Related
Just saw this and thought it might be very interesting if true!
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/06/samsung-galaxy-note-att-press-images-leaked/
Sorry if double post.
It's gotta be a mistake, but awesome if true.
If it's Exynos, it won't be LTE. If it's LTE, it won't be Exynos.
I'm betting on LTE. Most buyers won't give a damn if it's Exynos and has a marginal real-world performance advantage. They will care if it's only HSPA+ though.
bigmout said:
It's gotta be a mistake, but awesome if true.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the one thing that might suggest it does have the Exynos is that it is branded At&t, the rear cover has the Samsung logo removed, Galaxy Note added, but there is no flaming 4G logo on it. Fingers Crossed this is true!
Is it just me or does that 4G symbol say LTE under it like my skyrocket?
I WANT TO BELIEVE.
Seriously though, could easily happen. I'd take it over LTE
planoman said:
Is it just me or does that 4G symbol say LTE under it like my skyrocket?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did some zooming in, and yep, that says LTE.
Well, there's a chance it can still be the Exynos, since the Snapdragon is rated at 1.5GHz, and this is rumored at 1.4GHz, it could be the Exynos 4212, which is LTE compatible.
Wouldn't mind scamming the back cover from one of the AT&T units though, kinda like the "Galaxy Note" branding.
Longcat14 said:
Well, there's a chance it can still be the Exynos, since the Snapdragon is rated at 1.5GHz, and this is rumored at 1.4GHz, it could be the Exynos 4212, which is LTE compatible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't use this word a lot, but that would be EPIC!
I guarantee it will have LTE. All of AT&T's high-end phones released after the GSII have been LTE-capable. It's remotely possible that it has the new Exynos chipset that supports LTE. I doubt it, but it's possible. I have a feeling that the Engadget story just cribbed the specs from the unlocked international Note.
dwboston said:
I guarantee it will have LTE. All of AT&T's high-end phones released after the GSII have been LTE-capable. It's remotely possible that it has the new Exynos chipset that supports LTE. I doubt it, but it's possible. I have a feeling that the Engadget story just cribbed the specs from the unlocked international Note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with dwboston. I cannot see ATT launching this without LTE, especially since they just lit up several more LTE markets. We will see about the processor but as we have seen before many of these tech sites copy and paste specs without verification. I remember the frenzy about the t mobile SGSII and then the Skyrocket speculation until it was confirmed to have the Snapdragon 3. And the Skyrocket works fine with the snapdragon. I think I prefer my international GNote since I have an LTE phone, my battery life is amazing on HSPA+. Plus I like having no bloat or "other things" from ATT.
If you go check the sources...in this article....pocketnow .... it says No exynos...
the source has been edited to show no exynos and will swap out for the snapdragon...
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-galaxy-note-for-att-first-press-shots-images
That article on PocketNow is just full of "win"
"SGH-i957 Celox HD"? The SGH-i957 is the Galaxy Tab 8.9 LTE (mine is sitting right here in front of me). If they can't even tell that an already launched model number is not some secret new device, how likely are they to get the story right on an unreleased model?
Also, my Tab 8.9 LTE? Snapdragon S3 powered, 1280x800 resolution, and guess what? IT DOES NOT SUCK. Really.
I don't see what the fuss is all about with the LTE-capable Snapdragon S3.
It has comparable specs to that of the Exynos, and the new Snapdragons even excels over the Exynos in some benchmark tests.
Yeah, Exynos is probably the better chipset if OC'd/tweaked, but in stock, the new Snapdragons seem to be comparable with the Exynos.
entropy96 said:
I don't see what the fuss is all about with the LTE-capable Snapdragon S3.
It has comparable specs to that of the Exynos, and the new Snapdragons even excels over the Exynos in some benchmark tests.
Yeah, Exynos is probably the better chipset if OC'd/tweaked, but in stock, the new Snapdragons seem to be comparable with the Exynos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is comparable to Exynos 1.2Ghz but the International Note has Exynose 1.4Ghz.
Longcat14 said:
Did some zooming in, and yep, that says LTE.
Well, there's a chance it can still be the Exynos, since the Snapdragon is rated at 1.5GHz, and this is rumored at 1.4GHz, it could be the Exynos 4212, which is LTE compatible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What pic did u zoom?
Sent from my Dell Streak using xda premium
k1ng617 said:
I don't use this word a lot, but that would be EPIC!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't agree more!
Nice find
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
foxbat121 said:
It is comparable to Exynos 1.2Ghz but the International Note has Exynose 1.4Ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the N7000, I have the i957 (Snapdragon S3). The Tab does not suck compared to the Note, trust me.
Samwung galaxy note comes with sooo many version...
There is the original version in 1.4 ghz processor
A korean version (like mine) packed with 1.5ghz processor, 4G LTE, a tv module and a bit thicker compared to the original
And I saw another one, galaxy note with no physical button... just 4 old school touch bottons
its really confusing and disappointing that samsung is like selling different kinds of phone in one name. And with that, its so hard to customize it because of major hardware differences..
Sent from my SHV-E160K
Can anyone explain why Is this happening?
I tried to search but there is no specific thread with answers. Starting a thread would be better I guess.
Sent from my SHV-E160K
The home market will always get the LTE with the TV module version. Thats what they did with the SGS II as well.
The 1.4 Ghz version with the physical home button is their international version which is sold ALL OVER aside from the U.S.
the "Old School" 4 Button one you refer to is the U.S version. Its specified that all devices they sell will have the 4 capacitive buttons to follow a schema. Also the U.S version will get a Snapdragon processor. As to the reason behind why the diff processor is unknown to me. I am sure there is some tie up or standard set behind that.
Same was the case with the SGS II variants. Aside from the ATT version of the original SGS II (not Skyrocket).
Majority of the people wont MOD their device and those who do, will come to XDA to obtain the proper MOD / ROM for their specific device.
The buttonless version it's the US at&t LTE note. Basically the same as your Korean.
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
The reason Qualcomm CPU is used is because it supports 4G LTE, and the Samsung Exynos does not. Sadly the 1.5Ghz Qualcomm CPU is considerably slower than the Exynos chip. Qualcomm is Cortex A8 chip, Exynos 4210 is Cortex A9 chip, which is more effective and faster.
dhruvmalik said:
The home market will always get the LTE with the TV module version. Thats what they did with the SGS II as well.
The 1.4 Ghz version with the physical home button is their international version which is sold ALL OVER aside from the U.S.
the "Old School" 4 Button one you refer to is the U.S version. Its specified that all devices they sell will have the 4 capacitive buttons to follow a schema. Also the U.S version will get a Snapdragon processor. As to the reason behind why the diff processor is unknown to me. I am sure there is some tie up or standard set behind that.
Same was the case with the SGS II variants. Aside from the ATT version of the original SGS II (not Skyrocket).
Majority of the people wont MOD their device and those who do, will come to XDA to obtain the proper MOD / ROM for their specific device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmmm its USA.... I guess patent copyright issues? Lol
Sent from my SHV-E160K
Its not an att note. Its north American, Canada is getting the exact same version on all 3 major carriers BEFORE att even gets it. So call it north American or i717.
And why its different from n7000? Because samsungs CPU doesn't support lte. So they have to use a different CPU till they have a working lte exynos cpu.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
aniphreak said:
Hmmmm its USA.... I guess patent copyright issues?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pardon me, but I have a patent on that type of sarcasm. You will pay me a 1 USD royalty on each person that reads this, and you will cease and desist making sarcastic remarks.
aniphreak said:
Samwung galaxy note comes with sooo many version...
There is the original version in 1.4 ghz processor
A korean version (like mine) packed with 1.5ghz processor, 4G LTE, a tv module and a bit thicker compared to the original
And I saw another one, galaxy note with no physical button... just 4 old school touch bottons
its really confusing and disappointing that samsung is like selling different kinds of phone in one name. And with that, its so hard to customize it because of major hardware differences..
Sent from my SHV-E160K
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read lots of Korean galaxy note forum through internet and lots of people in Korea have bought international version of galaxy note because of the hardware differences and other reason is that Korean version of note comes with LTE which is amazingly fast. I mean its super fast as I saw the demo of it but you have to pay a price for it!! since its just started recently. However, because its new and there are lots of places in korea where LTE coverage is an issue as well and that is why lot of people have bought international version of note as 3g data plan is unlimited whereas LTE is not...
Samsung made so many editions. Does 1.4g CPU 2- core and 1.5g one 1-core?
I live in Montreal where Rogers is one of the first to start lte. Definitely already using it on skyrocket. Can't wait to get my note in 2 days haay.
Sent from my SGH-I727R using xda premium
Sarius24 said:
I live in Montreal where Rogers is one of the first to start lte. Definitely already using it on skyrocket. Can't wait to get my note in 2 days haay.
Sent from my SGH-I727R using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I live in Montreal too, but don't have a lte device yet so I cant wait to get my hands on a note and see what this speed is all about
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
Lucky you to have LTE deployed. In France we have to wait another two years for a reasonable deployment.
It will leave me enought time to play with my non-LTE Note and wait for a quad-core LTE version ;-)
how can i read My CPU on the phone?
tnx
enobrec said:
how can i read My CPU on the phone?
tnx
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are in the wrong section ...
mustang2012 said:
you are in the wrong section ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..mmmhh..not at all
i wanna know some information about my processor(CPU)..1.4?...1.5?
In this 3d i read about different processor on different NoteS ..
so i am simply interested about my Note Version...looking at the processor...
how can i know what processor i have?
there is a menu option?
enobrec said:
..mmmhh..not at all
i wanna know some information about my processor(CPU)..1.4?...1.5?
In this 3d i read about different processor on different NoteS ..
how can i know what processor i have?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE = 1.5Ghz Qualcomm Snapdragon Dual core
Non LTE = 1.4GHz Exynos Dual core
ah..ok..tnxx...
dhruvmalik said:
... Also the U.S version will get a Snapdragon processor. As to the reason behind why the diff processor is unknown to me. I am sure there is some tie up or standard set behind that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well snapdragon has the advantage of LTE and is more battery efficient.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk
andrawer said:
Well snapdragon has the advantage of LTE and is more battery efficient.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon may be more battery efficient (don't know, never heard that one) but LTE is apparently horrible on battery life! I will find out in a few days, lol...
Sent from my Dell Streak using Tapatalk
I just saw the review on slashgear and it shows Mali400MP as the GPU and clock speed of 1.4Ghz
LTE and Exynos?
ph00ny said:
I just saw the review on slashgear and it shows Mali400MP as the GPU and clock speed of 1.4Ghz
LTE and Exynos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So claims Samsung.
teiglin said:
So claims Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i guess that blows the whole exynos not able to support LTE service out the door
Btw, it comes with an IR port just like the 7.0+
http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-galaxy-tab-7-7-lte-review-04216701/
Sounds fishy now that Samsung was claiming LTE was not compatible with the Exynos 4210.. Now i'm thinking Samsung has been lying this entire time and opting for the cheap Qualcomm S3 chips that are about half the power of their Exynos just to make easy cash.
Sketchy sketchy Samsung, shame shame.
Diversion said:
Sounds fishy now that Samsung was claiming LTE was not compatible with the Exynos 4210.. Now i'm thinking Samsung has been lying this entire time and opting for the cheap Qualcomm S3 chips that are about half the power of their Exynos just to make easy cash.
Sketchy sketchy Samsung, shame shame.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd love a source link, or reliable citation of any kind, for that claim. I've read a lot of speculation that Exynos wasn't compatible with LTE, but it's always been just that--speculation. It's probably some combination of larger chassis in the 7.7 and its higher cost, where in phones it was both cheaper and easier to just use Qualcomm's chipset with integrated LTE baseband.
So does it mean its a better tab considering that it has LTE and exynos , you can always use voip for voice plus it has an IR blaster.
mywingtophone said:
So does it mean its a better tab considering that it has LTE and exynos , you can always use voip for voice plus it has an IR blaster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the million dollar question. Well 1) is the LTE 7.7 BETTER? 2) What are it's restrictions/compatibility issues....
teiglin said:
I'd love a source link, or reliable citation of any kind, for that claim. I've read a lot of speculation that Exynos wasn't compatible with LTE, but it's always been just that--speculation. It's probably some combination of larger chassis in the 7.7 and its higher cost, where in phones it was both cheaper and easier to just use Qualcomm's chipset with integrated LTE baseband.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't remember where it was originally stated or where I saw it, but EVERY single Samsung LTE equipped phone that originally came with Exynos ended up with a craptastic Qualcomm S3 chip instead. And it's been common knowledge that the reason was Samsung stated LTE was not compatible with Exynos.
So if the solution is to run a seperate LTE chip + Exynos, sounds like the Verizon LTE 7.7 could be a horrible battery sucker then :/
Diversion said:
I can't remember where it was originally stated or where I saw it, but EVERY single Samsung LTE equipped phone that originally came with Exynos ended up with a craptastic Qualcomm S3 chip instead. And it's been common knowledge that the reason was Samsung stated LTE was not compatible with Exynos.
So if the solution is to run a seperate LTE chip + Exynos, sounds like the Verizon LTE 7.7 could be a horrible battery sucker then :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I went to pick one up from the local Verizon store and it's sold out. 0 stock in nyc.
Demo unit was snappy. Noticeably snappier than the 10.1
IR port is definitely there
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA
I'd like to pick one up - but I don't want to be under contract, so looks like I'll have to shell out $699+tax for one.
Also, it doesn't look like the USA will be getting a Wifi-only variant any time soon. By then Exynos2 will probably be in other tablets.
It's a gamble buying one of these right now due to only getting 14 days to return it to Verizon (plus the $35 restocking fee).
Diversion said:
I can't remember where it was originally stated or where I saw it, but EVERY single Samsung LTE equipped phone that originally came with Exynos ended up with a craptastic Qualcomm S3 chip instead. And it's been common knowledge that the reason was Samsung stated LTE was not compatible with Exynos.
So if the solution is to run a seperate LTE chip + Exynos, sounds like the Verizon LTE 7.7 could be a horrible battery sucker then :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure you're not confusing the Exynos with the Tegra3 processors?
Diversion said:
I'd like to pick one up - but I don't want to be under contract, so looks like I'll have to shell out $699+tax for one.
Also, it doesn't look like the USA will be getting a Wifi-only variant any time soon. By then Exynos2 will probably be in other tablets.
It's a gamble buying one of these right now due to only getting 14 days to return it to Verizon (plus the $35 restocking fee).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exynos 5 series isn't supposed to be out until mid year probably with the high res galaxy tab 11.6
Paten said:
Are you sure you're not confusing the Exynos with the Tegra3 processors?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He's right
all the LTE version of previously exynos devices came out with snapdragon. Same goes for high speed HSPA
AT&T Galaxy S2 Skyrocket
AT&T Galaxy Note
Galaxy Tab 10.1/8.9 LTE
Tmo Galaxy S2
ph00ny said:
He's right
all the LTE version of previously exynos devices came out with snapdragon. Same goes for high speed HSPA
AT&T Galaxy S2 Skyrocket
AT&T Galaxy Note
Galaxy Tab 10.1/8.9 LTE
Tmo Galaxy S2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Specifically only LTE Samsung phones swapped out the Exynos for Snapdragons.
Galaxy S2 on both ATT and Sprint still kept the Exynos intact. The LTE variants unfortunately lost Exynos due to LTE.
So it IS possible that given enough room inside a device, it can be fitted with Exynos AND a independant LTE chip.. and this is why the LTE phones couldn't be Exynos + LTE, not enough room perhaps.
Sent from my SCH-I815 using xda premium
Haha
Read the article found out that 7.7 LTE comes with exynos
Called around a bunch of stores after the MRI
on my way home, score
I'm now a proud owner of 7.7 LTE
My new daily driver next to the current daily driver
Diversion said:
I'd like to pick one up - but I don't want to be under contract, so looks like I'll have to shell out $699+tax for one.
Also, it doesn't look like the USA will be getting a Wifi-only variant any time soon. By then Exynos2 will probably be in other tablets.
It's a gamble buying one of these right now due to only getting 14 days to return it to Verizon (plus the $35 restocking fee).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not just import the WiFi-only version from Negri Electronics? Hell of a lot cheaper than shelling out $700+tax for an off-contract VZW version...
---------- Post added at 10:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:11 PM ----------
ph00ny said:
My new daily driver next to the current daily driver
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, what do you do about phone calls if your VZW 7.7 is your daily driver?
My P6800 is my daily driver. When a phone call comes in, I answer it, on the 7.7 (via Bluetooth of course!).
1 device. Does it all. Love it!
Question for any of the Verizon LTE 7.7 owners: is your LTE performance any good? I get good speed test results, but when I try and web-browse, it takes 20 seconds or more to get from one page to another. It's really frustrating.
madafromSF said:
Question for any of the Verizon LTE 7.7 owners: is your LTE performance any good? I get good speed test results, but when I try and web-browse, it takes 20 seconds or more to get from one page to another. It's really frustrating.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im actually getting great performance with the tab. Much better than nexus. Don't forget, when you're on Verizon 3g, expect it to be dog slow
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA
I don't get how the largest electronics company in the world cannot work out how to make 4G support for their main smart phone chip. Like it's the biggest failure about this phone, the only reason why I wanted it was for the Exynos 5 + the 544 but instead now we get the Snapdragon with the Adreno 320. Basically it has the same internals as every other frigging phone out there and I bet they'll be cheaper too like the HTC One has no up front cost.
It's just made me got "forget the GS4" not only did it look no different to the GS3 but the internals are a let down too because Samsung doesn't have 4G support for Exynos. At this point I'm just going to end my contract, go on a month by month contract as it's only £12 for unlimited data what I'm paying £40 a month for now. Then I'm just going to wait it out for something better, hopefully Nokia do a 41mp Windows Phone or something actually interesting rather than these lack luster phones we've had so far this year.
I was gonna upgrade but no Exynos 5 + 4G = no sale.
slannmage said:
I don't get how the largest electronics company in the world cannot work out how to make 4G support for their main smart phone chip. Like it's the biggest failure about this phone, the only reason why I wanted it was for the Exynos 5 + the 544 but instead now we get the Snapdragon with the Adreno 320. Basically it has the same internals as every other frigging phone out there and I bet they'll be cheaper too like the HTC One has no up front cost.
It's just made me got "forget the GS4" not only did it look no different to the GS3 but the internals are a let down too because Samsung doesn't have 4G support for Exynos. At this point I'm just going to end my contract, go on a month by month contract as it's only £12 for unlimited data what I'm paying £40 a month for now. Then I'm just going to wait it out for something better, hopefully Nokia do a 41mp Windows Phone or something actually interesting rather than these lack luster phones we've had so far this year.
I was gonna upgrade but no Exynos 5 + 4G = no sale.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using a seperate radio and SoC consumes more battery, and LTE already consumers more battery. The N2 has a gigantic battery which is why it was released with Exynos. With 40 different LTE bands a different radio has to be used depending on the market which also makes developing and supporting the s/w a pain in the ass.
This is coming out mid-year and should allow multiband LTE-capable devices to be built and sold just like HSPA devices have been in the past. Samung's already said they plan on using it.
http://www.qualcomm.com/media/relea...olution-enables-single-global-lte-design-next
Thing is if that comes out later in the year, at that point I might as well just see what Nokia or Apple do and possible Google will have the Nexus 5 by then. It's just not good enough really and I have my upgrade now from my GS2 like loads of other people who got one in 2011.
What are u talking about the upgrade is HUGE
www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s4-vs-samsung-galaxy-s3-169204/
S4 INFO
The Exynos supports LTE so the whole question you're posing is loaded with misinformation.
The question you should be asking why Samsung decided to pair it up with the Qualcomm instead; that has some more meaningful answers and hypothesises:
- The Octa is not ready for mass-production in the quantity so to satisfy the demand for the biggest flagship phone on the market right now.
- Because of the above, they chose to multi-source the SoC.
- Because the LTE models are supposedly globally multi-band it is easier to engineer only two models.
- Why did they even release it as such - that's what most people are angry about; it sucks for the enthusiasts but it makes perfect sense from a business perspective. Release it early so to catch as many users as possible who would be otherwise tempted by the HTC One or the Z.
And who says that we won't get a refresh with Exynos and LTE.
Using a seperate radio and SoC consumes more battery, and LTE already consumers more battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That argument is useless here. The Snapdragon 600 doesn't have an integrated modem so they still need a separate LTE chip. And also proven by demonstration by the many new LTE devices which separate chip (Note 2, i9305, One), the battery argument is again something which seemed to be pulled out of thin air last year.
AndreiLux said:
The Exynos supports LTE so the whole question you're posing is loaded with misinformation.
The question you should be asking why Samsung decided to pair it up with the Qualcomm instead; that has some more meaningful answers and hypothesises:
- The Octa is not ready for mass-production in the quantity so to satisfy the demand for the biggest flagship phone on the market right now.
- Because of the above, they chose to multi-source the SoC.
- Because the LTE models are supposedly globally multi-band it is easier to engineer only two models.
- Why did they even release it as such - that's what most people are angry about; it sucks for the enthusiasts but it makes perfect sense from a business perspective. Release it early so to catch as many users as possible who would be otherwise tempted by the HTC One or the Z.
And who says that we won't get a refresh with Exynos and LTE.
That argument is useless here. The Snapdragon 600 doesn't have an integrated modem so they still need a separate LTE chip. And also proven by demonstration by the many new LTE devices which separate chip (Note 2, i9305, One), the battery argument is again something which seemed to be pulled out of thin air last year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's unlikely we will get a refresh with Exynos + LTE. Even the Korean LTE versions are Snapdragon-based.
We might see them earliest in Note 3.
Livebyte said:
It's unlikely we will get a refresh with Exynos + LTE. Even the Korean LTE versions are Snapdragon-based.
We might see them earliest in Note 3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's up to Samsung.
Japan also got a refresh and was in the same situation; original release was the Qualcomm S3, then they got the S3 Alpha which is basically an i9305 with the Note 2 Exynos revision. T-Mobile are also adopting their M3 (i9305) variant.
AndreiLux said:
The Octa is not ready for mass-production in the quantity so to satisfy the demand for the biggest flagship phone on the market right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wild ass guess.
Because of the above, they chose to multi-source the SoC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They used Exynos 4 in tablets last year so they had plenty and still multi-sourced.
Because the LTE models are supposedly globally multi-band it is easier to engineer only two models.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Until the RF360 comes out LTE radios are hardware limited as to the bands they support so there are multiple radio configurations based on where the device is to be sold or used.
Release it early so to catch as many users as possible
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wild ass guess. How many mainstream users know what an Octa or Snapdragon is and would care if they did?
And who says that we won't get a refresh with Exynos and LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A wild ass guess I'd agree with based on it driving more profit for Samsung by using their own SoC.
That argument is useless here. The Snapdragon 600 doesn't have an integrated modem so they still need a separate LTE chip. And also proven by demonstration by the many new LTE devices which separate chip (Note 2, i9305, One), the battery argument is against something which seemed to be pulled out of thin air last year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why did Samsung deploy the N2 with Exynos/LTE and not the SGS3?
BarryH_GEG said:
Why did Samsung deploy the N2 with Exynos/LTE and not the SGS3?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcomm didn't start offering a standalone LTE+GSM combo solution until late 2012 as far as I know. And Samsung did eventually offer an Exynos+LTE SGS3 with the I9305, which was released in fall 2012.
I suspect the Exynos vs. Qualcomm difference has nothing to do with LTE but is for some other reason, as others have said, the Snapdragon variants are not using one of the Qualcomms with integrated baseband, but one of the standalone modem chipsets (like the Xperia Z and Nexus 4 do... And in fact I think every quad-Krait device on the market is using an APQ with an external modem chipset.) Probably production rampup is one of the issues, also, the Exynos5 "Octa" is not by any means a proven platform, so Samsung might be sticking with a more proven base for the majority of their devices.
BarryH_GEG said:
Until the RF360 comes out LTE radios are hardware limited as to the bands they support so there are multiple radio configurations based on where the device is to be sold or used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're massively mistaking amplifiers and actual modems. The modems are identical on all models since they're compatible with everything. The Note 2 LTE variants are globally the same thing and the only difference are the antennas and amplifiers.
BarryH_GEG said:
They used Exynos 4 in tablets last year so they had plenty and still multi-sourced.
...
Why did Samsung deploy the N2 with Exynos/LTE and not the SGS3?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Last year" encompasses a period of 12 months, so please think a bit before doing such arguments. The S3 was launched on May 29th while the second device to have the Exynos was the Galaxy Note 10.1 in mid-August. That's already a 3-month period between devices and in manufacturing terms, that's an eternity. Furthermore you're comparing a device in double-digit million sales within the first two months to a tablet which basically nobody bought.
Furthermore they did not release it with LTE because at the time there wasn't any discrete modem available and only Qualcomm's MSM offered LTE capability. This is the same reason the Tegra 3 One X never came out in the LTE enabled countries, they were in exactly the same situation. The Note 2 (And i9305) came out with the Exynos + Qualcomm because the MDM9215 was specifically available as a discrete chip by that time.
Also please refrain from calling things wild ass guesses when your own claims are even more uninformed.
Check this:
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/data/competitive.pdf
BTW, does s600 have integrated LTE? I believe not.
I recall the model name was APQ***
s800 is supposed to have integrated LTE.
hot_spare said:
Check this:
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/data/competitive.pdf
BTW, does s600 have integrated LTE? I believe not.
I recall the model name was APQ***
s800 is supposed to have integrated LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the 600 being included in the GS4 is an APQ - which means no integrated baseband.
While there are quad Kraits with integrated modem on Qualcomm's roadmap, they are quite rare. As in I have yet to see a quad-Krait device that wasn't an APQ.
Could be related to the yield issues mentioned in the PDF above.
AndreiLux said:
The Exynos supports LTE so the whole question you're posing is loaded with misinformation.
The question you should be asking why Samsung decided to pair it up with the Qualcomm instead; that has some more meaningful answers and hypothesises:
- The Octa is not ready for mass-production in the quantity so to satisfy the demand for the biggest flagship phone on the market right now.
- Because of the above, they chose to multi-source the SoC.
- Because the LTE models are supposedly globally multi-band it is easier to engineer only two models.
- Why did they even release it as such - that's what most people are angry about; it sucks for the enthusiasts but it makes perfect sense from a business perspective. Release it early so to catch as many users as possible who would be otherwise tempted by the HTC One or the Z.
And who says that we won't get a refresh with Exynos and LTE.
That argument is useless here. The Snapdragon 600 doesn't have an integrated modem so they still need a separate LTE chip. And also proven by demonstration by the many new LTE devices which separate chip (Note 2, i9305, One), the battery argument is again something which seemed to be pulled out of thin air last year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you give more information on which LTE bands exynos supports?
Sent from my Xperia Arc S using xda premium
1337RYoN said:
Can you give more information on which LTE bands exynos supports?
Sent from my Xperia Arc S using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exynos4 and Exynos5 don't support ANY LTE bands directly. In fact they don't have built in wireless capability of any form. Neither does the Snapdragon 600 that is going to be sold in the GS4, neither does the APQ8064 used in many current Qualcomm quad-Krait devices.
All of the above depend on an external modem chipset, in almost all cases for LTE devices Qualcomm MDM9x15 or MDM9x25. Band support is determined by the RF frontend chipset (Qualcomm WTR1605L in all cases probably) and what bands the manufacturer added RF frontend filters for.
There is nothing that prevents a MDM9x15 or 9x25 from being hung off of an Exynos4 or Exynos5 (in fact, that's what was done for LTE Note2 variants).
The misconception that "this or that CPU doesn't support LTE" comes from the early days of LTE when the only multiband multimode modem was Qualcomm's, and initially Qualcomm only provided it in the form of fully integrated MSM CPU+baseband solutions. But since Qualcomm started selling the standalone MDM9615 last fall or so, there's nothing preventing any CPU with HSIC support (which basically any modern CPU has) from having LTE connectivity.
Exynos "Octa" not having LTE almost surely has nothing to do with technical incompatibilities but everything to do with Samsung not wanting to put all of their eggs in one basket with an unproven highly complex processor.
so what will be the better choice ? Snapdragon or Exynos, if both support 4G?
Now if the extnos octa does support lte, which I believe it does just not American frequencies. If it has a Qualcomm radio and its model supports multi band or world radio chip that support everything (forgot model number). Can a different modem enable those lte bands or is it all hardware related??
S4 Exynos 5 import -- 4g works?
Entropy512 said:
Exynos "Octa" not having LTE almost surely has nothing to do with technical incompatibilities but everything to do with Samsung not wanting to put all of their eggs in one basket with an unproven highly complex processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolute novice here, so if it's not down to technical reasons would an imported GS4 with the Exynos 5 still actually work with 4G networks, or will it just not work end-of? Would there be any way to mod the phone's firmware to get the 4G supported, or is the failure due to the hardware itself?
MattKneale said:
Absolute novice here, so if it's not down to technical reasons would an imported GS4 with the Exynos 5 still actually work with 4G networks, or will it just not work end-of? Would there be any way to mod the phone's firmware to get the 4G supported, or is the failure due to the hardware itself?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same question here. Furthermore, I am curious as to why no one else makes LTE modem besides Qualcomm.
MattKneale said:
Absolute novice here, so if it's not down to technical reasons would an imported GS4 with the Exynos 5 still actually work with 4G networks, or will it just not work end-of? Would there be any way to mod the phone's firmware to get the 4G supported, or is the failure due to the hardware itself?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Each device is customized for the bands it will run on. See the Note2 as an example - There are multiple t0lte variants, the N7105, I317 (AT&T), T-Mobile version, Sprint version, Verizon version - Each had RF frontend hardware customized for their target carrier/region. The CPU was the same (Exynos), the modem was the same (MDM9615), the primary RF chipset was the same (WTR1605L I *think*), but the RF frontend filter and switching circuitry was different for each variant, meaning you couldn't just flash an I317 baseband to N7105 and get AT&T LTE support for example.
As to why no one else is making an LTE modem besides Qualcomm - Qualcomm have more experience with these things than any other company. Many of the core principles of communications theory were created by Qualcomm's founders. Principles of Communication Engineering is still considered the Bible of communications theory, written by Wozencraft and Jacobs (Jacobs being one of the founders of Qualcomm, along with Andrew Viterbi, famous for the Viterbi Algorithm.) Same reason Qualcomm was the first company to achieve reasonably power-efficient UMTS baseband chipsets.
Edit: Here's a good read regarding Qualcomm's modems: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6541/the-state-of-qualcomms-modems-wtr1605-and-mdm9x25
maybe somebody interestening in
octa core with lte all 20 bands???
go to sammobile and look the new news.
Octacore supports LTE all 20 bands
Why is Samsung phasing out their Exynos 5 chip and implementing snapdragons in their upcoming phones? Its a shame that they are using their competition in their own devices rather than try to improve their own and then market it.
I love my i9500 but the lack or dev support is really depressing.
I honestly don't want to see the downfall of the Exynos 5.
starscream0 said:
Why is Samsung phasing out their Exynos 5 chip and implementing snapdragons in their upcoming phones? Its a shame that they are using their competition in their own devices rather than try to improve their own and then market it.
I love my i9500 but the lack or dev support is really depressing.
I honestly don't want to see the downfall of the Exynos 5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that its disappointing that the Exynos 5 chip hasn't been as good as they projected, and publicised.
But I do think that its a good move to use the snapdragon 800 in their i95005G device (google edition)
Samsung are giving customers the best they can for the S4. Using the Exynos 5 would be a mistake, as its reign as the best chip will be short lived. (slightly better than the snapdragon 600)
The 800 will be a lot better, and for a flagship device they need the best. Not to mention LTE for many countries is a tech selling point.
I think you guys are being premature. Exynos vs. Qualcomm is more about baseband than it is anything else. Last year before LTE grew in deployment the ratio was 2/3 Exynos 1/3 Snapdragon. This year it's reversed. And the only device that's "rumored" to use S-800 is the LTE Advanced SGS4 that's only being sold in Korea.
Qualcomm announced a new LTE baseband called RF360 in February that's supposed to be available in the fall. It allows a single baseband to be used across all 40 different LTE bands. Once it's deployed Samsung could use Exynos wherever they chose. If RF360's available in time for the N3's release I'd fully expect it to be Exynos.
http://www.qualcomm.com/media/relea...olution-enables-single-global-lte-design-next
Samsung Semiconductor is a very healthy business line within Samsung Corporation and generated $7.4 USD in sales in Q1 of this year.
Profit at Samsung’s semiconductor division in the first quarter was put at 1.07 trillion won, compared with 700 billion won last year, on sales of 8.58 trillion won.http://x.dawn.com/2013/04/26/samsung-posts-record-q1-profit-of-6-4-billion/
http://www.qualcomm.com/media/relea...olution-enables-single-global-lte-design-next
The above link provides more info on the Qualcom RF360 Front End Solution
They aren't introducing a new baseband... just making a complete solution that works with all the various global network setups.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
BarryH_GEG said:
I think you guys are being premature. Exynos vs. Qualcomm is more about baseband than it is anything else. Last year before LTE grew in deployment the ratio was 2/3 Exynos 1/3 Snapdragon. This year it's reversed. And the only device that's "rumored" to use S-800 is the LTE Advanced SGS4 that's only being sold in Korea.
Qualcomm announced a new LTE baseband called RF360 in February that's supposed to be available in the fall. It allows a single baseband to be used across all 40 different LTE bands. Once it's deployed Samsung could use Exynos wherever they chose. If RF360's available in time for the N3's release I'd fully expect it to be Exynos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link, thats really good news.
Hopefully they do use the Exynos 5 and continue to give it 100% support in the future.
What i was mostly scared about was that the i9500 users like myself are left in the dark due to not enough dev support, and it seems like all the devs are slowly backing away from the i9500.
starscream0 said:
Thanks for the link, thats really good news.
Hopefully they do use the Exynos 5 and continue to give it 100% support in the future.
What i was mostly scared about was that the i9500 users like myself are left in the dark due to not enough dev support, and it seems like all the devs are slowly backing away from the i9500.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not about developers supporting Samsung's SOC, its about samsung supporting the developers at XDA... they almost never release what they say they are going to.
hamdogg said:
Its not about developers supporting Samsung's SOC, its about samsung supporting the developers at XDA... they almost never release what they say they are going to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why should Samsung support us at XDA with its Exynos SoC ?
What is in it for Samsung to support us with the Exynos SoC ... ?
Where do we give Samsung a competitive edge over other mobile makers ?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
Gillion said:
Why should Samsung support us at XDA with its Exynos SoC ?
What is in it for Samsung to support us with the Exynos SoC ... ?
Where do we give Samsung a competitive edge over other mobile makers ?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung go on record stating they will release code for this and that... and almost never do.
Plus we buy the device. People are switching to other devices because of ROM availability and developers supporting other phone manufacturers.
Its in their interest to sell as many phones as possibile. So they are losing market share buy not following through with their promisses.
Thinking about their prospective... Apparently not enough to make a difference
Gillion said:
Why should Samsung support us at XDA with its Exynos SoC ?
What is in it for Samsung to support us with the Exynos SoC ... ?
Where do we give Samsung a competitive edge over other mobile makers ?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Word of mouth, tech savvy support, recommendations.
Although all of that can be negligible compared to the marketing monster at Samsung.
Gillion said:
Why should Samsung support us at XDA with its Exynos SoC ?
What is in it for Samsung to support us with the Exynos SoC ... ?
Where do we give Samsung a competitive edge over other mobile makers ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent question.
Us...
Them...
Gillion said:
Why should Samsung support us at XDA with its Exynos SoC ?
What is in it for Samsung to support us with the Exynos SoC ... ?
Where do we give Samsung a competitive edge over other mobile makers ?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tech savvy people are the ones who "are not so tech savvy" ask for recommendations for phones
it may not affect samsung sales a lot but still has some sort of impact
Sent from my GT-P6800 using xda app-developers app
hamdogg said:
... But I do think that its a good move to use the snapdragon 800 in their i95005G device (google edition) ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What ? where did you get that ? or is just your wish.
rsndetre said:
What ? where did you get that ? or is just your wish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No need to try and be condescending... Its all over the forum... even in news articles like this one:
LINK
hamdogg said:
I agree that its disappointing that the Exynos 5 chip hasn't been as good as they projected, and publicised.
But I do think that its a good move to use the snapdragon 800 in their i95005G device (google edition)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't you mean I9505G that is being released next week? And if so they are using the same chip as the I9505, namely the Snapdragon 600, not 800. For all intents and purposes they're the same device.
Sent from my Qualcomm Galaxy S4
Pagnell said:
Don't you mean I9505G that is being released next week? And if so they are using the same chip as the I9505, namely the Snapdragon 600, not 800. For all intents and purposes they're the same device.
Sent from my Qualcomm Galaxy S4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah agreed... got my device number confused.. SnapD 600 in the G addition...
The snapdragon 800 is appearing in the GS4 in Korea first then the US market. (as stated by engadget, pocketnow)
Wonder if there will be a mass exodus of snapdragon 600 S4's on ebay just before release
They will never going to use Exynos on Note 3?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda premium
hamdogg said:
No need to try and be condescending... Its all over the forum... even in news articles like this one:
LINK
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So the leak of a South Korea user manual doesn't quite apply to the Western world, but it does imply the likelihood of the same powerhouse Snapdragon 800 processor inside the rumored Galaxy Note III. Also, the user manual doesn't specifically state that the device is a Galaxy S4, however the specs and dimensions match those of the device, making it probable that a variant running Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 is imminent.
It is unclear if we will see a Galaxy S4 with the latest Snapdragon 800, but it is an exciting possibility. Check back in later for Samsung's Premiere 2013 Galaxy and ATIV event news, which kicks off at 2pm ET.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So it's not a sure thing...
hamdogg said:
Yeah agreed... got my device number confused.. SnapD 600 in the G addition...
The snapdragon 800 is appearing in the GS4 in Korea first then the US market. (as stated by engadget, pocketnow)
Wonder if there will be a mass exodus of snapdragon 600 S4's on ebay just before release
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unlikely given that there is nothing out there at the moment that can make a Galaxy S3 break sweat, never mind an S4. Someone would have to be a bit stupid to be that bothered about extra performance which won't even be noticed in the real world.
This S4 is more than sufficient for my needs until my contact is up in 2 years time.
Sent from my Qualcomm Galaxy S4
IMO, Why Google need snapdragon for there Google S4.?
Simple, Google don't want to be Apple - COZ, Samsung was the chip maker of Apple till yet but after there fight of patents, Apple simply drop there idea for CHIPS.
Samsung is preparing Exynox 4 (not OCTA ONE Exynox 5) chipset for there Tizen devices. They have successfully tested it on i9500 model.
Dont be feared guys. New Note 3 will be powered by Exynox 5 chipset. Samsung will support their Exynox chipset very well.:good:
Disturbed™ said:
IMO, Why Google need snapdragon for there Google S4.?
Simple, Google don't want to be Apple - COZ, Samsung was the chip maker of Apple till yet but after there fight of patents, Apple simply drop there idea for CHIPS.
Samsung is preparing Exynox 4 (not OCTA ONE Exynox 5) chipset for there Tizen devices. They have successfully tested it on i9500 model.
Dont be feared guys. New Note 3 will be powered by Exynox 5 chipset. Samsung will support their Exynox chipset very well.:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, samsung Dont gain anything for using snapdragom soc, New gs4 will be a sd800 only because of LteA
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app