved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh ok, that make sense.
so when Samsung skipped the 810 completely in the S6/Note 5 and just went with their Exynos, they still used Qualcomm's radios for the Sprint/Verizon versions.
beaner_b said:
so when Samsung skipped the 810 completely in the S6/Note 5 and just went with their Exynos, they still used Qualcomm's radios for the Sprint/Verizon versions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here are a couple articles about that...
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...mm-inc-totally-out-of-the-samsung-galaxy.aspx
http://www.androidcentral.com/about-qualcomm-4g-sticker-your-galaxy-s6
dscline said:
Here are a couple articles about that...
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...mm-inc-totally-out-of-the-samsung-galaxy.aspx
http://www.androidcentral.com/about-qualcomm-4g-sticker-your-galaxy-s6
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
good stuff, thanks!
so if it is technically possible to run this on Sprint (thinking Project FI which uses TMobile and Sprint 90% of the time), then is there a way to force the device to use the CDMA modem for the US Dual-band models (L29)? Is this a matter of Sprint rejecting the IMEI (akin to verizon) due to the chipset not "qualified" for use by FCC, or is it somehow disabled in the device? IF this is something turned off at the device (because it was shipped to US?), is there a custom ROM / Firmware that can be used to enable it? I'd really like to keep FI but right now my shiny new device wont switch over from TMobile to Sprint. #Pissed.
I'm bought in at this point, so if theres a way to do it, I'll do whatever is necessary, including voiding warranty.
my impression was the CDMA was for China DATA and not a voice CDMA. I bought 2 of the mate 9s but I may have to sell out - ATT covers 99% of the people - as long as they are in metro areas. Disapointing, I love these phones.......
It's never going to happen
dscline said:
It's not up to Sprint. The hardware is CDMA compatible (and works on CDMA in China), but it has not yet been certified by the FCC to use CDMA in the US. As per Anandtech in their Kirin 960 review:
"It should be pointed out that CDMA certification for the US via the FCC takes 18-24 months, and I was unable to confirm when the process was started, so we may have to wait another year for a US-focused CDMA devices."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While it may be CDMA compatible I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it ever to be here in the US, Huawei hasn't even been updating the US model of the mate 9 (last security patch was from May), and as far as I can tell the mate 10 is the last one with a US model, none of the new honor phones are US, just international models. With the BS from the government and the lack of support for US customers I think Huawei is a dead horse as far as we are concerned
I understand Exynos doesn't work with US CDMA and that is why the Qualcom versions exist. Is Samsung intentionally crippling it's own CPU to keep things the even? Verizon is EOL on their CDMA network next year really only leaving Sprint. Sprint is the 4th carrier now and only has a 12% market share. Canada is already sunsetting their CDMA too. Sprint has 12% (52 million) market share. Samsung has a 25% of that. At most that's 12 million people and much less since Samsung sales low end phones too.
Kind of silly to have to produce two models to cater to that especially with licensing and the fact that it is their chip.
I ask because I saw a thread suggesting that the camera could shoot much higher speeds on the Exynos, but was software limited.
I just want the best I can get!
Has anyone verified NextRadio and the FM antennae yet?
I'd say there are skeptical things with Qualcomm. They must have some impact on this to sell their chips in the US
ls3mach said:
Has anyone verified NextRadio and the FM antennae yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On Snapdragon versions, yes. Exynos versions no (I believe).
Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
Exynos 9810 has no modem built in, and CDMA compatibility has nothing to do with why the U. S. market gets the Snapdragon. Luckily Snapdragon 845 is a better SOC than the Exynos 9810 and you can rest assured you are not screwed.
This really ticks me off to hear if it is true. I am from Canada and purchased the international version this time because I read so much that bragged the Exynos version was so much faster than the Snapdragon version. Paid a pretty penny for it too! I do like my phone but my ANTUTU scores don't seem to be as good as those running SD SOC's.
Samsung apparently has a marketing agreement with Qualcomm to not sell phones with Exynos in the U.S. Otherwise, Samsung could certainly build Exynos based phones with CDMA support if they wanted to.
Guys,
Enjoy your phones, they are both more or less equal with Exynos being very slightly faster in CPU intensive tasks and Snapdragon being slightly faster in GPU (gaming) related tasks. In real world, this difference is almost unnoticeable. (0.5 to 1 second faster game launch on SD).
The good thing is that Exynos is only going to get better due to unlocked bootloader and open source development that will follow.
meyerweb said:
Samsung apparently has a marketing agreement with Qualcomm to not sell phones with Exynos in the U.S. Otherwise, Samsung could certainly build Exynos based phones with CDMA support if they wanted to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How long is that in place?
I was pretty sure samsung would not nerf their own processor but now I'm sure they did. We can all claim it is for battery reasons or something, but I believe that it is so that it can be neck and neck with the snapdragon.
These screenshots were taken a few minutes ago, after I flashed a custom kernel and unrestricted the 4 big cores so they are able to hit 2.9ghz and the little ones 2.0ghz. I believe that 2.7ghz is what was running for most of the benchmarks, but it hits 2.9ghz on the CPU scaling Log.
Exynos is, in fact the second best processor on a smartphone right after the A11 and would most likely match it on geekbench (surpasses it on antutu even stock) if I could lock the frequency at 2.9ghz but minimum can only be set to 2.0ghz and so it goes up and down and there is only the stock governor to choose from and that is utter crap.
Any doubts I'll help as best as I can.
ls3mach said:
How long is that in place?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No idea, I'm afraid.