Galaxy Note 3 fights self, barely wins: Exynos 5 Octa vs Snapdragon 800 versions benchmarked
0. phoneArena 01 Oct 2013, 09:16 posted on
Samsung is outing the Note 3 in two versions, depending on what processor they'll contain. The variation for LTE carrier networks will be shipping with Qualcomm's top-shelf Snapdragon 800 - a quad-core chipset clocked at 2.3 GHz - while the others will receive Samsung's homemade Exynos 5 Octa, running on 1.9 GHz...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
19. cdwjustin (Posts: 26; Member since: 18 Sep 2013)
what happened with your s3? i had a low end samsung the Galaxy reverb and ill tel you it worked like a charm then the os update they did BROKE the phone
47. miket247 (Posts: 81; Member since: 16 Apr 2013)
You'll love it! Its a machine by the looks!
11. twens (Posts: 979; Member since: 25 Feb 2012)
I have the exynos version. I went for the white but it had some issues. Returned it for the black and i am loving it. Weird thing is i get 34990 on Antutu which is higher than both of this phones in the video. It makes me not to trust benchmarks anymore. They are not always accurate.
13. medicci37 (Posts: 1284; Member since: 19 Nov 2011)
The snapdragon scored slightly higher. I thought the graphics on the improved exynos were supposed 2 be better than the 800?
17. sapibuntinx (Posts: 57; Member since: 08 May 2013)
so whats the point of getting the 3g version? lower video recording resolution, lower performance, what else? lower price? meh....
48. miket247 (Posts: 81; Member since: 16 Apr 2013)
Its for other markets, like China which is just starting to put up LTE networks. Even some European countries will be late moving to LTE.
20. jove39 (Posts: 1879; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Snapdragon is taking over soc market...hope samsung will put more effort in exynos soc once Apple shift load to tsmc...for now...snapdraggon is soc of choice.
22. megaLK (Posts: 7; Member since: 29 Sep 2013)
Note 3’s benchmarking “adjustments” inflate scores by up to 20%
arstechnica dot com for more info
40. SlimSoulja86 (Posts: 660; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)
You really are on a mission to spread the word hay. You posted this above. We get it. And i'm sure ppl don't care anymore.
49. miket247 (Posts: 81; Member since: 16 Apr 2013)
Its another iShεεp fan, just like 'bigstrudel'! They have no lives, so they troll.
26. zachattack (Posts: 621; Member since: 31 Jul 2013)
Well my G2 scored 37000 on antutu so i mean, you samsung fan boys can think whatever you want. The note 3 is nothing spectacular when compared to the Note 2. It's what the Note 2 should have been but that isn't saying much ~. Got my G2 (The best flagship of 2013) for 140$. You paid like what 350 or something for the Note 3. Too much credit given to samsung for not doing anything, not enough credit given to LG and other companies. L2smartphone
42. McLTE (Posts: 855; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Hmm.. nothing spectacular huh..
Better processor, bigger screen, 1080p, new stylus, better camera, bigger battery, IR blaster, better stylus integration.
If that's not an impressive iteration.. what the hell is?
53. maxican16 (Posts: 364; Member since: 29 Sep 2011)
This comment is so factually wrong I don't even know where to start. Maybe you should know a little about the phones you're talking about, and have actually used them, before talking nonsense.
45. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3725; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
There you go again saying things that make no sense. It's what the Note 2 should have been?
How many phones had 1080 screens when the Note 2 debuted? 0.
Did the Snap 800 exist when the Note 2 came out? No.
The Note 2 was the most feature rich, specs packed device when it hit the market. To say the Note 3 is what it should have been is the most asinine thing I've ever heard. You trolls get more idiotic every day.
28. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)
Artificially boosted benchmarks again. Nothing to see here.
36. JunitoNH (Posts: 1862; Member since: 15 Feb 2012)
Yup, they know Samdungs will buy and believe anything. I'll just leave this here, since they are not reporting it.
37. DukeX (Posts: 327; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
I like you all bragged about the 5s benchmarks and now it's "nothing to see here"? But i thought benchmarks don't matter? It's funny how people are singling out Samsung as if anyone else hasn't done this before. It's like givingone person a ticket for jwalking while letting a whole crowd walk by with no issues. Oh and I'll just leave this herehttp://www.macrumors.com/2013/
39. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)
By nothing to see here I mean..
These benchmarks are have been altered and do not represent actual results.
So if the article is about Galaxy Note 3 benchmarks and there are no actual correct benchmarks data available there would in fact be...
Nothing to see here.
43. McLTE (Posts: 855; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Say you're right and Samsung inflates their benchmarks by 20%..
What is this article talking about? the SAME @$^$ phone with different processors!
So, in the context of THIS (read slowly.. T H I S) article.. your trolling means NOTHING.
30. Penywyz (banned) (Posts: 255; Member since: 13 Aug 2013)
"Last Night I lost a dollar... TO MYSELF!"
Can't wait until Verizon ships them!
32. darkkjedii (Posts: 21794; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
34. jove39 (Posts: 1879; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
It certainly is...arstechnica dig into java files and found a cheat...samsung set cpu to full boost 2.3ghz when one of popular benchmark app is detected.
Noticeable point is - cheat and non-cheat scores are not drastically different...Note3 just goes down to G2 level (still pretty fast).
35. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)