Head to Head Performance comparison of EVO LTE and SGS3
- Thread starter FaisDogg
- Start date
I just read the article and stumbled upon this post...
The article did point out that repeated tests might flip the results in the SG3's favor...they didn't even specify how many test runs they did.
The interesting thing I took from the article was that GPS lock took 6 seconds I believe. My EVO LTE locks GPS within 2-3 seconds. They also said that AT&T's SG3's GPS wasn't as accurate. This could indicate Samsung's notoriously bad radios at work again (international versions never criticized this, but they weren't dealing with operating the phones in the US).
Another thing Engadget noted was HTC's screen was better in their opinion (better viewing angles, not overly saturated, and no PenTile).
I'm becoming more and more comfortable with my EVO now.
The article did point out that repeated tests might flip the results in the SG3's favor...they didn't even specify how many test runs they did.
The interesting thing I took from the article was that GPS lock took 6 seconds I believe. My EVO LTE locks GPS within 2-3 seconds. They also said that AT&T's SG3's GPS wasn't as accurate. This could indicate Samsung's notoriously bad radios at work again (international versions never criticized this, but they weren't dealing with operating the phones in the US).
Another thing Engadget noted was HTC's screen was better in their opinion (better viewing angles, not overly saturated, and no PenTile).
I'm becoming more and more comfortable with my EVO now.
Samsung radios info in the article made me completely stop thinking about SGS3...if you check out Cnet review (Samsung Galaxy S III Review - Watch CNET's Video Review), they also mention that SGS3 screen is much darker (low brightness) at max brightness as compared to iPhone and One X...and whites are not accurate..I just read the article and stumbled upon this post...
The article did point out that repeated tests might flip the results in the SG3's favor...they didn't even specify how many test runs they did.
The interesting thing I took from the article was that GPS lock took 6 seconds I believe. My EVO LTE locks GPS within 2-3 seconds. They also said that AT&T's SG3's GPS wasn't as accurate. This could indicate Samsung's notoriously bad radios at work again (international versions never criticized this, but they weren't dealing with operating the phones in the US).
Another thing Engadget noted was HTC's screen was better in their opinion (better viewing angles, not overly saturated, and no PenTile).
I'm becoming more and more comfortable with my EVO now.
I just read the article and stumbled upon this post...
The article did point out that repeated tests might flip the results in the SG3's favor...they didn't even specify how many test runs they did.
The interesting thing I took from the article was that GPS lock took 6 seconds I believe. My EVO LTE locks GPS within 2-3 seconds. They also said that AT&T's SG3's GPS wasn't as accurate. This could indicate Samsung's notoriously bad radios at work again (international versions never criticized this, but they weren't dealing with operating the phones in the US).
Another thing Engadget noted was HTC's screen was better in their opinion (better viewing angles, not overly saturated, and no PenTile).
I'm becoming more and more comfortable with my EVO now.
IMO its been rather obvious for a while now that the Evo is the better phone except if you need to multitask in which case the SG3 wins by infinity.
Thats not to say that the S3 sucks because it definitely does not the phone is a great phone but holy those screens are garbage they really need to start using ips or something better then those crapaleds.
Another thing I thought was interesting in the Engadget comparison:
AT&T's LTE-enabled battery life was 9:20 while Sprint's 3G battery life was just 10 minutes less at 9:10. AT&T and Sprint SG3's both have the same battery. Does connecting to the LTE network (when it's finally rolled out) not drain battery life faster than a 3G only connection? I hope so...I'm getting used to getting 30+ hours on a single charge.
AT&T's LTE-enabled battery life was 9:20 while Sprint's 3G battery life was just 10 minutes less at 9:10. AT&T and Sprint SG3's both have the same battery. Does connecting to the LTE network (when it's finally rolled out) not drain battery life faster than a 3G only connection? I hope so...I'm getting used to getting 30+ hours on a single charge.
I agree. If I was able to multitask more efficiently switching phones would not even cross my mind. IMO the EVO wins in every category except for removable battery (which would be nice but I'm fine living without) and multitasking. It's crazy how much I took for granted the ability to multitask... It's unacceptable that my two year old OG EVO can handle playing/pausing a podcast and answering incoming calls better than a brand new high end piece of technology.
Sent from my EVO using Android Central Forums
While the SIII took mere seconds to lock GPS longer they also pointed out that it was more accurate.
I don't use the phone GPS that much so it's not a big deal either way.
I don't use the phone GPS that much so it's not a big deal either way.
Engadget.com showed an interesting table of performance benchmarks (see attached) comparing EVO LTE and Sprint Samsung Galaxy S III...I wasn't going to switch anyways, but this shows EVO shining a little..
Link? I can't seem to find the article on Engadget.
Sent from my EVO using Android Central Forums
It's in this thread, read further up...:thumbup:
from Evo4GLTE on Android Central
The only link I see is the CNET video review. I was looking for the Engadget article the OP is referencing.
Sent from my EVO using Android Central Forums
Ahhhh, I was looking for a GS3 vs E4GLTE article. Thanks!
Sent from my EVO using Android Central Forums
AnnDroid
Well-known member
- May 19, 2010
- 901
- 28
- 28
What happens? I listen to podcasts almost all day long and have the og EVO. Right now, when my call has ended, it simply goes back to playing the podcast.
Also, do you ever list to podcast using the speaker? If so, is the EVO LTE as loud or louder than the og EVO?
a22matic
Well-known member
- May 10, 2012
- 187
- 5
- 0
Heck, I guess that's pretty good news for us EVO LTE owners. I wasn't going to switch anyway, and never really considered the SIII. I almost upgraded my OG EVO for the SII, but in a quick (15 mins) side by side comparison in the Sprint Store, it didn't blow me or my OG EVO away. I knew a new EVO would be out in a year, so I decided to wait. Glad I did!
AnnDroid
Well-known member
- May 19, 2010
- 901
- 28
- 28
The s3 looks to be on par minus the screen. But it works better overall and wait here's the big one it actually multitasks!
So let me guess, both of you didn't have an evo 3d did you? Yes the speaker on the og evo was great but the one on the evo 3d had to be one of the worst speakers ever on a smartphone. So yeah the speaker on the og evo is still better than the evo lte but at least the evo lte speaker is light years ahead of the evo 3d.
Similar threads
Trending Posts
-
-
-
-
One UI 7, and just updates in general - why consistently remove useful features??
- Started by Rev1010
- Replies: 28
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram