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
Related
These are super limited. They were released on the 20th on the HP site at $599 then pulled before they sold many. I am not sure why they did this. Maybe they will relist them when the last wave of HP Touchpads go for sale.
Aside from it being 1.5 GHz and having 64 GB of space, what differences are there? Think it is a higher binned CPU? Maybe it will hit 1.9 GHz easily. Perhaps it even has better cooling since it is clocked higher. I also wonder if the PCB is different. Maybe it has a USB powered 4G "slot" somewhere on it. That would be a fun mod to give the tablet a USB port with a little soldering. Hopefully they used the same PCB as the 4G version.
I get mine Tuesday. Anyone else here get one and willing to disassemble?
If you are wondering what the hell I am talking about, you can refer to the post on SD that points to a site where 200 were sold.
slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3236371
wow, white would look amazing! is the digitizer white aswell? your lucky dude! does it have 3g?
No, my understanding is that it's the same SoC as the 16/32gb version. The same thing was going to happen for the HSPA+ AT&T version.
http://forums.precentral.net/hp-touchpad/287396-tps-apq8060-cpu-ment-clocked-1-5ghz.html
This is why OC'ing to 1.5ghz is virtually danger free.
jmhalder said:
No, my understanding is that it's the same SoC as the 16/32gb version. The same thing was going to happen for the HSPA+ AT&T version.
http://forums.precentral.net/hp-touchpad/287396-tps-apq8060-cpu-ment-clocked-1-5ghz.html
This is why OC'ing to 1.5ghz is virtually danger free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.7 should be virtually risk free as well.
Dual core Scorpions have a baseline of 1.2Ghz and a max of 1.5Ghz. Anything above 1.5Ghz is a risk.
wrong the 1.2 on our cpu is under clocked. 1.5 is normal and 1.7 is a super easy 200mhz OC
tazzmissionx said:
Dual core Scorpions have a baseline of 1.2Ghz and a max of 1.5Ghz. Anything above 1.5Ghz is a risk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While that may be true for some chips, its obviously not true here. No manufacturer will release a chip and use it to its max potential right off the bat. Not only is that dangerous (overheat/melting/high failure rates), but not good business sense.
All newer smartphones/tablets, especially ones running The snapdragon chip and the tegra 2 chip are ALL underclocked slightly.
In our case, HP UNDERclocked our chip. Normally it sees duty running @ 1.5ghz (as in the white TP), but they chose to run it at 1.2ghz in ours. Thats why its deemed safe to "overclock" our TP to 1.5ghz, and some like me, clock it @ 1.712.
sanvara said:
1.7 should be virtually risk free as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its possible for HP to be binning the CPUs for the 1.5ghz
(like how AMD bins the quad core CPUs. if it doesn't make the cut, disable that core and sell it as tri-core CPU)
paperWastage said:
its possible for HP to be binning the CPUs for the 1.5ghz
(like how AMD bins the quad core CPUs. if it doesn't make the cut, disable that core and sell it as tri-core CPU)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
doubt it, they wouldnt go through all that trouble..
Well, I started using it today. So far I have logging off, dev mode on, preware installed. I am not going to change the kernel because for all I know it bricks the 64GB versions. I think I will hold out until overclocking is as simple as an app like with the hd2.
If anyone has any specific questions or things that I can look up, please ask.
I've got a question - what on earth possesses someone to spend four times as much money to get a device that is a different color and comes with $10 more worth of storage?
;-)
Has anyone tried the kernel from the 64gb to the 16/32gb models?
Official speed up?
Just so I can say I have one of the super rare white ones. TBH, I tried getting the other ones and was out of luck. I was on vacation Friday-Sunday that weekend. I placed orders on Sunday night and this was the only one to go through. I was on them the second they were posted on SD. 260 shipped for a tablet that hardware wise is better than the Ipad 2 64GB is a good deal in my book. Right now it sucks for apps, but I am sure the android port will fix that within the next 6 months.
Supposedly someone has overclocked it. Go to page 41 on that thread I linked on my first post here. Someone claims to have overclocked it to 1.92 causing it to lockup. 1.7 seems stable. I guess that is no different than the 16 and 32.
Crucible1001 said:
Well, I started using it today. So far I have logging off, dev mode on, preware installed. I am not going to change the kernel because for all I know it bricks the 64GB versions. I think I will hold out until overclocking is as simple as an app like with the hd2.
If anyone has any specific questions or things that I can look up, please ask.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The touchpads are all the same except for the obvious 64 GB of space and the white shell.
Then what allowing the 64gb model to run at the stock clock and the rest running underclocked?
bigsnack said:
Then what allowing the 64gb model to run at the stock clock and the rest running underclocked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Frequency HP let them run at? 1.5 GHz is stock clocks for our processor. Which is why everyone can "OC" to it so easily. HP underclocked for battery/heat reasons.
1.84Ghz ****ers!
Nburnes said:
Frequency HP let them run at? 1.5 GHz is stock clocks for our processor. Which is why everyone can "OC" to it so easily. HP underclocked for battery/heat reasons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, then its not like in the kernel or anything HP programmed to make the 64gb run at the stock clock? Dang ya'll.
}{Alienz}{ said:
1.84Ghz ****ers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same, just more politely .
You may want to sell this baby. I saw one on ebay that had a ending bid of $820.... a couple of days ago there was one that sold for $520.
I realize that this is the Vibrant forum, but it is the general section... so dont get too pissed about me posting a thread not really vibrant related.
So just thinking about processors (that may come come in the Nexus Prime), the two being rumored are Samsungs Exynos and the TI OMAP, from what i can tell.
How do these processors compare? In general the Exynos is generally regarded as better then the snapdragon (not trying to argue either way), but there are plenty of comparisons and topics on this comparison, but how does the Exynos compare to the OMAP? I can really find too many topics on it..
Thanks
Doesn't really matter how it compares right now, because Google can optimize ICS to run fast on Ti-OMAP 4460 while slow on other processors.
The same way when Froyo came out, the Snapdragon processors were able to gain a huge boost in CPU intensive tasks because they took full advantage of the Dalvik optimizations in Froyo. Hummingbird although newer than Snapdragon was not taking full advantage of Dalvik optimizations, thus it ran slower despite being a newer processor.
Nexus Prime running a Ti-Omap 4460 will be faster than any xynos because Google will make sure ICS is perfectly tuned to Ti-OMAP 4460.
Edit:
This is assuming nexus prime has a Ti-OMAP 4460.
SamsungVibrant said:
Doesn't really matter how it compares right now, because Google can optimize ICS to run fast on Ti-OMAP 4460 while slow on other processors.
The same way when Froyo came out, the Snapdragon processors were able to gain a huge boost in CPU intensive tasks because they took full advantage of the Dalvik optimizations in Froyo. Hummingbird although newer than Snapdragon was not taking full advantage of Dalvik optimizations, thus it ran slower despite being a newer processor.
Nexus Prime running a Ti-Omap 4460 will be faster than any xynos because Google will make sure ICS is perfectly tuned to Ti-OMAP 4460.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the response. anyone else have any ideas on the two processors?
So, i watched the presentation last night, i did not see them announce the processor...
have any of the reviews confirmed which processor and GPU?
Its the omap 4460, TI made an announcement on it.Gpu wise its weaker than the exynos in the texture department as it has the sgx540. The biggest advantage it has over the NS or vibrant is the CPU and ram (hardware wise) benching the NS vs the Droid3 or Bionic shows the NS doing fairly close with the differences being probably due to the omap having a higher gpu clock and a processor that can feed the data to the gpu faster.
I can tell you that the chip has great performance, even at that higher resolution, I believe the blackberry playbook has it and that thing runs beautifully =D
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
everything i'm reading about the omap is saying it's built for better HD performance, however clocking, number crunching and GPU it's weaker then the exynos found in the sgs II. actually there comparing the gpu to the one found in our Vibrant.
as dismal as this sounds, i'm still going for the Galaxy Nexus due to the stock interface and HD resolution...
or i can wait longer (god knows how much longer) and grab the sgs II HD thats currently only in Korea.
---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:54 PM ----------
qoutes from Extremetech website
"So now the OMAP4460 is getting quite a lot of scrutiny, even though it isn’t exactly a new chip. This dual-core SoC is clocked at 1.2GHz, and uses ARM Cortex-A9 architecture, just like the Exynos. That’s not a problem, but the older GPU, the PowerVR SGX540 is. We were hoping for a step up in the graphics department.
Why did Google choose the OMAP for its new Nexus? Well, it might not live up to the high graphical standards set out by the iPhone, but it is a solid chip in its own right. The OMAP4 platform makes use of an additional hardware accelerator called IVA 3 that makes encoding and decoding HD video a snap. The Galaxy Nexus has an HD screen, so this hardware focus on video is a big plus.
Google engineers were likely also drawn to the OMAP for its use of a dual-channel memory controller. Android’s multitasking system means that data is constantly being moved into, and out of, active memory. This is definitely a strength of TI’s OMAP parts"
hopefully that answers some of your questions.
Weak GPU, ****-tastic camera, no microSD slot, small battery, really high pricing (preliminary)...and once again plastic?
I don't get why Google felt they need to repeat the iPhone 4S announcement failure. The screen of the thing is amazing and its OS is. But the actual phone? Not so much.
:/
And I was so hyped about the "One phone to rule them all". . .
}{Alienz}{ said:
Weak GPU, ****-tastic camera, no microSD slot, small battery, really high pricing (preliminary)...and once again plastic?
I don't get why Google felt they need to repeat the iPhone 4S announcement failure. The screen of the thing is amazing and its OS is. But the actual phone? Not so much.
:/
And I was so hyped about the "One phone to rule them all". . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The phone is still worth getting. It will always have the latest version of Android, and Android will run smoothly on it.
I'm never repeating my Vibrant mistake ever again. Running CM-7 with half ass GPS and no 911 calling, no thanks. Next time a Nexus only phone. Just wish it wasn't made by stupid Samsung, errrrr.
Or maybe Motorola phone now that Google owns them, higher chance of getting updates. Just my opinion though.
One last thing. I do agree about the lack of microsd. I was shocked when Nexus S didn't get it, and now again. Hmmmmm. You would think they would want a dev phone to have a microsd slot.
}{Alienz}{ said:
Weak GPU, ****-tastic camera, no microSD slot, small battery, really high pricing (preliminary)...and once again plastic?
I don't get why Google felt they need to repeat the iPhone 4S announcement failure. The screen of the thing is amazing and its OS is. But the actual phone? Not so much.
:/
And I was so hyped about the "One phone to rule them all". . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Weak GPU? It is more than enough to drive a 720p screen at 60fps, as demonstrated consistently throughout the Galaxy Nexus hands-on videos.
How is the camera at all, as you so eloquently put it, '****-tastic'? From what I have seen (and trust me, it isn't nearly enough to make much of an impression to make a final call on its quality), the pictures look decent, with little chroma noise and balanced colours. The zero shutter-lag feature sounds most excellent as well, as most cellphone pictures turn out awful because of the nature of the beast (shaky hands and such). If your judgment is purely based on "Hurr because it's 5MP" then you are a moron.
Though I can lament the loss of a MicroSD card slot, most cards readily available to consumers (read: not newegg or amazon buyers) cannot even fathom being able to record 720p video, much less 1080p featured on the Galaxy Nexus. And using your smartphone as a primary MP3 player is only viable if you have no other use for the phone besides MP3 playing and occasional internet browsing, which would be just a flagrant waste of the ~$80 monthlies people pay for their plans.
And the 1,750mah battery is actually above-average (considering 1,450-1,500mah the standard), along with ICS' built-in 'app-freezing', carrier bloat will never be a cause for unnecessary battery drain again). The battery could last for days depending on your usage (Your mileage may ****ing vary, of course).
Really, high pricing? Really? If the previous two Nexus phones are any indication, it will cost $529 unlocked. Of course, it seems like a lot of money when you work retail or some other **** job, but then you shouldn't be playing with such expensive toys in the first place.
And plastic? Well this explains everything
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elKxgsrJFhw
Your post gave me cancer.
Camera---Look at the Nexus S photos at Engadget and the Galaxy Nexus ones. They look IDENTICAL except for colors on the GN looking a bit worse actually. Last I remember, the Nexus S camera is on the level of the Vibrant...it's great for a 5MP but its nothing compared to the competition nowdays. Not backlit sensor, not f2.2 or lower, not even high resolution. No shutter lag? I use Camera360 on my Vibrant and have had that feature for MONTHS. As Engadget comments, the no shutter lag is because the camera on the Galaxy Nexus does not focus. It is just NO competition to a Galaxy S2 or Iphone 4S sadly.
GPU-It is a 1.6 or 1.7 times faster than the Vibrant. We already have a good GPU but...for crying out loud. It is half as slow as the Galaxy S2 one. And THAT itself is already getting old...been on the market for over 6 months. Shall we compare to the new iPhone 4S? Difference of 7 TIMES? I HATE iphones but Samsung and Google seriously didn't try here.
Battery. I am CURRENTLY running a Samsung-made OEM 1800mah in my Vibrant. Same size as our original 1500mah. Should I remind you the Vibrant runs on a 4.0 screen and is NOT HD resolution? For a device that is as big as the Galaxy Nexus (4.6 inches) and with that huge and beautiful screen, 1750 is just TINY. At LEAST a good 2000 or more should have been put in it. And its' not impossible to do at all. Samsung HAS the technology. The phone HAS the space. It's fatter than the Galaxy S2 (and godforbid the new Razor)...doesn't have a MicroSD slot. There is no excuse except laziness.
Pricing---Several retailers in Europe have already priced it. Cheapest one is ~700...typical one is 800 and some go all the way up to 950. Look up the gsmarena.com article if you wish. Off contract it will be an arm and a leg. On contract it will be $300. That makes it the MOST expensive phone both on and off contract. $530? Yeah...maybe at that price it would be something to consider but 800? For an amazing screen and software? Heh.
Like I said, the real star of that presentation was the software. Ice Cream sandwich is amazing. GPU Acceleration anyone?
The phone though it comes on? A letdown sadly. Trust me, I was going to buy it. Was waiting for it for 3 months now. No more. May either get a Galaxy S2 now or wait for a Galaxy S2 HD for the Nexus HD screen and the Galaxy S2 performance and features.
In the OMAP 4460, the SGX540 is clocked at 384 MHz which gives it a total output of ~6.2 GFLOPs. In comparison, the Mali-400 MP4 clocked at 200 MHz produces about ~7.2 GFLOPs, and ~10.8 GFLOPs at 300 MHz. So yeah, it's a step back from the Exynos but still very good.
Everything yea saying don't matter its all about optimization an camera looks great to me
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
}{Alienz}{ said:
Camera---Look at the Nexus S photos at Engadget and the Galaxy Nexus ones. They look IDENTICAL except for colors on the GN looking a bit worse actually. Last I remember, the Nexus S camera is on the level of the Vibrant...it's great for a 5MP but its nothing compared to the competition nowdays. Not backlit sensor, not f2.2 or lower, not even high resolution. No shutter lag? I use Camera360 on my Vibrant and have had that feature for MONTHS. As Engadget comments, the no shutter lag is because the camera on the Galaxy Nexus does not focus. It is just NO competition to a Galaxy S2 or Iphone 4S sadly.
GPU-It is a 1.6 or 1.7 times faster than the Vibrant. We already have a good GPU but...for crying out loud. It is half as slow as the Galaxy S2 one. And THAT itself is already getting old...been on the market for over 6 months. Shall we compare to the new iPhone 4S? Difference of 7 TIMES? I HATE iphones but Samsung and Google seriously didn't try here.
Battery. I am CURRENTLY running a Samsung-made OEM 1800mah in my Vibrant. Same size as our original 1500mah. Should I remind you the Vibrant runs on a 4.0 screen and is NOT HD resolution? For a device that is as big as the Galaxy Nexus (4.6 inches) and with that huge and beautiful screen, 1750 is just TINY. At LEAST a good 2000 or more should have been put in it. And its' not impossible to do at all. Samsung HAS the technology. The phone HAS the space. It's fatter than the Galaxy S2 (and godforbid the new Razor)...doesn't have a MicroSD slot. There is no excuse except laziness.
Pricing---Several retailers in Europe have already priced it. Cheapest one is ~700...typical one is 800 and some go all the way up to 950. Look up the gsmarena.com article if you wish. Off contract it will be an arm and a leg. On contract it will be $300. That makes it the MOST expensive phone both on and off contract. $530? Yeah...maybe at that price it would be something to consider but 800? For an amazing screen and software? Heh.
Like I said, the real star of that presentation was the software. Ice Cream sandwich is amazing. GPU Acceleration anyone?
The phone though it comes on? A letdown sadly. Trust me, I was going to buy it. Was waiting for it for 3 months now. No more. May either get a Galaxy S2 now or wait for a Galaxy S2 HD for the Nexus HD screen and the Galaxy S2 performance and features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lmfao, best post all day. Gotta pay to play and $530 is pocket change for what you're getting in return.
Galaxy Nexus is clearly the device to get imo.
New Galaxy Nexus was just uncovered to only have 768MB RAM. Not a full GB.
}{Alienz}{ said:
New Galaxy Nexus was just uncovered to only have 768MB RAM. Not a full GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uncovered by whom?
Probably that's all that is available after boot up.
}{Alienz}{ said:
New Galaxy Nexus was just uncovered to only have 768MB RAM. Not a full GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 1 GB.
My Tab 10.1 only shows 768 MB as well, but it's 1 GB. The Android System uses part of the RAM to operate. The rest you get as free RAM.
How do I know? Supercurio's Twitter.
"supercurio François Simond:
I read several websites listing #GalaxyNexus with 1GB RAM.. hmm, it's not quite what I found. Linux says: 648MB in total, 630 Available""
Now. He further investigated and Samsung did the same thing they did with the Vibrant. All of the memory combined on it is indeed 1GB. HOWEVER, they are reserving a ****load of memory for the GPU and other functions. Hence of that 1GB (the phone DOES have 1GB), on average there is SIGNIFICANTLY less. How much less? Read the Twitter status posted here. This is the equivalent of the HTC Sensation which has 768MB of RAM and actually IS listed to have 768MB.
}{Alienz}{ said:
How do I know? Supercurio's Twitter.
"supercurio François Simond:
I read several websites listing #GalaxyNexus with 1GB RAM.. hmm, it's not quite what I found. Linux says: 648MB in total, 630 Available""
Now. He further investigated and Samsung did the same thing they did with the Vibrant. All of the memory combined on it is indeed 1GB. HOWEVER, they are reserving a ****load of memory for the GPU and other functions. Hence of that 1GB (the phone DOES have 1GB), on average there is SIGNIFICANTLY less. How much less? Read the Twitter status posted here. This is the equivalent of the HTC Sensation which has 768MB of RAM and actually IS listed to have 768MB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great find. Thank you.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using xda premium
can anyone point me to some really good hands on videos? i saw the one on phandroid and engadget the night all was announced. but are there any good videos that show a little more in depth?
}{Alienz}{ said:
How do I know? Supercurio's Twitter.
"supercurio François Simond:
I read several websites listing #GalaxyNexus with 1GB RAM.. hmm, it's not quite what I found. Linux says: 648MB in total, 630 Available""
Now. He further investigated and Samsung did the same thing they did with the Vibrant. All of the memory combined on it is indeed 1GB. HOWEVER, they are reserving a ****load of memory for the GPU and other functions. Hence of that 1GB (the phone DOES have 1GB), on average there is SIGNIFICANTLY less. How much less? Read the Twitter status posted here. This is the equivalent of the HTC Sensation which has 768MB of RAM and actually IS listed to have 768MB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Supercurio already has a Galaxy Nexus one day after announcement? Didn't know the devs got it that fast.
I already know the basics s4 @ 1.5ghz and adreno 320 but would like to soundchip, i/o speeds, video processor,details on the ram and gpu. Anybody spotted a full spec sheet for the qualcomm variant?
...
It is coming with the adreno 225 actually, the adreno 320 would be amazing though, its really only the GPU that im not happy about in the north american S3.
Battery Life LTE vs i9300
My major concern is battery life. How do you think battery life will compare between the International and US variants? I would be on ATT with unlimited LTE plan. Although for the most part, I'd be connected to wifi.
wildting said:
My major concern is battery life. How do you think battery life will compare between the International and US variants? I would be on ATT with unlimited LTE plan. Although for the most part, I'd be connected to wifi.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This might answer your question
http://www.tmonews.com/2012/05/editorial-why-a-snapdragon-s4-galaxy-s-iii-is-awesome/
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2
A very biased and uninformed article outside of the radio info.
...
@rbiter said:
A very biased and uninformed article outside of the radio info.
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I guess we will see in a few weeks
Sent from T-Mobile's galaxy S II running ICS
I work in the server world (enterprise computing) and adding system RAM is one of the biggest power draws in a server chassis.
For example, a server with 550W power supplies does just fine with 32GB RAM.
But tripe that to 96GB RAM and now you need 700W power supplies to keep up with the energy demand.
My point is, a simple doubling of RAM may draw a slight amount more of battery. Don't know how real world noticeable it will be, but it is a fact that it will take more battery juice to run 2GB than it will 1GB.
CZ Eddie said:
I work in the server world (enterprise computing) and adding system RAM is one of the biggest power draws in a server chassis.
For example, a server with 550W power supplies does just fine with 32GB RAM.
But tripe that to 96GB RAM and now you need 700W power supplies to keep up with the energy demand.
My point is, a simple doubling of RAM may draw a slight amount more of battery. Don't know how real world noticeable it will be, but it is a fact that it will take more battery juice to run 2GB than it will 1GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
would it be a wash between both variants considering the Int. quad core will eat more battery than the US duo core?
Trying to discover if the sprint variant will have the 800mhz lte radio onboard. Difficult finding full, detailed specs for the U.S. variants.
Sent from my Galaxy S II via XDA Premium
MoJoePin said:
would it be a wash between both variants considering the Int. quad core will eat more battery than the US duo core?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Without technical docs I wouldn't know, but my guestimate would be it's a wash, yeah.
Though the two extra cores will usually be turned off.
I'm kind of disappointed that it is coming out with the Adreno 225 and not something better. Also the HD screen instead of the HD+ was somewhat disappointing as well. I am just waiting to see what the iphone 5 is coming out with, hopefully they announce it soon so I can make my choice!
It puzzles me since Z5's have SD810 which supports LPDDR4 type at 1555mhz so is there any reliable info one this subject?
bubimir13 said:
It puzzles me since Z5's have SD810 which supports LPDDR4 type at 1555mhz so is there any reliable info one this subject?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The answer is straight in your question.
It doesn't support it, it uses LPDDR4.
Any source for this claim? As per testing with benchmarks it does not perform any better then Z3C or some other 2GB RAM models. But it should, shouldn't it?
bubimir13 said:
Any source for this claim? As per testing with benchmarks it does not perform any better then Z3C or some other 2GB RAM models. But it should, shouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please. This is no claim. Look at QC's SD810 spec sheet. The SD810 only supports LPDDR4.
What Benchmark did you use? Let me guess, Antutu?
Spec sheet also said support for Cat 9 LTE and its missing i Z5's. And some other OEMs have mentioned that they put in LPDDR4 memory inside their devices, only Sony said nothing, not even ''higher speed'' or something like that that would be used in marketing purposes.
Yes it was Antutu since it has greatest public database on benchmark results of various devices and yes i know it is not 100% reliable but what else is there to test things out RAM memory wise?
bubimir13 said:
Spec sheet also said support for Cat 9 LTE and its missing i Z5's. And some other OEMs have mentioned that they put in LPDDR4 memory inside their devices, only Sony said nothing, not even ''higher speed'' or something like that that would be used in marketing purposes.
Yes it was Antutu since it has greatest public database on benchmark results of various devices and yes i know it is not 100% reliable but what else is there to test things out RAM memory wise?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The hardware (SOC) is delivered by Qualcomm. Do you think Sony dissasembles the SOC and replaces the RAM chip with an outdated one?
Besides, i don't trust Sony's website. Can't imagine they cut down LTE. As long as there is no proof of the "speed cap" i don't believe it at all, as it makes zero sense.
I guess you're right, but still, i am not entirely satisfied how 2GB performs vs. Z3C's 2GB i previously had. Might be due to software optimization that is lacking...
bubimir13 said:
I guess you're right, but still, i am not entirely satisfied how 2GB performs vs. Z3C's 2GB i previously had. Might be due to software optimization that is lacking...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you conclude on the RAM performance?
Taking Antutu, my Z5C scores higher than my Z Ultra (LPDDR3).
Its about Hardware, there is nothing to be done via Software.
Hello, theese days i bought 2 samsung galaxy s6 edge for testing purposes, one white(64GB) and one black (32GB). I reflashed them with same stock 7.0 rom via odin, installed just antutu and geekbench, closed all apps, airplane mode with wi-fi, and the results were those below.
Both have the same exyons chipset, hence both being G925F.
So how is that explainable?
So? No idea?
costyy23 said:
So? No idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not possible that the results deviate so much. The 32GB model is most likely defective in some way or something is still running in the background. My guess is that the UFS is faulty
costyy23 said:
Hello, theese days i bought 2 samsung galaxy s6 edge for testing purposes, one white(64GB) and one black (32GB). I reflashed them with same stock 7.0 rom via odin, installed just antutu and geekbench, closed all apps, airplane mode with wi-fi, and the results were those below.
Both have the same exyons chipset, hence both being G925F.
So how is that explainable?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It could also be because of the storage. Both benchmarking softwares evaluate storage. So, because of the higher storage capacity, the scores could be slightly higher. But this rarely translates to real world performance boost. I'm not a pro, just an enthusiast, and this is what I just got in my mind.
Goushique said:
It could also be because of the storage. Both benchmarking softwares evaluate storage. So, because of the higher storage capacity, the scores could be slightly higher. But this rarely translates to real world performance boost. I'm not a pro, just an enthusiast, and this is what I just got in my mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a point there but still the difference shouldn't be that huge. If you have a higher capacity chip based storage solution (e.g. SSD, UFS...) that the R/W speeds will be higher. The speed depends on how many NAND chips are in your storage
CroGamer1 said:
You have a point there but still the difference shouldn't be that huge. If you have a higher capacity chip based storage solution (e.g. SSD, UFS...) that the R/W speeds will be higher. The speed depends on how many NAND chips are in your storage
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you checked out the comparison between the 32gb iphone 7 and 256gb model, the 256 one will embarass the 32gb one in terms of speed.
costyy23 said:
Well, if you checked out the comparison between the 32gb iphone 7 and 256gb model, the 256 one will embarass the 32gb one in terms of speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It looks like you didn't quite get me. The SPEED DEPENDS ON HOW THE STORAGE WAS BUILT. Was it built with a single NAND chip or with multiple NAND chips. Samsung in this case offers a single NAND chip, just modified to take the extra data (so the speed is the same across all models ( 32gb, 64gb and 128gb )) while Apple just adds more NAND chips ( e.g. A single 32gb NAND chip has a write speed of 40 MBytes/s. If you add more 32gb NAND chips the speed will multiply by the number of added NAND chips. So for the iPhone 7 you mentioned, 256gb/32gb=8 (we have 8 NAND chips), 8*40=320MBytes/s)