Samsung GT-I9300 Galaxy S III graphics benchmark appears, poised to rule them all
posted by Daniel P.
/ Apr 23, 2012, 3:01 AM
With the power of deduction we concluded last week that the only possible scenario for a chipset in the Galaxy S III is the officially unannounced quad-core Exynos 4412 clocked at 1.4GHz, which apparently comes with an ARM Mali-400 GPU, but clocked at 400MHz, making it 50% faster than the current edition in the Galaxy S II.
Since we know that some of you were worried about the graphics performance with "just" a 50% boost, instead of the sexier sounding "5x the performance" of Mali T-604 that is in the Exynos 5 series for tablets, we compared the screenshot that was tipped to us with the other heavy hitters. Not all test components are filled with the non-final unit, but what's there paints quite the rosy picture.
Samsung GT-I9300 Galaxy S III graphics benchmark appears, poised to rule them all
As you can see, the results from what is likely still a prototype Galaxy S III unit, beat the current Android king Snapdragon S4, beat Tegra 3 by a large margin, take over the iPhone 4S by a tad in most GPU test components, and even hold their own against the mighty quad-core PowerVR graphics in the new iPad. Since we already heard rumors about "superlative" benchmarks from the new Exynos, we are inclined to believe the same will be true for the CPU as well.
Long story short, until we see some benchmarks from the Adreno 320 GPU in the next Snapdragon, or if the next iPhone uses the same PowerVR as the new iPad (which wouldn't make much sense), the Samsung Galaxy S III could very well rule them all in its finalized version. Therefore worries that the phone doesn't have the Cortex-A15 based Exynos 5 series inside, which has actually been developed by Samsung to power high-resolution tablets, are apparently premature.
Thanks, Fayez!
Related phones
- Display 4.8" 720 x 1280 pixels
- Camera 8 MP / 1.9 MP front
- Processor Samsung Exynos 4 Quad, Quad-core, 1400 MHz
- Memory
- Storage 32 GB + microSDXC
- Battery 2100 mAh(11.60h 3G talk time)
49 Comments
1. daniel_bargs
Posts: 325; Member since: Nov 27, 2010
omg. makes me wanna sell myself or my kidney just like the chinese iFan or myself just to buy this stuff. the words used in these article is giving me goosebumpss hahahaha i think im so attached. ok calm down boy.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:09 AM 6
21. Non_Sequitur
Posts: 1111; Member since: Mar 16, 2012
No, we're excited because it's ACTUALLY FAST. You, the iSheep, get excited because it has a new dual core 800 MHz processor!! Wow! Oh, and it has the new iCloud. This means that you can sync apps and music and stuff over the Cloud, just like Android! Only after 5GB, you have to pay money!!
All I'm saying is, it's okay to be a sheep when your shepherd is the Terminator.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 5:34 AM 5
23. GENARAL.LEVY
Posts: 93; Member since: Apr 17, 2012
Windows prison sh?ep
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 6:34 AM 1
36. ZEUS.the.thunder.god unregistered
wooooo.... its gonna be a monster and hopefully worth the wait & hype.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 9:25 AM 0
3. RaKithAPeiRiZ
Posts: 1488; Member since: Dec 29, 2011
shut up and take my money
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:27 AM 6
4. rd_nest
Posts: 1656; Member since: Jun 06, 2010
I had also taken some screen-shots when they were in the GLbenchmark database.
Check for yourself --
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5200/7058354569_4e81d0b61b_c.jpg
http://i42.tinypic.com/zqvdu.jpg (this is already posted in the article)
Also in Beyond3D forum, a member found in a kernel dump that Samsung has revved-up the frequency to 440MHz in the Mali400. Results show that it's more powerful than tegra3 and SGX543MP2 in iPhone4S.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1634670&postcount=316
For comparison, SGS2 had Mali400 running at 266MHz.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:30 AM 3
39. NeXoS
Posts: 292; Member since: May 03, 2011
Something iPhoneArena forgets to mention is that the SGS3 is pushing 1280x720 pixels, while the SGS2 is pushing only 800x480 and the iPhone 4S only 960x640
To put it into clearer terms:
SGS3 ==> 921,600 pixels
iP4S ==> 614,400 pixels
SGS2 ==> 384,000 pixels
The SGS3 is faster than anything out there, has a 320dpi screen that is a whopping 4.6" huge and still thinner and lighter than the brickPhone!
Take my money already!
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 6:41 PM 2
5. ScottSchneider
Posts: 336; Member since: Dec 06, 2011
Beats the Bugatti Veyron EB16.4 by a Hugh Margin... The Ruler of Smartphones of All time...
All you Other Phone...
Make Way for the King....
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:30 AM 7
8. abdane
Posts: 507; Member since: Oct 07, 2011
yea i read on sammobile.com that GT-i9300 is GS2 HD+
and the i9500 is the GS3 :P
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:52 AM 1
12. Fayeznoor
Posts: 74; Member since: Nov 15, 2011
no, ur wrong.
Glbenchmark.com shows SGH-I9500 as taizen based Samsung smartphone being tested. results are already up for it on that site.,
and it showed SGH-i9300 as Galaxy S3 before being removed.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:01 AM 1
45. maxximuscool
Posts: 1; Member since: Apr 23, 2012
GT-I9500 ( != SGH-I9500 ) is running on ICS 4.0.3 and it is 1000Ghz Max/266Mhz Min CPU.
Looks like GT-I9500 is a low end device.
=========================
android.os.Build.VERSION.RELEASE 4.0.3
Device Name
android.os.Build.DISPLAY IML74K
android.os.Build.VERSION.SDK 15
android.os.Build.BOARD p990
android.os.Build.BRAND generic
android.os.Build.DEVICE p990
android.os.Build.FINGERPRINT lge/lge_star/star_450-05:2.3.4/GRJ22/LG-SU660-V20f .420e8e68:user/release-keys
android.os.Build.HOST tenkian
android.os.Build.MODEL GT-I9500
android.os.Build.PRODUCT lge_star
android.os.Build.TAGS test-keys
android.os.Build.TIME 1329701754000
android.os.Build.TYPE userdebug
android.os.Build.USER rmcc
android.os.Build.VERSION.INCREMENTAL eng.rmcc.20120220.013515
OS Android
Memory Page Size
Screen size 800 x 480
System Color Bits
System Colors
Min CPU Freq 216 MHz
Max CPU Freq 1000 MHz
====================
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 10:40 PM 0
10. FoneAddict
Posts: 263; Member since: Jul 05, 2011
Galaxy S3 performance wise is looking very tasty. I just hope Samsung do it justice by designing a premium looking device made of premium materials and not a generic plastic box. Come on Samsung you can do it!
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:56 AM 3
13. 8logic
Posts: 153; Member since: Mar 05, 2012
i like the plastic cause it keeps it super light!
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:03 AM 4
16. FoneAddict
Posts: 263; Member since: Jul 05, 2011
A phone can feel premium while still feeling light, for example Nokia and HTC use polycarbonate casing which feels solid yet is light. Samsung have the know how to produce similar things, or they can utilise ceramic materials as rumours indicate. Either way for a flagship product I think it's important for it to stand apart from mid and low tier Samsung phones.
It needs to shine alone!!
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:26 AM 5
11. hung2900
Posts: 966; Member since: Mar 02, 2012
I only trust 4 benchmark tests: Antutu, GL Benchmark, Browser Mark and SunSpider. not s**tty Quadrant and Linpack.
Exynos 4412: The return of the King!
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 3:58 AM 3
15. TylerGrunter
Posts: 1544; Member since: Feb 16, 2012
I must admit that I prefer Quadrant to Antutu, as the second one puts too much stress in the CPU performance. But that is just a personal preference.
But at the very minimum you should add Nenamark to your list of trustees!
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:08 AM 2
17. hung2900
Posts: 966; Member since: Mar 02, 2012
Nenamark is good, but it depends on the resolution and as a result, people are likely to have the mistake when seeing the benchmark.
GL Benchmark is perfect for not only on tab/phone but also on PC.
Quadrant is easy to be adjusted, so it's untruthful.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:28 AM 0
18. TylerGrunter
Posts: 1544; Member since: Feb 16, 2012
In my opinition, taking into account the resolution is the right thing to do. Nenamark at the end measures the final performance of the device and the user experince when using it, not merely the GPU performance.
Of course I admit that to compare GPUs GL Benchmark is better, but to compare devices Nenamark is OK too.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:42 AM 1
25. remixfa
Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008
quadrant is one of the most easily faked tests there are.. same with linpack.
if you do like to use quadrant, then you need to buy the pro version and take out the whole I/O section (i believe its the first big blue section off the top of my head) before you compare and contrast. Linpack is an I/O test as well. Both are useless and quite easily fluffed.
Antutu is great. Pair it with nenamark2 and you have CPU and GPU tests. Smartbench 2012 is also a good one.
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 6:57 AM 1
14. AhmadAlsayegh
Posts: 326; Member since: Jul 18, 2011
when did the iPhone become a benchmark?
I hate it when a company has the superior design and option, but decides to go with the lower option for the sake of getting more money! this really cripples and slows down the wheel of technology!
A15>A9 any day, and if the new galaxy comes with a quad A9, I would be really disappointed
posted on Apr 23, 2012, 4:06 AM 4
26. remixfa
Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008
Samsung themselves have said as far as CPU power goes, the quad A9 and dual A15 run about the same power. The only advantage the A15 has is a little better battery savings and the bigger GPU meant for large high res devices.
Of course, 5x the GPU power does sound a lot better than 50%.. :)
