Related
So I visited www.phonearena.com yesterday and saw the news about the HTC Pyramid.At first I thought wow,Qualcomm and HTC won't only get left behind but will have about the same technology and will run at higher frequencies.
But then I remembered something that troubled me.I remember reading somewhere that Qualcomm's dual-core CPUs will be based on the current-gen Cortex-A8 by ARM,while others,like Samsung's Orion,will be using the next-gen Cortex-A9 that is superior in both perfrormance and consumption,while being designed especially for dual-core CPUs,unlike the A8.
What's your take on this guys?
No one?
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
Strongly agree
i hope this isn't true. tegra 2 outperformed old cpu's with only one core running! that's because it's Cortex-A9. now, if it was Cortex-A8, i don't think there would be much of a difference.
In fact i think it is superior to the tegra 2 or Orion plat form despite being an cortex A8 architecture, but it is not a long term solution point proven as Qualcomm is developing it A9 counterpart the MSM 89xx
How it is superior? Well between A8 and A9 architecture to my knowledge there isn't much of a difference, the major one is enhanced soc and the capability to use DDR3 ram instead of being limited to ddr2
But how these two doesn't matter in the short term, well the first one is obvious because Qualcomm doesn't use just a Normal Cortex A8 architecture ( was used on the first gen of snapdragon) as the second generation MSM8255 used on the desire HD for exemple has an enhanced soc and cach point proven when compared to a lets say Omap 3 or hummingbird in every cpu benchmark i believe the MSM comes on top(correct me if i m wrong).
The second point which is about Ram, i don't believe we will be seeing DDR3 ram on smartphone anytime soon so at this it is a kinda useless advantage.
Now add to that if the rumors are correct that one cpu can be switched off if the charge is low then while the on tegra 2 which use a dual core architecture and not a dual cpu architecture.
Edit: this is true + Asynchronis clocking for each core!
Also in terms of graphics, the MSM8x60 comes with adreno 220 which is definitly faster than the adreno 205 almost as fast as the SGX540 and which is rumored to be faster than the GPU in tegra 2, the geforce, as for the Orion is believed to get the SGX543mp2 but Orion is not coming anytime soon, and probably will hit the market once tegra3 and MSM89XX is almost there (which comes with Adreno 300)
Hopefully this does help you, i know that not everything i mentioned is accurate, but i ll invite you to watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdVw9uBIr5I
But how these two doesn't matter in the short term, well the first one is obvious because Qualcomm doesn't use just a Normal Cortex A8 architecture ( was used on the first gen of snapdragon) as the second generation MSM8255 used on the desire HD for exemple has an enhanced soc and cach point proven when compared to a lets say Omap 3 or hummingbird in every cpu benchmark i believe the MSM comes on top(correct me if i m wrong).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Synthetic benchmarks like that though don't gauge real life performance though.
vbetts said:
Synthetic benchmarks like that though don't gauge real life performance though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do agree with you, but they do give a scal for the performance especially when there are different types that relies on a different system to test the perfomance.
In real world you have to agree that MSM8255 is the fastest CPU out there atm just look at how the Desire HD is a screamer! or even the G2/Desire Z with the same CPU but clocked 800mhz does a pretty great job even compared to the latest omap3/hummingbird phones.
Definitely, the MSM8255 45nm matches the old MSM8250 65nm even when the stock clock in the Z/G2 is only 800 mhz, versus that extra 200 mhz. The gpu is lacking compared to others.
vbetts said:
Definitely, the MSM8255 45nm matches the old MSM8250 65nm even when the stock clock in the Z/G2 is only 800 mhz, versus that extra 200 mhz. The gpu is lacking compared to others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No,the GPU of the Desire Z/HD only lacks against the SGX540 of the Galaxy S!
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
kurolife said:
In fact i think it is superior to the tegra 2 or Orion plat form despite being an cortex A8 architecture, but it is not a long term solution point proven as Qualcomm is developing it A9 counterpart the MSM 89xx
How it is superior? Well between A8 and A9 architecture to my knowledge there isn't much of a difference, the major one is enhanced soc and the capability to use DDR3 ram instead of being limited to ddr2
But how these two doesn't matter in the short term, well the first one is obvious because Qualcomm doesn't use just a Normal Cortex A8 architecture ( was used on the first gen of snapdragon) as the second generation MSM8255 used on the desire HD for exemple has an enhanced soc and cach point proven when compared to a lets say Omap 3 or hummingbird in every cpu benchmark i believe the MSM comes on top(correct me if i m wrong).
The second point which is about Ram, i don't believe we will be seeing DDR3 ram on smartphone anytime soon so at this it is a kinda useless advantage.
Now add to that if the rumors are correct that one cpu can be switched off if the charge is low then while the on tegra 2 which use a dual core architecture and not a dual cpu architecture.
Edit: this is true + Asynchronis clocking for each core!
Also in terms of graphics, the MSM8x60 comes with adreno 220 which is definitly faster than the adreno 205 almost as fast as the SGX540 and which is rumored to be faster than the GPU in tegra 2, the geforce, as for the Orion is believed to get the SGX543mp2 but Orion is not coming anytime soon, and probably will hit the market once tegra3 and MSM89XX is almost there (which comes with Adreno 300)
Hopefully this does help you, i know that not everything i mentioned is accurate, but i ll invite you to watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdVw9uBIr5I
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok,you convinced me!I'll be buyinh htc again!
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
vbetts said:
Definitely, the MSM8255 45nm matches the old MSM8250 65nm even when the stock clock in the Z/G2 is only 800 mhz, versus that extra 200 mhz. The gpu is lacking compared to others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As lotis said the only GPU that is faster than the Adreno 205 is the SGX540 and by a very slight marging in 3D while the Adreno wins in terms of 2D. The thing with Adreno GPUs is that they are clocked with the CPU and i believe the comparaisons were done with a G2 vs SGS + lagfix and froyo , i believe the GPU on the Desire HD does have a higher clock than the one on the G2 and thus perform better but again is this a fact or just another rumor if someone could confirm this..
But for a fact we all know that a stock G2 on pure android does 1600-1800 Quadrant score and a pure desire HD does a 1900-2100 on Android + sense out of the box
tolis626 said:
Ok,you convinced me!I'll be buyinh htc again!
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i m looking forward to the pyramid hopefully HTC will show it on the MWC (but im afraid there is a chance that they won't because they've just released the desire HD counter part in the US aka thunderbolt and inspire 4G) or else i might be tempted by the Motorola Atrix
whats up with all the fear and worries ? quandrant for tegra2 is a mere 1911 . it will get its a** kicked by anthing qcom makes in 2011 .
that said , there is a low possibility quandrant only runs single core enabled on quadrant , but what makes u sure that other apps will run dual core then ?
souljaboy said:
whats up with all the fear and worries ? quandrant for tegra2 is a mere 1911 . it will get its a** kicked by anthing qcom makes in 2011 .
that said , there is a low possibility quandrant only runs single core enabled on quadrant , but what makes u sure that other apps will run dual core then ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing!That's the thing!
At the moment there is no software that takes advantage of both cores.I think that Gingerbread also has problems.So we have yet to see the performance gains by dual-cores.
kurolife said:
In fact i think it is superior to the tegra 2 or Orion plat form despite being an cortex A8 architecture, but it is not a long term solution point proven as Qualcomm is developing it A9 counterpart the MSM 89xx
How it is superior? Well between A8 and A9 architecture to my knowledge there isn't much of a difference, the major one is enhanced soc and the capability to use DDR3 ram instead of being limited to ddr2
But how these two doesn't matter in the short term, well the first one is obvious because Qualcomm doesn't use just a Normal Cortex A8 architecture ( was used on the first gen of snapdragon) as the second generation MSM8255 used on the desire HD for exemple has an enhanced soc and cach point proven when compared to a lets say Omap 3 or hummingbird in every cpu benchmark i believe the MSM comes on top(correct me if i m wrong).
The second point which is about Ram, i don't believe we will be seeing DDR3 ram on smartphone anytime soon so at this it is a kinda useless advantage.
Now add to that if the rumors are correct that one cpu can be switched off if the charge is low then while the on tegra 2 which use a dual core architecture and not a dual cpu architecture.
Edit: this is true + Asynchronis clocking for each core!
Also in terms of graphics, the MSM8x60 comes with adreno 220 which is definitly faster than the adreno 205 almost as fast as the SGX540 and which is rumored to be faster than the GPU in tegra 2, the geforce, as for the Orion is believed to get the SGX543mp2 but Orion is not coming anytime soon, and probably will hit the market once tegra3 and MSM89XX is almost there (which comes with Adreno 300)
Hopefully this does help you, i know that not everything i mentioned is accurate, but i ll invite you to watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdVw9uBIr5I
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope you're right!!
I didn't think it was possible for an A8 to be dual core
The dual core cortex a8 qualcomm is building is a heavily customized version. It has features from a9 built into the cpu.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
hey what do you say about the net quad core processors from nvidia.. ? smart phones will become computers and our laptops will be just a notebook..for music and bigger games
alexandru.j91 said:
hey what do you say about the net quad core processors from nvidia.. ? smart phones will become computers and our laptops will be just a notebook..for music and bigger games
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My laptop already is for surfing the net only because I prefer the large keyboard(it's a 17 incher after all ).Everything else I do with my smartphone,which has a 25% share of my gaming time.I also have a ps3!
Now,quad-core CPUs will first be for tablets(August 2011) and then for smartphones(Fall 2011?Maybe).These will pack some things like 12-core GPUs etc.Tests have already shown that they beat many dual-core x86 CPUs.What's next?Dunno,but I surely wanna see!
The next computers is possible, but relatively weak computers per say. But can any of our phones run crysis or crysis 2? Are they even remotely capable of generating over 10fps of it? Even the MALI 400MP, Tegra 2, adreno 220 or power vr SGX543 can't manage that. I don't think we'll be seeing any SoC's with that sort of power until maybe two years?
Point being, phones will never hold the same amount of power a computer can output. So computers will stay. Who's to say computer SoC's haven't been improving? sandybridge, quantum processing, six cores core i9, 48 cores? No one cares for computer news anymore?
Anyways onto the topic, looking at the new gpu benchmarks posted of the dual core snapdragon, 1.5ghz. They're making the other cpu's look bad. So maybe the SoC isn't that bad after all. looks like it was a prototype also so the finished product could be even better. Source:
http://blog.gsmarena.com/the-new-1-...sm8660-got-benchmarked-meet-the-new-champion/
Many people told me that samsung's CPU is the best,qualcomm's and TI's is not good,why? And I also want to know,what different from kinds of GPU?Is there GPU can called"The Best"?I am a Chinese student,my English is bad....Please don't care...
If you re looking at the dual core cpu's and you want benchmark "best" then the snapdragon whips the latest qualcom cpu in the sensation without some serious overclocking... to be fair though the sensation is still an amazingly fast handset so its hard to tell..
小刷同学 said:
Many people told me that samsung's CPU is the best,qualcomm's and TI's is not good,why? And I also want to know,what different from kinds of GPU?Is there GPU can called"The Best"?I am a Chinese student,my English is bad....Please don't care...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well technically speaking the iPad 2 has the best GPU on the market (by a long shot), but we're probably talking about Android here so:
The best is the Adreno 220 in the dual core Snapdragons. (ie...HTC Sensation, MyTouch 4G Slide), (Any Qualcomm chip ending in 8x60). The Mali400MP in the Galaxy S II is supposed to be amazing, but the benchmark performance is rather disappointing. Either it's clocked very low or comes with a terrible OpenGL stack or driver.
As for CPU performance. They're all fairly close. They're all using dual core ARM Cortex-A9s. The differences come from L2 cache amounts, pipelines, RAM type, etc. I don't think you would find any noticable in every day usage going from the Tegra 2 to the 3rd gen Snapdragons to the Exynos, etc.
If you're buying a single core phone the only ones to look at are Hummingbird based ones and 2nd gen snapdragons (ending in 8x55).
Anyone else have Galaxy S3 specs on AnTuTu benchmark? I was running some tests and saw this...
Sorry for the quality, took with my Focus Flash.
All the specs look good except for the 4212 Exynos processor. Isnt that Samsungs dual core processor with no embedded LTE?
Hmmm.....it seems there will be really a 1.4Ghz processor within. They are considering to improve the OS before they go for more hardware......
I hoped for little more juce.....
Red5 said:
All the specs look good except for the 4212 Exynos processor. Isnt that Samsungs dual core processor with no embedded LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, that was the one they announced back in september, people thought it would be in the gnex I think
Red5 said:
All the specs look good except for the 4212 Exynos processor. Isnt that Samsungs dual core processor with no embedded LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Red5, didn't expect to see you here.
But yeah, you're right. Even though it's dual core, it seems to have better battery consumption than the Galaxy S II chip and "50% better GPU performance."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4900/samsung-talks-about-32nm-15ghz-exynos-soc
Edit: Just submitted this thread to Engadget. Let's see if they bite...
Edit2: Yup, found it through AnTuTu as well. It says "Certified Configuration" if that means anything.
Previous leaks have been of a quad-core phone, how does this being a dual core chip make any sense?
Edit: also the 4212 is clocked at 1.5 ghz, why is this reporting it at 1.4?
tehh4ck3r said:
Previous leaks have been of a quad-core phone, how does this being a dual core chip make any sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at all! Or it's again dust in the wind? Soon we'll know
I think this is fake, i don't believe that Samsung could launch the Galaxy S3 with a dual-core A9 at this time... the previous leaks points to a quad-core processor - Exynos 4414.
This also could be one of the samples used for tests...
I it's true it sucks and won't really be able to compete with the IP5. Or are they aiming to smoke the now old IP4s? ... Not that impressive at all.
If it's true i think i would buy the HTC ONE X (Tegra3)
So if I overclocked my GNote's gpu I would get similar performance? If so then it looks like I'll be keeping my Note for another year.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA HD app.
According to the bar graphs in antutu, the S3 would be just a bit under twice as powerful as the Note - which runs dual A9s at 1.4GHz also. The 32nm Mali-400s have been clocked 50% higher, which is the main performance difference - and that wouldn't go anywhere near explaining the massive overall performance gap. However that combined with an additional two A9 cores seems fairly realistic.
Either it's a complete fake, or it's just mislabeled - and is actually a 4412. Since this is reality, I'd lean towards the former.
Sjael said:
According to the bar graphs in antutu, the S3 would be just a bit under twice as powerful as the Note - which runs dual A9s at 1.4GHz also. The 32nm Mali-400s have been clocked 50% higher, which is the main performance difference - and that wouldn't go anywhere near explaining the massive overall performance gap. However that combined with an additional two A9 cores seems fairly realistic.
Either it's a complete fake, or it's just mislabeled - and is actually a 4412. Since this is reality, I'd lean towards the former.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can overclock an S2 or Note's GPU to 400mhz with Tegrak OC Ultimate, which is double the stock 266mhz.
EDIT:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/25/2975835/samsung-14gz-exynos-4-quad-processor-next-galaxy?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
So it's quad core but still Mali-400 at 400mhz.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA HD app.
Yep. Seems like AnTuTu didn't know what chip it was so they reported it as a 4212.
tehh4ck3r said:
Yep. Seems like AnTuTu didn't know what chip it was so they reported it as a 4212.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndtvyTPIx3Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player
In the video they compare Exynos 4 dual vs quad and the quad is labeled as Exynos 4212 so it seems Antutu was correct.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA HD app.
It seems that Samsung change the name of the chips, see this http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_announces_new_quadcore_exynos_4_quad_processor-news-4160.php.
4212 - Quad-Core
4210 - Dual-Core
Now the name on the Antutu makes sense.
does anyone know if setting the CPU SPEED to 1.5 GHz is dangerous while the SENSATION XL has the same chipset as the desire s has (Qualcomm Snapdragon MS8255) and the SENSATION XL's CPU speed is set to 1.5GHz .
sensation has msm8260 (dual core 1.2-1.5 GHz and adreno 220)
Sensation XL indeed has MSM8255.
Just like in PCs, chipsets in phones are binned not only by their type, but also by their target frequency. You don't go overclocking Core2Duo 1.8 GHz to 2.4 GHz because it's "the same CPU", right? Because it isn't the same CPU. The same applies here.
אז זה מסוכן או לא ?
English, please.
Answer - would you run the CPU on your computer at 1.5x the speed it was made to run, because there's CPU with the same name (i3/i5/i7/whatever) that runs at 1.5x the speed?
The same answer applies to your phone.
I expect people to be able to make minimal logic work with their own brains rather than just answering "yes/no". I think that this way people actually understand more than what they've asked for.
i guessed that was the answer but just wanted to be sure...
thanks anyway !
msm8255 should run stable on 1.5GHz (if stock freq is lower)
441Excelsior said:
msm8255 should run stable on 1.5GHz (if stock freq is lower)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it won't. It depends on the specific part, and few parts run stock 1.5 GHz without stability issues surfacing / burning out very fast (if overvolted).
If you really want - you can try it on T-Mobile G2, that has MSM8255 of the earliest bin, with stock at 800MHz. Good luck, don't forget to write how did you like a phone as a toaster.
I suggest refraining from bad advice, especially when it's in the forum and it's not your phone you're talking about. You can burn your phones as much as you like, but don't go around suggesting it to others. Just let me understand something: you have stock non-rooted ICS and have no idea about such basics as which guide to use to downgrade, but you allow yourself posting about chipset frequencies?
so which speed can i overclock to that shouldn't turn my device into a toaster ?
deanshugan said:
so which speed can i overclock to that shouldn't turn my device into a toaster ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.2 runs most things with no lag.
Sometimes you're the windshield; sometimes you're the bug.
- Mark Knopfler.
The point is each chip is different even if the same model
What works for me on my device won't necessarily work for you
So test and see if your brave enough, but be aware of the consequences
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
I overclock my ds to1.5 every time I play games and it doesn't even get warm. So I think it's pretty harmless.
Sent from my Desire S using xda premium
Nobody still have discussed it but... our Moto Z XT1650-03 are *really* underclocked!!!
Let's start from the beginning...
First models on marked were the Verizon's Droid version and their SD820 were clocked @2.15 GHz (at least so declared officially Motorola)...
Then came out the unbranded international version and, even if not so "advertized" by Motorola, it's clock was lowered (officially...), to 1.82 GHz. True?
False.
Even if apps like CPU-Z find the CPU able to work between 300 MHz and 1.82 GHz, the real clock frequencies used by Moto Z are in the range 652 MHz - 1.59 GHz!!!
Using root, both my "reference" apps, Antutu CPU Master Pro & FauxClock show this range (652 - 1,59) as used BUT while the lower clock can be lowered to 300 MHz (best setting for longer battery life in my opinion... ), there is NO option to go over 1.59 GHZ at all!!!
From my experience there should be two more setting 1.82 GHZ and, probably, something around @1.7x GHz, but both are unavailable on stock kernel.
So, if @erfanoabdi has really raised clock to real 2.15 GHz in its modified kernel, the difference in performance should be really noticeable! (I don't know about battery life anyway... ).
enetec said:
Nobody still have discussed it but... our Moto Z XT1650-03 are *really* underclocked!!!
Let's start from the beginning...
First models on marked were the Verizon's Droid version and their SD820 were clocked @2.15 GHz (at least so declared officially Motorola)...
Then came out the unbranded international version and, even if not so "advertized" by Motorola, it's clock was lowered (officially...), to 1.82 GHz. True?
False.
Even if apps like CPU-Z find the CPU able to work between 300 MHz and 1.82 GHz, the real clock frequencies used by Moto Z are in the range 652 MHz - 1.59 GHz!!!
Using root, both my "reference" apps, Antutu CPU Master Pro & FauxClock show this range (652 - 1,59) as used BUT while the lower clock can be lowered to 300 MHz (best setting for longer battery life in my opinion... ), there is NO option to go over 1.59 GHZ at all!!!
From my experience there should be two more setting 1.82 GHZ and, probably, something around @1.7x GHz, but both are unavailable on stock kernel.
So, if @erfanoabdi has really raised clock to real 2.15 GHz in its modified kernel, the difference in performance should be really noticeable! (I don't know about battery life anyway... ).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, let me explain it
If you take look at snapdragon 820 details and tech specs you will see this processor have 4 core and
2 core of them is clockable up to 2.15
And other 2 core is clockable up to 1.5
And you can also check it by kernel adiutor app on your device.
International version of moto z using same hardware as Verizon edition but kernel of them are different and CPU of it underclocked to 1.3 and 1.8 Hz
There is some restrictions for GPU too and I fixed them on my kernel
So don't worry
Use my turboZ or Verizon (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69459891&postcount=205) kernel for better speed and performance
erfanoabdi said:
Hi, let me explain it
If you take look at snapdragon 820 details and tech specs you will see this processor have 4 core and
2 core of them is clockable up to 2.15
And other 2 core is clockable up to 1.5
And you can also check it by kernel adiutor app on your device.
International version of moto z using same hardware as Verizon edition but kernel of them are different and CPU of it underclocked to 1.3 and 1.8 Hz
There is some restrictions for GPU too and I fixed them on my kernel
So don't worry
Use my turboZ or Verizon (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69459891&postcount=205) kernel for better speed and performance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With turboz kernel 0.7 it never pass 1.59.
Performance are great all most everywhere with elementalX governor. Just some scrolling stuttering. All is fast and no lags.
It's probably because it's reading the speeds of the other 2 cores in the "efficiency" cluster.
enetec said:
Nobody still have discussed it but... our Moto Z XT1650-03 are *really* underclocked!!!
Let's start from the beginning...
First models on marked were the Verizon's Droid version and their SD820 were clocked @2.15 GHz (at least so declared officially Motorola)...
Then came out the unbranded international version and, even if not so "advertized" by Motorola, it's clock was lowered (officially...), to 1.82 GHz. True?
False.
Even if apps like CPU-Z find the CPU able to work between 300 MHz and 1.82 GHz, the real clock frequencies used by Moto Z are in the range 652 MHz - 1.59 GHz!!!
Using root, both my "reference" apps, Antutu CPU Master Pro & FauxClock show this range (652 - 1,59) as used BUT while the lower clock can be lowered to 300 MHz (best setting for longer battery life in my opinion... ), there is NO option to go over 1.59 GHZ at all!!!
From my experience there should be two more setting 1.82 GHZ and, probably, something around @1.7x GHz, but both are unavailable on stock kernel.
So, if @erfanoabdi has really raised clock to real 2.15 GHz in its modified kernel, the difference in performance should be really noticeable! (I don't know about battery life anyway... ).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So any battery saving experience when you lower the minimum CPU speed to 300MHz?
Is it really running at 300MHz instead of 652MHz?
benson1118 said:
So any battery saving experience when you lower the minimum CPU speed to 300MHz?
Is it really running at 300MHz instead of 652MHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it seems so. Yes, real 300 MHz...
Hello. I am interested in purchasing this phone but am confused by the different versions and conflicting specs that I see online for each. So certain versions have the faster 2.15GHz processor vs 1.8GHz but lack Band 12 support (I'm on T-Mobile). While the others have Band 12 but have the slower processor? Is that correct; there is no way to have both?
cyborgLIS said:
Hello. I am interested in purchasing this phone but am confused by the different versions and conflicting specs that I see online for each. So certain versions have the faster 2.15GHz processor vs 1.8GHz but lack Band 12 support (I'm on T-Mobile). While the others have Band 12 but have the slower processor? Is that correct; there is no way to have both?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can have both by unlocking the bootloader and installing custom roms.
The Marionette said:
You can have both by unlocking the bootloader and installing custom roms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I could purchase either version and use a custom rom to unlock the missing features, i.e. the hardware is identical? Is one route recommended over the other?
cyborgLIS said:
So I could purchase either version and use a custom rom to unlock the missing features, i.e. the hardware is identical? Is one route recommended over the other?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think only a specific variant like the Verizon one is in a bs state when it comes to software. Other than that one, you should be "on equal grounds".