Beta

Galaxy S 4 Dominates In Early Benchmark Testing

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the competition-is-grand dept.

Android 276

redkemper writes with an excerpt from BGR.com of interest to anyone in the market for a new phone: "Samsung's Galaxy S 4 might not offer much in the way of an exciting new exterior design, but inside, it's a completely different story. The retooled internals on the U.S. version of the Galaxy S 4 were put to the test by benchmark specialists Primate Labs and the results are impressive, to say the least. The Galaxy S 4 scored a 3,163 on the standard Geekbench 2 speed test, just shy of twice the iPhone 5's score of 1,596. That score was also good enough to top the upcoming HTC One, the Nexus 4 and the previous-generation Galaxy S III."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

funny thing is (3, Insightful)

etash (1907284) | about a year and a half ago | (#43212989)

sgs 3 is better than iphone5 in that chart

Re:funny thing is (5, Informative)

niftydude (1745144) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213091)

sgs 3 is better than iphone5 in that chart

The international sgs 3 is better, the US sgs 3 isn't.

I was never sure why samsung put a slower soc in the phones that went to the US.

Re:funny thing is (5, Informative)

olsmeister (1488789) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213239)

The faster Samsung processor used in the international versions didn't work with the 4G LTE that we have in the States.

Re:funny thing is (5, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213313)

Qualcomm's "Snapdragon [wikipedia.org] has good in-package support for cellular flavors in common use in the US. As can be seen in the wikipedia list, that puts them in quite a few US-release phones, even from people like Samsung who have their own SoCs.

Re:funny thing is (0)

realityimpaired (1668397) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213147)

You're surprised that a quad core 1.4GHz processor outperforms a dual core 1.3GHz processor?

I'm more surprised that they were so close.... That's actually a vote in favour of the Apple offering, because Apple's slower processor with half the processing cores will use less battery....

(and before some twat accuses me of being an Apple fangirl, I'll point out that I'm quite happy with the 1GHz single core processor in my HTC One V, and have no intention of replacing it until either it up and dies or I have maxed out the credit available on the tab with my cell phone carrier and can get the new one for free... $300 max, currently $163, and increasing at $6/mo)

Re:funny thing is (0)

etash (1907284) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213203)

the answer is: the average end user doesn't know and doesn't care about gigahertz or core numbers. The end user understands that a phone which was introduced by apple 1 year later is worse than a phone introduced by samsung 1 year earlier.

Re:funny thing is (5, Insightful)

GNious (953874) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213205)

I'm more surprised that they were so close.... That's actually a vote in favour of the Apple offering, because Apple's slower processor with half the processing cores will use less battery....

Is not quite that simple - the quad-core 1.4GHz might be able to finish some intensive operations significantly faster than the dual-core 1.3GHz, allowing it to go back to a low-power state earlier and save more battery.

Re:funny thing is (1)

etash (1907284) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213233)

yeah, look at the difference, one sgs3 is 4 core, the other 2 core, one would assume the difference wouldn't be just 300 points ( ~1700 vs ~1400 ). multicores are overrated in smartphones ( cpu )

Re:funny thing is (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213269)

It's not really that straight forward. For many tasks, multi-cores are under-rated, it just depends on the task and how the software is written. Multi-cores are not particularly helpful with single threaded applications though, true.

Re:funny thing is (0)

etash (1907284) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213325)

that's what i actually meant, but was lazy enough to explain:

- it's not just good to have a multicore cpu, you also need the software to be multithreaded and...
- the task at hand that the softare solves has to be "parallelizable"

so given the fact that a) most smartphone software are not multithreaded and b) for most smartphones apps there is no point in having them multithreaded ( multithread calendar ? wtf ), it'd say they are overrated. Hell even in desktops, it's only the last couple years or so that some major applications were recoded to take advance of multicore systems

Re:funny thing is (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213309)

so why are the "slower" intel CPU's of today so much faster than the 4GHz monsters they sold 10 years ago?

Re:funny thing is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213541)

The only problem with the One V is usable memory. 333MB is not nearly enough.

Re:funny thing is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213801)

"You're surprised that a quad core 1.4GHz processor outperforms a dual core 1.3GHz processor?"

I don't think his point was really anything to do with the hardware, but simply the fact that more expensive device that came out, what, 6 months later, performs less well. Most end users would probably be a bit suprised to find that out given that they'd expect the more expensive device to perform better, especially when it was so much newer.

" That's actually a vote in favour of the Apple offering, because Apple's slower processor with half the processing cores will use less battery...."

That's stupid, if the processor processes more slowly, then it's also draining battery for longer. Modern smartphone processors don't just sit continuously processing at maximum capacity draining the shit out of the battery, they ramp up only as and when they need to. Also, even if they did just sit draining the shit out of the battery at maximum processing capacity then why the assumption that the Samsung doesn't just have a higher capacity battery to compensate leaving you with no impact in practice?

If you really believe anything you said then I have an old 90s Nokia 3330 I'd like to sell you for £600. It's way slower than any of these and so the battery does in fact last far longer, which obviously is a vote in favour of the device. You may not be an Apple fangirl, but you're obviously comfortable being a bit dishonest with the truth when it comes to Samsung, so fangirl or not, you're still a twat.

Re:funny thing is (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213871)

because Apple's slower processor with half the processing cores will use less battery....

Thats not a for sure unless its been shown. I thought everyone would know by now that you cant just compare mhz to mhz across CPU families?

Quick, Ivy Bridge 3.4 GHz vs AMD 3.1GHz-- who will use less power? Pentium 4 2.8 vs Piledriver 2.4GHz-- which is faster?

core count doesn't work that way (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213873)

Apple may be more efficient per core, sure. However, how much power is used per core? Are phones running at max power consumption all of the time? Speed says nothing about energy efficiency, just that under "ideal circumstances", one phone is faster than the other.

If these are ideal circumstances is a matter of debate. I personally wouldn't want my phone to be doing something that uses so much CPU power that it requires 4 cores at 1.4 GHz to do the task, or 2 cores at 1.3GHz for that matter. I'd want the apps on my phone to be elegant and power friendly, not some blunt thing thrown together "because todays phones don't need programs to be optimized anymore".

But not the Z10? (1, Redundant)

blither (29422) | about a year and a half ago | (#43212999)

No mention of BlackBerry's new phone?
Would be interesting to see that comparison.

Re:But not the Z10? (4, Informative)

Junta (36770) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213049)

You mean like they did, right in the article? It comes up just shy of iPhone 5.

Re:But not the Z10? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213085)

Excellent job looking at the chart in TFA.

Re:But not the Z10? (1)

Mattcelt (454751) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213119)

This raises an interesting question: is there a suitable replacement for blackberry for the enterprise yet? None of the phones systems/solution I've seen have anything resembling the BES (Blackberry Enterprise Server) and encryption for email, etc. What will be the successor to BB in the enterprise?

Re:But not the Z10? (2)

David_Hart (1184661) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213185)

Ummm... Blackberry....

Seriously, all of the other vendors, with perhaps the exception of Microsoft, have been focused on home users, not the enterprise. So, I guess the answer should be Microsoft, but Blackberry still has the better enterprise solution.

Re:But not the Z10? (2)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213211)

umm samsung and apple

BB might own the super secret enterprise market, but most of it is gone. apple and samsung are more than good enough for most corporate email

Re:But not the Z10? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213399)

Microsoft is sort of a funny one: their attempt to push Windows Mobile devices into Blackberry's market back in the day was largely a failure, and is totally dead now; but did manage to win 'Activesync' enough support among enterprise admins as the 'Hey guys! we are totally kinda, sorta, adequately endurable compared to BES!' alternative that devices from Apple and the droid crowd that support it were able to absolutely brutalize Blackberry in ways that Windows Mobile was never able to, and Windows Phone seems to be making a rather tepid attempt to.

Re:But not the Z10? (1)

gordo3000 (785698) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213247)

I'm in finance (about as regulated for email as you get) and we use iphone, ipad, and android for work email now (as well as bb). So when I'm in country, I don't carry my bb anymore, just my personal as I can check the email via the Good app. I'd ditch the bb but I'm on international business often enough and if I do, my company won't pick up the tab for my calls and roaming data while on business.

Blackberry's been dead a while. (2)

Medievalist (16032) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213439)

This raises an interesting question: is there a suitable replacement for blackberry for the enterprise yet? None of the phones systems/solution I've seen have anything resembling the BES (Blackberry Enterprise Server) and encryption for email, etc. What will be the successor to BB in the enterprise?

BES was always a half-assed and expensive solution to the regulatory problems US corporations have with email.

End-users send HIPAA/HITECH/SOX/GLB/FDA-regulated material with their phones (for legitimate reasons or just because they are end users) so having the mail transit a server at RIM headquarters was a regulatory non-starter (stupid enterprises did it anyway, and most did not get caught so how stupid were they really?). So the big boys bought BES servers and we hacked their existing email systems up to support the extra mail hub.

But BES, while it kept your sensitive email on a system you controlled, also usually exposed a Microsoft host to the Internet on at least one port. That's something one generally wants to avoid, and while Microsoft's SUS automagic updating makes it a lot less risky than it used to be, and you can put some transparent firewally stuff in between, why would you want all that complexity? (answer: because the CEO has a bloated ego and wanted a blackberry just like his rivals. But now he has an iPhone).

Today you just use iPhones and Androids. It's no harder to secure them than it was to keep a BES server up to regulatory requirements in a US zaibatsu. And the whole process has always been driven by the egos of corporate officers anyway, and now those same officers are measuring their relative penis length with iWhatsits and Androids, not Blackberries.

Re:Blackberry's been dead a while. (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213687)

And with this response you prove you have never used a BES.

YOU host the damned server, and YOU control the encryption keys. ALL traffic to the device is encrypted on YOUR side. RIM cannot see into these and does NOT have access to these keys.

This is why it is the ONLY choice for HIPAA compliance, because it is end to end encryption. Not just device encryption.

Stupid iLoverz and sexDroid humpers.;

Re:But not the Z10? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213821)

For many environments it's either ActiveSync or Good Messaging. Lots of control = Good Messaging, less control, cheaper = ActiveSync.

You don't even need to be an Exchange shop to support ActiveSync. There's also IMAPS and SMTPS, some places use those as well, still encrypted device->access point.

Super (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213005)

Now:

When can I get one from Sprint?
How much will it cost?

Great! (3, Interesting)

zhvihti (864974) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213007)

Considering this is the US version with Qualcomm chips, the results for the international one with Exynos should be even better.

It's a friggin' phone (4, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213011)

I've had two smartphones now, the T-Mobile G1/HTC Dream, and the Samsung Galaxy SII. It's not about the phone speed, it's about the applications and the connectivity. If my wife's Palm T|X was a phone and had the ability to synch to a server automagically like Android does with Google's applications, she'd probably still be using it. Having the web is nice, but having the e-mail, calendar, contact list, music player, e-book reader, camera, picture viewer, and calculator are what make the device so useful. For me, it's a tool first and foremost, and the toy gadgets aren't what make it why I carry it.

Deal breaker for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213197)

Having the web is nice, but having the e-mail, calendar, contact list, music player, e-book reader, camera, picture viewer, and calculator are what make the device so useful. For me, it's a tool first and foremost, and the toy gadgets aren't what make it why I carry it.

The deal breaker was that there isn't a bottle opener or corkscrew.

It's fine and dandy to have all of those electronic communications, but when it comes to face to face communication, it's seriously lacking.

Re:It's a friggin' phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213277)

I've had two smartphones now, the T-Mobile G1/HTC Dream, and the Samsung Galaxy SII. It's not about the phone speed, it's about the applications and the connectivity. If my wife's Palm T|X was a phone and had the ability to synch to a server automagically like Android does with Google's applications, she'd probably still be using it. Having the web is nice, but having the e-mail, calendar, contact list, music player, e-book reader, camera, picture viewer, and calculator are what make the device so useful. For me, it's a tool first and foremost, and the toy gadgets aren't what make it why I carry it.

Youre right.

But my galaxy s3 has more tools on it than your s2 and it can use those tools faster than yours because its more powerful.

Buy an electric drill kit from 10 years ago and compare it with a more powerful drill kit today from the same manufacturer and tell me there isn't a improvement in both what you get with it, extra options and performance.

Re:It's a friggin' phone (3, Interesting)

TWX (665546) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213633)

(I hate the "preview/submit" feature, seem to lose a lot of posts that way, this is a retype)

To use your example against you, I started a new position as an infrastructure specialist a year ago, working with someone with 13 years experience at the same company. I got outfitted with a new Ryobi 18V tool set so that he and I could share batteries with his decade-old 18V Ryobi tool set. The power drill from his set has places for two bits, the plastic housing is sturdy, and the bit holders don't lose their bits easily. My new one has a flimsy plastic housing the deforms under pressure, has only one position to store a bit, and the bit frequently pops out. The only new feature on my drill is a little LED that's supposed to shine on the work area while the drill is in use, but that feature is negated by the need to use bit extensions to reach into wire management and server racks with equipment protruding.

So, newer is definitely not always better, even when the newer product is a direct successor-in-market to the old product. The Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volaré were arguably worse cars than the Dodge Dart and Plymouth Valiant that they replaced. The Netbook type of computer was a lesser product than the Subnotebook type it replaced. The modern Craftsman any-fastener wrench is a lesser product than the 12pt wrench as while it technically fits everything, it fits nothing especially well.

Re:It's a friggin' phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213641)

Buy an electric drill kit from 10 years ago and compare it with a more powerful drill kit today from the same manufacturer and tell me there isn't a improvement in both what you get with it, extra options and performance.

Improvements in cordless drills are largely in battery technology. It isn't uncommon for newer generations to be mechanically inferior to older models.

Re:It's a friggin' phone (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213319)

And that's why the iPhone/iPad/iPod outsell every single lamedroid device 1,000 to 1. Android has no apps and the fragmentation is its death sentence. As usual Apple FTW.

Re:It's a friggin' phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213563)

That's right. Android has no apps. It's so fragmented no one is using it.

Jeez. Are there any Apple fans with any sense of reality left? Your comment is so offbase I can't tell if it's satire or not.

Apple is the "emperor has no clothes" phenomenon of our era.

The sad thing is that I was going to post that my friends and family *did* have Palm phones, and they didn't have a reason to get rid of them until they met untimely deaths (e.g., accidentally taking a dip in the pool). The iPhone is nothing but a Palm phone with an updated OS with the design stolen from an LG Prada.

These people are drooling over the G4's specs, Apple fans like to feel like they're superior because they're, well, shiny and clean. The grandparent post is probably right in that in neither case does it probably matter because you're not going to need that sort of hardware anytime soon for what you use a phone for.

At least with the G4 it's something actually functional. With Apple it's just hubris and appearances.

Re:It's a friggin' phone (0)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213679)

paper specs

iphone has always needed less CPU/RAM resources than android. i have a droid pro i carry for work and my wife's old iphone 4 with only 128MB or RAM was a much better phone

my father in law has a galaxy s3 and i play with it every one or two weeks when i see him. ok phone, but my iphone 5 with only 1GB of RAM is snappier

iPhone is not cutting edge (5, Interesting)

SpaceMonkies (2868125) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213015)

The iPhone is definitely not cutting edge technology, despite what some people believe. The iPhone is more the tried and true stuff, although I think most people use it for the software, not the hardware. However, for those who like power and fun in their pockets, the S4 is the bomb.

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (5, Informative)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213165)

the CPU and GPU in the iphone 5 were cutting edge for 2012.
i'm playing Real Racing 3 and the graphics are about as good as the xbox

MHz or GHz speed has never been a good predictor of actual processing power. Intel sold 4GHz CPU's 10 years ago. the 2GHz ones they sell now are A LOT faster

cpu/gpu architecture and the having the software actually take advantage of the hardware features will give you better performance than paper specs

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213381)

Apple does seem to emphasize GPU speed/efficiency on their chips. Makes some sort of sense, since the UI heavily depends on the GPU.

I don't know what geekbench tests, but I want to know is how fast single thread performance is. Currently (Likely in the phone's useful lifetime) your smartphone software really doesn't benefit much from having more than two cores. Quad core is nice in some situations, but if geekbench is running a bench on four cores and summing the result, it's not a good indicator of performance for the end-user. If this is the case then "just shy of twice" means "just shy of the iphone 5 cpu". (The iphone 5 cpu is dual core)

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213517)

Although your point stands... Intel has never sold a 4GHz CPU. About 10 years ago Intel broke 3Ghz with the P4 however. 3.8Ghz has been about the limit for stock clock speeds for a while now.

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213653)

must be getting old

either way the 2.4GHz iCore and Xeon's i'm using now are a lot faster than the 3.4GHz ones from a decade ago. still have a few old HP proliants with 3.4GHz Xeons.

what's the killer ap for bigger CPU on cell phone (4, Insightful)

goombah99 (560566) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213209)

what's the killer app for increased CPU?

why do I need such a powerful computation engine in my pocket? the main use I see is if it gets to be good enough to be a desktop replacement and I can just dock it to a big screen. But until then having more cpu or GPU isn't going to let be surf the internet faster or type e-mail faster or even give me longer battery life. THe existing ones already play HD movies so the frame rate threshold has been reached for highly satisfactory video.

SO what's the killer app for increased CPU? playing halo? Nice but not a killer app for a cell phone I think. I just can't think of anything in terms of compuational horsepower that I would like my cell phone to do that it doesn't do now and for which the cell platform is the right place to do it. I need help with my imagination I guess.

For me the thing I need on my cell phone is vastly more battery. Why? Well aside from the obvious of longer charge time, you could probably vastly increase the communication rate and reliability by broadcasting more power. You could certainly increase the amount of time you would be tempted to use video (battery consumers).

Re:what's the killer ap for bigger CPU on cell pho (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213241)

games?

only reason to buy an iphone over android at this point is games. i play real racing 3 on my iphone 5 and the graphics are about as good as my xbox 360. ipad 4 has better GPU and will be slightly better.

and if you have an apple TV you can output the game to your TV to make it like a real game console and that takes CPU power as well as a nice wifi router

Re:what's the killer ap for bigger CPU on cell pho (1)

geoffrobinson (109879) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213255)

You get to charge your cell phone more often?

Seriously, Apple takes great care to make sure battery life lasts as long as possible.

I'm not saying the S3 or S4 are bad phones, but I think we can be sophisticated enough to worry about overall experience for what you are trying to accomplish.

Maybe I want a faster processor and lower battery life. But I agree with you. I don't see the killer app that requires a super-charged CPU.

Re:what's the killer ap for bigger CPU on cell pho (1)

Aranykai (1053846) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213655)

You get to charge your cell phone more often?

Seriously, Apple takes great care to make sure battery life lasts as long as possible.

I'm not saying the S3 or S4 are bad phones, but I think we can be sophisticated enough to worry about overall experience for what you are trying to accomplish.

Maybe I want a faster processor and lower battery life. But I agree with you. I don't see the killer app that requires a super-charged CPU.

That's an interesting take considering the talk time, standby time and battery capacity stats are firmly in the favor of the samsung devices. The s3 out talks the iphone5 by over two hours. No telling what the s4 will do, but based upon their trend, it will improve on the s3.

Re:what's the killer ap for bigger CPU on cell pho (2)

obarthelemy (160321) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213437)

I've got an old Nook Color (800MHz single-core A8) lying around, it's still perfectly OK for most everything I do on a tablet, except HD video (I don't game).

I think OEMs are mis-aiming. Better battery, louder sound, more rugged design... would be more interesting to me than octo-core with bells on.

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213215)

This couldn't be more untrue. The newest iPhones always are in the top of the pack when it comes to CPU performance and they always have had cutting edge GPUs.

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213245)

The iPhone is definitely not cutting edge technology, despite what some people believe. The iPhone is more the tried and true stuff, although I think most people use it for the software, not the hardware. However, for those who like power and fun in their pockets, the S4 is the bomb.

No. People use it because its an iphone and has a apple logo on it. They use it because they are a slave to trend and nothing else.

That's why anytime someone has an apple product they refuse to call it a cell phone, a tablet, a computer, a laptop, a mp3 player or whatnot. They have to call it a iphone, ipod, imac, ipad and so on. While everyone else in the world regardless of who makes the product call a cell phone a cell phone.

Its why people will defend their apple products and justify it to others even in the face of total defeat. People still to this day say imacs cant get viruses, they will say the iphone has the most features and most powerful phone even if you pull up a fact sheet proving otherwise.

Its why I see people with apple logo stickers on their cars, and apple tshirts. While I don't see the android guy on anything.

All of that is due to the fact people buy apple products because of the name brand recognition, they don't actually buy it for the product, they want others to know they have apple stuff and that's it.

Re:iPhone is not cutting edge (3, Interesting)

Ecuador (740021) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213667)

Actually, at around the time of iPhone 4, Apple started putting in some good specs. By the time the iPhone 5 came out it, was among the fastest phones. This is in direct contrast to the early iPhones which had tragically bad specs.
I mean it seemed to me the were targeted at complete retards - people would show me their (gen 1) iPhone and say "look at how well you can browse the web". I could see how the UI of the browser was an improvement over my 3-year old PDAs (Axim X50v) browser, however trying to read on that half-VGA screen would give me instant headaches. Yes, my 3-year old PDA has twice the resolution and a faster CPU. In fact, even before that, my ancient (2003) Toshiba e805 had a 4" screen with full VGA resolution. Consider also the fact that the iPhone originally did not support apps, it should become apparent that the touch-friendly UI alone would not have given momentum to the iPhone release if it was not for marketing and fanboy-ism.
And yet it is surprising that people would call the original iPhone e.g. as a "high resolution display" device. There were devices at least 2 years older with 3x the resolution (but Nokia was too stupid to make a phone back then based on the N770/N800), but they were "invisible" to people.
After Apple opened a new market and everybody jumped in, then they started trying to compete on merit and not just style.
Another reversal that has happened is that now iOS is the least innovative OS. Android - though I am still not a great fan - evolves quickly and I have seen UIs made from scratch (e.g. Swipe UI on Maemo/Meego) look like they are coming to us from the next decade (in look and functionality). Instead of a modern OS on retarded hardware Apple now offers modern (at least relatively) hardware on an aging platform. The only thing that hasn't changed is that you always get less functionality than the competition and you can't change the battery or add memory...

meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213023)

What I'm interested in is the web performance. That's more or less the only thing that matters on these devices.

Battery life (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213039)

I want to know about battery life and how long it will actually remain at that level. I am not getting anything anymore that I cannot be sure will have battery that will actually last for more than 2 days at a time. I've got Samsung Note in the fall, initially the battery life was OK, now it's down to 2 days on standby! It's crazy, you can put everything into this thing but if it will only last for 5 minutes then it's not good. What's the battery life like after just 6 month?

Re:Battery life (1)

bobthesungeek76036 (2697689) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213737)

I would kill for 2-days of battery life. I have a SG2 and with the stock battery I was lucky to get 8 hours out of it. I now have a 3800mAh battery that gets me through the work day but not by much...

Re:Battery life (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213759)

I would kill for 2-days of battery life.

- stay away from me

Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (5, Interesting)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213075)

http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-s4-not-cyanogenmod-support-174322/ [androidauthority.com]

Reports are coming in that Cyanogenmod will not be spending any resources on Galaxy S4. None. They've complained that the Galaxy models are too hard to keep working. The strange thing about it, Cyanogen works for Samsung on their Android Team.

Question is, will that affect your decision to buy or not buy the Galaxy S4.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (4, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213195)

if i was to leave iphone for android it would be the S4 or the Note

couldn't care less about rooting and tooting. its like the shade tree mechanics of 30 years ago. people have nothing better to do with their devices.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213307)

Personally, I'm not likely to buy another non-Nexus device. You can't trust Samsung to update the OS, and it's nice to be able to remove any custom Samsung software. Third-party ROM support is never guaranteed, and is often required for non-Nexus devices, even just to fix security vulnerabilities.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213351)

i was going to "buy" a free Galaxy S2 for my mother in law 2 months ago. main reason was that it was getting ICS and maybe even Jellybean.

as far as the point updates, don't really care if my phone has 4.2.1 and the latest is 4.2.2. i update my iphone 5 to the latest ios when its released, but don't really see any difference. the one difference i saw was a bug where my phone wouldn't work with my car's USB except on locally stored music. it was fixed in the last month and now i can listen to spotify and pandora via my car's USB port

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (3, Interesting)

Alter_3d (948458) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213355)

Unfortunately that means you will be stuck with the Android version that comes with your device until Samsung and your carrier decide to upgrade it. That takes a loong time after Google releases updates. I have a Galaxy SII running the latest version of Android (4.2.2), but if I had not rooted it and switched ROMs, it would be running 4.0.4.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213497)

so i miss out on google now? who cares

the way android OS versions are buying something like the S2 which has ICS is perfectly safe from an application compatibility standpoint. ICS is at its peak installs now so it will be at least 2 years before good apps will require jellybean or something later

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213371)

Any pocket computer is a combination of hardware and software. If you dislike the "value" added to Android by Samsung, Motorola, et al (and want upgrades to a newer OS in the future), but prefer their phone hardware to the Nexus, then you will prefer one that runs custom ROMs well. At least with Cyanogen, the features added are features that some people want.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213601)

I can understand. I feel like most people hanging on rumors and press releases about the newest phone or operating system fail to realize that mobile phones are a hobby, not a necessity or something of great importance.

Installing CM on my phone was fun, but honestly, it's still the same phone it was before, just with different standard backgrounds and a few apps that were bundled in with it. Jailbreaking my ipad was a bit more functional, but at the end of the day, I tinker with my devices because I enjoy it and because they're mine to do so. The fact that various companies try to tell me they're not actually only adds an element of "Fuck you, apple" to it.

That said, if mobile phones aren't a hobby of yours, why upgrade at all?

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213637)

Cyanogen is lilfesaver for older phones which stopped getting os upgrades, but have still enough firepower to run newer stuff.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (3, Insightful)

dc29A (636871) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213199)

http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-s4-not-cyanogenmod-support-174322/ [androidauthority.com]

Reports are coming in that Cyanogenmod will not be spending any resources on Galaxy S4. None. They've complained that the Galaxy models are too hard to keep working. The strange thing about it, Cyanogen works for Samsung on their Android Team.

Question is, will that affect your decision to buy or not buy the Galaxy S4.

The only reason I picked up a Galaxy S3 is because it was CM10 supported. 2 hours after purchase, warranty was voided and CM was running on it. So no CM, no sale.

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213501)

You obviously don't use Bluetooth audio or you need to re-examine your meaning of the word "working"

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213283)

Uh.. no. That's a stupid question. Who is not buying phones because some hacked rom isn't going to be developed for it while a ton of others will be?

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (1)

InEnacWeTrust (1638615) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213527)

Definitely!

Having CM since my HTC Dream, yes, the fact that Samsung collaboration with the open source community is next to non-existent will drive my next phone choice.
Smasung has been plainly lying to the community for years. promising tons of stuff and delivering nothing. The source they publish is wildly different from the source in their device, tons of proprietary stuff prevent quality versions of CM to be developped for Galaxys except spending countless days reverse engineering stuff.
Contrast that to Sony Mobile who has been delivering lots of things, stays close to AOSP, and actually helps the community getting there...

Re:Cyanogenmod not on Galaxy S4 (1)

wildstoo (835450) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213755)

Personally, I find the stock Samsung roms to be perfectly good. I've rooted my S3 and disabled a lot of the built-in Samsung apps, but apart from that, it's still running the latest official Samsung firmware. It does everything I want, so I see no reason to change for the sake of it. (In other areas/devices I'm an incorrigible modder, so this isn't just apathy, this is the 3rd party roms not being compelling enough to change).

If I still have my S3 in a year or so when Samsung have stopped releasing updates for it, then I *might* consider flashing a 3rd party rom, but by that time I'll probably have upgraded to the Galaxy S4 or S5 or whatever the new hotness is anyway.

So, no it won't affect my decision, and I doubt I'm a unique case in this regard.

Yes, but will this be the phone they release? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213083)

The Galaxy S3 was a quad core when it was first announced, but that phone didn't materialize in the US.

2013 phone is faster than 2012 phone (2)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213095)

holy crap

is there any software that actually takes advantage of this? there are only a few games that take advantage of the iphone 5's graphical power

not like most people are going to dump their S3 or iphone 5 and run out to buy the S4 just because it gets better numbers
i know someone who is going to buy the Galaxy S3 this week if he gets if for $99 on T-Mobile. he doesn't need the S4's power and price

Re:2013 phone is faster than 2012 phone (1)

gordo3000 (785698) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213293)

remember the screen has a much higher number of pixels, demanding a lot more computation (granted, in graphics, but still relevant for SoC)

Re:2013 phone is faster than 2012 phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213303)

not like most people are going to dump their S3 or iphone 5 and run out to buy the S4 just because it gets better numbers

Buncha neckbeards who spend all day on gadget websites will.

Re:2013 phone is faster than 2012 phone (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213513)

I can't find any app which taxes my 2 year old Desire HD (Single core 1GHz Scorpion CPU, part of MSM8255 chipset). I think mobile processing has come to the same point as desktop processing; For 99% of the tasks, 2 years ago is more than enough (5 in desktop, really). The "new shiny" is for posers.

Re:2013 phone is faster than 2012 phone (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213805)

http://www.polygon.com/2013/1/7/3848380/hawken-project-shield-exclusive-tegra-4 [polygon.com]

Mind you, the above link is for Hawken on a Tegra 4, which this isn't using, but the point is that developers are working on bringing console-level titles to phones.

Does that mean... (4, Funny)

SailorSpork (1080153) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213097)

...those birds will look TWICE as angry on a Galaxy S 4 as they do on an iPhone 5? IN!

Re:Does that mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213723)

It means you'll be able to dial twice as fast and answer calls in half the time with the SG4 than on a IP5.

this is as bad as nvidia's hype (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213113)

at least the S4 is going on sale next month
for the next 6 months i have to read how the Tegra 4 is the most awesomenest mobile chip even though there aren't any products on sale that have it. but all i have to do is keep waiting and not buy anything else

Obvious, why waste your/our time? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213151)

You know, those benchmarks were not necessary at all. With a four core CPU @ 1.9 GHz, or an eight core CPU @ 1.6 GHz, all you only need to do is simple math to know it beats everything else on the market at this moment. Period.

Re:Obvious, why waste your/our time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213469)

The 8-core is 4 fast Cortex-A15 cores and 4 "slow" Cortex-A7 cores, for power saving. It won't have the performance on an 8-core CPU as only 4 cores are used at once.

oh that's right (5, Insightful)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213159)

Wow, now it's fast enough to run Crysis 3! Oh wait...that's right, it's a phone. Apps are written for the slowest Android devices for the biggest marketability so that speed means nothing and does nothing but waste battery life. Maybe it can process photos faster with a built-in app or something faster but who cares? Most people run 3rd party apps the vast majority of the time. I would much, much, much rather see a doubling of the battery life than a doubling of the processor speed.

Re:oh that's right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213573)

Then don't buy this phone. Buy an Ace or a blackberry or some other phone-oriented device and not a game-oriented device.

Re:oh that's right (2)

swb (14022) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213729)

I don't think apps are written for the slowest device. My experience with Apple IOS and devices of mixed age is that over time the apps seem to target faster and faster CPUs, either by doing more things or adding new features.

Every so often I grab an old iPhone 4 we use for a home phone and try to use Instacast and it about locks up updating 4-5 podcasts, yet it's like glass on my iPhone 5.

I see what you did there... (0)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213171)

The > Galaxy S 4 scored a 3,163 on the standard Geekbench 2 speed test, just shy of twice the iPhone 5s

I know what is being conveyed in this fragment but given Apple's naming convention on the iPhone this looks suspiciously like an article from the future!

Let's shoot for desktop replacement, Samsung (1, Interesting)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213193)

As long as we're going down the road of matching cores and RAM to that of nearly current desktop specs, why not nail down some standards for connecting peripherals? And no, I don't mean shitty proprietary bluetooth/wi-fi protocols. I mean a standard mini-usb dock with VGA, HDMI, DVI output and a few USB ports for a keyboard and rat. Something that can be implemented by the entire range of Android devices whether it's HTC, or Samsung, or Motorola. Otherwise, I see no point in phone with 4 damn cores and 3-4G of ram. It's just an expensive and wasteful pocket heater. Gaming on a screen that small is ridiculous.

Re:Let's shoot for desktop replacement, Samsung (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213663)

> I mean a standard mini-usb dock with VGA, HDMI, DVI output and a few USB ports for a keyboard and rat.

Why a standard? All the outputs are standard, the dock gets resold with your phone when you buy a new one (or you buy a compatible phone).

http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones-accessories/EDD-S20JWEGSTA [samsung.com]

> Gaming on a screen that small is ridiculous

Oh, maybe not talking about the Note then ;)

Having been through 4 Samsung android devices... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213207)

I can confidently say that the only way I'll purchase another is if it carries the Nexus brand.
Fool me 4 times....

who gets paid for this crap (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213219)

I got to be honest...who the heck benchmarks phones......and why would anyone really care. This is up there in the top ten of get a life and do something with a purpose.

Twice the cores (1)

dFaust (546790) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213225)

Given that the S4 has twice the cores of the iPhone5, this seems reasonable, if not a bit disappointing. I'd be curious to see some real-world benchmarks to see how actual apps fare, as they typically won't be making use of all 4 cores. For instance, while the S3 international flavor scores higher than the iPhone5 on this chart, there were many real world tests that the iPhone5 easily won.

I'll be anxious to see real world tests and see how well the S4 is making use of all of the available cores.

Re:Twice the cores (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213369)

The CPU can only have 4 active cores at a time. There are 4 high-power and 4 low-power cores, with the idea that you can use the slower cores for most tasks and save battery, but have power when you need it.

And this means...? (0)

pev (2186) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213259)

So this is a GeekBench 2 score :
    http://www.primatelabs.com/geekbench/

Does this tell you :
    - How responsive UI is and how well graphics accelleration in 2d and 3d improves your experience?
    - Whether the phones and apps operation scales onto the multiple cores to make use of them?
    - How well the O/S has been optimised to make use of the processor features?
    - Whether the O/S and apps are optimised to make use of cache well?
    - If you're going to be waiting on I/O all the time?

So - if you're using your S4 to run matlab I think this is great news. If you're wanting to use it as a smart-phone, perhaps more subjective tests will tell you more if you get on with it.

Personally having spent my teens and twenties fascinated and overly keen on benchmarks in computing, these days I pick up a device and use it for a while. If I like how it feels to use and how fast it feels then I'll keep it. (Caveat: I use benchmarks all the time developing embedded platforms to verify optimisation but that's a whole different kettle of fish)

What about battery? (1)

houbou (1097327) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213275)

Got a nexus.. so, whatever apps work on my Nexus will work on the 4.. but will it offer significantly better battery life?

iPhone 5 could still tear this phone a new one (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213281)

iPhone 5 could still tear this phone a new one. iPhone software is optimised for...iPhone hardware. Android software is not optimised for...(random) hardware.

Re:iPhone 5 could still tear this phone a new one (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213705)

Hahaha, yeah, like how OSX is "faster" than Linux on xserve mac hardware.

It will pass everything but a gas station... (1)

unixcorn (120825) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213331)

From my personal experience, if the phone does what it needs to do based on current software, the most important thing for me is battery life.

We're doing benches for mobile phones now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213353)

Like, CPU and memory?

How about the only things that matter in a phone and that are rarely checked in detail:
- battery life (various aspects of it)
- speech quality
- reception quality
- interactiveness (i.e. reaction to input)
- interoperability (i.e. usb mass storage, sync protocols)

Thankyouverymuch.

Please explain to me (1)

nanotech (34819) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213401)

How does this translate to real-world user-visible improvements?

Does it scroll more fluidly?
Do apps run noticeably faster? (Were they slow to start with?)
Is there any software out there that takes advantage of it to do more?

Can't see anyone caring about this at all in the mainstream market (you know, the one where people buy 50M+ units).

Also, comparing against iPhone5 is misleading as Android code runs via a JVM and iPhone runs native.

(Not a fan of either, aiming for objectivity)

Don't care about speed, I care about battery life. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213547)

I don't care how fast it is. I have a Samsung Galaxy S 2, and it's already faster than I need it to be.
What does suck, though is that I only get at most 16 hours of battery life with normal usage before it's dead. (as in, playing music, using minimal GPS/data to track where my bus is, maybe 25 text messages sent, and taking a call or two). The only way I can push it to 24 hours is if I keep it on airplane mode for half the day.

My only question is, can I reduce its CPU speed to at least the level of the S2 to have a greater battery life than the S2? Because no matter how you put it, a fast phone with no battery left is just a $600 weight in your pocket. I wish smartphone makers would focus on R&D for better batteries and less power consumption rather than useless new "features".

Desktop comparison? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43213565)

How does that compare to a desktop CPU? Are there any benchmarks that compare cell phone CPU's to desktops?

Comparing Internals (1)

topic7 (1968054) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213671)

The real question i'd like answered is for someone to benchmark the GS4 Snapdragon version VS the GS4 Exynos 5 version. If the Exynos version benchmarks higher, I may have to fly out to Europe and pick one up.

Re:Comparing Internals (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213827)

The real question i'd like answered is for someone to benchmark the GS4 Snapdragon version VS the GS4 Exynos 5 version. If the Exynos version benchmarks higher, I may have to fly out to Europe and pick one up.

Why would you spend considerable money and fly thousands of miles (I'm assuming you're in the USA) to pick up a phone that's faster in synthetic CPU benchmarks but may not be fully compatible with next generation 4G networks here in the USA? What do you do with your phone that requires the fastest possible CPU? And what do you do every 6 months when a faster phone comes out?

Latency (1)

Twinbee (767046) | about a year and a half ago | (#43213879)

I'd be more interested in the latency, responsiveness and touchscreen delay than raw CPU speed.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?