Related
Just having a little look around and found that the HTC One XL has listed 32GB internal storage on the Australian HTC site.
I'd attach a link, but it looks like you just have to google it ;]
Unfortunately because the only thing holding me back from getting the XL was 16GB of storage, Ive already purchased the HOX, just waiting for it to arrive.
Sorry if this is old news.
I would still prefer a quad-core One X over a dual-core XL
good work! all we need are about 50,000 more threads and we can have 1 for every member! how many xda members are there?
Well, I thought it was in the general interest to people as I know a few people were bothered about the 16GB on the LTE version of this phone, so I was just giving out the news, I did have a look around and didn't see any other thread giving this information out..
Unicorns said:
Well, I thought it was in the general interest to people as I know a few people were bothered about the 16GB on the LTE version of this phone, so I was just giving out the news, I did have a look around and didn't see any other thread giving this information out..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because they would be in the one xl forum!
M.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
mattman83 said:
That's because they would be in the one xl forum!
M.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there is no htc one xl forum anymore
nicholaschum said:
I would still prefer a quad-core One X over a dual-core XL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Krait Dual-Core 1.5Ghz 28nm > Tegra 3 Quad-Core 1.5Ghz 40nm
If you had a Dual Core phone before, the Tegra 3 isn't much different, since it has to scale over to the 4 cores which is less likely, whereas the Krait is similar to the A15 Architecture and produces better performance which is why no-one has experience lag on the HTC One S due to faster processor and the smaller resolution. Also battery life is easily going to be better due to the 28nm compared to Tegra 3 Companion Core 40nm.
The Tegra 3 GPU isn't much powerful to the Adreno 225, on GLBenchmark they are both are equal (720p Offscreen, 1 each) and Adreno 225 beats the Tegra 3 in Nenamark 2.
MrPhilo said:
Krait Dual-Core 1.5Ghz 28nm > Tegra 3 Quad-Core 1.5Ghz 40nm
If you had a Dual Core phone before, the Tegra 3 isn't much different, since it has to scale over to the 4 cores which is less likely, whereas the Krait is similar to the A15 Architecture and produces better performance which is why no-one has experience lag on the HTC One S due to faster processor and the smaller resolution. Also battery life is easily going to be better due to the 28nm compared to Tegra 3 Companion Core 40nm.
The Tegra 3 GPU isn't much powerful to the Adreno 225, on GLBenchmark they are both are equal (720p Offscreen, 1 each) and Adreno 225 beats the Tegra 3 in Nenamark 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well we can't really allow the One X to fight against the One S because there are too many variables. When the AT&T version of the One X comes out with the LTE support and One S' processor, then we can actually see the difference.
I agree that sometimes dual core processors can process fast through benchmarks, but then benchmarks can be flawed and tampered with. Also with many factors which could affect raw power testing, as you said resolution difference, background services, etc.
There is a reason why the One S doesn't have the carousel affect when sliding the bars on the bottom to switch menus. It runs a smaller OS, which in turn allows it to have a smaller footprint than One X's heavily bloated OS.
It may be fast over a short period of time, to process small things, but, let's say for computers, if I had to render a 1 minute video on a dual core machine, it will take 5 minutes, but on a quad core machine it will take 2.8 minutes or below. I think of the long period of using a quad core device, and the capabilities in which it hasn't fully utilized yet.
Also when you said dual core, yeah, I had a Samsung Galaxy S II and a Samsung Galaxy Nexus. You can get their ROMs under 200mb for the full Touchwiz experience, while to get a full Sense 4.0 experience, you have a ROM which can go over 600mb easily. The Galaxy S II in my opinion was a very fast device when I used it, all the raw power it had, but as I said, sometimes you just can't compare them because there are way too many variables. Physically if none had an OS, okay fine, you can test, but the way many people test speeds have affected results in at least two ways.
That's my opinion, many people think differently, but I guess people could see where I'm going
Have to say the one s runs like a champ. That thing fast. Faster than my one x. Smooth and snappier. I don't care to much about quadrant but the ones s I've tried scored 5400 lol and transitions were butter. Snappier and smoother than my quad core lol. On the other hand I've also tried the one x dual core from att. I think.that's the same as the xl. That one was laggy and not smaooth as the one.s so one s wins.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
nicholaschum said:
let's say for computers, if I had to render a 1 minute video on a dual core machine, it will take 5 minutes, but on a quad core machine it will take 1 minute or below.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm, what? If you take an Intel E6600 and a Q6600, the quad core is twice as powerful, in theory. You can't get a 5 times speedup! You can't even get a 2 times speedup, since some of the workload isn't parallelisable.
This is completely irrelevant, however, since has already has been mentioned, the Tegra3 and Snapdragons are quite different.
BenPope said:
Ummm, what? If you take an Intel E6600 and a Q6600, the quad core is twice as powerful, in theory. You can't get a 5 times speedup! You can't even get a 2 times speedup, since some of the workload isn't parallelisable.
This is completely irrelevant, however, since has already has been mentioned, the Tegra3 and Snapdragons are quite different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, that was a pretty bad comparison, since I don't really have a quad core computer, only 8 core (4cores+imaginary4cores) I don't really know the exact comparison, but at least you know where i'm trying to get at
Hello guys,
Well i need some advice from real people. There are two models in my country: international One X and One XL. You know what the differences are. So maybe someone tested both with same kernel and os version. Which processor is better? Tegra 3 or Snapdragon clocked Krait S4?
In your opinion which one to buy and why? Or just go for One S?
P.S. There are like 1 million reviews and benchmarks and like every single one is different.
Thank you for your opinion!
redh4t said:
Hello guys,
Well i need some advice from real people. There are two models in my country: international One X and One XL. You know what the differences are. So maybe someone tested both with same kernel and os version. Which processor is better? Tegra 3 or Snapdragon clocked Krait S4?
In your opinion which one to buy and why? Or just go for One S?
P.S. There are like 1 million reviews and benchmarks and like every single one is different.
Thank you for your opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
S4 for the battery.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
S4 because its the future.
S4 for the LTE.
S4 for the battery life.
S4 for the win
Sent from my One X
I really do not need LTE. The main thing is speed! And about battery? It is really big difference? Or just go for Galaxy S3...? I just love HTC design, and galaxy is just near ugly, but speed is more important, just hate lag so much.
28nm ftw
Sent from my JellyBean
S4 processor is better. The tegra 3 was rushed so they could be the first to get a quad core. It's crappy architecture. The s4 is better for everything but gaming but only by a little and it kills battery on the tegra
Sent from my One X using xda premium
Speed difference is negligible. S4 wins in a lot of benchmarks, and Tegra wins in a couple. And you would likely not see much difference in real world use. Same performance, but better battery life on the S4.
Also, at launch the Tegra version had graphical glitches, and a number of other bugs that were attributed to the Tegra chipset. Not sure if these were ever sorted out, as I don't keep up with that version. But many were doubting it would be fixed anytime soon, as NVIDIA is notorious for taking forever to address such issues.
And you might think you don't need LTE. But its not just about speed. I get fantastic data reception at my house now under LTE, where under HSPA+ it was dismal (1 bar, with frequent connection drops). At some point, you may find your self in a location(s) that has poor HSPA reception, and LTE will save the day.
Every Tegra device I've put my hands on has always seemed far too slow and glitchy for the supposedly excellent hardware and software behind it. Except the Zune HD, but everyone ignored the Tegra 1 for some reason. S4's got better battery, chances are they are basically identical in real world use. The only downside to the S4 is the lack of official support for the Tegra games, but I'm sure we'll be able to play them in time.
To be honest, we might be able to do them now if Chainfire3d works for us.
I'd buy a Qualcomm based device over a Tegra based one any day of the week for all of the reasons already mentioned.
The S4 may be "only" dual core, but it's the better chip.
sweet, another thread for this
you should of done something original, like ask one x vs. galaxy s3
gunnyman said:
I'd buy a Qualcomm based device over a Tegra based one any day of the week for all of the reasons already mentioned.
The S4 may be "only" dual core, but it's the better chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there are s4 with quad core. a chinese phone maker jiayu, is making the jiayu s1 with s4 pro. that is 4 cores with gpu andreno 320! and with 2 gb ram with 32 gb memory with sd card slot and 2500 mah battery or 3000 mah battery!, with a 3.0 megapixel cam in front and 13 megapixel in the bag, and is thin!. only for 260 or more dollars!. incredible no? (gorila glass maybe, like the other older models!) and the value is near the nexus 4, but this one is better, with more battery, (the jiayu g4 with an older procesor with quadcore wins the nexus 4, this will win the samsum galaxy note 2 or more) jiayu is good with good performance battery and resistant products. and very beautiful too
http://www.gizchina.com/2013/01/30/jiayu-s1-prototype-spotted-alongside-g3/
and the definition isnt hd is full hd 440+ ppi !
I'm very interested in the potential gaming performances of the upcoming Motorola devices, in light of the fact many people are less than excited for their releases due to their non cutting-edge specs.
The Droid MAXX, Droid Ultra and Droid Mini are all confirmed to be equipped with Motorola's new X8 Mobile Computing System, and the Motorola X is almost guaranteed to come with it as well.
The X8 consists of 8 cores, and they are categorized as:
- 2 application processor cores
- 4 graphics processor cores
- 1 contextual computing processor core
- 1 natural processor core
The overall X8 MCS is exciting for a variety of reasons, with the main one being that because of the highly custom and optimized system, the battery will enjoy a heavily increased lifespan. The gaming capabilities, however, are of course the main focus of this thread.
This is what Motorola has to say about the graphics processor cores:
"Four powerful graphics processors each running at 400 MHz delivering 3.2 million pixel fill rate,16 shader units, 512kb dedicated cached memory and running the Egypt performance benchmark at a blazing 155 frames per second (FPS). Fully compliant with Android Project Butter."
Being (apparently) based off the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro, the X8 comes with an Adreno 320 GPU.
For a comparison, here are the results of other comparable devices tackling the Egypt GLBenchmark 2.5:
Galaxy S4 - 40 FPS; HTC One - 32 FPS; Optimus G Pro - 27 FPS; Nexus 4 - 44 FPS.
Just ignore the 1080p and 720p aspects here. True, the Nexus 4 cruises through thanks to its 720p display requiring less work. However, this only serves to enhance the X8's power; while it has an Adreno 320 just like all the devices listed above except for the S4, it completely blows them out of the water - all the upcoming Motorola devices will have a 720p display. I know we're talking on a synthetic level here and that real world performance can differ, but surely this is too big a difference to brush aside like that?
What do you guys think? Is there really more to the Motorola X and and new Droid lineup than meets the eye, for those who look at it purely from a specs perspective?
For all the information, this is the link I used: http://www.androidauthority.com/mot...guage-processing-contextual-computing-247346/
Yeah, the thing about upcoming Motorola phones is, that their graphic chips are not midrange at all. Based on benchmarks they are elite. That's similar to Apple strategy - people say their specs are nothing special, but in fact their graphics is far superior compared to Android devices.
Sounds something like Amiga did in the 90's with dedicated chips for various things, alleviating the need for hefty CPU's as the load was shared between the specialist chips - watching the news/reviews on this with interest.
what about the battery life
I think it needs 5000mAh battery:laugh:
ASMI1 said:
what about the battery life
I think it needs 5000mAh battery:laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully the battery won't be too much of a problem. The Nexus 4's battery life is probably its weakest point (2100mAh), and the Moto X (as an example) is speculated to be coming with a 2200 mAh battery, and also has a 4.7 inch 720p display. Bear in mind, however, that Moto X has the custom X8 system optimised for battery life, and has a dual-core CPU as opposed to quad-core.
Beplexor said:
Hopefully the battery won't be too much of a problem. The Nexus 4's battery life is probably its weakest point (2100mAh), and the Moto X (as an example) is speculated to be coming with a 2200 mAh battery, and also has a 4.7 inch 720p display. Bear in mind, however, that Moto X has the custom X8 system optimised for battery life, and has a dual-core CPU as opposed to quad-core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, but I think with an app like greenify the battery life won't be a problem anymore (or you can reduce the screen density, this help too much)
One thing i've been trying to figure out: Does it come with 4 adreno 320's? Because I have not found any sources that say 1 adreno 320 has 4 cores. Does anyone have a source for this info?
Beplexor said:
I'm very interested in the potential gaming performances of the upcoming Motorola devices, in light of the fact many people are less than excited for their releases due to their non cutting-edge specs.
The Droid MAXX, Droid Ultra and Droid Mini are all confirmed to be equipped with Motorola's new X8 Mobile Computing System, and the Motorola X is almost guaranteed to come with it as well.
The X8 consists of 8 cores, and they are categorized as:
- 2 application processor cores
- 4 graphics processor cores
- 1 contextual computing processor core
- 1 natural processor core
The overall X8 MCS is exciting for a variety of reasons, with the main one being that because of the highly custom and optimized system, the battery will enjoy a heavily increased lifespan. The gaming capabilities, however, are of course the main focus of this thread.
This is what Motorola has to say about the graphics processor cores:
"Four powerful graphics processors each running at 400 MHz delivering 3.2 million pixel fill rate,16 shader units, 512kb dedicated cached memory and running the Egypt performance benchmark at a blazing 155 frames per second (FPS). Fully compliant with Android Project Butter."
Being (apparently) based off the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro, the X8 comes with an Adreno 320 GPU.
For a comparison, here are the results of other comparable devices tackling the Egypt GLBenchmark 2.5:
Galaxy S4 - 40 FPS; HTC One - 32 FPS; Optimus G Pro - 27 FPS; Nexus 4 - 44 FPS.
Just ignore the 1080p and 720p aspects here. True, the Nexus 4 cruises through thanks to its 720p display requiring less work. However, this only serves to enhance the X8's power; while it has an Adreno 320 just like all the devices listed above except for the S4, it completely blows them out of the water - all the upcoming Motorola devices will have a 720p display. I know we're talking on a synthetic level here and that real world performance can differ, but surely this is too big a difference to brush aside like that?
What do you guys think? Is there really more to the Motorola X and and new Droid lineup than meets the eye, for those who look at it purely from a specs perspective?
For all the information, this is the link I used: http://www.androidauthority.com/mot...guage-processing-contextual-computing-247346/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Independent benchmarks of the Moto X (same X8) indicate that the "155 fps egpt benchmark" score has a typo. Specifically a freaking addition of a 1.
The moto X got 55 fps on that test. Sure it's enough to beat the S4 and One on graphics specs, but that's still false freaking advertising. Those are old phones (in smartphones 6 months is a whole product cycle).
Guess all the people *****ing about specs were correct.
here's the benchmarks. pathetic. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...he-moto-x-sports-a-great-gpu-respectable-cpu/
I've no doubt in my mind that Motorola will release a Moto G2 sometime late next year, because of the success of the Moto G.
But what improvement would you like to see, while still keeping the cost down.
I think 4G/LTE could easily be an option next year, but what else?
camera improvements maybe
Colour led, better camera, more RAM, (faster processor) are the main things for me.
All of the above with the same 720p screen and 32GB at $200
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
2gb RAM or at least 1.5gb, a better processor, maybe The X8 chip... A better camera (8mpx), 4G
But if you ask me ill take the better CPU/GPU/RAM then a better camera or a 1080p screen so they can keep the $200 price tag, 720p its more than enough for smartphones as long as the screen has a good quality... 1080p its already way too much and nos LG wants a 2k screen lol
Sent from my XT1032 using xda app-developers app
To keep the cost of the device the same i would like to see a few minor improvements to the current G like 4G, 1.5 to 2gb ram, better camera megapixels don't matter.
Sent from my beautiful Lumia 1020 using Tapatalk
My guesses:
RGB Led
8mp Camera
Either an older Snap 600/S4 Pro (think Nexus 7) or a new, yet unannounced Snap 400 with maybe a new low end GPU (Adreno 307, if you will)
1GB RAM, maybe faster DDR3L
8 and 16GB
Slightly bigger battery, maybe 2.2Ah
Tweaked 720p IPS display
Tweaked design - slightly thinner, slightly lighter
Expecting more than this is setting yourself up for disappointment, IMO.
If I were Moto, I'd keep the first gen G and X around, drop the G to $99 or $79, give the G2 LTE and put it starting at $179, drop the X to $279 and release the new X as a true flagship. You get all the price ranges covered with nice phones and, if kept with the same design and basic layout, without much need for retooling.
Lets just enjoy this awesome phone and worry about the 2nd version later...
Maybe X4 or X6 chip? (Since low end processors dont come with quad core GPU I'm thinking)
Gyrosensor & More Space
4.5 or 4.7" 720p display no need to change this I think.
4G/LTE should be cheap enough to have on midrange phones in 2014
Better camera 8mp BIS Sony Sensor
1080p video, the current snapdragon 400 has 1080p support but wasn't implemented in the Moto G for some reason, maybe because the lack of space with the 8GB version.
New snapdragon processor maybe the 405 clocked at 1.5Ghz with better gpu.
2GB of ram will trickle down to midrange phones in 2014, as the top end smartphones move onto 3GB & 4GB.
Slimmer design.
Colour options.
RGB notification led.
8GB storage dropped in favor of both 16GB & 32GB, should be cheap enough in 2014.
If all the above was to be the case for the Moto G2 for next year, it probably be even bigger seller than the current Moto G is now.
The 4G will depende con how things go in the world in the next months, A LOT of countries doesnt even have 4G un the works, and some of them are just starting to embrace it
I dont think a X8 CPU its really out of the realm of possibilities, obviously not The same one as the MotoX one, but a low-end one...
Bigger storage should be a thing, 16/32gb.
Sent from my XT1032 using xda app-developers app
Faruko said:
2gb RAM or at least 1.5gb, a better processor, maybe The X8 chip... A better camera (8mpx), 4G
But if you ask me ill take the better CPU/GPU/RAM then a better camera or a 1080p screen so they can keep the $200 price tag, 720p its more than enough for smartphones as long as the screen has a good quality... 1080p its already way too much and nos LG wants a 2k screen lol
Sent from my XT1032 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, so you basically want the g2 to be a moto X LOL.. so no, this won't happen.
a 1080p screen IS a 2k screen. the 'k' monika refers to the horizontal not vertical resolution. hence 1080, by 1920 (2k). 720 is about 1.2k.
The truth is, the margin on the Moto G is about 20%, this is so much lower than any other phone manufacturer that any improvements will be added basically at 'cost' therefore, any meaningful spec upgrade leads to a big price price rise (relatively speaking).
I would like the same phone, a year newer CPU and GPU, slightly bigger battery, 4G and improved build quality, 10% price rise. This is at least doable.
Better camera/video
Gyroscope
32 GB version
Same price 180/200/240 (8/16/32)
Sligthly more rubberized shell for better grip
Keep the rest, it's already a great phone.
For me all I'd like to see for a 'G2' is:
4.7" 720p screen
LTE
8MP Camera
1.5 or 2GB RAM
The Moto G2 will be inspired by Motorola's next year flagship, but weaker.
I could see the Moto G2 with a quad core chip, a better gpu, and 1080p screen, LTE, 4.7" screen, 2gb ram, and MAYBE 8MP camera
moto G was created to be a cheap phone with mid-highend specs. You guys want moto x specs on a 200$ phone? Forget about it. Go and buy a moto x
ilovetorresmo said:
moto G was created to be a cheap phone with mid-highend specs. You guys want moto x specs on a 200$ phone? Forget about it. Go and buy a moto x
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair 5 years ago a low end phone was considered to be 256 MB of ram and a 600 MHz single core processor with a 3 inch screen and would cost the same as the moto g does today. As time goes on technology standards go up.
But I do agree some people in this thread are asking for way too much even for today's standards. If you want modern flagship specs get a modern flagship phone.
Sent from my XT1034 using Tapatalk
helppme said:
ok, so you basically want the g2 to be a moto X LOL.. so no, this won't happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would not be surprised to see next year's Moto G to be pretty close to the current Moto X. Maybe they change a few components to lower the price but in a year's time, the cost of most of those components will probably be down as well.
bozzykid said:
I would not be surprised to see next year's Moto G to be pretty close to the current Moto X. Maybe they change a few components to lower the price but in a year's time, the cost of most of those components will probably be down as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not just buy the moto x when the moto x2 comes out then? I guarantee it will drop in price.
Sent from my XT1034 using Tapatalk
I have only used dumb-phones until now and plan to get a smartphone.
I did a little surfing and found Adreno 320 is better than Mali 400 GPU and Qualcomm Snapdragons are better than Samsung Exynos, right?
But in real world they say Note 2 is considered better phone than Nexus 4. I don't understand this.
Different phones top in different benchmarks, and still some things like display quality are not considered in benchmarks i guess, right?
Now I haven't used any smartphone before, and the I would be using it for gaming or watching videos/movies only most of the time as I'm a student.
Which of these phones that I mentioned (all in 23-29,000 INR range) are better than others in reality?
Those who have used these phones or are techsavy might be able to guide me in making the right choice
Just found S3 in India has different specs than in US, Canada etc.
India: 1.4 Ghz Quad-core Exynos 4412,Mali-400,1GB
US: 1.5 Ghz Dual-core Snapdragon, Adreno 225,2GB