Related
I just got the international version of the SIII. I was wondering if I should return it and get the AT&T version because some people say that it is faster graphics and memory wise, and that even though it's dual core it has a newer processor architecture (A9 vs A15). I want to know which one really has the better graphics performance and per-thread performance, just overall which one is more powerful in the end. I dont care about network speeds.
CAN YOU PLEASE USE THE DAMN SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING?
*calms down*
because some people say that it is faster graphics and memory wise
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has more memory (2GB vs 1GB) but a slower graphic engine. Note that slower is a relative term; the speed differences may be neglectable in most real-world applications, but synthetic benchmarks do show them.
it has a newer processor architecture (A9 vs A15).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. However none of the new features (such as Virtualization) are even used.
Note that an architecture doesn't say anything about the CPU itself since Samsung has heavily modified the ARM design.
Also note that the US-version is dualcore at ~1.5Ghz with the Exynos (international) is 4core clocked at 1.4Ghz.
The Exynos is also produced with a newer technology called High-K metal gate which allows higher clock speeds with less power consumption as compared to the old production technology used on the Dualcore version.
My best guess is that everything you'll want to do will just run fine on both versions, but the international one definitively has more horsepower.
The US-version with it's 2GB of RAM should be better for multitasking tough.
I got the international version and I think I made a good decision getting the international version.
Thanks so much. I looked around but couldn't find exactly what I was looking for there was always people saying the Snapdragon S4 was better, but i didn't know if they just meant battery/data wise or what. Thanks for the clarification though. So far I am loving my International version.
I know that this isn't a Q&A Forum, but we don't have any, we only have a post that no ones answer, i know too that this question is anwered so many times before but the answer i got was like "is normal", "an article from Xperia phones that explain some of that", but i still don't get it. System always get an amount of RAM needed for the correct working of all stuff. But why in other phones (even with the same chipset) that doesn't happen? And why we can't see where and how the left memory is been used by system? Normally i've seen before how RAM is reduced to share it with GPU, but in ICS our GPU looks worst than on GB so RAM definetely isn't on the GPU, so is good that all of us reach the point of this, i get some screens from other devices and i will posting this in a little bit time. SORRY FOR MY BAD ENGLISH!
PICS are:
1-i9100G
2-i9100G
3-Motorola Droid Razr (SAME CHIPSET) TI OMAP 4430
4-i9300 Galaxy SIII Exynos Quad
5-i9100 Galaxy SII Exynos Dual
6-i9250 Galaxy Nexus TI OMAP 4460
this was asked before but the answer was found here link:http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1682204
darkshadow1997 said:
this was asked before but the answer was found here link:http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1682204
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And what is the answer? The article about xperias that i've stated in the OP? If that was the case why in other phones like of the screenshots i put it doesn't happen? I already readed all of related post and no one give me an accurate answer!
why do you need more ram?
uninstall unnecessary apps and use supercharger.
Sent from my E15i using xda app-developers app
Lukenda said:
why do you need more ram?
uninstall unnecessary apps and use supercharger.
Sent from my E15i using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't need more RAM, what i need is to know WHERE DID my RAM go. Maybe nobody know the answer, if i knew a little bit of development i would search the answer but i can't!
As Codeworkx said:
codeworkx said:
It's only 687 MB shown because some amount of ram gets reserved from the kernel for video and graphics stuff.
But ram is there to be used. Free ram is wasted ram and therefore wasted money.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anyways, it doesn't impact performance, and yes, this is mainly tied with the GPU of our phones, it seems.
Jiangyi said:
As Codeworkx said:
Anyways, it doesn't impact performance, and yes, this is mainly tied with the GPU of our phones, it seems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Strangely the gpu performs better on GB than JB. How is that possible?
Enviado desde mi GT-I9100G usando Tapatalk 2
Jiangyi said:
As Codeworkx said:
Anyways, it doesn't impact performance, and yes, this is mainly tied with the GPU of our phones, it seems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its ok.....i have also read similar thing in xperia topic. But i just want to ask , why does this not happened in the non G version. If it was reserved by kernel for graphics and gpu use then why the graphics performance have become worse in ics....???? All is clear that samsung is not treating the both sets similar only selling them at similar price.....poor samsung .
cooladityarai said:
its ok.....i have also read similar thing in xperia topic. But i just want to ask , why does this not happened in the non g version. If it was reserved by kernel for graphics and gpu use then why the graphics performance have become worse in ics....???? All is clear that samsung is not treating the both sets similar only selling them at similar price.....poor samsung .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1000000000000
is Gnex in yhe picture has the same ram like us ?
because in pics its has only about 680 like our phone .
Expect a signature ?
codybank_789 said:
is Gnex in yhe picture has the same ram like us ?
because in pics its has only about 680 like our phone .
Expect a signature ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah only the galaxy nexus seems to have the same RAM..
codybank_789 said:
is Gnex in yhe picture has the same ram like us ?
because in pics its has only about 680 like our phone .
Expect a signature ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh yes it has same as our..... but it has a better display of 720p res. So what does it mean...??? The cpu has to work more on the extra pixels . And the thing that ram is reserved for graphics sounds correct here because more pixels more load on gpu and ram. But did u noticed the same processor and ram having moto razar hav nearly 800mb available ram. I just can not understand why the G version has been locked with ram and not the nonG version , still while launching the G version Samsung said that both devices are similar in performance. But we all know about it , nothing to say here.
And the most important thing is that Motorola Atrix2 is available @22.5k which have everything same except display, and also gnexus in some places @24 k yet it have more powerful cpu and higher resolution. . ...and what we r paying for i9100g........27.5k . Samsung is only cheating Indian users, even they have not specified on the boxes whether it is G version ( saw many issues like that on google ).
cooladityarai said:
Oh yes it has same as our..... but it has a better display of 720p res. So what does it mean...??? The cpu has to work more on the extra pixels . And the thing that ram is reserved for graphics sounds correct here because more pixels more load on gpu and ram. But did u noticed the same processor and ram having moto razar hav nearly 800mb available ram. I just can not understand why the G version has been locked with ram and not the nonG version , still while launching the G version Samsung said that both devices are similar in performance. But we all know about it , nothing to say here.
And the most important thing is that Motorola Atrix2 is available @22.5k which have everything same except display, and also gnexus in some places @24 k yet it have more powerful cpu and higher resolution. . ...and what we r paying for i9100g........27.5k . Samsung is only cheating Indian users, even they have not specified on the boxes whether it is G version ( saw many issues like that on google ).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just go ahead & sue Samsung for cheating... as consumers we have right to know the real model we are paying for... but i dont think can win the case so just be it!
zaclee said:
Just go ahead & sue Samsung for cheating... as consumers we have right to know the real model we are paying for... but i dont think can win the case so just be it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Man u r wrong we can win against samsung . They are cheating us Under Consumer Act 1987 . So we can.....either they refund our money or replace with the original one. And also Samsung has to pay for the mental hrassment that we suffered.
What if I told you the 680mb ram is just a display error across the device.
Have you ever exceeded using 680mb ram on the phone?
rskyline said:
I know that this isn't a Q&A Forum, but we don't have any, we only have a post that no ones answer, i know too that this question is anwered so many times before but the answer i got was like "is normal", "an article from Xperia phones that explain some of that", but i still don't get it. System always get an amount of RAM needed for the correct working of all stuff. But why in other phones (even with the same chipset) that doesn't happen? And why we can't see where and how the left memory is been used by system? Normally i've seen before how RAM is reduced to share it with GPU, but in ICS our GPU looks worst than on GB so RAM definetely isn't on the GPU, so is good that all of us reach the point of this, i get some screens from other devices and i will posting this in a little bit time. SORRY FOR MY BAD ENGLISH!
PICS are:
1-i9100G
2-i9100G
3-Motorola Droid Razr (SAME CHIPSET) TI OMAP 4430
4-i9300 Galaxy SIII Exynos Quad
5-i9100 Galaxy SII Exynos Dual
6-i9250 Galaxy Nexus TI OMAP 4460
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I regret buying this phone, if you ask me, not because is Samsung, just because it's Android. I really don't understand the logic behind a mobile OS that uses lots of RAM in a device that obviously does not have great battery. I had at the time an iPhone 4S and my SGSII simultaneously, so I got the chance to test them in RL. Even iPhone having a less efficient display (LCD vs AMOLED) and a smaller battery than the one on the SGSII, in actual daily use, iPhone seems to handle its RAM way better than any Android I have tested. The problem in many Android IMO is when in idle, still consuming a lot of RAM that greatly affects battery.
jorgelh8 said:
I regret buying this phone, if you ask me, not because is Samsung, just because it's Android. I really don't understand the logic behind a mobile OS that uses lots of RAM in a device that obviously does not have great battery. I had at the time an iPhone 4S and my SGSII simultaneously, so I got the chance to test them in RL. Even iPhone having a less efficient display (LCD vs AMOLED) and a smaller battery than the one on the SGSII, in actual daily use, iPhone seems to handle its RAM way better than any Android I have tested. The problem in many Android IMO is when in idle, still consuming a lot of RAM that greatly affects battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so u think more free ram is better ? its maybe right in ios but its not in android. ram is born to be used.
Dont think ram consuming cause battery drain.
Expect a signature ?
Straight answer below.
Scenario: An Xperia™ Phone.
"Now, let’s look at how the RAM is used. Out of our 512MB RAM, about a third is used for functions that require a dedicated memory slot to operate fast enough. For example, this is the case for certain multimedia functions. The remaining space, which is at least 340MB, is reserved for the Linux user space, as required in the Android Compatibility Definition Document (CDD). Within the Linux user space, functions like the activity manager and Home screen app are running." (Sonymobile, 2012).
Picture illustration as follows:
This partitioning more or less applies to all other manufacturers' devices, thus explains why the promised 1GB in our device is not entirely visible to us.
As to why different phones with the same chipset has different amounts of RAMs (i.e. Samsung SGS2 VS Motorola Droid Razr & that Razr appears to have more usable RAM), it simply goes back to the reason:
Samsung SGS2 consists of more system functions thus uses more more RAM than compared to that of Motorola Droid Razr.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
______________________________________
Source led by:
darkshadow1997 said:
this was asked before but the answer was found here link:http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1682204
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Direct source (read more): Learn about the technical differences between Gingerbread and ICS [Updated] — Developer World
KeithOYS said:
Straight answer below.
Scenario: An Xperia™ Phone.
"Now, let’s look at how the RAM is used. Out of our 512MB RAM, about a third is used for functions that require a dedicated memory slot to operate fast enough. For example, this is the case for certain multimedia functions. The remaining space, which is at least 340MB, is reserved for the Linux user space, as required in the Android Compatibility Definition Document (CDD). Within the Linux user space, functions like the activity manager and Home screen app are running." (Sonymobile, 2012).
Picture illustration as follows:
This partitioning more or less applies to all other manufacturers' devices, thus explains the OP's question why the promised 1GB in our GT-I9100 is not entirely visible to us.
______________________________________
Source led by:
Direct source (read more): Learn about the technical differences between Gingerbread and ICS [Updated] — Developer World
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that answer why razr doesn't have less ram and our phone does? Same chipset same os same version.
Enviado desde mi GT-I9100G usando Tapatalk 2
rskyline said:
But that answer why razr doesn't have less ram and our phone does? Same chipset same os same version.
Enviado desde mi GT-I9100G usando Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it depend on the manufacturer.
s2g samsung
razr motorola
Expect a signature ?
Hello,
i just got my Z5C yesterday and so far i´m more than happy. But there is one issue:
I use the AOSP Full disk encryption on the phone but it seems like the native Qualcomm hardware cryptographic engine doesn´t work well - i benchmarked the internal storage before and after, here are the results:
Before: read ~ 200 MB/s write: ~ 120 MB/s
After: read ~ 120 MB/s write: ~ 120 MB/s
(Benchmarked by A1 SD Bench)
I´m using a FDE on my windows 10 Notebook with an e-drive resulting in like 5% performance loss. The decrease in read-speed on the Z5C is noticable. What do you think, is there something wrong or is this a normal behaviour?
Cheers
I don't know if this helps, but it seems that the Nexus 5X and 6P won't use hardware encryption according to this:
DB> Encryption is software accelerated. Specifically the ARMv8 as part of 64-bit support has a number of instructions that provides better performance than the AES hardware options on the SoC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source: The Nexus 5X And 6P Have Software-Accelerated Encryption, But The Nexus Team Says It's Better Than Hardware Encryption
So maybe, Sony is following the same path...
Sadly they don't, it seems like the write-speed decrease is just on the same level as the N6 back then. Let's hope that they include the bibs in the kernel by the marshmellow update.
Why would they use Qualcomms own crappy crypto engine, if the standard Cortex-A57 is really fast with AES thanks to NEON and possibly additional, newer optimizations/instructions? AFAIK the latter are supported in newer Linux kernels per default, so there's no need to use additional libraries to enable support or the Qualcomm crypto stuff.
But it would be nice, if someone with actual insight and detailed knowledge about this could say a few words for clarification.
Neither i got insight nor big knowledge, but i benchmarked the system and like 60% loss in reading speed doesn't feels like a optimized kernel either :/
Qualcomm is a no go. On android plaform, only Exynos 7420(not sure about 5xxx series) real get used h/w encry and decry engine and no speed down.
TheEndHK said:
Qualcomm is a no go. On android plaform, only Exynos 7420(not sure about 5xxx series) real get used h/w encry and decry engine and no speed down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not only off topic, it's also wrong. The Exynos SoCs don't have a substantially different crypto engine or "better"/"faster" crypto/hashing acceleration via the ARM cores. If anything, the Samsung guys are smart enough to optimize their software so it makes use of the good hardware. This seems to be missing here, but for no obvious reason.
xaps said:
That's not only off topic, it's also wrong. The Exynos SoCs don't have a substantially different crypto engine or "better"/"faster" crypto/hashing acceleration via the ARM cores. If anything, the Samsung guys are smart enough to optimize their software so it makes use of the good hardware. This seems to be missing here, but for no obvious reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agreed all ARMv8-A cpu support hardware AES and SHA. Both Exynos 7420 and S810 should also got that ability but it turns out doesn't work on Z5c now which is a fact. I'm sure S6 got it working but not sure about on other S810 phones or might be Qualcomm missing driver support.
TheEndHK said:
Both Exynos 7420 and S810 should also got that ability but it turns out doesn't work on Z5c now which is a fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please show us the kernel source code proving that fact.
What you call "fact" is the result of a simple before and after comparison done with a flash memory benchmark app run by one person on one device. To draw the conclusion that the only reason for the shown result is that the Z5(c) can't do HW acceleration of AES or SHA is a bit far-fetched, don't you think?
xaps said:
Please show us the kernel source code proving that fact.
What you call "fact" is the result of a simple before and after comparison done with a flash memory benchmark app run by one person on one device. To draw the conclusion that the only reason for the shown result is that the Z5(c) can't do HW acceleration of AES or SHA is a bit far-fetched, don't you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got a S6 and no slower after encry/decry and we had a thread discussing about it on S6 board.
I don't own a Z5c now bcoz my living place HK not yet started to sell it(I come to here bcoz considering to sell my S6 and Z1c and swap to Z5c later) so I can't test it but according to OP, there is a substantial slow down.
All ARMv8-A should support hardware AES/SHA, it is not just a cached benchmark result on S6. That's real.
A few things to ponder...
This is confusing. I was always under the impression that decryption (reads) are usually a tad bit faster then encryption writes. This at least seems true for TrueCrypt benchmarks. But that may be comparing apples and oranges.
A few thoughts...
In some other thread it was mentioned that the Z5C optimizes RAM usage by doing internal on the fly compression / decompression to make very efficient usage of the RAM. As cryptotext usually is incompressible could this be a source of the slowdown on flash R/W. Could this be a source of the problem (either by actual slowdown or confusing the measurement of the benchmarking tool?)
These days the SSD flash controllers also do transparent compression of data before writing to reduce wear on the flash. If you send a huge ASCII plaintext file into the write queue the write speed will be ridiculously high, if you send incompressible data like video the write speed rate goes way down. This happens on hardware level, not taking any cryptop/decrypto operations on the OS level into account.
Is there maybe a similar function in todays smartphone flash controllers?
Can I ask the OP, in what situations do you notice the slower read rate on the crypted device? Not so long ago when spinning rust disks were still the norm in desktop and laptop computers read rates of 120 MB were totally out of reach. What kind of usage do you have on your smartphone that you actually notice the lag? Is it when loading huge games or PDF files or something similar?
I'm seeing folks ordering the SpecialEedition. Unless the info I'm finding on them is inaccurate, the only difference is 821 ca 820.
I'd love to go with the 'latest', but I"m not sure that the 821 is worth $300 more than the Deluxe. That's a 60% premium over the Deluxe for what is advertised as a 10% increase in performance.
They seem to be slow to ramp up delivery. I"m anxious to see some of the reviews. Particularly interested in how good the GPS is.
I know this isn't much of a boost (and it's a benchmark), but I'll give my take on both the Deluxe and Deluxe Special Edition (own both of them).
Deluxe Special Edition Antutu Scores:
Total: 156729
3D: 61350
UX: 49963
CPU: 34635
Ram: 10781
Deluxe Antutu Scores:
Total: 138675
3D: 58261
UX: 41921
CPU: 28281
Ram: 10212
Take these scores conservatively as peoples phones vary (Mostly manufacture processes with some of the CPU's/Ram being of better grade, etc). Both phones were ran before any other software was installed and with all the bloat either removed or disabled. Before I disabled all the bloat on the Special Edition, it ran the same score as what was on the regular Deluxe, so the bloat was definitely causing a slowdown.
firepong said:
I know this isn't much of a boost (and it's a benchmark), but I'll give my take on both the Deluxe and Deluxe Special Edition (own both of them).
Deluxe Special Edition Antutu Scores:
Total: 156729
3D: 61350
UX: 49963
CPU: 34635
Ram: 10781
Deluxe Antutu Scores:
Total: 138675
3D: 58261
UX: 41921
CPU: 28281
Ram: 10212
Take these scores conservatively as peoples phones vary (Mostly manufacture processes with some of the CPU's/Ram being of better grade, etc). Both phones were ran before any other software was installed and with all the bloat either removed or disabled. Before I disabled all the bloat on the Special Edition, it ran the same score as what was on the regular Deluxe, so the bloat was definitely causing a slowdown.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the special edition version and in performance mode I only score 142K. What did you disable to score 156K?
Pretty much every app that came pre-installed on the phone was uninstalled or disabled. Only a couple of the preinstled apps like mobile manager and audiowizard (and maybe a few others). I'm also using Nova Launcher, but since I don't have ZenUIauncher disabled, that shouldn't give me a performance boost.
Also, in Autostart Manager, I have all the apps that were starting on boot disabled except for the apps I use daily.
firepong said:
I know this isn't much of a boost (and it's a benchmark), but I'll give my take on both the Deluxe and Deluxe Special Edition (own both of them).
Deluxe Special Edition Antutu Scores:
Total: 156729
3D: 61350
UX: 49963
CPU: 34635
Ram: 10781
Deluxe Antutu Scores:
Total: 138675
3D: 58261
UX: 41921
CPU: 28281
Ram: 10212
Take these scores conservatively as peoples phones vary (Mostly manufacture processes with some of the CPU's/Ram being of better grade, etc). Both phones were ran before any other software was installed and with all the bloat either removed or disabled. Before I disabled all the bloat on the Special Edition, it ran the same score as what was on the regular Deluxe, so the bloat was definitely causing a slowdown.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
firepong said:
Pretty much every app that came pre-installed on the phone was uninstalled or disabled. Only a couple of the preinstled apps like mobile manager and audiowizard (and maybe a few others). I'm also using Nova Launcher, but since I don't have ZenUIauncher disabled, that shouldn't give me a performance boost.
Also, in Autostart Manager, I have all the apps that were starting on boot disabled except for the apps I use daily.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's weird because I disabled or uninstalled practically everything Asus and made sure I forced closed everything before I re-ran the test and only got 143K ? Not sure why I can't duplicate your performance.
The difference seems to be my UX score is 42K and my CPU score is 29K. Everything else is similar to what you have.
pacattack81 said:
That's weird because I disabled or uninstalled practically everything Asus and made sure I forced closed everything before I re-ran the test and only got 143K �� Not sure why I can't duplicate your performance.
The difference seems to be my UX score is 42K and my CPU score is 29K. Everything else is similar to what you have.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A 5k difference on the CPU is pretty extreme. Even if you got a bottom of the barrel CPU performance wise, it should still perform >150k. Your CPU score as it is is almost comparable to my 820, which is not good imo. Should be better than that, way better.
I did find out that if you run the test while it is charging, the CPU test will call about 20% short of expected due to having to regulate the quick charge feature. Were you charging your phone while the test was ran?
firepong said:
A 5k difference on the CPU is pretty extreme. Even if you got a bottom of the barrel CPU performance wise, it should still perform >150k. Your CPU score as it is is almost comparable to my 820, which is not good imo. Should be better than that, way better.
I did find out that if you run the test while it is charging, the CPU test will call about 20% short of expected due to having to regulate the quick charge feature. Were you charging your phone while the test was ran?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I confirmed through cpu z I have the 821. I've tested both charged and not charged. Each test around 142K. Let's both try another test. What's your geekbench scores? Also, can anyone else post their antutu scores if you have the 821. Thanks.
ewingr said:
I'm seeing folks ordering the SpecialEedition. Unless the info I'm finding on them is inaccurate, the only difference is 821 ca 820.
I'd love to go with the 'latest', but I"m not sure that the 821 is worth $300 more than the Deluxe. That's a 60% premium over the Deluxe for what is advertised as a 10% increase in performance.
They seem to be slow to ramp up delivery. I"m anxious to see some of the reviews. Particularly interested in how good the GPS is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe we also get 256gb internal memory on the Special Edition whereas you only get 64gb on the Deluxe... That also needs to be taken into acount...
Instead of having one sim and an SD card you can use both sim card slots and have 256gb space for what you want, as long as you want to use 2 sims...
The rear camera is 23 megapixel on the S.E. vs. 16 megapixel on the Deluxe as well and we have 6gb Ram vs 4gb Ram.
There are some differences... Here is a site that seems to have a list of all the models, not sure how accurate but click on "Other Configurations" to see other models... - http://www.phonegg.com/compare/7617...70KL-256GB-6GB-RAM-vs-Samsung-Galaxy-A9-(2016)
pacattack81 said:
I confirmed through cpu z I have the 821. I've tested both charged and not charged. Each test around 142K. Let's both try another test. What's your geekbench scores? Also, can anyone else post their antutu scores if you have the 821. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://imgur.com/JGowLFN
With the latest Antutu run, it got roughly 500 point increase, sitting at just over 157k. Nothing has changed that much except more apps installed on the phone.
Give me a few minutes and ill download geekbench and run that test as well.
---------- Post added at 03:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:39 PM ----------
Geekbench for the 820:
http://imgur.com/8Jg6RfR
http://imgur.com/9As8RnL
http://imgur.com/FuKhTlw
Geekbench 821:
http://imgur.com/bfGLYtZ
http://imgur.com/0DYxtF0
http://imgur.com/ZnfmN2N
firepong said:
http://imgur.com/JGowLFN
With the latest Antutu run, it got roughly 500 point increase, sitting at just over 157k. Nothing has changed that much except more apps installed on the phone.
Give me a few minutes and ill download geekbench and run that test as well.
---------- Post added at 03:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:39 PM ----------
Geekbench for the 820:
http://imgur.com/8Jg6RfR
http://imgur.com/9As8RnL
http://imgur.com/FuKhTlw
Geekbench 821:
http://imgur.com/bfGLYtZ
http://imgur.com/0DYxtF0
http://imgur.com/ZnfmN2N
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. I scored very similar to you. Single core 1832. Muti-core 4371.
I also re-ran AnTuTu and scored 155K. I think my issue was I was playing Asphalt 8 not to long before I ran the test so the CPU might have been throttling a bit to keep down the temperature.
ultramag69 said:
I believe we also get 256gb internal memory on the Special Edition whereas you only get 64gb on the Deluxe... That also needs to be taken into acount...
Instead of having one sim and an SD card you can use both sim card slots and have 256gb space for what you want, as long as you want to use 2 sims...
The rear camera is 23 megapixel on the S.E. vs. 16 megapixel on the Deluxe as well and we have 6gb Ram vs 4gb Ram.
There are some differences... Here is a site that seems to have a list of all the models, not sure how accurate but click on "Other Configurations" to see other models... - http://www.phonegg.com/compare/7617...70KL-256GB-6GB-RAM-vs-Samsung-Galaxy-A9-(2016)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think in the middle of what you were saying you got confused between zenfone 3 and zenfone 3 deluxe specs. You better recheck that.
I got a 154k score today on my brand new special edition while it was installing all my apps. I think once this thing gets optimized is going to be getting over 160k.
By optimized, I don't mean mine in particular. I mean this phone in general.
Sent from my ASUS_Z016D using Tapatalk
Paytocum said:
I think in the middle of what you were saying you got confused between zenfone 3 and zenfone 3 deluxe specs. You better recheck that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He is referring to the 5.5" 4GB Deluxe with the SD625. He obviously doesn't realize the question was about the difference between the 5.7" versions, which are also the deluxe. Asus is giving out Deluxe monikers like they are Oprah.
---------- Post added at 08:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 AM ----------
ewingr said:
I'm seeing folks ordering the SpecialEedition. Unless the info I'm finding on them is inaccurate, the only difference is 821 ca 820.
I'd love to go with the 'latest', but I"m not sure that the 821 is worth $300 more than the Deluxe. That's a 60% premium over the Deluxe for what is advertised as a 10% increase in performance.
They seem to be slow to ramp up delivery. I"m anxious to see some of the reviews. Particularly interested in how good the GPS is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only differences are that one has the SD820 and 64GB of storage and the other has SD821 and 256GB of storage. I know others answered, but the other posts weren't very concise.
Blues-n-Blazin said:
...The only differences are that one has the SD820 and 64GB of storage and the other has SD821 and 256GB of storage. I know others answered, but the other posts weren't very concise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had forgotten that there was also more memory in the Special Edition. That makes the $300 bonus charge a bit less onerous. On a quick check, there's a bit over $100 difference in cost between a 64 and 256 k SD Sandisk cards. So that makes the premium for the processor a bit under $200.
I'm still not sure it is worth the extra $.
If Asus had better manufacturing capability I'm thinking this phone would be quite competitive to some of the main stream brands. It sure seems slow to be getting out to users.
ewingr said:
I had forgotten that there was also more memory in the Special Edition. That makes the $300 bonus charge a bit less onerous. On a quick check, there's a bit over $100 difference in cost between a 64 and 256 k SD Sandisk cards. So that makes the premium for the processor a bit under $200.
I'm still not sure it is worth the extra $.
If Asus had better manufacturing capability I'm thinking this phone would be quite competitive to some of the main stream brands. It sure seems slow to be getting out to users.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got the SD820 and feel I won't miss the performance vs. the $300 extra bite. The phones can take up to a 2TB card, so unless you prefer internal storage, or need two working sim cards at all times, the storage difference is of no concern.
After de-bloating, my phone gets a score of 148718 - 8.5% less than the highest SD821 score currently posted here. Will I ever notice the difference? Nope.
That being said, for some reason Asus has decided to separate their firmware for the SD821 and SD820 (firmware for the SD821 version is labeled "pro") so I don't know if there are more hardware differences that come into play.
ewingr said:
I had forgotten that there was also more memory in the Special Edition. That makes the $300 bonus charge a bit less onerous. On a quick check, there's a bit over $100 difference in cost between a 64 and 256 k SD Sandisk cards. So that makes the premium for the processor a bit under $200.
I'm still not sure it is worth the extra $.
If Asus had better manufacturing capability I'm thinking this phone would be quite competitive to some of the main stream brands. It sure seems slow to be getting out to users.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well the storage (memory is RAM) is actually UFS2.0, not EMMC, so the price difference between 64 and 256GB micro SD cards is an inaccurate comparison. UFS2.0 gives the storage in phones SSD like transfer speeds, much faster than what micro sd cards can perform.
Read this to hi e you an idea of the enormous difference
http://technotif.com/ufs-2-0-new-generation-mobile-device-storage/
So if you really think about it, this makes the value of this phone extremely high, especially since it uses all the newest standards. And if I recall correctly, only the ze570kl models have UFS2.0, I think all the others have EMMC.
Blues-n-Blazin said:
Well the storage (memory is RAM) is actually UFS2.0, not EMMC, so the price difference between 64 and 256GB micro SD cards is an inaccurate comparison. UFS2.0 gives the storage in phones SSD like transfer speeds, much faster than what micro sd cards can perform.
Read this to hi e you an idea of the enormous difference
http://technotif.com/ufs-2-0-new-generation-mobile-device-storage/
So if you really think about it, this makes the value of this phone extremely high, especially since it uses all the newest standards. And if I recall correctly, only the ze570kl models have UFS2.0, I think all the others have EMMC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes UFS storage is supposed to be a lot faster. It was rumored that Samsung was going to take things a step further and make their SD card slot UFS compatible. It never happened though. If you all remember, storage speed was one of the reasons Samsung and other manufacturers got rid of the micro SD card slot completely. Only after user backlash did they bring it back.
The Simple said:
.That being said, for some reason Asus has decided to separate their firmware for the SD821 and SD820 (firmware for the SD821 version is labeled "pro") so I don't know if there are more hardware differences that come into play.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well the SD820 is the MSM8996 and the SD821 is the MSM8996 Pro, so that is why they name the firmwares like that.
Also the SD820 has gotten a few firmware updates but the SD821 hasn't gotten any yet.
---------- Post added at 01:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:17 AM ----------
pacattack81 said:
If you all remember, storage speed was one of the reasons Samsung and other manufacturers got rid of the micro SD card slot completely. Only after user backlash did they bring it back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That may be why Samsung claimed they got rid of it, but Apple does it to force us to buy the bigger storage options. One of the many reasons why that half eaten apple can rot in the garbage for all I care. I do like that touch screen strip to replace the function keys on the new MacBooks though. I hope Razer copies that cuz it is sick. My Razer Blade is still more powerful though...
Blues-n-Blazin said:
Well the SD820 is the MSM8996 and the SD821 is the MSM8996 Pro, so that is why they name the firmwares like that.
Also the SD820 has gotten a few firmware updates but the SD821 hasn't gotten any yet.
[..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got 2 within the 1st day of turning on...
Version WW_4.10.40.839 - Original firmware,
Version WW-4.11.40.983(8996 Pro) - quick upgrade after turning on,
Version WW-4.11.40.1085(Pro) - one I'm on now...
These are on the ASUS site - https://www.asus.com/Phone/ZenFone-3-Deluxe-ZS570KL/HelpDesk_Download/
This doesn't mean that there is less support, but that they didn't release the older firmware that needed patching as the SD821 was released later. Both versions, 8996 & 8996 pro are currently on 1085
ultramag69 said:
I got 2 within the 1st day of turning on...
Version WW_4.10.40.839 - Original firmware,
Version WW-4.11.40.983(8996 Pro) - quick upgrade after turning on,
Version WW-4.11.40.1085(Pro) - one I'm on now...
These are on the ASUS site - https://www.asus.com/Phone/ZenFone-3-Deluxe-ZS570KL/HelpDesk_Download/
This doesn't mean that there is less support, but that they didn't release the older firmware that needed patching as the SD821 was released later. Both versions, 8996 & 8996 pro are currently on 1085
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do u have an international SD821 or US? I have US and it came with 1085
There's too much misinformation around and once I get my unit I will have about 28 days to decide if to keep it or skip this generation, I would like to use this thread to build evidence on how good or bad the international version of this device is, if Samsung scammed 90% of the world then they don't deserve our money.
I'm getting mixed feelings about this chip, In speed test G the 855 beats it by a huge margin, so most people went back spitting at it for being a badly optimized SoC.
Anandtech's Comparisons Show super disappointing scores for the S10 Exynos version, but many of the scores presented make no sense, with older hardware of the same OEM scoring better than the newest, I don't know how much to believe that review and I hope it is fake or badly executed, to my interest, my pre-order comes with the Exynos version and there's no way to have warranty on a 855 in the UK.
Then, the positive evidence we have is that it beats every other released phone on the market in battery usage, there's no such video about the 855 yet so we can't compare them, but that's all I found about the battery of this chip.
In a S10+ vs iPhone XS Max, the S10+ again Exynos beats the iPhone on almost every application, I didn't expect that to happen since it almost never happened, the apps are supposedly the same most of the time and they might as well have completely different algorithms to do the same task done superficially, but generally iOS apps are cleaner inside and their developers have higher standards of work, so how can Exynos be THAT much better?
From what I see the Exynos 9820 is not as what is perceived here on XDA....
Duncan1982 said:
From what I see the Exynos 9820 is not as what is perceived here on XDA....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that's a demo unit with 6GB of ram, there are even higher benchmarks with real ones around:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/12211126
But everyone is dismissing Geekbench as "not reliable", and in a way it is not reliable since it doesn't demonstrate the effectiveness of a good scheduler, even the crappiest ones will be pushed to maximum performance once geekbench runs, we need more comparisons with other tools.
it is a solid fact that the Exynos is much faster than anything else in single core performance except the apple A12 and is much faster than the SD855 , while the SD855 is faster in multi core but no by much,
my only concern with the exynos is the stuttering and frame drops and the smoothness overall , i don't care about benchmarks really , and the S10 is ultra fast in launching apps already in both the exynos and SD855 , but the main concern as i mentioned is the smoothness which i think will be related to how the KERNEL will handle & is optimized and if was targeting performance or targeting efficiency only.