Go Back   Android Forums > Android Phones > Samsung Galaxy S4

Like Tree12Likes

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old March 15th, 2013, 09:07 AM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 62
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

So if the Snapdragon 600 is similar to the S4 pro, and the S4 pro scores around say 2200 on Geekbench, what should we expect the Octa 8 to be benchmarked like? Just trying to get an idea of the power.

Advertisements
Kgor93 is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old March 15th, 2013, 09:46 AM   #2 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default

Nobody knows. They are both quad core processors as far as benchmarks are concerned (the "Octa" is 4 A15 cores plus 4 slower A7 cores, with only one or other set used at any time). And unless it's a pure CPU benchmark you need to consider other elements of the system - we've seen often enough that different phones with the same processor and clock speed don't always produce the same benchmarks.

Most importantly, benchmarks have only a loose correlation with real world performance, so actually aren't really important. People geek on them because they are numbers which can be compared and look more "objective" than assessments of responsiveness, lag etc, but that doesn't mean that they are necessarily meaningful. Wait until we have samples of both and see whether it actually makes a difference, and if so to what aspect of performance.
__________________
Forum Rules & Guidelines - Android Forums FAQ
If a post helps you, use the Thanks! button.
Spam or offensive? Don't respond, report it /!\
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hadron For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013), mrhomiec (March 20th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 09:59 AM   #3 (permalink)
Junior Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 62
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

On that note, you notice how in many ways mobile OS's are becoming more demanding than their desktop counterpart? I played with a Tegra 3 on my friends's touchscreen laptop and it was super fast, yet a Tegra 3 running Android can be a bit laggy at times, like the HTC One X.
Kgor93 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 11:58 AM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
trparky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, United States
Posts: 691
 
Device(s): Galaxy Note 3 Galaxy S4
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 18
Thanked 136 Times in 98 Posts
Send a message via AIM to trparky Send a message via MSN to trparky
Default

OK, I'm thoroughly confused. ARM Cortex-A7 vs. ARM Cortex-A8 vs. ARM Cortex-A9 vs. ARM Cortex-A15. Wow, so many different ARM architectures.

So what is the Snapdragon 600? Is it A7 or A15? What about the Octa-Core CPU that the US isn't going to get? Is that A15 or is it A7? Is there really that much of a difference between all of those architectures?

And I thought Intel was confusing with Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell, etc.
__________________
Tom
trparky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 12:23 PM   #5 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default

The "octa core" isn't octa core. It's dual quad-core: Quad A15 for heavy lifting, plus quad A7 to save power when doing light work. At any time it will be using either the A15s or the A7s, but never uses more than 4 at a time.

Snapdragon 600 is quad Krait 300 - another arm-compatible architecture, not identical to the A15 but with a number of similarities.

Other components (e.g. graphics) will also make a difference to performance.

For all of the bloggers who wrote yesterday "Samsung weren't saying, but I reckon it was a snapdragon because it wasn't as blazingly fast as I'd expect the Octa to be", I'll personally be surprised if it actually makes a real world difference to the user (at least in performance - it will be interesting to see how power use compares). And I suspect a lot of those who wrote that type of stuff didn't understand what the "octa" actually is...
EarlyMon and trparky like this.
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hadron For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013), jmt9779 (March 20th, 2013), Slug (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 12:47 PM   #6 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

ARM licenses their architecture designs and others build them. So does Qualcomm. But unlike Qualcomm, there are many ARM implementations, but each Snapdragon is its own model number.

So, if I say, here's an ARM Cortex from Tegra and here's one from Samsung, and they're the same class (A9 as was used in 2012 for example), they'll be mostly the same cpu silicon because they were built under license - but they'll perform just a little differently because Tegra and Sammy roll a little differently.

The Snapdragons use their proprietary Krait CPU cores, not an ARM Cortex design, but they operate on the ARMv7 instruction set (not to be confused with the ARM A7 chip).

Confused? Don't be, you've seen this elsewhere for years - Intel vs. AMD. The AMD will run great, run Windows and your favorite apps because it uses the Intel instruction set, but it's not an Intel design.

The Krait cpu core is an A15-class processor in terms of speed and performance. It's not an A15, just like an AMD chip isn't a Pentium.

The A15 is generally considered to be almost double the performer of the A9 in many circles.

Because the S4 dual core is an A15 class, Samsung thought nothing of providing the dual core S4 in the US while providing the A9 quad core elsewhere on the SGS3.

Samsung somehow managed to break from ARM in one important aspect last year - independent CPU clocking.

The Snapdragon multicores have always run their cpu clocks independently. The A9 dual and quad cores from others ran all cpus at the same speed, whether they needed it or not - not power efficient. Samsung, beginning in 2012, started running their cpu cores independently, like the Snapdragon.

For that reason, some write-ups will call the Sammy chips "like A-whatever (9 or 15)" while others will simply call them "A9" or "A15."

Here's your ARM comparison chart from the horse's mouth -

Cortex-A Series - ARM

Likewise for the Snapdragon -

Snapdragon 800, 600, 400, 200 Processor Specs | Qualcomm

The Snapdragon 600 ought not be compared so strongly to the Snapdragon S4 Pro.

The 600 cores are model Krait 300, the S4 Pro is model Krait 200 cores. The Krait 300 provides 15% faster processing than the Krait 200 when running at the same clock speed.

ARM vs. Krait involves only the cpu cores.

It doesn't involve the GPU, DSP, ISP, media management or other cores - just the CPUs.

Both the Snapdragon 600 and S4 Pro use the Adreno 320 GPU, but it's clocked faster in the 600.

And I agree - benchmarks are pretty worthless for most uses.
Hadron and trparky like this.
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; March 15th, 2013 at 01:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
AntimonyER (March 15th, 2013), Doomstang (March 16th, 2013), Hadron (March 15th, 2013), jmt9779 (March 20th, 2013), kyler13 (March 16th, 2013), rivera02 (March 19th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 01:06 PM   #7 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kgor93 View Post
On that note, you notice how in many ways mobile OS's are becoming more demanding than their desktop counterpart? I played with a Tegra 3 on my friends's touchscreen laptop and it was super fast, yet a Tegra 3 running Android can be a bit laggy at times, like the HTC One X.
That was more likely caused by differences in the kernel, memory and io logic than the processor.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 01:24 PM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
trparky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, United States
Posts: 691
 
Device(s): Galaxy Note 3 Galaxy S4
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 18
Thanked 136 Times in 98 Posts
Send a message via AIM to trparky Send a message via MSN to trparky
Default

OK... let's see if I can wrap my brain around all of the info you provided.

The Samsung Exynos Octa-Core CPU really is nothing but a 4 + 4 design; a quad-core ARM Cortex-A7 Class CPU and a quad-core ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU smashed together onto the same silicon.

Whereas the Snapdragon 600 CPU that's going to be featured in the US version of the Samsung Galaxy S4 utilizes a Krait 300 CPU which is an ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU. Right?

So if I'm right so far, then tell me this. Since the ARM Cortex-A7 Class CPU is supposed to be a power-saving CPU that's used a majority of the time and the ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU is only supposed to be used when the uber CPU power is needed, how is this going to effect battery life in the US version when the US version only has the higher-end ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU?
trparky is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to trparky For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 01:36 PM   #9 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trparky View Post
OK... let's see if I can wrap my brain around all of the info you provided.

The Samsung Exynos Octa-Core CPU really is nothing but a 4 + 4 design; a quad-core ARM Cortex-A7 Class CPU and a quad-core ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU smashed together onto the same silicon.

Whereas the Snapdragon 600 CPU that's going to be featured in the US version of the Samsung Galaxy S4 utilizes a Krait 300 CPU which is an ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU. Right?
Perfect-a-mundo!

Quote:
So if I'm right so far, then tell me this. Since the ARM Cortex-A7 Class CPU is supposed to be a power-saving CPU that's used a majority of the time and the ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU is only supposed to be used when the uber CPU power is needed, how is this going to effect battery life in the US version when the US version only has the higher-end ARM Cortex-A15 Class CPU?
The answer to that is no one really knows yet.

And we don't know if the A7 quad will run the majority of the time (referring to when the phone is in actual use, not sleeping, for this part).

And because of task scheduling, we don't know when it will switch from all four A7 cores to just two of the A15 cores (not all cores need to run, so that's potentially a valid situation).

Did Samsung tune it for power savings, running the small quad most of the time? If they did, will that make people happy? (And that's like - way slow compared to either SGS3 last year, ok.)

Or - is it going to be tuned for performance?

~~~~~~~~~~

Sleeping is another matter - ideally, sleeping ought to run for what feels like forever, if it can run just one of A7 cores at its minimum clock speed.

Some people's phone use is for sleeping the majority of the time, others, not so much.

~~~~~~~~~~

If Samsung hits it out of the park, then you'll see very little or no difference as a user in performance between the two models, and the dual quad will get better battery life.

If they goof, then the Snapdragon 600 model will be better.

Anyone who says they know today is really guessing on that.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 02:21 PM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
davoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,678
 
Device(s): Galaxy SIII
Carrier: 3UK

Thanks: 658
Thanked 574 Times in 436 Posts
Default

I was wondering why the A7 consumes less power than the A15 in the octo-core? Does it have less transistors, and as a simpler design use less power? I thought that each iteration of CPU technology was more efficient than the last, or is that because they use more miniaturized silicon? And so fewer transistors on miniaturized silicon uses less power than the newer cpu design? Did I just answer my own question?
davoid is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to davoid For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013)
sponsored links
Old March 15th, 2013, 02:23 PM   #11 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davoid View Post
I was wondering why the A7 consumes less power than the A15 in the octo-core? Does it have less transistors, and as a simpler design use less power? I thought that each iteration of CPU technology was more efficient than the last, or is that because they use more miniaturized silicon? And so fewer transistors on miniaturized silicon uses less power than the newer cpu design? Did I just answer my own question?
Toss in lower clock speed on top of that and yep, you did.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
davoid (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 02:32 PM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
davoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,678
 
Device(s): Galaxy SIII
Carrier: 3UK

Thanks: 658
Thanked 574 Times in 436 Posts
Default

but... then is it only miniaturization that makes the newer cpu designs more efficient, and not improved memory controllers etc? I ask because it's heard said that newer processors can do more work for the same clock speed. But if that is the case, why not use newer processors at lower clock speeds rather than the older processors? Oh dear, I started off well...
davoid is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to davoid For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 02:58 PM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
trparky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, United States
Posts: 691
 
Device(s): Galaxy Note 3 Galaxy S4
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 18
Thanked 136 Times in 98 Posts
Send a message via AIM to trparky Send a message via MSN to trparky
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

So really this Octa - Core stuff is only marketing BS.
EarlyMon likes this.
trparky is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to trparky For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 03:19 PM   #14 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davoid View Post
but... then is it only miniaturization that makes the newer cpu designs more efficient, and not improved memory controllers etc? I ask because it's heard said that newer processors can do more work for the same clock speed. But if that is the case, why not use newer processors at lower clock speeds rather than the older processors? Oh dear, I started off well...
No no - great questions!

Smaller structure geometry in silicon does indeed equate exactly to higher performance and lower power consumption.

And - we know a lot of what to expect by examining the manufacturing processes.

Let's use some numbers to sort it all out.

Both the S4 Pro and the Snapdragon 600, for example, are made with the same 28 nanometer manufacturing process.

The 600 is 15% faster because of its design, not the transistor size. Let's see the possible outcomes to know what that means, and assuming the same number of transistors (close enough for this discussion's purposes) -

I could do the same job on the 600 as the S4 Pro but run the clock 15% slower, and I'd get a power savings with no performance difference.

Or, I could run my 600 and S4 Pro at the same rates, but get 15% more processing power out of the 600 without using any extra battery.

See how that works?

Ok, let's use that, turn it around and see how that explains the Samsung chip -

Both the A7 and A15 quads are made on the same silicon, probably no bigger than the result of a 32 nanometer manufacturing process.

The A15 will have minimum and maximum possible clock speeds - ditto for the A7, but they will both be lower than for the A15.

For the A7, I don't care a lot about design efficiency - that affects performance. I don't care about performance there - I care about power efficiency. If I want performance, I'll go to the A15 quad. If I want power saving, I go with fewer transistors, running slower than my A15, all made the same size per transistor.

If I have two chips and run one at half the speed of the other, I'll save a lot of power. If I cut the number of transistors in half, I'll double my power savings (not saying that those are the exact numbers between the A7/A15, just laying it out to clarify).

And that's what the A7 is all about for power efficiency.

This approach actually appeared last year in the Tegra 3. That used an A9 quad plus a single slow, small core for the power savings.

Like the new Sammy, that too was a big/little design.

Some complained that the transition on the Tegra 3 from the single tiny core was kind of great when jumping to the A9 or vice versa.

And that would have gotten worse with an A15 quad.

So, Samsung evidently decided to combat that with a quad of smaller cores. I don't know, but I could see that it might scale up from 1 to all 4 cores on the A7 and then switch over to the A15 - just as one design example.

I'll stop there - does this help any??
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; March 15th, 2013 at 03:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
davoid (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 03:30 PM   #15 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trparky View Post
So really this Octa - Core stuff is only marketing BS.
Yep.

An octacore would be 8 identical processors all running at once, same rules as a dual core or a quad core.

Both Intel and AMD make octacores. Pretty neat stuff.

And here we have a dual-quadcore where you don't run all 8 at once, so it's not really an octacore.

But according to Samsung marketing, 2x4=8 and 8=8 and who is going to argue with Samsung?

The press? Not likely!

They're getting a lot of mileage out of this. People are excited - OMG, an OCTAcore! Who can blame them? That would be exciting.

But - just as many people are saying - What the heck do I need an octacore for?? I want better battery life.

And if people are lucky enough to find half-way decent articles, and then read up, and then click through to the Samsung links explaining what I just did, I'd bet they'd agree with me that Dual-Quad is a really great thing to market because if you like Quad, and you like power, maybe you'll like Dual-Quad.

But no.

That's all hard to believe when Samsung says up front, it's an octacore, in an age where people know what octacore means.

And here we are.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 03:38 PM   #16 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
davoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Posts: 1,678
 
Device(s): Galaxy SIII
Carrier: 3UK

Thanks: 658
Thanked 574 Times in 436 Posts
Default

Yes, thanks

I see how it is down to the number of transistors - the fewer the better when the phone is ticking over.

I suspect the A15 would need to kick in any time the screen came on or people would be crying about UI lag. I know I would.
davoid is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to davoid For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 03:45 PM   #17 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

By the way - my source of info on this is Samsung's own publications.

If they change their minds by the time they deliver, that won't have made me wrong, it will simply have made these posts obsolete.

Which - I kind of doubt will happen.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 05:18 PM   #18 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,813
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 144
Thanked 313 Times in 276 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trparky View Post
So really this Octa - Core stuff is only marketing BS.
Of course it is, it's a marketing name only, that said it does have 8 CPU cores, 4xCortex A15 and 4xCortex A7.

It's not like Samsung are keeping it a secret, the specs are out there for anybody to see if they want to.
Shocky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 06:47 PM   #19 (permalink)
Junior Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 62
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

I guess my next question is what causes these improvements in chip technology? Obviously technology progresses, but if someone had an idea in 2009 of how the Snapdragon 600 should run on a 28nm process, what would actually prevent them from mass producing such a chip? Even if you give 1 year to get assembly lines ready, what is preventing (and how) the manufacturing of such a chip until a few years later?
Kgor93 is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Kgor93 For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 15th, 2013)
Old March 15th, 2013, 07:14 PM   #20 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

The Nexus One was built using 65 nm technology, 45 nm appeared on the HTC Thunderbolt, 32 on the Sammy Exynos, 28 on the Snapdragon S4, and finally 22 18 for Samsung memory last year.

Each technology reduction is incredibly difficult and insanely expensive.

It requires changes in manufacturing tooling, processes, materials, testing (failure modes change as size is reduced), vendors and personnel.

The initial wafers from which chips are cut costs millions of dollars, and then you get to spend more refining everything until the yields (ratio of good vs attempted parts) are acceptable.

The stages of reduction over the years is laid out in a roadmap followed by semiconductor manufacturing industry, and if any steps could have been cut out, they would have been.

Then on top of that comes design layout of the processors. At GHz speeds, the internal data paths are screaming along like high frequency antennas. So speed increases can't just happen without a whole regime of engineering just for that one effect.

Then comes the design improvements for the other cores and glue logic (last year's chips weren't dual or quad core, that was just the cpu count, anywhere from 6 to 9 cores was reality).

And I've only scratched the surface.

You could have imagined an HDTV in 1960 but you couldn't have built then what we have today.

Comparing to SoC processor technology of 4 years ago, it's actually a good analogy.

Hope this answers a little.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
davoid (March 16th, 2013), Xxmen (March 16th, 2013)
sponsored links
Old March 15th, 2013, 08:32 PM   #21 (permalink)
Junior Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 62
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Interesting. So the size keeps shrinking. I heard that eventually we'll reach a point where the chips can't be shrunk any further because the electrons will act erratically between transistors or something like that. How small would that be, are we close?
Kgor93 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 08:38 PM   #22 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kgor93 View Post
Interesting. So the size keeps shrinking. I heard that eventually we'll reach a point where the chips can't be shrunk any further because the electrons will act erratically between transistors or something like that. How small would that be, are we close?
We're already operating by exploiting quantum effects.

We'll never fly, we'll never get to the moon.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2013, 08:53 PM   #23 (permalink)
Junior Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 62
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
We're already operating by exploiting quantum effects.

We'll never fly, we'll never get to the moon.
Well that's what I mean. We'd have to move to quantum computing, which I don't believe will be backwards compatible with x86 or ARM.
Kgor93 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2013, 04:52 PM   #24 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rushmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 7,812
 
Device(s): S4, iPad Air, Note 2014 10.1, Dell V11 5130, Nvidia Shield. Yes- too many devices.
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 403
Thanked 1,379 Times in 968 Posts
Default

Frankly, I would be happy with A6X performance. MAMEReloaded 1.39 on my iPad 4 destroys my S3, Excite 7.7 and TF300. Not to mention others recent tablets tested, in spite of the iPad pushing a LOT more pixels. MAME is a very good app to test how powerful the actual CPU is.

If the Snap 600 is faster than the A6X, I will be happy.

Added: This of course assumes the new radio improves the weak 3G performance and battery sucking demon ways with low signal. Worse of any device I have owned or tested. Still, the S3 is my favorite. Call range is great, in spite of the data radio issue and I am mainly in decent 4G areas- but not always. I turn the data off in weaker areas to avoid battery drain when needed.
rushmore is offline  
Last edited by rushmore; March 19th, 2013 at 04:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2013, 04:59 PM   #25 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rushmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 7,812
 
Device(s): S4, iPad Air, Note 2014 10.1, Dell V11 5130, Nvidia Shield. Yes- too many devices.
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 403
Thanked 1,379 Times in 968 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kgor93 View Post
Well that's what I mean. We'd have to move to quantum computing, which I don't believe will be backwards compatible with x86 or ARM.
In theory, it could software emulate them at 100%
rushmore is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2013, 03:30 PM   #26 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default

If GSMArena are right, it looks like we're getting the Snapdragon in the UK as well: Samsung Galaxy S4 to ship with Snapdragon 600 in the UK - GSMArena.com news

Damn that LTE rollout!

(Disclaimer: we don't actually know how much difference there will be in practice, so it is a little early to get upset.)
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hadron For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 20th, 2013)
Old March 20th, 2013, 03:42 PM   #27 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadron View Post
If GSMArena are right, it looks like we're getting the Snapdragon in the UK as well: Samsung Galaxy S4 to ship with Snapdragon 600 in the UK - GSMArena.com news

Damn that LTE rollout!

(Disclaimer: we don't actually know how much difference there will be in practice, so it is a little early to get upset.)
^This!

They expect the A15 running slower to out-perform the Krait 300s.

With zero data.

Yeah. No.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2013, 04:40 PM   #28 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,813
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 144
Thanked 313 Times in 276 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadron View Post
If GSMArena are right, it looks like we're getting the Snapdragon in the UK as well: Samsung Galaxy S4 to ship with Snapdragon 600 in the UK - GSMArena.com news

Damn that LTE rollout!

(Disclaimer: we don't actually know how much difference there will be in practice, so it is a little early to get upset.)
I read about this earlier, bit of a surprise as Exynos should be compatible with LTE in Europe.

If there's a big enough performance difference I might import one, depends on cost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
^This!

They expect the A15 running slower to out-perform the Krait 300s.

With zero data.

Yeah. No.
But we do have some data, we already have Exynos 5250 from the Nexus 10 for comparisons which uses Cortex A15 Dual Core.
Shocky is offline  
Last edited by Shocky; March 20th, 2013 at 04:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Shocky For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 20th, 2013)
Old March 20th, 2013, 05:02 PM   #29 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocky View Post
I read about this earlier, bit of a surprise as Exynos should be compatible with LTE in Europe.

If there's a big enough performance difference I might import one, depends on cost.

But we do have some data, we already have Exynos 5250 from the Nexus 10 for comparisons which uses Cortex A15 Dual Core.
This is the next generation Exynos and Samsung has been slipping in changes (improvements) not on the Arm Cortex specifications.

Maybe the 5250 is a helpful indicator, maybe not, I couldn't say.

I noted with interest that Samsung clocked the Snapdragon 600 higher than the dual quadcore Exynos. Gut instinct says that they either did that to out-spec the One or to match this particular Exynos for performance. In any case, I doubt that they sacrificed potential battery life for speed without good reason.

As for LTE, we've seen the quad A9 Exynos support it in Korea and another Exynos support it on the US Note 2, if I'm not mistaken.

That may make this all more about supply and demand than anything.

The Snapdragon 600, unlike the Qualcomm S4, doesn't include the LTE modem and does require a separate chip complement, just like an Exynos.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
Hadron (March 20th, 2013)
Old March 20th, 2013, 05:43 PM   #30 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,813
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 144
Thanked 313 Times in 276 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
That may make this all more about supply and demand than anything.
Yeah, that's what i'm thinking afterall we still haven't seen any results for it and they still haven't started manufacturing them.
Shocky is offline  
Last edited by Shocky; March 20th, 2013 at 06:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Shocky For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 20th, 2013)
sponsored links
Old March 20th, 2013, 05:55 PM   #31 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
I noted with interest that Samsung clocked the Snapdragon 600 higher than the dual quadcore Exynos. Gut instinct says that they either did that to out-spec the One or to match this particular Exynos for performance. In any case, I doubt that they sacrificed potential battery life for speed without good reason.
Yeah. My suspicion all along has been that the clock difference is intended to ensure that there isn't a large performance difference between the two models. For that reason I'm actually more curious about the dual-quad's battery performance (and how well the scheduling, swapping core-sets, works out for the user in a range of circumstances, as that's an amusing little problem to optimise).

But it looks like in the immediate future this question is academic for me (though as I am an academic I shouldn't use that word like that ).
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hadron For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 20th, 2013)
Old March 20th, 2013, 06:48 PM   #32 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

I keep seeing various rumors, but if we're going to take guesses, so far as I know, the Nexus 4 runs the S4 Pro at 1.5 GHz and the owners insist it screams.

If it's true that this will run the 600 at 1.9, and if it's true that the Krait 300 is 15% more clock cycle effective, then we're talking about a potential speed bump over the Nexus 4 to the tune of 45% faster.

Take that with a huge bag of salt, but that may be interesting if true.
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; March 21st, 2013 at 05:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2013, 04:38 AM   #33 (permalink)
Master X is Watching You
 
XplosiV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,413
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 16GB Blue (x2) 4.1.1 ****** Galaxy mini ****** Galaxy Tab 8.9, ****** Galaxy Portal 2
Carrier: T-Mobile UK!

Thanks: 723
Thanked 1,962 Times in 1,531 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to XplosiV xplosiv.ss@gmail.com
Default

This might be useful

Samsung Exynos

This approach offers up to 70 percent energy saving when performing various tasks, compared to using Cortex- A15™cores only.
__________________




XplosiV is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to XplosiV For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 21st, 2013)
Old March 21st, 2013, 06:39 AM   #34 (permalink)
Resident Slide Rule Guru
 
OverByter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CT, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G,Triumph CM7 TG=Reloaded, Intercept UD6, HTC Wildfire S HBOOT Unlocked w/s-off
Carrier: Virgin Mobile

Thanks: 403
Thanked 918 Times in 656 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to OverByter
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Quote:
Originally Posted by davoid View Post
Yes, thanks

I see how it is down to the number of transistors - the fewer the better when the phone is ticking over.

I suspect the A15 would need to kick in any time the screen came on or people would be crying about UI lag. I know I would.
I don't know about that, I think that quad A7's wouldn't have too I much trouble with screen transitions and the like, bring the big boys in just when something is computationally and graphically demanding like a high end game with a serious rendering engine like NFS Most Wanted/Shift, Real Racing 3 or MC3, now you want those 4 A15 cores to kick in and start screaming.
OB
OverByter is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2013, 12:02 PM   #35 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OverByter View Post
I don't know about that, I think that quad A7's wouldn't have too I much trouble with screen transitions and the like, bring the big boys in just when something is computationally and graphically demanding like a high end game with a serious rendering engine like NFS Most Wanted/Shift, Real Racing 3 or MC3, now you want those 4 A15 cores to kick in and start screaming.
OB
I'm not going to assume that the A7 quad is the default, and the A15 kicks in later.

The A7 quad is going to result in performance far below the SGS3 of either species.

I'd be surprised if the A15 isn't the default.

The transition strategy is going to be interesting.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2013, 02:30 PM   #36 (permalink)
Resident Slide Rule Guru
 
OverByter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CT, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G,Triumph CM7 TG=Reloaded, Intercept UD6, HTC Wildfire S HBOOT Unlocked w/s-off
Carrier: Virgin Mobile

Thanks: 403
Thanked 918 Times in 656 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to OverByter
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

You have to remember that the A15 cores are clocked at 1.2 while the A7's are running at 1.6. Here's a good article describing how the octa core works: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-03/19/exynos-5-octa
OB
OverByter is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2013, 02:47 PM   #37 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OverByter View Post
You have to remember that the A15 cores are clocked at 1.2 while the A7's are running at 1.6. Here's a good article describing how the dual quadcore works: Samsung Galaxy S4 processor: how the eight-core CPU works (Wired UK)
OB
Ftfy.

BTW -



From -

ARM’s new Cortex A7 is tailor-made for Android superphones | Ars Technica

Even with the A7 core clocked at 1.6 GHz, it's not going to be fast, and transitions between cores are not going to be trivial.

There has - without a doubt - been a thought put into this by Samsung.

But we won't know if they pulled it off until they're in users' hands, imo.
XplosiV and OverByter like this.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
OverByter (March 21st, 2013)
Old March 21st, 2013, 03:28 PM   #38 (permalink)
Resident Slide Rule Guru
 
OverByter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CT, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G,Triumph CM7 TG=Reloaded, Intercept UD6, HTC Wildfire S HBOOT Unlocked w/s-off
Carrier: Virgin Mobile

Thanks: 403
Thanked 918 Times in 656 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to OverByter
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

It's definitely good looking on the paper graph, the performance has a nice, steep ramp. Then again, so does the power consumption. Should be very interesting, a totally new and different stab at the Holy Grail of smart phones, power to spare, both computationally and power savings.
OB
EarlyMon likes this.
OverByter is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2013, 03:38 PM   #39 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gearu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 774
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy Note 3, Samsung Galaxy SII Silver Edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 61
Thanked 87 Times in 59 Posts
Default

I'm now undecided on which I will order until reviews of the performance of both come out.
I want to get the Exynos 5 version, but I've acquired some doubt with what I've read in the last 24 hours.
I won't want the Exynos version if there are tiny lags when it switches core sets, or other little glitches, I want a smooth running phone, the overall performance seems a bit of an unknown.
Gearu is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gearu For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 21st, 2013), Njd4 (March 29th, 2013)
Old March 21st, 2013, 03:50 PM   #40 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearu View Post
I'm now undecided on which I will order until reviews of the performance of both come out.
I want to get the Exynos 5 version, but I've acquired some doubt with what I've read in the last 24 hours.
I won't want the Exynos version if there are tiny lags when it switches core sets, or other little glitches, I want a smooth running phone, the overall performance seems a bit of an unknown.
Yeah. It could be the best processor ever devised for mobile. I can't wait to see actual results, too!
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old March 26th, 2013, 07:39 AM   #41 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rushmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 7,812
 
Device(s): S4, iPad Air, Note 2014 10.1, Dell V11 5130, Nvidia Shield. Yes- too many devices.
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 403
Thanked 1,379 Times in 968 Posts
Default

Snap 600 FTW!

Again the A6X rocks, so anything faster is butter on the biscuit for me.
rushmore is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 27th, 2013, 07:17 PM   #42 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
CafeKampuchia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Pursat, Cambodia
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,155
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy TabPRO 8.4, Google Nexus 5, OnePlus One
Carrier: CellCard & Metfone

Thanks: 1,334
Thanked 1,410 Times in 746 Posts
Default

Done on two pre-production phones, so take this with a grain of salt. The GT-I9505 has the Snapdragon chipset and the GT-I9500 the Exynos.

AnTuTu:
I9500 - 27,417 (from sammobile.com)
I9505 - 23,607 (from gsmarena.com)

Quadrant:
I9500 - 12,726 (from sammobile.com)
I9505 - 12,028 (from gsmarena.com)

Sources:
Samsung Galaxy S4: User Interface Walkthrough | SamMobile
Samsung Galaxy S4 vs. HTC One: Army of two - GSMArena.com
__________________
Don't just say thanks, click Thanks
Android Forums Site Rules/Guidelines OnePlus One Rooting Guide

Please don't send me PMs with support questions. That's what the forum is for
CafeKampuchia is offline  
Last edited by CafeKampuchia; March 27th, 2013 at 07:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CafeKampuchia For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 27th, 2013), Hadron (March 28th, 2013), Shocky (March 28th, 2013)
Old March 28th, 2013, 07:00 AM   #43 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Interesting that the SamMobile Antutu screen shots show 4*1800 MHz clock speed, higher than the generally expected 1600.
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hadron For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 28th, 2013)
Old March 28th, 2013, 07:24 AM   #44 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rushmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 7,812
 
Device(s): S4, iPad Air, Note 2014 10.1, Dell V11 5130, Nvidia Shield. Yes- too many devices.
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 403
Thanked 1,379 Times in 968 Posts
Default

What good are benchmarks if you do not see actual performance results that correlate? Especially since we do not know the weight of each parameter, nor any bias created as a result. This means a device that could actually be faster for REAL use could get weaker benchmarks. High potential for placebo effect using benchmarks in general as a presumed standard.
Hadron likes this.
rushmore is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 28th, 2013, 07:37 AM   #45 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Yup, I suspect that for devices in this class we'll see no real life differences in responsiveness, or if we do they will be down to software (eg cpu scheduling) more than hardware.

Battery life differences will be interesting, but will depend hugely on usage, so review sites' methodologies will struggle with this.
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hadron For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 28th, 2013)
Old March 28th, 2013, 07:43 AM   #46 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rushmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 7,812
 
Device(s): S4, iPad Air, Note 2014 10.1, Dell V11 5130, Nvidia Shield. Yes- too many devices.
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 403
Thanked 1,379 Times in 968 Posts
Default

They always do struggle. Human nature is to take subjective things and filter them into objective things.
EarlyMon likes this.
rushmore is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rushmore For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (March 28th, 2013)
Old March 28th, 2013, 07:48 AM   #47 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,813
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 144
Thanked 313 Times in 276 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadron View Post
Interesting that the SamMobile Antutu screen shots show 4*1800 MHz clock speed, higher than the generally expected 1600.
Yep, a few sites have got hold of them and confirmed the Cortex A15's are clocked at 1.8GHz, Cortex A7@1.2GHz and the PowerVR SGX544MP3@533MHz.

It's looking good.

The camera is better on the Galaxy S4, much more detail overall and in low light conditions, it's not even close.

The shots on the HTC One look blurry when zoomed in and HDR mode is just horrible. HTC can call it whatever they want but it's just a slightly better than average 4MP camera which doesn't match up at all.
Shocky is offline  
Last edited by Shocky; March 28th, 2013 at 08:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old March 28th, 2013, 09:38 AM   #48 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 46,370
 
Device(s): M8, LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift - Evo retired
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 42,727
Thanked 57,185 Times in 22,977 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

If we're going off-topic, there's already been an update, that blur is coming from typical HTC overcompression rather than the hardware. The megapixel myth is clearly alive and well. We can discuss the HTC camera in the One forum if you like.

Anyway, I never trusted the earlier specs that had those two clock frequencies reversed for the dual quadcore, and what's out here makes much more sense.

It especially makes sense that the new A15 wasn't beating the Snapdragon 600 while only running at 1.2 GHz lol.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 28th, 2013, 02:33 PM   #49 (permalink)
Member
 
beowulf7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: TX
Posts: 474
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S4 (rooted), Motorola Droid 3 (rooted)
Carrier: Verizon Wireless

Thanks: 52
Thanked 25 Times in 21 Posts
Default

It is confusing, but I'm looking forward to some benchmark results between these 2 variants of SGS4s.
beowulf7 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 02:34 PM   #50 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Hadron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dimension Jumping
Posts: 12,300
 
Device(s): HTC One (S-Off), HTC Desire (retired)
Carrier: Orange UK

Thanks: 2,281
Thanked 5,165 Times in 3,721 Posts
Default Re: How much faster is the Octa 8 vs the Snapdragon 600?

Was thinking just now that a someone who will root and mod phones the Qualcomm may be better regardless: more owners = more devs, and Qualcomm have been more developer friendly than Samsung with the Exynos from what I hear.
Hadron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Samsung Galaxy S4
Current Rating:
Rate this Phone:

The all-new Samsung Galaxy S4 is all but guaranteed to be the next top-selling device. The new device is dubbed the "Life Companion" due to its intuitive features. The Galaxy S4 sports a 5-inch 1080p Super AMOLED display, an awesome 13 MP... Read More



Go Back   Android Forums > Android Phones > Samsung Galaxy S4
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:23 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.