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.
I just have one question for you: why is the HOX w S4 chips are significantly more expensive than the quad core version, given that they're both imported?
Thanks.
I bought mine outright with Telstra and it was $749 AUD - not that much more than the Quad core version at the time.
More likely that as our S4 One XL is for Telstra's 4G LTE network with 32gig of storage its a little unique therefore more expensive.
To be honest though there really isn't an issue with price when IMO I have a better device on a better network than the other carrier offerings over here!!
Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk 2
Newer CPU tech, larger storage and LTE connectivity = more expensive.
geekygrl said:
I bought mine outright with Telstra and it was $749 AUD - not that much more than the Quad core version at the time.
More likely that as our S4 One XL is for Telstra's 4G LTE network with 32gig of storage its a little unique therefore more expensive.
To be honest though there really isn't an issue with price when IMO I have a better device on a better network than the other carrier offerings over here!!
Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sly ******* said:
Newer CPU tech, larger storage and LTE connectivity = more expensive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What they said ^^
averygagaanroid said:
I just have one question for you: why is the HOX w S4 chips are significantly more expensive than the quad core version, given that they're both imported?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S4 chip is on the new 28nm process at TSMC, where literally every single chip coming off the line is spoken for. The quad Tegra 3 is based off of the 40nm process, which is basically cheap and easy to work with by now.
hi
Some of the Samsung lead phones have excellent support here on XDA... I have a GSII etc...
I was wondering which of the "dual sim" phones have almost equally excellent support on the forum here.
I admit dual sim phones are not available every where, and also as not as popular..
BUT I still have the question....
I would like to buy a dual-sim phone which I can easily install a custom rom, and a custom kernel...
G
ghatothkach said:
hi
Some of the Samsung lead phones have excellent support here on XDA... I have a GSII etc...
I was wondering which of the "dual sim" phones have almost equally excellent support on the forum here.
I admit dual sim phones are not available every where, and also as not as popular..
BUT I still have the question....
I would like to buy a dual-sim phone which I can easily install a custom rom, and a custom kernel...
G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simple. Non. Dual sim phones are still too rare and not supported by any of the major US carriers. No Dual Sim phones have any real support here.
zelendel said:
Simple. Non. Dual sim phones are still too rare and not supported by any of the major US carriers. No Dual Sim phones have any real support here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought there were a number of folks here from Europe India and China here...
I guess its a common idea in those countries to use a dual sim phone, where one sim is your
personal sim and the other on is provided by your workplace/job...
Which is why Samsung/HTC and alll the major players have dual-sim or multi-sim phones...
G
Oh there are. Many of our greatest developers are in Europe but very few use dual similar phones. No one has picked up development for them so they never get a forum. XDA is a US based site so I think that is why we see less of this really.
Wayne Tech S-III
zelendel said:
Simple. Non. Dual sim phones are still too rare and not supported by any of the major US carriers. No Dual Sim phones have any real support here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
interestingly the Galasy SII-i9100 is NOT a US phone....
yet it has so much support on the forum here
the same goes for the Galaxy Note-II i7100 and various other phones which are not really US phones...
My next upgrade will be the S4, but I want the Exonys version, which wont be available here in the US and may be not in Europe too...
I wish T-moble with its new plans brings the Exonys version here, but thats still a dream...
Dont know if that is a problem or Qualcomm is blackmailing Samsung with Patents in not selling the Exonys here...
Samsung went head-head with Apple, but I bet they dont want to do that with Qualcomm..
G
ghatothkach said:
interestingly the Galasy SII-i9100 is NOT a US phone....
yet it has so much support on the forum here
the same goes for the Galaxy Note-II i7100 and various other phones which are not really US phones...
My next upgrade will be the S4, but I want the Exonys version, which wont be available here in the US and may be not in Europe too...
I wish T-moble with its new plans brings the Exonys version here, but thats still a dream...
Dont know if that is a problem or Qualcomm is blackmailing Samsung with Patents in not selling the Exonys here...
Samsung went head-head with Apple, but I bet they dont want to do that with Qualcomm..
G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It maybe the fact that alot of devs have threatened to leave samsung because of that exynos chip
Okay to kick things off this thread is specifically for Chinese Android phones, please leave popular phones (Nexus 4) as well as Huawei out of it.
I've been looking into Chinese phones and they're awesome. Great specs at a third of the cost. But as you may know most Chinese phones will not have working 3G with US carriers.
What I'm looking to do is make a list of phones that will have working 3G with US carriers.
So let's establish what carriers allow you to bring your own unlocked phone. So far I only know of Simple Mobile and T Mobile. PLEASE tell us what other carriers let you used unlocked phones and what bands they use.
These phones are VERY rare and VERY hard to find, that's why I'm here. I want other people to be able to share their work and hopefully save some time for those interested.
So this is about how you should post:
Blu Quattro 5.7 HD - $340 - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/900/1700/1900/2100)
Blu Quattro 4.5 HD - $339 - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/900/1700/1900/2100)
Blu Quattro 4.5 - $225 - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/900/1700/1900/2100)
Meizu MX (dual core) - $270 - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/900/1700/1900/2100)
Meizu MX 4 core - $355 - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/900/1700/1900/2100)
Oppo Find 5 - $500 - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/1700/1900/2100)
Alcatel One Touch Scribe X - $??? - Apparently released but I can't find it online? - Compatible with Simple Mobile and most other carriers (850/900/1700/1900/2100)
I have links to all these phones that include full specs but can not post them as I am a noob! Aggravating to say the least. But if you're curious about them I can point you in the right direction.
There are many other phones that offer more than just the 850/2100 combo but as I don't know what carriers use what (yet) I haven't bothered to post them.
Please help build the list guys! So many great phones being overlooked simply because it's a real pain to find out about them.
I think this thread definitely deserves a bump, I've just started peeking into the fascinating world of Chinese phones and it'd really help to know which ones have been tested on US networks.
Yes, I am another who is interested. But not only are the specs important. Any verifiable evidence that any Chinese phone works on 3G and 4G bands. I am also interested in T-Mobile which utilizes 1700, 1900 & 2100.
The CDMA version of this phone(XT1548) is elusive. You cannot order it from motorola.com as it is not even an option. Their customer service directed me to Verizon which is annoying since they do not carry it. Looking at the specs on Droid Life, I tried each carrier site listed for this version. US Cellular is the only company to offer it but they WILL NOT ship it unless your billing address is in one of their tiny coverage cities and in my case it is not even available in my state. Who has this phone and where can you buy it? I want it! Please help if you know, thanks.
Sprint and Sprint MVNOs still do not have any stock or information on their websites yet. Sprint employees don't have any information.
The sooner the better.
To add to this sad news, I noticed that only the 8GB/1GB factory firmware has been posted here which leads me to believe there might not be a 16GB/2GB model available when it does go on sale. I guess we're just going to have to settle for what we can get.
EDIT: On the bright side there are many happy customers with the 8GB/1GB model.
As of today for the Sprint network...
Virgin Mobile (USA) has the XT1548 listed on their site for $149. Will require a year of service before being released. Unlimited data plan is available.
Neither Boost Mobile or Ting have the XT1548 available.
I think I did see the Virgin mobile one but it is only 1gb and I think you have to buy coverage with it, but thanks for the heads up. I am trying out an xt1540 GSM 2gb alongside my moto x which is Verizon unlimited. The moto g is definitely faster smoother, better battery and much better camera but still too big but maybe I'll get used to it. I'm praying the CDMA version will come out in the 2gb flavor on their site and I'll sell this one for it.
Best Buy Here.
thanks so much, just wish they had a 2gb/16gb CDMA model available, but it looks like they did that on purpose. If there was a teardown available for this 3rd gen moto g then I would be tempted to attempt to swap the motherboard and ram from the 2gb gsm model to the 1gb CDMA one. I doubt it would be that easy, but I can always hope...
Why?
Why do you think they did it on purpose?
nexus7lte said:
thanks so much, just wish they had a 2gb/16gb CDMA model available, but it looks like they did that on purpose. If there was a teardown available for this 3rd gen moto g then I would be tempted to attempt to swap the motherboard and ram from the 2gb gsm model to the 1gb CDMA one. I doubt it would be that easy, but I can always hope...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RAM on phones is soldered down and very small, so you probably won't be moving it from one motherboard to the other. The motherboard also contains the baseband, so putting a GSM motherboard in your CDMA phone would just give you a GSM phone with mismatched antennas.
I'm curious if the CDMA version only has 1GB/8GB to save space on the motherboard for CDMA radio components. I thought this was basically all handled in the Snapdragon SoC, but maybe CDMA requires more components on the motherboard and that's why these other specs suffered? More likely, though, it's just that the CDMA carriers wanted a cheaper price point for the device/higher profit margin at launch.