Performance issues? Really?

About the that specific reviewer. Just want to post a observation I had with my OG NOTE. A few months back the update to 4.1.2 came out and after doing the upgrade it was a complete mess with the gallery app as well. Many people commented about it and how it was basically unusable. I experienced this myself and it presented itself in much the same way the guy in that review is saying. I have a drop box and Google+ linked to my OG note as well. Basically after some time though and a few more cycles of opening the gallery and letting it run through some stuff it works fine. It is't as fast as i would like, but it doesn't take anything close to the amount of time this guy is talking about now. It did though when it was first upgraded to 4.1.2.

I would suspect this has something to do with content created outside of the phone being processed and indexed by the phone. I come to that conclusion because to correct the problem I did a factory reset in my troubleshooting as a step to try to correct it. I suspect the problems this guy is having is because he linked all his stuff to it. Given time it would of corrected itself.

As far as fudging the numbers. I am not sure I believe that either. It isn't uncommon practice to push a machine to a max performance mode in certain circumstances if it is needed. Now if it was overclocking the CPU and GPU then that would be a big issue. The best example i can think of for this is PC's where gamers disable speedstep or cool n' quite to make the cpu run at full clock all the time. It is common in PC's and does make a difference.
 
It depends on the test. Most sites do a looping video playback to test the battery. Or an opinion from the reviewer based on their subjective view of normal/heavy use.
The Note 3 does very well in the looped video playback tests and has done well in subjective use too. The Ars technica review would seem to be dependent on how the system ramps up for new page views. Apparently, the G2 has a more efficient design for that than the Note 3.
 
yeah, that gallery crap was weird. They said in stock form it's unusable. What happens if they had closed the app and reopened. or if they had closed the app, removed it from the recent app list, and they reopened the gallery. Does it still take that long?
 
It depends on the test. Most sites do a looping video playback to test the battery. Or an opinion from the reviewer based on their subjective view of normal/heavy use.
The Note 3 does very well in the looped video playback tests and has done well in subjective use too. The Ars technica review would seem to be dependent on how the system ramps up for new page views. Apparently, the G2 has a more efficient design for that than the Note 3.

This test confused me too. Did they have someone just surf the web for hours nonstop? Did they have a script to go from. So go to AC and surf the home page for 5 minutes. Then go to forums and click on threads and scroll to end of them, page next, new thread......

Going to heavy pages vs text pages is a big difference in power needs.
 
I've been waiting for the Note 3 for months. According to the reviews it's everything I had hoped for and more.

Note 8.0 via Tapatalk IV
 
This from the droidlife review.

Performance

Much like we saw with the Galaxy S4, the current version of TouchWiz that is running on the Galaxy Note 3 sometimes hinders the Note 3′s performance. The Galaxy S4 received an update after it was released that allowed the device to speed up, and we are hoping for the same thing here. The Note 3 has a next-gen quad-core processor and 3GB of RAM, so there is no reason to see performance issues.*It wouldn?t be a shot in the dark to blame any type of slowness on Samsung?s software.

Most of the issues (stuttering, lag, slow app switching, etc.) we have seen come when you are running Samsung?s stock home launcher that first appears packed with widgets. Once the widgets are removed, it seems to be more of a fluid experience. But again, with 3GB of RAM and a Snapdragon 800 CPU, there shouldn?t be a delay when exiting an app or launching one of Samsung?s heavily advertised S Pen features, something we saw quite often.

Another frustrating time to see performance issues is in the camera through the previously mentioned ?Processing? message when you are taking pictures. Many of the times we snapped a shot in Auto and with ideal lighting, were then met with the on-screen delay while the phone processed the photo. Both Kellen and myself have been met with this issue time and time again, one that we are hoping is resolved very soon. Again, we had zero lag with photo processing on devices like the G2 or Moto X.
 
People still care that much about benchmarks?

Idiots care about idle performances. Any proper benchmarking software should take what ever they can out of the device they are testing, because what on earth it helps to compare sleeping devices? If that is the problem (device is sleeping, not utilizing everything it has), then just change the software. Much more harder to beat hardware that is in use already.
 
Maybe if you gave us the links to those " less than flattering" reviews, we could help answer your questions?

Check out the gallery video at the bottom of this page. Downright scary...

Review: The Galaxy Note 3 is big

That part of the article blames the CPU, but also mentions the CPU load is light during that test. Are there other factors involved that the test is not taking into account? One even mentioned in the article is a lag caused from the Dropbox connection. Does that lag happen everytime the gallery loads, or just on the initial scan while it is creating thumbnails. I'd call that bothersome if there is no way to improve on the base performance (and there are)... "downright scary" is a term I would reserve for a system crash while trying to load the app.
 
Downright scary is idiotic tech journalists who think taking photos at a Chinese restaurant and publishing them as part of a "professional" review is okay because it might be funny/amusing.
 
That part of the article blames the CPU, but also mentions the CPU load is light during that test. Are there other factors involved that the test is not taking into account? One even mentioned in the article is a lag caused from the Dropbox connection. Does that lag happen everytime the gallery loads, or just on the initial scan while it is creating thumbnails. I'd call that bothersome if there is no way to improve on the base performance (and there are)... "downright scary" is a term I would reserve for a system crash while trying to load the app.

Yes, the Dropbox galleries are slow and no proper caching is done to ensure it won't happen next time you open the gallery. However, you can turn them off.
 
Gallery takes 2 seconds to open for me, that's from closing all apps and clearing all ram. Phone has been nothing but super fast this far.
 
I don't know where they got the "2 minutes to open gallery" from this the smoothest phone I've ever had better than my HTC one or gs4

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
 
The thing is a beast and in a good way. It is more than I had hoped for and I hoped for a lot. The only 'lag' I have experienced is when initially setting up and all of my previously bought apps were loading after signing in Google. After that initial period all has been as perfect as a device can be. Every user and reviewer is human and bring their personal biases and expectations to the table. To early to talk about battery. Maybe in a week or two I will know how that will all settle out. So far I am still smiling broadly.

Posted via Android Central App