Why do many people just assume that Exynos Octa is better than Snapdragon 600?

[polap#AC]

I really don't understand. It is the first SoC with ARM Cortex A15 cores in smartphone. It is also the first SoC with big.LITTLE design. So many things could go wrong or don't work well. Rumors are that more regions will be using Snapdragon than in Galaxy S3.

Samsung is in the business of making money. Isn't it possible that Exynos is used just to save face?

 

[Ry]

Spec war!

 

[JRDroid]

MOAR CORES IS MOAR GOOD!!!!!!!

But really, I posed this exact question on the thread about Samsung "screwing" the US.

 

[crester]

MOAR CORES IS MOAR GOOD!!!!!!!

But really, I posed this exact question on the thread about Samsung "screwing" the US.

^^^This... people assume more cores automatically mean the processor is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better.

There are so many blind judgements being made about this phone... people need to chill out and wait to actually use the device.

 

[Kyungie]

^^^This... people assume more cores automatically mean the processor is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better.

There are so many blind judgements being made about this phone... people need to chill out and wait to actually use the device.

+1

 

[CZonin]

Just saw a video of the S600 version getting over a 25000 on Antutu. Can't wait for the Verizon release!

 

[The Real X Dawg]

If it truly does have a noticeable improvement in battery life I can see why they would say the Exynos better than the S600. Even if it isn't from raw power comparisons.

Sent from my Jelly Bean chomping Infuse 4G!

 

[lukair]

1. Battery savings
2. (Most probably) Wolfson audio chip
3. PowerVR GPU

In terms of raw power Qualcom might be more powerful, but it still yet to be seen. The CPU Clock is not everything. Samsung prides himself on the quality of its products, so it isn't that hard to believe his 1.6GHz A15 Exyons quad core will be better than Qualcoms 1.9GHz.

But even if Qualcom comes on top, the 3 things I mentioned above outweights heavily Qualcom chip, and that's why most people prefer Exynos Octa. I'm from EU and am happy I will be getting the Octa CPU, even for the price of LTE (not as much expanded in my country + LTE takes much more juice from the battery vs 3g, 3.5g, 3.75g).

 

[lukair]

One more point I forgot to mention.

Octa will deffinetly be coupled with DDR3 RAM. How it will be with Snapdragon we don't know yet (whether it will be DDR3, or DDR2 like it was till now)

 

[Kerafyrm]

It is exactly as Lukair described.

1. Battery savings

GSMArena Battery Life Endurance Rating (includes stand-by battery life):
Samsung Galaxy S3 International (Exynos Quad): 43 hours
Samsung Galaxy S3 U.S. (Dual-core Snapdragon S4): 40 hours

That does not even include the fact that the new Exynos Octa has power-saving cores.

2. (Most probably) Wolfson audio chip

GSMArena Audio Quality Test
Samsung Galaxy S3 International (Wolfson DAC): -90.3 Noise Level, 90.3 Dynamic range, minimal distortion, -92.6 Stereo Crosstalk
Samsung Galaxy S3 U.S. (Qualcomm DAC): -82.3 Noise Level, 82.3 Dynamic range, minimal distortion, -78.4 Stereo Crosstalk

The Wolfson DAC wins across the board in terms of cleanest audio quality when connected to either headphones or an external amplifier.

3. PowerVR GPU

Anandtech's GLBenchmark Egypt HD (1080p)
Apple iPhone 5 (PowerVR SGX 543MP3 GPU): 27 frames per second
Google Nexus 4 (Qualcomm Adreno 320 GPU): 18.5 frames per second

The LG Optimus G (29 frames per second) was also tested, but as Anandtech says, "The explanation is simple: the Optimus G can't complete a single, continuous run of GLBenchmark 2.5 - the app will run out of texture memory and crash"

Also, in terms of optimized browser scores:

Anandtech's BrowserMark (Higher is better)
Samsung Galaxy S3 International (Exynos Quad): 172237
Samsung Galaxy S3 T-Mobile (Dual-core Snapdragon S4): 114812

Anandtech's SunSpider Benchmark (Lower is better)
Samsung Galaxy S3 International (Exynos Quad): Completed in 1442.9 ms
Samsung Galaxy S3 T-Mobile (Dual-core Snapdragon S4): Completed in 1751.3 ms

All in all, the U.S. Galaxy S4 will be inferior to the International version in every way, especially since it will have a GPU that was first used 4 months ago.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

All in all, the U.S. Galaxy S4 will be inferior to the International version in every way, especially since it will have a GPU that was first used 4 months ago.

As opposed to a GPU that is an updated (as in, support for more stuff, not performance improvements) version of something much older than the 320?

Also worth noting is how much Samsung optimizes for Exynos. That will account for some of those differences for sure.

And finally, these are both new chips. We know what to expect from Qualcomm (S4 Pro isn't slow and makes a good baseline). With the Octa, though, we have no idea. I say again, WE'RE ALL JUST GUESSING. Leaked benchmarks, marketing fluff, etc. Wait for the devices to be released and compared side by side.

 

[croppz]

8 cores is useless in a phone. Simple as that. We havent even fully embraced quad core.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

 

[msavic6]

8 cores is useless in a phone. Simple as that. We havent even fully embraced quad core.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

Please read the reason why their is 8 cores before saying its useless. It is for efficiency and battery saving. The 8 core is basically a quad core except there's two of them an A7 and an A15 which help increase battery longetivity.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Android Central Forums

 

[thebizz]

Why do I assume the exynos 5 octa is better: the a15 is 30% faster clock to clock than the s600, more memory bandwidth 12.8gb per second compared to 8.5gb per second, GPU performance should be comparable. But the Qualcomm chip should be better during active use especially when those a15s are active.either way they will both be great

 

[bdog421]

Why do I assume the exynos 5 octa is better: the a15 is 30% faster clock to clock than the s600, more memory bandwidth 12.8gb per second compared to 8.5gb per second, GPU performance should be comparable. But the Qualcomm chip should be better during active use especially when those a15s are active.either way they will both be great

Not to burst bubbles or anything, both exynos5 octa and snapdragon 600 use dual channel LPDDR3...they will be virtually tied here....both chips supplied/made/implemented for mobile by samsung. Exynos5 will be damn good, much like the s600, but how good is yet to be seen.

If anyone actually reads this post, I apologize in advance, not 100% sure the octa uses dual channel DDR3...I'm basing that on later versions of the exynos5 dual, however I'm certain the s600 has dual channel DDR3.

 

[thebizz]

^^ exactly how are you bursting my bubble by stating that they both are using dual channel ddr3 ram it still doesn't negate the fact that the exynos has more memory bandwidth( or should I say faster). As in it will transfer 12.8gb per second compared to the s600 8.5gb per second. Granted you may only see the advantage during certain task. Either way it doesn't matter to me as I'm most likely picking up the HTC one. With the s600

 

[Wilbur]

From Digital Trends:

The reason for this change is well documented, and is to do with the Qualcomm chip having a built-in 4G LTE modem, while the Exynos chip must deal with a separate module, making it a little less energy efficient. However, this doesn?t matter if 4G isn?t an essential feature, as is the situation in many international markets.

Much of the U.S. now has 4G so its a natural decision to use the Snapdragon here.

 

[lukair]

Frankly, I wouldn't touch the "B class" product of S4 even if they forced me. For me it's only the Octa version or no S4 at all.

As opposed to a GPU that is an updated (as in, support for more stuff, not performance improvements) version of something much older than the 320?

It is still more powerful, while it will take lots of time for those benefits of 320 to show themselves on regular basis. Lots of time.

And finally, these are both new chips. We know what to expect from Qualcomm (S4 Pro isn't slow and makes a good baseline). With the Octa, though, we have no idea. I say again, WE'RE ALL JUST GUESSING. Leaked benchmarks, marketing fluff, etc. Wait for the devices to be released and compared side by side.

We are guessing indeed, but these are educated guesses.

 

[thebizz]

And FYI last I checked the 600 doesn't have an integrated modem were as the 800 does but thats not a knock against it

 

[s44]

The reason for this change is well documented, and is to do with the Qualcomm chip having a built-in 4G LTE modem, while the Exynos chip must deal with a separate module

Wrong.

last I checked the 600 doesn't have an integrated modem were as the 800 does

Correct.

The *only* inherent advantages of S600: (1) time to market, and (2) driver/dev support.

If you can wait for the E5O model, and intend to run either stock or with a stock-based ROM, it's a no-brainer. If you want the S4 soon or want to run an AOSP-based ROM (e.g. CM, AOKP), the S600 is your choice. Of course, if Samsung only offers one model in your market or with your carrier's LTE bands, you don't have much choice.