[Galaxy S III General] gliatiotis:
Even when on a wi-fi network , most devices require more time to actually draw and present a page than it takes them to download it .

Since LTE connections are more resource consuming than a simple wireless connection to a home network , even though most of the hardware that handles the connection is dedicated to the LTE part , a 60Mbit transfer speed should at best provide the same browsing experience with a similar wi-fi connection .

Since rendering and processing times are usually greater , no matter the kind of connection , a 60Mbit transfer rate of a web page will end up on some kind of a bottleneck inside the device .

using the phone as a torrent downloading machine will probably make better use of the connection speed , but this requires at least a standing device on one point to achieve greater speeds . Thethering the phone with a computer and using it as a modem is another option , however most providers at least in North America do charge for tethering and offer unlimited data only for phone based browsing where you can not actually make much use of the increased data rate . On top of all that there is always the battery problem , since an active LTE connection , downloading at the maximum attainable rate will drain the battery amazingly fast .

Just because marketing-wise LTE is advertised as the future ( that may actually be , but not at this point ) and provides greater speeds , it doesn't mean that at this point at least , those speeds are of any real use on the mobile phone itself .

On top of all that , in most urban areas , a correctly deployed HSPA+ network with adequate spectrum available from the carrier will provide almost the same average download speeds , and it's only in upload speeds that there is no way to come even close to LTE .

Just because LTE's backend equipment is cheaper and much easier to deploy for the network , and it understandably advertised as an evolution , it doesn't mean that we can actually benefit from it as consumers , with only very few usage scenarios available .

Especially the average transfer rate issue , is something that in the USA at least is carefully hidden by the carriers and not mentioned a lot even by most mainstream media , let alone all the other drawbacks of the whole implementation , when we put the actual devices in the picture .

---------- Post added at 02:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------

SGS ii has also four cores in the GPU that however run at lower clock speeds and probably are different in some other way too that Samsung is not willing to share with us .

SGS ii drives an WVGA screen of 800x480 pixels and can deliver pretty good graphics and multimedia features on this lower speed GPU since the screen resolution is much smaller .

I agree with you on the SGS iii . Playing videos of any kind with any given resolution is something that it handles without any problems . On top of that it manages to provide quite good playback times even when streaming video content at least on wi-fi connections .

Playing an 1080p movie of above average quality bumps into other problems that are the same for most devices and have nothing to do with hardware performance . You have to actually fit the movie in the available memory which usually means using an extra micro-SD card at least on a 16GB phone . On top of that , if the movie file is larger than 4.5 GB you have to use an NTFS formatted media that you then have to find a way to make the phone actually read .

In comparison to the HTC one X (or most HTC devices for that matter ) that you have to use only the in-built memory , multimedia content of high quality and resolution is something that is limited by everything else besides the phone's ability to play them .

At least the expandable memory of the SGS iii gives you an extra option if you are willing to fight your way through and play an 1080p high quality , high bitrate mkv file .