***The Official Samsung Galaxy S III Thread***
- Thread starter uvarvu
- Start date
That should be true, but the problem is because that we know nothing about the S3, we can't be so sure. Aside from the CPU used, what else is there that will make it hugely more desirable than the One X?
My 2 year old Desire is getting old and tired, and I want to decide between the One X and this. The lack of info is frustrating.
Snap! I just want to buy the phone outright and be done
Could it be possible that the S3 isn't better than the One X hence why Samsung are remaining so quiet about its specs?
I would say there is little chance of this, especially if we are talking directly about the SoC. The tegra 3 is trounced in almost all tests by the S4 used in the "lower spec'd" One S. If any 32nm Soc Sammy produce for their new flagship phone fails to beat the Tegra 3 hands down I will be amazed.
Man of Honour
The flagship Galaxy phones are leaders in their class and by nature aren't supposed to be beaten by other phones of the time. The SII still remains high up in the high end list of phones and it's old hat now.
Man of Honour
I did mean and imply Samsung's own handsets, not Nexus handsets.
Soldato
Oh yeah that inbuilt storage was soooo good
Oh yeah that inbuilt storage was soooo good
Apart from that, wasn't the Desire a better overall phone than the SGS?
Man of Honour
Once the lagfix was in place, the SGS was better and recsorded superior images and video.
It's very likely that the SoC in the SGSIII is closer to the Tegra3 than it is to the S4. This phone could be a bit of a let down as the technology might not be ready to make a decent step. If it's a 4412 then it's not much of a step, and if it's a 5250 then it might be a very heavy on the battery.
Also the chip used in the S2 and the Note matches tegra3 in the transformer prime, in gpu benchmark tests. Which is pretty dire if you ask me.
You must must be having a laugh. The SGS was the highest specced android device when launched, we have a thread saying that, and it's use has lasted longer than the desire.
the specs were only a little better - but the looks were fugly.
Oh yeah that inbuilt storage was soooo good
back then it didn't matter - apps were fairly small
Hopefully the days of plastic iPhone 3G rip off's are over 
Anyone else think the SGS3 is getting a tad over hyped?
Exynos 5 should use less battery than the 4212/4412.
...but the SGS3 is a high volume product. They'll only use it for something produced in small numbers this year, like the 11.6" tab.
I'm still clinging on to this old ARM road map. Hopefully the quad A9 + T604 GPU is Exynos 4412.
Anyone else think the SGS3 is getting a tad over hyped?
Exynos 5 should use less battery than the 4212/4412.
...but the SGS3 is a high volume product. They'll only use it for something produced in small numbers this year, like the 11.6" tab.
I'm still clinging on to this old ARM road map.
Hopefully the quad A9 + T604 GPU is Exynos 4412.
I have to give you that! You either hated it it's looks or learned to live with them
Also the apps are still small, but the push to save the apps to the sd card were numerous in the comments by desire owners
Tegra 2 was a failure in so many ways and 3 doesnt better the SoC by samsung so another failure in my eyes.
Last edited:
I have to give you that! You either hated it it's looks or learned to live with them
Also the apps are still small, but the push to save the apps to the sd card were numerous in the comments by desire owners
Tegra 2 was a failure in so many ways and 3 doesnt better the SoC by samsung so another failure in my eyes.
AFAIK the Tegra3 is 80mm2 chip, while the chip in the SGSII was 120mm2 2 cores vs 4/5(or 4.5 or whatever you want to call it!)