Database Users

[Q] Would u like Quad or Dual in your next note?

Since the launch of SGS3 is around the corner and the next note will probably come within next few months, I thought of starting this thread to know how many users prefer having Quad Exynos 4 ( similar to SGS3 which is based on A9 arcitecture with Mali 400 GPU built using 32nm manufacturing process) or dual Exynos 5 (A15 architecture with Mali T604 GPU which is based on probably 28nm manufacturing process)in our next Note...
Cast your votes in the poll

You should put a POLL, it would get more people interested. But for me, I'd rather get the A15 with the Mali 604T since A15 is supposedly to be 40% faster than A9 and the Mali 604T will blow the Mali 400 away.

Definitely the dual A15 with Mali 604. No doubt.
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

I dont see any benifit by haveing a quad core cpu. Most apps dont even use the duel core.
Cant fault my note at all. So just the new duel will do with less battery drain
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

Quad! I don't care if I don't use it, and I don't care if I don't need it.
It just feels good to have that much power in the palm of your hand.
I'll benefit from that much power since I play games and I look forward to more capable emulators in the future.

I don't give a CRAP about the amount of cores!
I want the most speed that's possible, if that would be with dthe dual i take that, if it's with de quad, then thats my way to go...
Can't vote in the poll because i want speed, and since it's not sure wich one is faster i can't vote!
PS
I think the Exynos 5 will be released @ the end of this year, and the Exynos 4 tomorow
If that's correct i go with the Exynos 4, i hate waiting

what the note lacks is a decent GPU. the current GPU can't efficiently handle the 1280x800 pixels. however what i want more than anything is 1. non-pentile screen that is FLAWLESS and 2. a bigger battery still ~3000 mAh like the RAZR max. I would gladly sacrifice a few mm for a larger battery. I find it stupid how HTC decided to go with a slim and NON-REMOVABLE battery and storage to save a few mm. Seriously? This is why HTC is falling in a deep pit.

Exynos 5 dual, it has more power and is more efficient
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA

EASILY the A15 with the T-604! Come to papa!

The fastest clock speed and the best GPU is all that matters. 2.2 ghz 2 core with a fab GPU will blow away a 10 core 1.0 ghz with a bad gpu everyday every way.

How about the beast Quad Core A15 Exynos 5450 with Mali T-658? Ok, ok, I know technically it hasn't been built yet and will probably be for tablets, but wouldn't mind seeing it in the Note since it is a tab/phone hybrid.
But as for the current SoC's available now, I would take the A15 dual Exynos 5250 with Mali T-604.
More likely, I think Samsung's road map would be to release the flagship Galaxy S lines (in this case the GS 3) with the latest SoC's, then the next Note (Note 2 in this case) would get a slight spec bump based on the Galaxy S 3 with a faster clocked CPU/GPU combo of the Galaxy S 3 line 6 months later, then the GS4 would get next Gen SoCs with the Note 3 getting a spec bump of the GS 4 SoCs, etc.....

I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.

With a single core my galaxy s with ics is snappier than my note. Finally its the software I guess.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA

Mystic38 said:
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Android multitasking would need to be vastly different than what it is today, and on top of this the RAM specs need a major bump to even begin to show advantages in multi-core processing.
Also like you said, it has not mattered for deskptops and laptops what the real-world benefits are, just what the consumer feels about the value in their purchase. Nowadays it seems people are more concerned with the number of cores as opposed to the clock speed.
I do like the approach that Ti has taken with the OMAP in dedicating low-power cores to low-power functions, and feel that it really has potential in mobile devices, but they seem to be a step behind when it comes to the bigger tasks of mobile processing. Intel being on the cusp of Haswell has me excited to see what they can do in this territory.
Dual Exynos 5 for me at the moment.

It'll be interesting to see how they market this dual core a15 processor because joe public, will always think more cores is better. I do feel though that the note 2 might not have the same internals as the s3, like our notes had the same as the s2. For the note they seemed to put in all the best tech they had on offer at the tine, so if the a15 is ready to go by November time then I think they'll defo use it unless something better is available.

Dual core with speed.
Quad cores mean squat if they slow the primary usage down.

I'd rather get a dual than a quad even if its on the same generation and process so long as it is clocked higher. Give me a smaller process, newer gen chip and better gpu? There is no choice.

Id go for the i7 3960x and gtx 690 if they can squeeze that in the next note but I think I wont get a choice and will just end up with whatever Samsung puts into the note 2.

Mystic38 said:
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you....the main reason I created this thread, because I wanted to know how many members actually know the effect of system architecture and the manufacturing process will affect the day to day performance of the device, battery consumption etc.,it was never about the software but I know it everything comes to the OS how deeply it is integrated with the hardware and how effectively it co-ordinates with them...this is why Apple's devices are snappier than the android...the problem here is Samsung is more concerned about bringing more devices out than focusing on the system's deep integration...so it only comes to the fact that the thread is only about the hardware... but the discussion about the embedded systems is also welcomed....

adelmundo said:
How about the beast Quad Core A15 Exynos 5450 with Mali T-658? Ok, ok, I know technically it hasn't been built yet and will probably be for tablets, but wouldn't mind seeing it in the Note since it is a tab/phone hybrid.
But as for the current SoC's available now, I would take the A15 dual Exynos 5250 with Mali T-604.
More likely, I think Samsung's road map would be to release the flagship Galaxy S lines (in this case the GS 3) with the latest SoC's, then the next Note (Note 2 in this case) would get a slight spec bump based on the Galaxy S 3 with a faster clocked CPU/GPU combo of the Galaxy S 3 line 6 months later, then the GS4 would get next Gen SoCs with the Note 3 getting a spec bump of the GS 4 SoCs, etc.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I heard that Note 10.1 tablet is being delayed because Samsung wanted the device with quad than dual...so there is a little chance that the next Hybrid Note will come with some other spec....

Quad-core or 2gb ram?

In real phone scenario what we could benefit more? Will a quad-core be faster the 2gb of ram? Or will a 2gb will perform better against quad-core?
Pocketnow did a video between the gs2 and gs3 and both were opening apps really quick, they were really close on browsing, gaming. Do you think the 2gb will make a difference on the phone compare to the international? What are your thoughts?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA

2GB will help with multitasking while the faster processor will help with gaming and to a degree, faster apps.

If it were an iPhone, then the quad core would be much better because apps will actually make use of the amazing gpu. In android, I doubt there will be an app released in the next year or two that realistically benefits from the quad core's gpu vs the dual core's.
Both the dual and quad core will have all of the software optimizations Samsung has done for web browsing. The 2gb memory is probably overkill at this point, but in theory it means that apps will never close in the background since there will be no need to free up new memory.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA

lepapirriky said:
In real phone scenario what we could benefit more? Will a quad-core be faster the 2gb of ram? Or will a 2gb will perform better against quad-core?
Pocketnow did a video between the gs2 and gs3 and both were opening apps really quick, they were really close on browsing, gaming. Do you think the 2gb will make a difference on the phone compare to the international? What are your thoughts?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
muyoso said:
If it were an iPhone, then the quad core would be much better because apps will actually make use of the amazing gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.

RandomKing said:
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Well the whole android cant handle 4 cores i think is false because its derived from Linux and i know those who use 4,6,8 core processor's and use Linux. so if android isn't im sure its all in code is all.
2. More Ram does mean things will run much faster. For Example: playing gta 4 with 4GB of DDR3 Ram @ 1333MHz plays decent but my pc setup that plays gta 4 with 8Gb of DDR2 Ram @ 1333MHz plays faster and loads faster but GPU does factor those speeds too so, in a sense you cant bottleneck them.

Extra RAM. It's going to be a while before the apps/software catches up with having two more cores. Meanwhile even old stuff can benefit from extra memory. Also see it as more future proof as you won't get the lame ass excuses from Samsung about it not having enough RAM to run whatever the latest release of Android is like we got with ICS and the Epic 4G.

XxLostSoulxX said:
1. Well the whole android cant handle 4 cores i think is false because its derived from Linux and i know those who use 4,6,8 core processor's and use Linux. so if android isn't im sure its all in code is all.
2. More Ram does mean things will run much faster. For Example: playing gta 4 with 4GB of DDR3 Ram @ 1333MHz plays decent but my pc setup that plays gta 4 with 8Gb of DDR2 Ram @ 1333MHz plays faster and loads faster but GPU does factor those speeds too so, in a sense you cant bottleneck them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've misunderstood. Android can use 4 cores, of course. What it can't do is use them effectively in a way that creates any sort of advantage. But just as a mention, being derived from Linux source does not make it a full-fledged Linux OS by far.
And on your second point, again, you're comparing to a full PC operating system. Up until now, apps have been designed for phones with far less than 1GB of ram. It really depends on how you use your phone as to how much ram is needed. If you have a video editor running in the background, while playing pandora, and emulating Mario 64 you'll need more than simply browsing the web. But the processor, bus speeds, operating system, etc. all factor into how effectively more ram can be used. For Example: A 32 bit computer can't even use more than 4GB of ram. More ram does not simply mean 'much' more more speed, there are many other limiting factors. You can throw all the ram you want at a netbook, it will never run GTA4.
Off-Topic Edit: I vote 2GB ram over Quad-Core.

I guess then the only thing that will "improve", not that the int'l lacks of, is on the multitasking??
The few videos I saw, they were really fast but that's of course without all the apps that a normal user install. Like I have 38 apps install on my phone and most of the time I open between 9 to 13 apps everyday. Most of the time I have to close it...I guess more for the habit of doing it and of courses need it when playing games.
I read the answer and I kinda feel its true, maybe android is not yet ready for such hardware just yet, does it feels the hardware manufacture is going too fast compare to the software?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA

lepapirriky said:
I guess then the only thing that will "improve", not that the int'l lacks of, is on the multitasking??
The few videos I saw, they were really fast but that's of course without all the apps that a normal user install. Like I have 38 apps install on my phone and most of the time I open between 9 to 13 apps everyday. Most of the time I have to close it...I guess more for the habit of doing it and of courses need it when playing games.
I read the answer and I kinda feel its true, maybe android is not yet ready for such hardware just yet, does it feels the hardware manufacture is going too fast compare to the software?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There will be improvement between the dual-core, faster processor, and more ram, rest assured!
Although I still recommend closing apps unnecessarily opened to save battery.

2 A15s > 4 A9s.
Also, the A15 use less power. I'd take the 2 GBs of RAM with the newest CPU anyday.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

theking_13 said:
2 A15s > 4 A9s. Also, the A15 use less power. I'd take the 2 GBs of RAM with the newest CPU anyday.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+9000

RandomKing said:
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't have any lag on our epic 4g's? What ROM are you running? I've tried every rom out there and am friends with several other rooted epic owners, none of our phones are remotely comparable to the modern phones like s2 and above.
I'd love to see a video of you opening and running netflix, facebook, web browsing on chrome and stock, or whatever if you have time because this blows my mind. i'm doing something horribly wrong.

Too bad we don't have a samsung developed a15
I don't know why but I don't like qualcomm chips
Also whenever I hear snapdragon I automatically think worse than hummingbird
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium

I would take the dual core Krait hands down because it is designed from cortex a15. More instruction per clock is better than stacking cores which a phone doesn't even use. I think the 2 gb of ram has more performance advantage.
They also increased the memory bandwidth with new SOC by adding a new dual channel memory controller which the exynos had all along... They fixed alot of the shortcoming of snapdragon processor with the this gen product

gtuansdiamm said:
[...]Also whenever I hear snapdragon I automatically think worse than hummingbird[...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because Hummingbirds rape Snapdragons. See the following:
​

Either way if you want LTE at the moment you are stuck with dual core. So the 2GB of RAM is a nice enhancement. The EVO 1x ended up as two models the 1X which is quad core with no LTE and the 1XL which is dual core with LTE.
Sent from my PantechP4100 using xda premium

RandomKing said:
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where the hell did the epic4g or the iPhone 4 come into the question? My point was that iPhones actually make use of their gpu's better than android phones do, so the difference between the quad core and the dual core gs3 should be minimal in that regard, at least for a while.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA

noobnl said:
I would take the dual core Krait hands down because it is designed from cortex a15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is wrong.
The Krait is very much designed from the Cortex A9. While it shares similarities with the A15, it is not quite as powerful.
Krait is about 60% of the way between the A9 and A15.

jnadke said:
This is wrong.
The Krait is very much designed from the Cortex A9. While it shares similarities with the A15, it is not quite as powerful.
Krait is about 60% of the way between the A9 and A15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, where'd you even get that from? Krait is slightly below an A15, Qualcomm derived their design from it. Yes, its not a true A15 core. But its the best right now in production.
Qualcomm has a license to mess around with ARMs designs and make their own CPUs, not just copy and slap an "A4" on them like Apple does.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

theking_13 said:
No, where'd you even get that from? Krait is slightly below an A15, Qualcomm derived their design from it. Yes, its not a true A15 core. But its the best right now in production.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting how someone "Likes" wrong information.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4940/qualcomm-new-snapdragon-s4-msm8960-krait-architecture
Designing a processor takes an extremely long amount of time. A15 was just barely released a few months ago. No way Krait was designed from it.
Now, Krait borrows some features from A15, but it's missing some important features as well. Krait does feature an extended instruction pipeline over the A9 (11 vs 9 cycles), but it's nowhere near as long as the A15 (15 cycles). Strictly speaking, lengthening a pipeline is less work than shortening it, hence Krait was not designed from the A15.
It's more likely Krait is an evolution of the Scorpion than anything.
As far as Apple, they have no place in this conversation, but if you must.... while they do have a "processor-only" license with ARM, they do farm out to a company to change some transistor signaling to make it more power efficient (they later bought them).
2 years ago, Apple bought Freescale, the only remaining PowerPC processor design company. (aside: The defense industry was largely concerned, as they rely on PowerPC for their power-efficient but high-speed applications). Anyhow, I wouldn't be surprised if they have an architecture license now so they can design their own ARM processors, Qualcomm-style. The main advantage would be integrating LTE radios like Qualcomm does.
Coincidentally it takes about 2 years to fully design a processor.

CPU/Processor Showdown - HTC One vs Galaxy S4

Which processow will be better, Exynos 5 Octa or A simple Snapdragon 600 quad?
In my POV, Octa will be useless since it will be a battery hog and no apps really use that much cores and power. The S600 will be more efficient for day-to-day use since it consumes less power and will actually be used.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Sent from a dark and unknown place
Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 P3100

I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
AndreiLux said:
Misconception #1: Samsung didn't design this, ARM did. This is not some stupid marketing gimmick.
Misconception #2: You DON'T need to have all 8 cores online, actually, only maximum 4 cores will ever be online at the same time.
Misconception #3: If the workload is thread-light, just as we did hot-plugging on previous CPUs, big.LITTLE pairs will simply remain offline under such light loads. There is no wasted power with power-gating.
Misconception #4: As mentioned, each pair can switch independently of other pairs. It's not he whole cluster who switches between A15 and A7 cores. You can have only a single A15 online, together with two A7's, while the fourth pair is completely offline.
Misconception #5: The two clusters have their own frequency planes. This means A15 cores all run on one frequency while the A7 cores can be running on another. However, inside of the frequency planes, all cores run at the same frequency, meaning there is only one frequency for all cores of a type at a time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing

I hope that the overclocking or higher clock rate doesn't produce Moment-esque results.

Alsybub said:
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.

crawlgsx said:
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. I see. Different hardware for different regions. Like the One X.
Even though it's eight cores it is probably complete overkill. Yet another bigger number to put on marketing. How many apps will actually use that? How many apps use four cores at the moment?
There have been some articles about multiple cores being more for point of sale than for the end user. Even if you're signing up for a contract right now I doubt that much would be making use of it in two years time. So, the future proofing argument is moot.
It'll be interesting to see. Of course the galaxy builds of Android will use the cores. With things like the stay awake feature and pip it is useful. Outside of the OS I can't see it being necessary.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD

The "octa" core processor is complete bullsh*t. Imo, 2/4 cores are perfectly fine as long as they optimize it and perfect the hardware, why stack 8 cores when only 4 work at one time and no app will use all that power.
They should've focused on design to make it look less like a toy phone and use better finish, instead.
Oh the marketing..
Not HTC or whatever fanboy, just stating my opinion.

rotchcrocket04 said:
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good read, thanks for taking the time to post it. Surprised no-one has mentioned that we need this in our Ones. Would certainly help with the battery.

Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.

Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app

Squirrel1620 said:
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.

Nekromantik said:
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll just stick with the one and wait for the 4.2 update. By then we should have custom kernels to overclock ourselves
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app

Here you go

Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.

hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know all 8 can run at the same time? Has Samsung demonstrated that already? Any links?
Also what would be the speed if all 8 are running at the same time?
Also did you see that an Intel dual core @2GHz beat the Exynos Octa in benchmarks!!! So all 8 cores running at slower speed might not be very good actually. It might even slow down things even more...
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!

joslicx said:
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?

backfromthestorm said:
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its all about bragging rights really. Same as Samsung is doing with regards to Octa.
The the chip that could run at 3GHz could also very well run at 1GHz at just 0.6V (so consuming far lesser power than anything else in the market). A dual core at 1GHz is still good enough for all mundane tasks like playing videos or internet browsing etc. So in practice it would have been a very efficient solution. It was a real innovation really. Sadly the company did not have money to pour more funds into the program and has shut it.
It was demonstrated at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in february this year.
Anyway point is, we did not need extra set of power efficient cores like Samsung is doing. We ran the same cores that could do crazy high speeds and even crazier power efficient mode! Thats a very neat solution.
Heres a press link: http://www.itproportal.com/2013/02/25/mwc-2013-exclusive-dual-core-st-ericsson-novathor-l8580-soc-crushes-competition-benchmarks/
To quote the article:
A continuous running test monitored by an infra-red reader showed that the 3GHz prototype smartphone remained cooler as it uses less energy and in some scenarios, it could add up to five hours battery life in a normal usage scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no. At least not in my opinion. Octacore means 8 cpu cores on one cpu-chip.
I would see it like this:
You have 2 houses on your lawn which are beside each other. Every house has 4 rooms. You have to switch houses to open up the rooms. Just like the Exynos "Octa" has to, since it cannot run both CPU's at the same time.
If you are in a house with 8 rooms, you cannot simply be in all 8 rooms at once. You can connect the open doors between all the rooms, and since your in that house, you can freely walk in every room. But not with that implementation.
I wouldn't call the Exynos "Octa" an Octacore, its a dual CPU system with a 2x4 cores, with the difference that regular desktop dual CPU systems can use both CPU units at once, but not like the Exynos "Octa". Still, dual quad system comes closer than a pure octacore system.
This is kind of a hybrid. Nice technology for a mobile device, but at the same time, kind of unneeded / inefficient, compared to regular quadcore systems. Even the Tegra 3 system with 4 active cores and 1 companion core for standby tasks seems more efficient (in terms of "used space" and ressources).
Ah well let's see how the supposed and so called "octacore" will score in the future...

processor differences
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????

dawg00201 said:
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should be identical. I think its just a manufacturer choice. But it could also be associated to termals or battery.
Cause Samsung took the higher frequency chips, there is the possibility that they also get the "better" chips: Lower Voltage for the same frequency. But thats just an assumption.

Who is faster between exynos 5 octa vs snapdragon 800 ?

Should buying s4 or waiting nexus 5 ?
Sorry for bad English!!
Sent from my XT910 using xda premium

Wait for the Galaxy S5. It will surely be faster than both.
Sent from my C6603 using xda premium

U must be joking! Now i use motorola razr. I will change my phone in this year. Should i buy s4 or wait nexus 5? There is a rumour nexus 5 cpu is snapdragon 800. Is snapdragon 800 cpu faster than exynos octa 5?
Sent from my XT910 using xda premium

monpeso said:
U must be joking! Now i use motorola razr. I will change my phone in this year. Should i buy s4 or wait nexus 5? There is a rumour nexus 5 cpu is snapdragon 800. Is snapdragon 800 cpu faster than exynos octa 5?
Sent from my XT910 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure but they say that the Kyocera ultra is coming out soon with a new snapdragon 800 plus with an advance CPU and it makes great decaf coffee too. Should probably wait for that one.

if xda dev enable all 8 cores running performance should be same as 2.3ghz s800
even if 4 a15 clock at 2ghz should be same as 2.3ghz s800
but adreno 330 better than the adreno 320 and 533mp3 for sure

jianlinooi said:
if xda dev enable all 8 cores running performance should be same as 2.3ghz s800
even if 4 a15 clock at 2ghz should be same as 2.3ghz s800
but adreno 330 better than the adreno 320 and 533mp3 for sure
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is only my guess, but IF that was even possible to run all 8 cores at the same time it most likely will not run at full speed because of the amount of heat that would be generated by running all 8 cores at once.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using xda app-developers app

monpeso said:
Should buying s4 or waiting nexus 5 ?
Sorry for bad English!!
Sent from my XT910 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adreno 330 will smoke the 544mp3
Cpu speed could be about the same

snapdragon will blow exynos cos exynos already par with s600 but s800 will be monster

cihanleanne said:
snapdragon will blow exynos cos exynos already par with s600 but s800 will be monster
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol please stop talking. The exynos octa smothers the s600 in benchmarks while at a lower clock.
Anywho, there were some leaked benchmarks a little while back I saw
(Don't remember where) for the s800 and it hit slightly higher than the Tegra 4 on antutu. But it also was clocked at 2.3ghz where as the t4 was 2 ghz.so to answer your question no, the s800 really isn't anything special compared to a15 chips, and exynos outperforms tegra. But the krait chips probably have slightly better efficiency. So maybe it might be worth looking into, the gpu (330) will most likely outperform the power vr marginally, not that it even matters at this point. From the bit I researched the s800 doesn't deviate too greatly from three s600 aside from higher peak frequencies and large band width
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app

monpeso said:
Should buying s4 or waiting nexus 5 ?
Sorry for bad English!!
Sent from my XT910 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We can't compare something which isn't even out yet, so I wonder if there is any use of this thread

MultiLockOn said:
Lol please stop talking. The exynos octa smothers the s600 in benchmarks while at a lower clock.
Anywho, there were some leaked benchmarks a little while back I saw
(Don't remember where) for the s800 and it hit slightly higher than the Tegra 4 on antutu. But it also was clocked at 2.3ghz where as the t4 was 2 ghz.so to answer your question no, the s800 really isn't anything special compared to a15 chips, and exynos outperforms tegra. But the krait chips probably have slightly better efficiency. So maybe it might be worth looking into, the gpu (330) will most likely outperform the power vr marginally, not that it even matters at this point. From the bit I researched the s800 doesn't deviate too greatly from three s600 aside from higher peak frequencies and large band width
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You might want to check other threads yourself before stating "facts" like that.
With the final firmware, things seem different, both version are pretty close to each other, sometimes the S600 version wins, sometimes the Octa does.
But most of the time, it seems the Octa has a faster CPU, but the overclocked Adreno 320 in the S600 version of the S4 beats the PowerVR 544MP3 of the Octa version.
Here's a comparison with the latest and most strenuous benchmark from GLBenchmark :
http://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?benc...true&arch-MIPS=true&arch-x86=true&base=device

monpeso said:
Should buying s4 or waiting nexus 5 ?
Sorry for bad English!!
Sent from my XT910 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would wait for Nexus 5, i know it's painful, but trust me, it's gonna be whort it.

Mithrandir007 said:
You might want to check other threads yourself before stating "facts" like that.
With the final firmware, things seem different, both version are pretty close to each other, sometimes the S600 version wins, sometimes the Octa does.
But most of the time, it seems the Octa has a faster CPU, but the overclocked Adreno 320 in the S600 version of the S4 beats the PowerVR 544MP3 of the Octa version.
Here's a comparison with the latest and most strenuous benchmark from GLBenchmark :
http://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?benc...true&arch-MIPS=true&arch-x86=true&base=device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Glbenchmarks are not a good way for comparing gaming performance.
I think, gaming would be quite same on both devices.

i9100g user said:
Glbenchmarks are not a good way for comparing gaming performance.
I think, gaming would be quite same on both devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's ultimately what I meant, but you're right.. benchmarks are not the best way to compare gaming performance, but right now, it's pretty much all we have to compare

Mithrandir007 said:
You might want to check other threads yourself before stating "facts" like that.
With the final firmware, things seem different, both version are pretty close to each other, sometimes the S600 version wins, sometimes the Octa does.
But most of the time, it seems the Octa has a faster CPU, but the overclocked Adreno 320 in the S600 version of the S4 beats the PowerVR 544MP3 of the Octa version.
Here's a comparison with the latest and most strenuous benchmark from GLBenchmark :
http://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?benc...true&arch-MIPS=true&arch-x86=true&base=device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol you tell me to check other threads then repeat exactly what I just said? Anyways, I'm not basing my info of a single stream on benchmarks conducted by someone after a few firmware updates, that doesn't show anything and certainly doesn't do much towards leveling the playing ground between the two soc's. I've done pretty extensive research into the architectures of mobile chipsets, both Qualcomm and arm designs; mostly reading up on how each generation changes from one to the next and some blue prints. S600, or even s800, based chips will not perform as well as any a15 chip. More efficient? Definitely, but that's about it. In fact the s800 architecture really doesn't deviate that greatly from the dated krait s4.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app

Damn the Gs4 has 8 cores what Gigs is the processor 1.8?
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda app-developers app

rp56 said:
Damn the Gs4 has 8 cores what Gigs is the processor 1.8?
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The international variant has 8, with only 4 being able to be active at a time. 4 a15 cores clocked at 1.6ghz, and 4 a7 which I believe are clocked at 1.2 (I could be very wrong). Most of the world is receiving the i9505 variant which uses Qualcomm's s600 quad core though
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app

MultiLockOn said:
Lol you tell me to check other threads then repeat exactly what I just said? Anyways, I'm not basing my info of a single stream on benchmarks conducted by someone after a few firmware updates, that doesn't show anything and certainly doesn't do much towards leveling the playing ground between the two soc's. I've done pretty extensive research into the architectures of mobile chipsets, both Qualcomm and arm designs; mostly reading up on how each generation changes from one to the next and some blue prints. S600, or even s800, based chips will not perform as well as any a15 chip. More efficient? Definitely, but that's about it. In fact the s800 architecture really doesn't deviate that greatly from the dated krait s4.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, you were the one talking about benchmarks (and how the Octa smothers the SD600 in them), I only gave you a link to one (that should be among the best benchmarks for GPU) that contradicts what you said.
If you want links to other benchmarks showing the same type of results between the 2 SOC, it's not hard to find either, it's not like this is the only benchmark giving these results.
Also, theoretical performance (based on blue prints, and the architecture of the SOCs) is one thing, but it does not always translate to practical performance.
To tell you the truth, I was pretty sure I'd import the i9500, but I'm changing my mind more and more based on what I'm reading.
I'm still not sure right now though
But in real life use and gaming, it shouldn't really make a noticeable difference in performance whether you have one or the other.

Mithrandir007 said:
Hmm, you were the one talking about benchmarks (and how the Octa smothers the SD600 in them), I only gave you a link to one (that should be among the best benchmarks for GPU) that contradicts what you said.
If you want links to other benchmarks showing the same type of results between the 2 SOC, it's not hard to find either, it's not like this is the only benchmark giving these results.
Also, theoretical performance (based on blue prints, and the architecture of the SOCs) is one thing, but it does not always translate to practical performance.
To tell you the truth, I was pretty sure I'd import the i9500, but I'm changing my mind more and more based on what I'm reading.
I'm still not sure right now though
But in real life use and gaming, it shouldn't really make a noticeable difference in performance whether you have one or the other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough. I suppose I did contradict myself, didn't I
By the way I'm getting the i9505 as well.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app

MultiLockOn said:
Fair enough. I suppose I did contradict myself, didn't I
By the way I'm getting the i9505 as well.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, but truth is that it's still hard to tell which version is better, and it probably won't even make much difference in usage
Battery usage is still unknown too, even though on paper, the Exynos sounds good, it really depends on what you do, and how well the dual processor architecture manages that.

Which processor is/should be faster?

Hi I currently have an S3 i9300 and my company requires me to install MobileIron app and encrypt the whole phone; I find this slows down my phone considerably and often times I need to wait almost a minute for my app drawer to display my apps or some 20 seconds for camera to start.
Don't know if my experience with the S3 i9300 is only because of encryption app or also my processor-ram specs combination is not powerful enough to get a smooth experience.
So I'm looking to upgrade to an S4 but I don't know which version should I get based on which should be the faster one?
Should I get the 1.9GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 quad-core processor or a 1.6GHz Exynos Octa-core processor?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

etereo said:
Hi I currently have an S3 i9300 and my company requires me to install MobileIron app and encrypt the whole phone; I find this slows down my phone considerably and often times I need to wait almost a minute for my app drawer to display my apps or some 20 seconds for camera to start.
Don't know if my experience with the S3 i9300 is only because of encryption app or also my processor-ram specs combination is not powerful enough to get a smooth experience.
So I'm looking to upgrade to an S4 but I don't know which version should I get based on which should be the faster one?
Should I get the 1.9GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 quad-core processor or a 1.6GHz Exynos Octa-core processor?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Octa core variant is marginally faster but does not support 4g
Snapdragon Is little slow compare to Octa core but support 4g
u can choose as per ur need
Both are good device

the i9500 is faster even though it is really a quad core phone and only 4 cores can be activated at the same time. but I've seen somewhere that Samsung said with android 5 update the phone will be a real octa core and all eight cores can be used simultaneously.

The change to a i9500/9505 for you will be very good because the s3 I9300 only has 1gig of ram compared to the i9500/i9505 that have new processors and 2gigs of ram. That extra ram will definitely make a difference.
Sent from my SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2

Octa core :good:

Hamoonfarsa said:
the i9500 is faster even though it is really a quad core phone and only 4 cores can be activated at the same time. but I've seen somewhere that Samsung said with android 5 update the phone will be a real octa core and all eight cores can be used simultaneously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you saying, Android 5 doesn't even exist. Also the Exynos 5410 won't allow all 8 cores only the exynos 5420 can which is only in the Note 3

So based on what you said, I could even consider the Note3 which has 3gigs of ram and expect even better smoother performance? Saying I wouldn't mind the extra real state needs if I could realistically expect a noticeable improvement over currently described S3 conditions...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

4core is faster. clocked at 1.9

etereo said:
So based on what you said, I could even consider the Note3 which has 3gigs of ram and expect even better smoother performance? Saying I wouldn't mind the extra real state needs if I could realistically expect a noticeable improvement over currently described S3 conditions...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If u can go for the note 3 and u don't mind it's size ... go for the note 3 and never look back ... but i suggest u wait if you can ofc for about a month to see how the s800 against the 5420 exynos compares ... it not so much about the ram except if you are a really heavy multitasker but the cpu and gpu which we know for sure that in the snapdragon case it's a considerable improvement especially in the gpu department and we ve yet to see how the new exynos chipset will compare to it's older sibling ...

crzykiller said:
What are you saying, Android 5 doesn't even exist. Also the Exynos 5410 won't allow all 8 cores only the exynos 5420 can which is only in the Note 3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what I'm talking about. And for now note 3 is not octa core either.