Samsung Galaxy S II HD LTE benchmark tests
0. phoneArena posted on 06 Feb 2012, 23:24
Out of the box, the handset is capable of executing most basic tasks, such as opening apps, kinetic scrolling, and pinch zooming will little problems at all. Furthermore, it delivers a great amount of fluidity while navigating through its various homescreens with a static...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
19. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:27 3 0
I see samsung is still faking the I/O scores on the crapdragon. 3700 on a crapdragon?? lololol. nice try sammy.
for anyone that doesnt understand what im talking about. check the difference between the skyrocket HD and the Evo3D/sensation. They are both running the exact same chipset with just a minor variance in clock speed (which doesnt make that much of a difference). On quadrant, look at the increases in the Dark blue areas. On Velamo look how big the red and yellow are, but how small the "user experience" is... all while comparing it to the Evo3d/Sensation.
For those of you that think I worship Samsung, you obviously dont pay attention, since I nail them to the wall for this every darn time they try it.
2. JGuinan007 posted on 07 Feb 2012, 00:35 0 0
So how do thoughs scores compare to the SGS2 with Exynos processor?
3. GoodFella posted on 07 Feb 2012, 01:17 1 0
My Galaxy S II with Exynos (Overclocked to 1.6Ghz) will do about 4600 to 5000 on Quadrant.
7. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:21 3 1
they're pretty much the same which is BS because these S3s shouldn't be getting anywhere near those scores. i think it's a Samsung thing.
20. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:28 3 0
since samsung fakes the I/O scores on their crapdragon phones, its incomparable. If you want the real score difference, the proof is right there. Check the regular SGS2 vs the evo3d/sensation.
4. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 01:23 3 2
remixfa, why your "crapdragon " posted some pretty damn good results!
and oh my, it did that despite having a HD screen and gingerbread!
what happened?!
9. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:29 2 1
the scores are always sky high when you run Quadrant on a Galaxy S II for some reason regardless of SoC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGnhXZxQb-Y
the first test this guy does in the video is of course Quadrant and so of course it's scoring highly but the next benchmark he performs is Smartbench which really knows what's up if you'll watch that through to the end you'll see. i'll take Smartbenches' word over Quadrant's because it shows consistent results.
6. cheetah2k posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:13 6 0
Are they cheating?
I'm pretty sure the real answer to this is that Samsung actually knows how to fully optimise the hardware for Android.....
10. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:51 2 1
@kingkurogii, what's BS is your reasoning, actually.
if Samsung is optimizing the s3, then what's Samsung doing with it's own Exynos?
can you give me some other phone running the Exynos?
oh yeah, it's Chinese Meizu phone!
12. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 03:17 1 1
actually it's not.
HTC optimizes the S3 for their Sense devices but it still sucks all the same. I'm not even saying Exynos should be getting those scores but it's far more likely based on real life performance. I have a Droid Razr and it's way snapper than my friend's sister's T-Mobile Galaxy S II. so really all you've done is add more BS reasoning to the pile. I never even mentioned Exynos. I'm saying these are unrealistic scores coming from anything running an S3 which is why I think Quadrant is pretty bad now hence my first comment.
22. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:32 1 0
what was your point, exactly?
All the proof you need is in the half dozen graphs at the top. Samsung messes with the I/O scores on the snapdragons to fluff the quadrant scores. Its as easy as looking at this phone vs the evo/sensation. Its the same chipset with only a minor variance in speed. If you want to say samsung is probably fluffing exynos, fine. Easy way to tell which chip is better without I/O scores is to ignore the dark blue area in quadrant.
11. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:53 2 1
.. my point is, there's no neutral reference.
for all we know , Exynos on HTC could suck compared to Exynos on Samsung
13. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 03:23 1 1
neutral reference? you're contradicting yourself for the sake of arguement. if Samsung is optimizing the S3 for their Galaxy S IIs then really the only differentiating factors between an S3 SII and an Exynos SII is sheer processor performance which means Exynos is simply better no matter what it's in, if it's an HTC device or a Samsung device, at least based on your logic.
14. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 04:00 1 2
no, you're not listening. how can HTC optimize s3?
you say so, so it makes it a fact?
what I'm bringing up are facts - snapdragon is a mass adopted soc, adopted by assemblers.
while Exynos is a basically exclusive used solution, by a chip know-how brand.
and since they both get pretty close in benchmarks on Samsung, that should mean they have pretty close base potential, right? it's a neutral reference.
HTC is not a chip manufacturer, they can just assemble what they get.
and you say you never mentioned Exynos but you nevertheless proclaimed s3 benchmark result to be BS, based on what?
your comparisons with previous s3 scores, which were, yeah, compared with Exynos. and again, that's not a neutral reference.
I'm just saying that until we see Exynos scores on some other brand than Samsung, we'll never have an objective picture about it
18. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:15 1 1
..wow, I've lost any faith in this being an intelligent conversation.
HTC's devices have been exclusively using Qualcomm chipsets for the past few years so naturally HTC devices are optimized for use with Qualcomm SoCs.
I say so because I believe it's fact like anyone would, yourself included and you're not exactly bringing any good arguments to the table.
no, they get similar scores on ONE benchmark which hasn't been updated in over a year. guess which factors I don't take very seriously. if you're going to think S3s are as good or better than Exynos just because Exynos is Homemade and Qualcomm is a more recognized mobile SoC supplier then you're really naive guy.
no, my proclamations were based off of S3s compared to...anything. they're trash. it doesn't even need to be compared to Exynos for you to be able to see that. maybe you should do some real life comparisons or you could just read this article if you'll take Phone Arena's word over mine.
so far there is really no reason to doubt the power of Exynos so believe me no one here wants to see Exynos on other brands more than me.
23. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:34 2 1
say it... say the word. u know you want to say it. :) :) :) come on KK, dont let me down!! :) lol
