yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy S 4 General] bala_gamer:
If I'm not wrong the score for Egypt 2.5 hd is higher than adreno 320 right? Afaik adreno scored around 40 fps

《posted from s3》
[Galaxy S 4 General] i9100g user:
Yes it is a bit higher(or rather same) than s600 which scored 41fps in glbenchmark 2.5.

sent from an Galaxy s3 GT I9300

Running perseus kernel 33.1 , XELLA 4.1.2 leaked build

:D xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1784401

The other side of XDA :rolleyes:
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
WTF with Triangle throughput its about 2 times lower than IP5 which has half clocks of GS4 :eek::eek:

http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare....le+iPad+4&D3=Apple+iPhone+5&D4=HTC+One&cols=4
[Galaxy S 4 General] i9100g user:
Retail firmware version might be the cause, that would explain the lags in gameplay videos too.
[Galaxy S 4 General] [ady]:
Thanks for the infos
[Galaxy S 4 General] Tranceh:
What about the Korean models (SHV-E300K/S)? I believe those are LTE and Exyons based, no?
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
yes :)
[Galaxy S 4 General] mw86:
Its only Korean LTE bands to my knowledge, so i stuck with the i9500.
[Galaxy S 4 General] SirCanealot:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/XDA-Big.LITTLE-Kernel-Exynos-5,22420.html

So tom's hardware manages to completely mis-report the issue. I'm vaguely tempted to email them; but it's a nice day and probably will be more constructive to go for a walk in the sun or something, lol.
[Galaxy S 4 General] deathnotice01:
Very informative thread, great research.

Finally something intelligent to read.

All this one vs s4 is making me bored

Sent un Samsung Galaxia S Quatro LTE
[Galaxy S 4 General] DADER:
I have one question from what I understood

Due to the current IKS ruling ;

Each cluster will lock any of its cores to its maximum clock & once the iks switcher notice a weak performance from A7 core(s), it will lock one from (according to demand) A15 core(s) to max clock, because governer is not present, am I right? Or there are more conditions to be applied to get to my conclusion?
[Galaxy S 4 General] TingTingin:
U bought s4?

S4 INFO
[Galaxy S 4 General] Cap'nO:
This is best XDA thread to inform consumer choice on S4 versions

This thread is amazing and I need help deciding which S4 to get. I read all 20 pages.

Andrei, you explain things well and I appreciate you shutting the pretenders down so the less experienced like myself know who to listen to and also understand the basics.

My Help Challenge

I buy phones for the long haul, so appreciate the phone with the most potential for the future. I still use the SGH-T959 (Galaxy S Vibrant), but feel its time to upgrade devices (understatement) as my 4.2.1 rom is quite laggy and power efficiency is horrible for me now. Which S4 has the most potential to still be a relevant device 3 years from now?

I Appreciate any responses from senior members or recognized developers.

Potential for me =

power efficiency because I'm on the metro or bus a lot. I browse net, play games, email, stream movies, hotspot, etc. also fly a lot

good hardware to support anticipated software or development ( sorry if I say it wrong) longer without being all super slow

Bottom line , which S4 will be more relevant and able to keep up with devices that come out several years from now? I know this is a speculative and subjective answer you give, but its informed advice in my opinion.

I can't purchase phones all the time because its expensive, so try to get ones that can last the longest using tweaks/ custom roms.

Help a noob??? Thanks in advance
[Galaxy S 4 General] deathnotice01:
Ugh yeah?

Like 1 week and 3 days ago

Sent un Samsung Galaxia S Quatro LTE
[Galaxy S 4 General] warfareonly:
1.) I dunno about that. The S600 SoC is quite power efficient, but I have no idea about the exynos 5410(in the i9500 variant)

2.) If you mean development support from the xda community, then I'd suggest you to go for the i9505 without any qualms.
[Galaxy S 4 General] demlasjr:
[MENTION=4339584]Cap'nO[/MENTION] Totally agree with [MENTION=4393033]warfareonly[/MENTION]. To have a good mobile for 3 years from now, I9505 is a great selection.

- First of all you have 4G LTE (just in case you have 4G or will have in the future in your location)

- The GPU is better, you have OpenGL ES 3.0 (I9500's GPU have only 2.0), which may become a standard, not this year, but maybe next one or in 2 years

- Even if Samsung will not update your phone after 2 years and you will want the last Android version on your phone, Cyanogen will always have a stable and complete version for the S600 CPU (even if you probably will lose some features. Exynos never released their code

- Ignore those small results in the benchmarks, there is enough space to improve through upgrades and the difference are not visible in normal use. Also, if you play games, your battery life will be lower on I9500 due to A15 cores. Resuming this, with I9500 you have better battery life in standby but weaker while playing or browsing, while I9505 you have balanced battery life.

Cheers !
[Galaxy S 4 General] i9100g user:
1.As for battery life,I would say Exynos variant may turn turnout to be better ,if a different implementation of big.LITTLE (Cluster migration is not the "most" battery friendly)

is implemented.

2. AOSP support would be better on snapdragon variant, so if you plan to install CM roms or you like pure/stock android then snapdragon S4 is for you.

All in all both variants should provide good support in future as there are developers working for both of them.

But as you live in a country where 4G would become a huge necessity in a year or so(and you are planning to keep your phone for a longer period of time) ,I would say go for snapdragon variant.

Also snapdragon variant should be better for handling games in future(like 2-3 years).
[Galaxy S 4 General] Rahulrulez:
Source of information? If that is true then Samsung has to call back all the devices :mad:
[Galaxy S 4 General] Beefheart:
Why do they? The phone does have Octacore architecture so they haven't lied. And I don't recall anything in the advertisements indicating all 8 cores could be used at the same time. Misleading no doubt, but they are under no legal obligation to recall the product.

But given this issue, and given the ease of development in comparison, for the first time I'm glad I have the tried and tested architecture contained in the I9505. Previously I wouldn't have cared too much what model I bought given that I don't use 4G.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Rahulrulez:
I am not talking about being 8 cores activated all the time thing mate.. I am asking about the SERIOUS issue with CCI that is unsolvable since it is in silicon itself.

Selling Octa Core sh*t with not making ANY use of it. Won't that be cheating?
[Galaxy S 4 General] Beefheart:
But doesn't the fault you're referring to result in cluster use and therefore equates to all 8 cores not being simultaneously available? Which is the same thing isn't it?

It is cheating, yes. But the phone does have 8 cores so therefore falls within the description that is used to sell the device. The fact it's not unreasonable to assume all cores, when called on, should be available for use simultaneously and can't doesn't really effect that. If you ask me Samsung have indeed mis-sold the I9500, but proving that legally is another matter and, short of them replacing handsets in some sort of nice gesture (no chance with a corporation of Samsung's size) that is what you would need to do.
[Galaxy S 4 General] MuertoKo:
I'm sorry, but did you read this post? Or at least checked how samsung is advertising Octa?

Samsung is NOT advertising it as an 8 core device, just as simple as that. It is not suposed to do anything, just to work. You have 8 cores, working 4 - 4 actually without hotplugging not core migration, but working pretty well. [Edit: Meaning of this sentence corrected by next poster, saying in clearer words what I ment in here, thanks there]

When you do light tasks (actually seems like many of the tasks are actually "light" on stock config.) it works with 4 A7 cores, saving a bunch of battery and performing well. When you switch to heavy tasks (HARD gaming, or as reported in some threats some video playback triggers them as well) it switches to 4 A15 cores, giving you the most stunning performance you can actually get on a device at the cost of power and some heating.

That's all, it's working, it's perfect; it's just not as we all techy fans desired, no AS perfect as we know it could have been and as we wished it would be...

Stop the panic and "I will sell my i9500 because it's a broken device" please, I really WISH I could buy one... But LTE is coming to my country in a few months so I'll have to wait a bit to switch device, depending on how data-plans go and coverage is...
[Galaxy S 4 General] Beefheart:
http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxys4/

I agree with all your post except the section I have bolded. As you can see from the link, they are using the phrase 'Octa-Core' when advertising the I9500, which is clearly saying the device has 8 cores. So they are advertising it as an 8 core device but what they're not saying is that all 8 cores can be used at once.
[Galaxy S 4 General] MuertoKo:
1.6 GHz Octa-Core Processor <--- referring to this one, right? Yep, I ment exactly what you said, miss-write it if it isn't transmitting that! I ment it's advertising an Ocra-Core Cpu, but never a CPU with 8 core at the same time, not a CPU with core migration, etc etc... It's just BS marketing, completly true, but still legit.

At least as legit as advertising the iPhone 5 as the "thinest smartphone ever" when there were some chinese ones which were thiner, or like saying it has "The best display experience using Bravia engine" on Xperia T, when it had a complete crap contrat handling... and like this, a ton of examples :P

Nothing we should worry or care about at least. Thanks for pointing that out!

PS: Just like this as well: 4G (LTE Cat 3 100/50Mbps) : up to 6 different band sets (Dependent on market) <--- This caused some discusions about i9500 having LTE modem in it, as it doesn't explicity say that the MODEL is dependnt no market (i9505 vs. i9500) and not the LTE availability... had some arguments in Xda due to this sentence, and many blogs missinformed about this... but meh, can't complain... U.U Even if we all should xD But that's another topic
[Galaxy S 4 General] SirCanealot:
If you look up the big little papers, the method of migration samsung are using is part of the spec. Unless I'm going mad. Which is possible.

It's just the 'weakest' of the three methods :)
[Galaxy S 4 General] Rahulrulez:
Yes.. But I heard hotplug latency is causing battery drain issues and performance lag. Since it is stepping between clusters. I am not sure about that, I just heard it somewhere.. Is it true? and can we fix it anyway? Like by implementing Linaro IKS?
[Galaxy S 4 General] MuertoKo:
No idea about the second question but I guess it's a no as it might also be hardware limited, but that's out of my knowledge. About lags I've tested an i9500 device of a friend, monitoring CPU while trying different stuff and with a normal use you will hardly hit A15 so you won't notice ANY lags, remember you are running permanently on a quad-core CPU (on my S3 for example, you are using most of the time 2 cores, so even if we have A9 we are running it on dual core, having all time quad gives a smooth experience and it has a really, really low consumption on those A7's).

i can't see any noticeable lag when in-game it switches to big cores, managed to trigger it was some racing game and I couldn't see anything like a lag or stuttering (I'm saying SEE, so just subjective perspective related to real daily usage!).

Btw, I think there is no hotplug at all, it's cluster migration not hotpluging (not really sure, but at least I think it's better say it this way to avoid confusion, please correct me if I'm wrong)

---------- Post added at 02:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:33 PM ----------

You are correct there, that's why I stated they are not... really really lying, not more than any other marketing campaign at least.
[Galaxy S 4 General] noodles2k:
If the CCI doesn't work, how do the clusters transfer C2? Ram? :eek:
[Galaxy S 4 General] resore:
say hello to microlags;)
[Galaxy S 4 General] F|OYD:
Thanks a lot!

Thanks for the detailed information! Got a lot of insight. I have already bought the Snapdragon model, applied CF-Auto root and then flashed CWM recovery over this using SGS4 flasher. Never have I been so happy with my phone. Works like a charm. Also I haven't noticed any lag on this model. I need the LTE, and Qualcomm is more developer friendly. So that's why I went with GT-i9505.
[Galaxy S 4 General] noodles2k:
Oh dear. Think I'll be getting the HTC One. :eek:
[Galaxy S 4 General] Beefheart:
Get the I9505 instead.
[Galaxy S 4 General] rcarlossgs:
For people asking proof on the Exynos big.LITTLE implementation

Samsung official FAQ guide meant for Customer contact centres (Source:http://www.sammobile.com/2013/06/03/time-to-answer-123-questions-about-the-galaxy-s4/)
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
haha

even without CCI still faster than One :D

[YOUTUBE]ODMGN7jk3yc[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]3SiiVeDVNk4[/YOUTUBE]
[Galaxy S 4 General] F|OYD:
Lol
[Galaxy S 4 General] fahad2mail:
thanks a lot for the info bro. it will help me to buy the perfect model
[Galaxy S 4 General] Arviter91:
Helped me a lot! Exynos woot!
[Galaxy S 4 General] HAAAAAATIUUUU:
So in the end, octa is kinda fail. Its still like a beta for me, working great but not working as it should be. And if the note 3 will get the snapdragon 800, the exynos 5 octa will leave in the shadows. Unless they release the source code, things will be different ^ ^
[Galaxy S 4 General] mw86:
Your underestimating A15 cores. So what if it can't be as efficient. Its extremely powerful.

Benchmark pics from stock setup

http://db.tt/ojvxm7ew

Benchmark from overclock

http://db.tt/dajfCB7q
[Galaxy S 4 General] HAAAAAATIUUUU:
Iknow the A15 in the exynos 5 octa are the most powerful as of now, what im just saying is that itsdoing a good job right nowbut not in the way they really should be working with the A7s
[Galaxy S 4 General] noideaforusername:
They never said how the A15s will work with the A7s. Actually, from what they said at CES, it works as intended. Cluster migration is what they talked about.
[Galaxy S 4 General] mw86:
This is true as the exmple we saw on tablet with exynos using hmp etc was not the GS4 and was a sample of how bug little could work. The product delivered is what was planned for the GS4. The big little architecture was too new to properly integrate the hmp although all exynos supposedly support all three forms of processing these ones were cast on the silicon with only cluster migration mind, and is why Andrei pointed out it would never use anything but cluster migration due to the way the chip was put together lacking the proper interconnect between the two cpus.
[Galaxy S 4 General] richardbroder:
As far as benchmarks tell, it's barely 10% faster than S600´s Krait core, sometimes not even that. 10% speed improvement does not justify so much more power consumption.

The new BMW M5 is about 10% faster than the old M5. But it is actually more fuel efficient than the old one. So that makes it a good deal. But 10% faster with lower (much lower) efficiency? Nah.
[Galaxy S 4 General] parhelion69:
I have good battery life, and good performance. So what is the problem really?

It could have been a little or much better (we can't tell how much), but theoretical numbers are just that, we can't expect to get 50% (or whatever it is, I'm just making up that number) better battery life.

Fact is, A15 are incredibly powerful cores and the A7 perform very decently and efficiently (you can check these benchmarks for A7: http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=42248273&postcount=539 ), and the SGS4 runs most of the time on the A7 anyway, so again, what's the big deal?
[Galaxy S 4 General] danveer:
BTW from whay I have read so far, exynos has better battery life than snapdragon variant in day to day life..
[Galaxy S 4 General] richardbroder:
Tests comparing the two devices side by side indicate that the I9505 has better battery life:

http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_i9500_vs_i9505-review-930p3.php

About "day to day life", with LTE disabled I have managed to keep my phone on for 2 days and 14 hours in a single charge, with 3hours of screen time. That included a 30minute drive with my g/f in which I used the phone to stream Internet music. Brightness set to auto, Wi-Fi and GPS on all the time. Power saving mode DISABLED.

If I hadn't streamed Internet music (very battery intensive) and had used power saving mode, I recon I could have reached 3+ days of battery time. Despite A7´s incredible power efficiency, I have yet to see users posting 3+ days of battery life with over 3hours of screen time in a single charge on their I9500´s.

Screenshots attached.
[Galaxy S 4 General] danveer:
With 2.5 days on single charge and 3 hrs of screen time surely sounds great. .

I have never gotten higher than 17 to 18 hrs myself but even in those 18 hrs, I get a screen time of 5-6 hrs..

Here is how i use my phone in those 18 hrs.

40 to 50 mins real racing 3

30 to 50 mins fast and furious 6

About 1hr of csr racing

15 to 20 mins of temple run

25 mins of subway surfers

25 to 30 mins xda

30 mins opera

A few minutes of whats app and camera.

Air guesture, airview, sync and wifi on and never used power saving mode. .

If I stop these games which I play a lot even I might get that much of stand by but the use differs from user to user.

Besides the test from gsmarena cant be termed accurate..

First reason being they used older fimware for 9500 against updated version of 9505.

Besides there test just diminished the whole purpose of big little in web browsing test. In normal day to day use, loading of a webpage uses a15 and afterwards a7 for the time the person is reading the same page which can take couple of minutes.

In gsmarena test the webpage was refreshed every 10 sec never allowing a15 to shut down.

Also overall difference even with so much disadvantages, the diff is of just 4 hrs.
[Galaxy S 4 General] richardbroder:
Loading a web-page is not CPU intensive, why would it switch to A15 for such a simple task? I thought the A7 was supposed to be powerful enough to handle simple tasks.
[Galaxy S 4 General] renosj:
what about overheating when playing games or browsing?
[Galaxy S 4 General] danveer:
You might have seen reviewers often load a same webpage on different mobile at same time, its because the faster the processor is, more quickly it can render the webpage.

It surely dependd on type of connection too but it does bring the processor running at 100% espically those webpages having great amount of flash content on it.. it surely uses a15 to render the webpage asap and switch back to a7...:thumbup:

It used to overheat in MDK firmware but the new update which brought apps2sd and other featured on 9500, 9505 last week took care of it.

Besides the processor cools down prettly quickly and by that I mean it can drop 20 ° within few seconds ar a minute max.

Also undervolting takes care of that problem but as you might have guessed it requires sacrifising warranty..

Look guys I am not here to say which is better or why..

9505 too with snaodragon processor and Its asynchronous technology can provide great battery life, it will depend on from person to person for eg for a person fond of heavy games and processor demanding tasks will be better of with 9505 because of its asynchronous technology and for a person with normal usage and casual gameing will be happy with 9500 because of a7 ( games like subway surfer, temple run run on a7 and not a15 ) but still no matter how you use it the difference just boils down to just 3% to 5%.

As I stated above, for some 9500 will be better choice for others 9505 is the phone to go for..

I just dont like it when people start saying that the difference in battery life is quite huge or big little in 9500 is a dissappointment..

Its working great just the way it was meant initially, a15 to take care of heavy tasks and a7 for light ones providing a balance between performance and efficiency. ..:thumbup::D:)
[Galaxy S 4 General] AndreiLux:
Webpage rendering is the single most CPU intensive task on smartphones.
[Galaxy S 4 General] mw86:
I have no battery issues on gti9500. This seems like fine battery life to me. I ran it non stop surfing web. Half time on mobile data and half time on wifi. Plenty of downloads in a row that day.

http://db.tt/ROCuSygt

http://db.tt/5B9UPBkA

http://db.tt/tvdCIT8y

I could go multiple days if i had not had straight use of screen on in a row for 7 hours. This phone makes two days easy with more normal use.
[Galaxy S 4 General] ChardC:
Nice write up.

Very factual and indeed noteworthy on the processor architecture.
[Galaxy S 4 General] HAAAAAATIUUUU:
GT- I9500 still has the better battery life that the snapdragon version, the battery life of the I9500 is almosy near in the note 2
[Galaxy S 4 General] Easton999GS:
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_i9500_vs_i9505-review-930p3.php

Um no, Read again.
[Galaxy S 4 General] mw86:
All depends on how one configures the cores. Both i9505 and i9500 has far more potential than GSM arena has shown. The stock setup pushes the exynos often into the high power cores. Setting the governor values better i don't hit A15 cores unless overloaded on the A7. It's no different on the snapdragon. Users can gain far more battery over stock. The stock governors for Android give no good comparison of how users use these phones once they get them. Stock comparison no adjustments made is fair enough to say the i9505 is getting better battery life. In real world usage its not nearly as clear.

S600 users and exynos could post a few battery life stats but would need a thread for it if one doesn't exist yet comparing these two models. If it's not too far off topic here is a good place to post battery stats for comparison of the two models. I get 7:30 screen on pretty easily without much effort. Personally the two models were designed to be so close, I don't see the draw to say one is better than the other. They are both sibling models labeled galaxy s4.
[Galaxy S 4 General] HAAAAAATIUUUU:
Nah that site is not reliable. Look at the iphone 5 battery life in gsmarena, its has better rating than the Galaxy S3 but it iphone 5 battery lifes pales in real life comparison. Gets your facts straight bro
[Galaxy S 4 General] barondebxl:
I'm using an iPhone 5 right now and I promise you that battery life is excellent to say the least.
[Galaxy S 4 General] timberwolf60:
If screen continuous on for 5 hours then I should said it was good but not the best. My i9505 can last me 6 hours continuous used. I charged my battery daily with an spare battery with me. I can changed rom easily and enjoy.

Send via i9505 using Tapatalk,

ROM: PYRANA MF5 1.5 LITE.,

CSC/Modem: OLBBMEA/DXUBMEA

Kernel: adam 1.4, Phil recovery.

SuperSU Pro 1.34, 64GB exFAT Card
[Galaxy S 4 General] mw86:
This was early on when i first got my i9500. Still on a stock type setup.

http://db.tt/ROCuSygt

http://db.tt/5B9UPBkA

http://db.tt/tvdCIT8y

I have gone above 7 hours screen time but im always updating i have yet to record a new run where i haven't installed and rebooted several times for installs
[Galaxy S 4 General] plasmastate:
What the hell? How on earth did you 7 hours of screen time? What is your brightness level? Screen filters? Also, what are your regular activities in that screen time. Do you have push notifications and apps like Facebook,and whatsapp turned on? Sorry for too many questions but your battery life is great!
[Galaxy S 4 General] tclocki:
Screen on time 6 hrs 57 mins... Total battery time 7 hr 49 mins... I see that the phone was never awake all the time but the screen was on? Not sure how was that possible? Everytime I turn on my screen, my phone goes awake...