x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options
    Close






Qualcomm confirms that the '600' is the other processor for the Samsung Galaxy S 4

0. phoneArena 15 Mar 2013, 23:02 posted on

Qualcomm has confirmed that its Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 will be the processor under the hood of the Samsung Galaxy S4 in some regions including the U.S., while those in other areas will find that their Samsung Galaxy S 4 is powered by a Samsung Exynos Octa 5; the Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 is said to provide over 40% better performance than the Snapdragon S4 processor it replaced...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:08 13

1. Daftama (Posts: 619; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)


Bring it...The Next Big Thing Note 3 or Galaxy Q

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:11 9

2. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


Did Samsung think we weren't going to find out?

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:44 10

10. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


I don't think they really cared. Qualcomm of course cares so they announce it to everyone to promote the Qualcomm 600.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 00:13 3

16. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)


Sucks for people getting the US version. The Exynos 5 is more powerful with better GPU, CPU and better battery life. And it doesn't make oyur phone run super hot like snapdragon. Its stupid the onyl reason there using the krait 300 is because the carriers force them to support all the bands.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 01:01 4

19. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)


Who cares real life performance will be exactly the same. There has been ZERO battery testing on the Exynos Octa. Pure conjecture. It hasnt even been demo'd yet. The S4's in New York were all running Snapdragon 600s.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 05:36 4

26. Guest_star (Posts: 231; Member since: 30 Dec 2011)


how do you know that cpu is better and that consumes less power in exynos than in snapragon 600? have you tested it? and about that heat from snapdragon compared with exynos, done some more tests? please share them with us via video or something...(in case if someone did not notice i am being sarcastic because i hate comments like these that have no foundation to stand on)

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 08:39

28. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


It is not a stretch to hypothesize that a processor with two quad cores would use more battery.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 10:53

34. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


It is also not a stretch to hypothesize that the lower power cores would be running a majority of the time, which would make the two quad chip use less battery.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 08:40

29. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


I thought it was funny. This is the equivalent of advertising a computer with an Intel processor without specifying the model. I think it's funny because, it was as if they didn't want to admit that they had no leg in the processor department with their competition.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 10:04

31. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)


Snapdragon is like amd, there cpus are cheap but they work okay. Tegra 4 is like Intel, much faster cpu but cos more. Exynos octa is between a tegra 4 and snapdragon 600. There is also a big.little hack that allows all 8 cores to run at once.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 10:51

33. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


I have no idea how you can infer that from Samsung not mentioning the processor. I am pretty sure they didn't mention the hardware because they concentrated on the software. They didn't even mention the screen much. In fact, not mentioning does not benefit them in anyway so why would they hide it?

It probably hurt them more if anything. The Samsung hating sites like Pocketnow and The Verge even went as far as saying the GS4 was using the now ancient, in relative terms, S4 pro. Which would really give HTC an edge in North America if that was the case.

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:13 11

3. xperiaDROID (banned) (Posts: 5629; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)


What about Snapdragon 800, Samsung? Samsung should've wait for the 800 before they release the S4.

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:25 17

5. darkskoliro (Posts: 1077; Member since: 07 May 2012)


but then ONE and Z will already have half the 2013 customers, and then S4 will have too much competition with iPH and MotoX second half of 2013

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:31 9

7. xperiaDROID (banned) (Posts: 5629; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)


I agree.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 00:13 11

17. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)


Apple is mid range now. They don't deserve to be compared to new phones.

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:42 2

8. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


I don't think they have much competition. Just Apple.

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:43 4

9. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


Yes, I agree. They definitely should have waited. Let's hope that the Exynos 5 Octa doesn't outperform the Qualcomm 600 too badly.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 01:05 5

21. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)


Why? Tech enthusiasts that care about stuff like this are probably 1% of their target consumers and are the only people that care which processor they have. As if it matters since both will likely run flawlessly.

Their concern is making money pure and simple and Samsung has got to strike while the iron is hot. Unveiling and releasing the S4 six months before the iPhone just makes sense rather than competing head to head.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 10:55

35. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


It is actually a pretty big step up, especially the gpu. Go look at the comparisons. I know it doesn't really matter to Samsung in the big picture but it still gives them another marketing tool at the very least and would improve popularity with the tech crowd.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 10:05

32. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)


The 800 would be on par with the exynos 5 but it wouldnt have the powersaver cpu.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 15:27 1

37. akki20892 (Posts: 3901; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


i hope nokia choose intel i3 or i5 or maybe i7 powerful one.....!!! if they then it will great......!!! just dreaming

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 22:10 1

39. xperiaDROID (banned) (Posts: 5629; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)


Maybe a 2.3 GHz Quad Core Intel Core i7 processor. Oh, and 3 GB of ram. (dreaming)........

posted on 17 Mar 2013, 14:51 1

41. akki20892 (Posts: 3901; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


yeah men, dreaming is good. Lol......!!!

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:23 4

4. joey18 (Posts: 589; Member since: 20 Jul 2010)


sammy fail so who is going to copy lg -htc or nokia

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:29

6. true1984 (Posts: 825; Member since: 23 May 2012)


i thought the Sprint version of the SII was the one with the Exynos, not the AT&T version

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:46

11. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


None of the US models had the Exynos. Just the Canadian Bell/Virgin model and the international global one.

Which makes me wonder. If Bell pays extra for the Exynos 5 Octa plus LTE, they can market the hell out of it and get people to switch. I don't know if Samsung would allow that but they should go for it. I'll buy the Bell one and unlock it if it had the Exynos again.

posted on 15 Mar 2013, 23:50 3

12. galanoth (Posts: 425; Member since: 26 Nov 2011)


Both Sprint and AT&T had Exynos in their Galaxy S 2 models.
For the Galaxy S 3, all USA carriers used a dual-core Snapdragon.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 00:58 2

18. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


No, I am pretty sure that every US variant used the crapdragon S3. Only the Bell/Virgin model used the Exynos in North America. Let me double check and I'll post if I am wrong.

Which makes you wonder. How did Qualcomm improve so much from the crapdragon S3? LOL

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 01:05 1

20. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


My bad. The Epic 4G touch and the AT&T does have an Exynos according to Phonearena.

The Bell/Virgin one was the only one that looked like the original international one.

posted on 16 Mar 2013, 01:07

22. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)


AT&T had 2 versions of the S2, one with Exynos and HSPA+, and one with the S3 and LTE. The Sprint version also had Exynos.

The HSPA+ AT&T model was the closest thing in the U.S to the international model with its 4.3" display and Exynos, all the others either had 4.5" displays, S3's, or both.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories