yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy S 4 General] americasteam:
Well I'm not sure about jumping on the bandwagon. I had the Galaxy S, Note, S3, and Note 2. I know my way around Samsung, Android, iOS, and Windows Phone. Yep, had them all.

Exynos may be more powerful, but I'm sure most users won't notice a difference. We can argue this all day long, but there's no facts to support it. Sorry, benchmarks are useless to determine day to day usage. As you stated above, it depends on the user. My biggest gripe is the DAC. I would love to have Wolfson but it is what it is. I haven't heard the music output on the US S4, so I'll have to rely on reviewers. So far, it sounds promising.

I really don't understand Samsung's money making scheme you talk about (Accessories I can understand, extra for wireless charging - come on Samsung. Really?). You think they want to pay Qualcomm for thier chips? Wouldn't it benefit Samsung to use their own tech that they have spent tons of money to develop? I see a trend here and I think it's a timing issue. Seems to me they don't have the latest Exynos R&D done in time enough to ramp up production to support a Global release of the S series, so they rely on Qualcomm. I see this changing in the future though.

I agree with you that the Note 3 will be Gobally sporting the new Exynos. That's months down the line. I'm sure I'll have one of those too. ;)

Just my 2 cents.
[Galaxy S 4 General] :
IMO, that's not the reason why they ignored the processor.

They didn't mention the processor because millions of people who are potentially interested in a smartphone are oblivious of the processor/GPU etc., It just doesn't matter for them.

Just check the official micro-site for GS4 - http://samsung.com/gs4

There is no mention of processor or GPU or any technical specifications. They feel that it's not the internal hardware that sells, rather how the phone can make your life simpler.

Obviously there will be a few people in the XDA or similar forums who will fight on the basis of processor and memory. But we hardly constitute 1% of total customer base.
[Galaxy S 4 General] AndreiLux:
They're ignoring it because they're ashamed of the situation. Basically the reason of the S600 vs Octa variants is money, licenses and a company whose divisions are (supposedly) walled off.

There's an article on Semiaccurate about it but it's behind a pay-wall to access it.
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
yep i think its all about money :rolleyes:

manufacturing Exynos Octa + powervr GPU will probably cost them more than buying Snap S600 ( which will come ready to use )

+ the WIFi - GPS - FM chip in the Octa ( Broadcom ) is more expensive than the one in S600 ( Qualcomm Atheros wcn 3680 )

edit : adding the LTE modem will cost them even more
[Galaxy S 4 General] Brendo:
There's still no proof yet of exynos having/not having lte. Originally it was said that the exynos version was international and snapdragon was to be made for using us lte bands. And in that case it would be stupid not to include a version without lte/4g. Only time will tell

-----
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/29/samsung-exynos-octa-now-rocking-lte-destined-to-korean-market/
[Galaxy S 4 General] Razzzzer:
the drama is self imposed...I doubt any average user would notice a difference... the only ones that would note the diffference are the stat-fiends or the developer/customizers out there...
[Galaxy S 4 General] crawrj:
I think that really depends on actual battery stats. I would say that the majority of the users aren't power users. So they would notice the biggest difference in battery life. If they achieved hours more battery life on the octa vs the snapdragon they would definitely notice. And I don't think that is unlikely for the normal casual users.

I want it because it is the best and I don't use CM.
[Galaxy S 4 General] foxy4270:
Can someone give me ONE good reason why to prefer Snapdragon instead of Exynos model?
[Galaxy S 4 General] crawrj:
Right now LTE and probably better development are it.
[Galaxy S 4 General] americasteam:
Well, for me it's LTE and a greater dev community. That means more to me than the .0000000004 seconds longer it'll take to open an app or the 4 frames per second I'll lose in Barbie's Horse Adventures.

I would like the Wolfson DAC though. Oh well, can't have everything. ;)
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
Paying $20 to Qualcomm for S-600 costs more than paying $30.00 to another Samsung division because the profit stays in house. The $30 Octa SoC probably costs $15 or less to make. It's hard to say for the other stuff because it's all tentative according to the chart. But just knocking the $15 off the BOM for Octa makes it the cheaper device to manufacture. Samsung has a ton of chip making capacity unused because of Apple moving to TSMC. So Samsung is now Samsung's biggest chip customer. Other than LTE, it doesn't seem logical for them to not use Octa as their first choice wherever they can. Unless there's something else going on like production capacity issues.

Apple has begun the process of lessening its dependency on Samsung for chipmaking, an analyst told CNET. "Apple is working with TSMC at 20 nanometers," said Gus Richard, a chip analyst at Piper Jaffray, referring to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's most advanced 20-nanometer (nm) manufacturing process. Another chip industry source contacted by CNET confirmed this. "The Apple-Samsung relationship has deteriorated to such a poor point that they're just looking to fill contractual obligations, then make a change," said the source, who corroborated the move to TSMC at 20 nanometers. An Asia-based news report said Apple will turn to TSMC for quad-core chips. Of course, a seismic shift like this -- Apple consumes probably more chips than any single consumer device maker in the world right now -- can have a profound impact on other TSMC customers. "TSMC has allocated a disproportionate amount of resources to Apple. And has pushed out other [TSMC customers] in the process," Richard said.​

Samsung Electronics Co is looking to supply chips to more Chinese and other emerging smartphone makers, the head of its system chip business said, to counter any fall-off in demand from Apple Inc, which is weaning itself off Samsung chips used in its iPhones and iPads.

Samsung and its main U.S. rival, and biggest customer, together account for more than half the global smartphone market, and the South Korean group is the main supplier of mobile processors, or application processors (AP), powering both Apple devices and its own range of Galaxy phones and tablets. But, as Apple looks to be less reliant on its rival for parts for its gadgets - it is already buying fewer Samsung memory chips and display screens as the two have gone to war over patents - concerns have grown that Samsung may see its processor revenues tumble."As there are just two smartphone makers that are doing really well, chipmakers supplying them have grown in tandem. So we plan to bolster our relationship with those key customers," Stephen Woo, president of Samsung's System LSI business, which makes processors for Apple products, said in an interview.​

Funniest thing I've seen in a while. ;)
[Galaxy S 4 General] _MrAwesome_:
The Korean s4 is Octa core and LTE I'm gonna buy one online and wait for it here is a link confirming it, and samsung officially confirmed it

http://www.sammobile.com/2013/03/28/samsung-exynos-confimed-lte-exynos-5-octa/
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
There was a Korean SGS3 with Exynos/LTE also. The bands weren't compatible so I'd make sure what bands the Korean SGS4 supports before buying it.

This is what we're all waiting for which Samsung's said they'll be introducing this year.

http://www.qualcomm.com/media/relea...olution-enables-single-global-lte-design-next
[Galaxy S 4 General] qazibasit:
samsung simply wants its s4 to top the chart in performance twice. because they opted the sd600 brcause of the availability at that time. their fears of sd800 devices leading theirs is bothering them for a late release of octa version. the latter release will definitely be good at performance.

pure business and u guys are speculating.
[Galaxy S 4 General] demlasjr:
I Hey guys, we better stop with all this.

Was Samsung said on the Unpacked what CPU will S4 have? No.

Was Samsung said what frequency will the CPU clock will have? No.

Was Samsung said that there will be a 3G and 4G version of S4? No, they said S4 will support 4G/LTE globally period. No more details.

People started saying S4 Octa will be clocked at 1.6 GHz as that's what Samsung said. When Samsung said that? In Unpacked event the said nothing about the CPU. As you all see, this data was wrong, because now we have proofs S4 will be at 1.8 GHz.

There are 60% chances to see 4G in Octa version. I'm wondering, those who received the Octa version to test, is there any 4G existence proof? At least in the way it happened with Nexus 4?
[Galaxy S 4 General] hung2900:
One more thing that Samsung didn't say, that is the NAND flash inside the phone.

This one is incredibly importance. The unbelievable scores (that much higher than the Octa with the same architecture) of Tegra 4 were contribited by a extremely fast eMMC, and we know Samsung also told that Exynos Octa support the new eMMC also, and probably the final units will have 1.6Ghz Cortex A15 so is it possible with a different NAND flash also?
[Galaxy S 4 General] demlasjr:
They said nothing about the CPU frequencies, but if I remember well, they said about the new eMMC. I'm sure they will improve that part and take care to not have the same problems like with the S3, you know, the sudden death issue.
[Galaxy S 4 General] hung2900:
At least, S4 Pro and S600 are proven to have real bad thermal throttling issue.

Not sure about Exynos Octa.
[Galaxy S 4 General] AndreiLux:
Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

See above. It's all in the official press event statement.

Would help out this forum tremendously if people would actually read and get their facts straight instead of doing blind claims.
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
WTF.... an Saudi reviewer said he got the I9500 with Snap S600 :eek::eek::eek::cyclops:

but i asked him to install quadrant and post device info :rolleyes:

but i'm still not sure about it :cyclops:

edit : anyone know what the kernel version on the snap S600 version ? is it 3.4.5 too ?
[Galaxy S 4 General] AndreiLux:
The Snapdragon devices should be 3.4.0 if they didn't change it from the test devices at release.
[Galaxy S 4 General] park.cean:
yea the exynos model is better; however i'm not sure if it's worth the price difference
[Galaxy S 4 General] demlasjr:
Got it! Well, people like me doesn't read articles wrote by Samsung New Zealand :rolleyes:

However, got you explain the 1.8 instead of 1.6 GHz? I'm kinda sure Samsung people doesn't really know either and they wait the news from Samsung Mobile Korea. At least here it took a time till Samsung confirmed we will get I9505 instead I9500.
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
IDK but here is screenshot from the review

edit : it seems totally the same as Sammobile screenshot from Exynos Octa version
[Galaxy S 4 General] puremind:
Exynos had to be downclocked to 1.6Ghz due to battery throttling issues, so I doubt you will see improved battery performance on the exynos version. Having said that if people are going for battery, they might as well go for Motorla or HTC One, which has superior battery performance for web browsing, GPS navigation and everything that uses a lot of white / bright content.

AMOLED's still suffer from higher energy consumption for displaying bright tones, which is why Samsung has to keep pushing for larger devices and hence bigger batteries, and also why they cap maximum brightness at 300cd/m² on their devices.

Currently, according to various polls, battery life is the number 1 concern of Smartphone purchasers, followed by increased screen quality.

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2192572

This of course is for the wide audience. Gamers will still prefer that extra bit of gaming performance and will choose the S600, because this chip will be in 90% of the devices and games will definitely be optimized for it. Software optimizations and fine tuning means everything as far as the the level of detail and frame rate a games plays at is concerned.

If I were to purchase an S4, I would go for the S600. It does great in all the tests, and does not have throttling issues that prevent further overclocking. Also the S600 can be downclocked and still have HTC One level of performance, which is a great advantage for battery performance!

My personal opinion is that thex Exynos is overhyped, and too late for this year's smartphone market to have a wider developer support anyway (and didn't cyanogen say they would not support the Exynos because the sources are not readily available?). Its 8-core marketing is deceptive and most people don't understand that it is 4 cores+ 4 energy saving cores and believe 8 cores will bring them more in-game performance. This would be true without the throttling issues, but as it stands...nope...

---------- Post added at 08:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:07 PM ----------

S4 Pro and Exynos do (every semiconductor specialist predicted it, Anandtech had prophesized it and now it is official with the downclocking announcement).

S600 doesn't, hence why Samsung can overclock it vs. the HTC One.
[Galaxy S 4 General] legion1911:
Unfortunately, there comes that other option Samsung has...

They do not sell you what you want to buy, so you have no option unless you are smart and with connections.

Unfortunately most people will get what they CAN get...

Samsung is in business to make money... they are not our "friend"...
[Galaxy S 4 General] puremind:
Totally spot on.

It is clear to me that HTC will have a 5" + Butterfly successor in HTC One style with S800 chip on board and this will be the true competitor of the S4. HTC One vs. S4 is how the press is looking at competition today, but because Samsung opted for a larger form factor, they now find themselves competing with the 5"+ devices. The fact that the HTC One is even a contender is disquieting for Samsung, because as we know June is when the S800 will appear in mobile devices, about the same time as the Exynos 5 Octa...
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
Exynos 4412 has no problem at all :D
[Galaxy S 4 General] puremind:
It is sad isn't it? When money-making takes precedence over common sense...

:(
[Galaxy S 4 General] Glotttis:
this thread is pretty funny. all the tests so far showed that octa version of s4 is vastly faster (both cpu and gpu), but people here try to come up with some excuse that octa isn't much better. what's the point of denying the facts? please tell me, if you could pick a model right now would you honestly choose quad core over octa core? :eek:
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
Having nothing to do with Octa, ARM’s big.LITTLE is supposed to be 1/3 more energy efficient than Snapdragon because the four A7 cores on 28nm HKMG are more powerful than the highest performing dual-core chip and one to all four cores can be active at any given time. In other words, quite a large amount of what people typically do with their smartphone will never kick-in the A15 chips.

And unless someone's concerned about the cost of electricity to keep their phone charged "time on" is the criteria battery performance should be judged on. With Samsung moving to a light background in TW, sensors on all the time monitoring for actions, and a 1.9GHz clock speed, the bigger battery in the SGS4 outperformed the smaller battery on the "more efficient" HTC One because the SGS4 does better at stand by which is why the endurance rating is so much higher. And since the One’s the same size as the SGS4 (and heavier) there’s no penalty for the SGS4’s larger battery. There's nothing to support that the Octa SGS4 will get worse battery life than the S-600 version, at least for now, and ARM's bet their future that it will be better. And if the Octa benchmarks are to be believed, if there's throttling going on, it's certainly not hurting top end performance.

Do more research.

The brightness levels of the Samsung Galaxy S4 are about on par with the rest of the company's AMOLEDs, which is to say not very high. However, due to their low reflectivity, this doesn't affect outdoor performance.

Keep in mind that enabling the auto tone setting in the screen option limits the maximum brightness to under 300 nits, so if that matters to you, you better keep it off

.​

http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4-review-914p3.php

But we know that won't be happening because you just bought a One.

Do more research. Based on the performance of Exynos-Dual in the N10 and Chromebook there’s nothing to back up that four pure A15 chips in Octa won’t perform as well or possibly better than four hybrid A15’s in S-600 under load. And that’s not even taking in to account potential performance differences between PowerVR 544 and Adreno 320.

It's taken ARM (not Samsung) two years to bring big.LITTLE to market. It's their next-generation architecture and all of Qualcomm's chips are designed off of licensed ARM technology so you can assume their next generation of chips after S-800 will be big.LITTLE also. Minimizing energy use while maximizing power is the Holy Grail to chip manufacturers. ARM's determined big.LITTLE is the solution. And by everyone using their designs you'd have to think they know a little bit about chip design.

www.arm.com/files/downloads/big.LITTLE_Final.pdf
[Galaxy S 4 General] Bagbug:
the differences are actually huge. You failed math how many times ?
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
1/3 of carriers either have LTE lit up or have committed to implementing it in 2013. Those carriers have large and affluent audiences (or subsets) that can afford the cost of expensive data plans. So let's say 1/3 = 1/2 of the most populated urban centers worldwide. For those that travel, LTE's still not that big of a draw depending on what percentage of time you use your phone away from your home network. And if your home network won’t offer LTE for a year it’s not important at all (unless you keep your phone for years). Especially since there's no such thing as LTE roaming for now. I'm using a N7100 vs. AT&T's N2 because while I'd like LTE at home I'm fine with HSPA+ and the N7100 is much more reliable than a carrier phone when registering on foreign networks. I'd get a i9500 vs. i9505 for the same reasons and I'd prefer Exynos over S-600 even if it's just to try it out. By 2014 Qualcomm's 360 baseband will be out, carriers will have LTE roaming agreements, and LTE's footprint will be bigger. In 2014 I'd pick the LTE device in spite of any benefits an HSPA only device (if they still exist) had because of those things. How important LTE is in 2013 all depends on where you'll use your phone most, your country/carrier's plans for LTE, and how long you plan on keeping your phone.
[Galaxy S 4 General] SlimJ87D:
I don't think so I think people are pointing out that words like "vastly" is an exaggeration. Truth, it is.

Anything around a factor of 2 is a vast domination. But seriously, 1.15 and lower?
[Galaxy S 4 General] SlimJ87D:
Since I failed math can you tell me what a "huge" the difference to you is? If your phone opens an app a few milliseconds faster are differences really that huge?
[Galaxy S 4 General] puremind:
Benchmarking and real life experience are two different things. On the paper, the BIG Little architecture is promising. In reality it is a little bit too late for this year's smartphone market. It will not enjoy the same development support as the more widely supported Snapdragon platform.

BIG Little is new, and like all new architectures still in their infancy, they need time to shine. Look at what happened with the Tegra 3? It had a poor start due to poor adoption but now that it has received more support, it is widely appreciated and games take full advantage of it.

You need to give new technologies some time. I don't think the Exynos 5 Octa will bring real life advantages in the 2013 device generation because software development and support is everything to in-game performance. Also, as we have seen with the equivalent Optimus technology technology from Nvidia in the laptop world, architectures that rely on smaller GPU's for light activities have their issues, you end up missing a fluid experience in some situations and you experience micro-lags due to the chip switching.

We should take LITTLE Big for what it is, i.e. is a bet on the future of chip architecture. To me it is clear it will yield compelling real life advantages at some point in the future, but right now, like AMOLED's in the S1 and S2, I don't think it will have a sufficient level of maturity. Mind you, I am not a gamer, like a majority of people in this forum, all I care about is battery performance in a new device.

Right now I am sceptical as to whether the theoretical gains in battery life will translate into real life improvements because of the lack of software optimization for it and whether their will be a compromise in terms of responsiveness to reach those gains. Of course I will be doing my testing like every one else (or even more so than everyone else), so we will see.