Samsung Galaxy S III rumored to come at MWC 2012 with a quad-core chip, a Galaxy S 3D could also be in the making
posted by Victor H. / Dec 27, 2011, 4:52 AM
The next Samsung flagship, probably the Samsung Galaxy S III, has been rumored yet again to arrive at the Mobile World Congress (MWC) in February 2012, and expectations are that it will run on a quad-core processor. Previously, a leaked slide allegedly coming from Samsung stated that the device will feature a 1.8GHz dual-core processor.
This time, the news comes straight from Korean publication ETNews, and it suggests that Samsung has opted for a quad-core solution. The yet unofficial Exynos 4412, a 32nm quad-core Cortex A9 chip is one candidate rumors have been trying to tie up with the allegedly upcoming Galaxy S III. Other more unlikely options include the Exynos 5xxx lineup which includes such chips as the dual-core Cortex A15-based Exynos 5250. The problem with that is timing - the Koreans will only have the chip later in 2012.
Otherwise, here’s what we can expect from a Samsung Galaxy S III:
- big, possibly 4.6” HD (1280 x 720) Super AMOLED Plus display,
- LTE connectivity,
- Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich
- camera capable of capturing 1080p video, rumors say a 12MP shooter.
Other somewhat surprising news from the rumor mill is that Samsung is actively working on 3D. The technology didn’t really catch up widely with only two 3D phones released stateside - the HTC EVO 3D and the LG Thrill 4G. It’s not yet clear to what extent Samsung plans to integrate 3D, but ETNews says that it’s possible that the Koreans release a separate phone focusing on the feature - probably a Samsung Galaxy S 3D.
The name definitely makes sense as company’s Galaxy S lineup has been a huge success bringing over 30 million sold units in the couple of years it’s been on the market.
- Display 4.8" 720 x 1280 pixels
- Camera 8 MP / 1.9 MP front
- Processor Samsung Exynos 4 Quad, Quad-core, 1400 MHz
- Storage 32 GB + microSDXC
- Battery 2100 mAh(11.60h 3G talk time)
Posts: 507; Member since: Oct 07, 2011
hope it have the flexible OLED displays ! ^_^ FIRST :D
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 4:55 AM 7
Posts: 866; Member since: Jul 15, 2011
if the galaxy S III had a flexible screen, i won't buy. not yet standard enough http://www.concept-phones.com/samsung/samsung-galaxy-iii-fresh-design-specs-samsung-galaxy-tab-andromeda-tablet/ I made this one. :) i also gave my wanted specs here. take time to read. :) you can see my name there, lol.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 5:26 AM 5
Posts: 2; Member since: Sep 08, 2011
actually, the 5250 will almost definitely be powering the SGS3. Exynos 4210, aka Orion, was said to be scheduled for 1H 2011 mass production when the announcement came in late 2010. All was revealed in MWC when the SGSII was unveiled. It was later rolled out worldwide by June/July, exactly on schedule. The same thing is happening here. Announcement coming in late-2011, with the SGS3 as the release vehicle in Q2 2012. Now, you might be thinking, what about the 4212 and the 4412? Sadly I cannot answer this. However I want to make clear that the 5250, with dual-A15s will certainly perform better than quad-A9s. Samsung knows this. Being Sammy's flagship, the SGS3 will never be forced to settle for an inferior SoC, especially since OMAP 5 and NovaThor will be shipping by then. One will also note that the 4412 was never officially announced - and never will. It has no reason to exist. My theory is that the 4212 will go into a second-place Galaxy R II device. Lastly I advise Phonearena to do a little more research before publishing silly speculation in future articles.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 5:20 AM 7
Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008
the 4212 has plenty of reason to exist. there is more than just "ultra high end" and "cheap". Samsung has split the line into 4 different variants based on specs and pricing. The exynos 4210 dual core chip is about to be phased out for the 4212. The 4210 "may" be relegated to other companies.. but more than likely it will just fade away into chip heaven. The 5xxx series quads will be in the flagships like the S3, the dual cores will be in the sub flag ships.. maybe that 3D they were talking about.... and so on.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 9:37 AM 2
Posts: 2; Member since: Sep 08, 2011
Your reasoning is more or less sound. However I imagine having a 2-core flagship alongside a 4-core 2nd-place phone will only serve to confuse consumers. (case in point, wsker's comment below) Besides, why couldn't samsung just buy tegra 3 instead? What's the point of committing tons of resources to design a second-rate SoC? 4212 is understandable as it's only a die-shrink and clock boost. 4412 is not. Also I don't expect quad-A15s to be out next year. Maybe 2013... or a samsung nexus 4?
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 12:17 PM 0
Posts: 396; Member since: Nov 11, 2011
If the SGS3 is released with a 1.8 GHz quad-core Cortex A9, HTC and Motorola will undoubtedly destroy Samsung and be laughing all the way to the bank. Unfortunately Samsung's Galaxy S is their crown jewel, and since they can make a massive amount of hardware in house, from SoC to RAM and flash NAND, it'll probably have a dual core Cortex A15 and postively destroy any Cortex A9 SoC and also probably edge out the Snapdragon S4.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 5:27 AM 3
Posts: 24; Member since: Dec 02, 2011
Dual-core = FAIL. Samsung has to be on the top by lifting up to quads ;), Quad-core = Me buying it :)
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 5:36 AM 5
Posts: 733; Member since: Oct 13, 2011
no matter how superior these galaxy s phones are than others, i still wont buy any samsung products.. they have great specs and at the same time poorest quality..
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 6:28 AM 6
Posts: 102; Member since: Oct 20, 2011
What's ur definition of quality?
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 6:56 AM 8
Posts: 2014; Member since: May 03, 2011
samsung galaxy s phones are some of the most durable material..just cause its plastic does not mean its not good quality...be;ieve it or not the military uses plastic alot so if its good for the military,plastic cant be that bad...my definition of build quality extends to how its put to together ie screws,if theres any squeaky areas,gaps etc etc and the gs2 international version has no issues like that...every complains about the ''flimsy'' back and people dont realise that its very flexible and is very hard to break....what i consider bad build is example a few of the new htc devices,due to the way the back cover is the shell of the phone,you can actually push the screen in,also the fact that most of the antenna plates are on the back aluminium plate,can cause antenna issues and now thats what i call bad quality...i think theres a big difference between poor build quality and feel of the phone...feel of the phone is subjective,some like the light feel and warm feel of plastic where as others like the feel of a heavier phone and the cold feel of the aluminium..theres nothing wrong with what you prefer but i dont think we should confuse biuld quality with the feel of a phone...and yes am sure samsung use cheap plastic for there low model devices bit i would guess they use good quality plastic for there flagship devices lol shock yes there is a poor and good quality plastic.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 10:36 AM 3
Posts: 1319; Member since: Oct 07, 2011
I was never a Samsung fan but after owning my GT10.1 and now my Galaxy Nexus, i'm hooked. I owned the OG Droid, the DX, the Thunderbolt and I used to buy all HTC WinMo phones but I have been 100% converted to Samsung. Don't know what you're talking about when you say poorest quality...
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 11:06 AM 3
Posts: 1732; Member since: Feb 10, 2009
I actually had a samsung omnia and actually still have it in my room for a mp3 player and if it was not for the fact it has a resistive touch screen I would have used it a lot longer. It was Verizon's better phones but as with the galaxy nexus Verizon really does not advertise any samsung products that much and I think that's weird
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 3:30 PM 0
Posts: 6; Member since: Dec 27, 2011
totally agree. Every time I consider a Samsung smartphone, I lift it up and its feel ultra-cheap. Regardless of the tech specs, it does not feel substantial like HTC or Moto phones. I don't mind thin and lightweight but at what cost??? I need some metal, aluminum, gorilla glass, etc.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 8:44 PM 0
Posts: 403; Member since: Sep 21, 2011
The scariest news for Apple. Come on sammy!!!!
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 6:43 AM 11
Posts: 614; Member since: Dec 09, 2009
Cheap hardware, poor reception, clumsy OS, unweildly size and short battery life. Which on of these is scary?? Just another cheap Korean crapware phone.
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 7:33 AM 3
Posts: 1319; Member since: Oct 07, 2011
Dude, what happened to you? You used to make (somewhat) quality comments. Now you are just a complete troll... I miss the c.hack that actually made sense half the time. We never agreed, but that's OK. Now you are practically The_Miz 2.0
posted on Dec 27, 2011, 11:08 AM 2
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):