Database Users

galaxy tab vs galaxy s

So I just bought my girl a G2, and I am waiting for the tab. I was very impressed with teh speed of the g2 and its perfomance in all games. I was really wondering since the galaxy s scored even below the nexus one with 2.2 on it in a benchmarking review. how do you think the tab will do?
Everything seems to be the same from the galaxy s to the tab... so does anyone expect the tablet to perform slower than say the g2? Or what about aleast better than the Galaxy s?
Also is the chipset in the tab the same as the one in the galaxy s? Or are their minor differences?

I can assure you that the galaxy tab will be plenty fast on 2.2 I have a samsung galaxy s (captivate) running 2.2 and I never have lag you cannot compare the galaxy s series though quadrant scores as that benchmark is biased to the snap dragon processor which the galaxy s does not run on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

laxwillsch said:
I can assure you that the galaxy tab will be plenty fast on 2.2 I have a samsung galaxy s (captivate) running 2.2 and I never have lag you cannot compare the galaxy s series though quadrant scores as that benchmark is biased to the snap dragon processor which the galaxy s does not run on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant scores dont count for everything, and its hardly biased, snapdragon does better at the I/O tests more than anything. My Desire on a myTouch 4G port is quicker than stock Android roms according to quadrant.
Make sense of that
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App

laxwillsch said:
I can assure you that the galaxy tab will be plenty fast on 2.2 I have a samsung galaxy s (captivate) running 2.2 and I never have lag you cannot compare the galaxy s series though quadrant scores as that benchmark is biased to the snap dragon processor which the galaxy s does not run on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol, No it's not.
Stock vs Stock The G2 beat the Galaxy S at every bench mark I've put on them
(5 total) except CPU benchmark and those scores were 812 for the G2 vs 799 on the Galaxy S ( lower the better )

The g2 has the latest snapdragon, it will be a little faster than the galaxy s in cpu benchmarks once overclocked. This is what happens when google coded froyo optimization's for only one cpu type, before that we kicked snapdragon ass
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

siberslug said:
lol, No it's not.
Stock vs Stock The G2 beat the Galaxy S at every bench mark I've put on them
(5 total) except CPU benchmark and those scores were 812 for the G2 vs 799 on the Galaxy S ( lower the better )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
JIT.
RFS.
go read up on those before you go around correcting people on what's better than what. Benchmarks don't mean a thing. There's a reason why people like Cyanogen don't trust them.

It's kinda hard or weird (or pointless) to compare SGS and Tab CPU and GPU wise, since they both have THE EXACT SAME HARDWARE as long as those are concerned... They both run on the Samsung-built 1GHz Hummingbird chip (that includes the PowerVR GPU). So as long as only CPU/GPU are benchmarked, hardware-wise the SGS and Tab are identical.
Now, comparing those two on a general level makes more sense as they are bound to have small software differences. (At least my Tab does not have the 'SGS-lag' present at all and generally feels smoother to operate)
tl;dr: Basically Galaxy Tab = SGS with different screen, no real point comparing these two extensively

But they must have done a lot of tweaking on the tab that has yet to be ported to the S(if it ever does....).
Seriously, the Tab is smooth as silk, runs like you'd want and as we all know, essentially the same hardware, 2.2 and even RFS.
Also, benchmarks are worthless. My Galaxy S, with Docs JPO 7.5 ROM, ULF ext4 lagfix (no overkill here, not a score whore) gets around 1500 on quadthingy. My Tab, stock, gets around 900-1000. Yet the Tab is sooo much smoother, even with all my tweaks on the S. linpack is pretty much the same (as you'd expect) and I can't be bothered after that.
The only test that matters, usability, favours the Tab.
If I could get the stock Tab rom/fw/whatever onto my S, I'd be a happy camper.
That and a decent browser (dolphin doesn't do it for me either, just don't like it, gotta try the firefox alpha/beta/whatever)

I think the galaxy tab gpu is clocked at higher speed than the s,using neocore it gives same fbs as. Galaxy s although tab has higher resolution and also tab is announced with 1080p playback while galaxy s is anounced with 720 p correct if im wrong

Both equally good. If size does matter, big and small screen, your choice. For me, tab is best.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App

tab performs significantly worse as it has a bigger screen to power + more pixels.
But the tab 8.9 and sgs 2 (dual cores) will be a good match!

spekesel said:
But they must have done a lot of tweaking on the tab that has yet to be ported to the S(if it ever does....).
Seriously, the Tab is smooth as silk, runs like you'd want and as we all know, essentially the same hardware, 2.2 and even RFS.
Also, benchmarks are worthless. My Galaxy S, with Docs JPO 7.5 ROM, ULF ext4 lagfix (no overkill here, not a score whore) gets around 1500 on quadthingy. My Tab, stock, gets around 900-1000. Yet the Tab is sooo much smoother, even with all my tweaks on the S. linpack is pretty much the same (as you'd expect) and I can't be bothered after that.
The only test that matters, usability, favours the Tab.
If I could get the stock Tab rom/fw/whatever onto my S, I'd be a happy camper.
That and a decent browser (dolphin doesn't do it for me either, just don't like it, gotta try the firefox alpha/beta/whatever)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my tab isnt smooth at all!

I preffer sgs.

Samsung Galaxy Z unveiled: Tegra 2, 4.2-inch SC-LCD

I think this is the Tegra version known as i9101 or i9103?
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_z_appears_in_sweden_tegra_2_42inch_sclcd-news-2838.php

Wow, that's an Iphone replica Just kidding. Still voting for my lovely yellow tinted SII

You can see a quick preview here :
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9103_galaxy_z-review-614.php
I wanted to buy a galaxy s but now i'm hesitating

This is going to smother the LG O2X. Samsung plans on controlling the market for high end androids and it looks like its going to succeed by having a galaxy at every possible pricepoint.

Why would you hesitate as its not as good as the s2, dual 1ghz, 720p recording, no s-amoled screen and 8gb storage seems to be a more entry level version than anything else.

Tegra 2 beats Exynos once all the variables are similar.
~4000 quadrant stock and still clocked lower.
LOL

KingKuba13 said:
Tegra 2 beats Exynos once all the variables are similar.
~4000 quadrant stock and still clocked lower.
LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, take that with a grain of salt, why is Galaxy Z 50% faster in quadrant than LG O2X using the same platform?

It looks more like a face-lifted Galaxy S than a SGS2 variant.

tjtj4444 said:
well, take that with a grain of salt, why is Galaxy Z 50% faster in quadrant than LG O2X using the same platform?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Twice the RAM than O2X for one and probably clocked to 1.2ghz (1ghz O2X).

This is the baby version of s2.

was this the rumoured sgs3 ?

AvRS said:
Why would you hesitate as its not as good as the s2, dual 1ghz, 720p recording, no s-amoled screen and 8gb storage seems to be a more entry level version than anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 2 clocks higher (faster clock vs clock), more optimized applications, other Tegra 2 devices are recording in 1080p (so that would come in later update/mod), Super LCD is just as good if not better than Super AMOLED+ w/ no yellowing/uneven colors with better color accuracy (also it is a 24-bit screen vs 16).

AvRS said:
Why would you hesitate as its not as good as the s2, dual 1ghz, 720p recording, no s-amoled screen and 8gb storage seems to be a more entry level version than anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If Tegra2 is entry level then damn we've come a long way in the past few months I know what you mean though. I'm a geek so it's no choice in my mind either, I'd still have bought the S2 if these two devices were released together. But if this is priced nicely it could reach a whole other group of consumers that the S2 was too rich for.

Hollow.Droid said:
1 I'd still have bought the S2 if these two devices were released together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
The SGSZ also doesn't appear to have HDMI, Wi-Fi Direct, USB2G, and Bluetooth 3.0. Let's hope it doesn't have the SGS1 GPS chip.

KingKuba13 said:
Tegra 2 beats Exynos once all the variables are similar.
~4000 quadrant stock and still clocked lower.
LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This means absolutely nothing. SGS2 can't go higher than 60fps, after all that's the screen refresh rate so anything higher is just a waste of battery. Now you might want to ask yourself why Tegra 2's fps limit is higher. Nvidia have been in the game a long time, they know how to cheat in benchmarks.
Besides you should compare benchmarks that pushes these phones, Quadrant is very flawed and afaik not even multithreaded. I managed to score 1700 with my old Legend with a 600 MHz ARMv11 CPU clocked to 786 and data2ext hack.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App

quadrant standard isnt the best way to decide on the speed. Even some of our own rom devs for the s2 can cook a hack into the rom. I have already benched in the 4000's on the old lite'ning rom. Its not hard. BTW, tegra is nice and all because im an nvidia fan, but it is not better if you ask me-maybe once properly optimized it will be better for gaming, but i couldnt care less about ps1 graphics on a phone.
Rex-tc! im surprised to see you here! You tried your best to defend the atrix yet you post here!!! Coming over to the darkside i c

Wrong naming schema. Should be Galaxy S2 - Lite

rd_nest said:
Wrong naming schema. Should be Galaxy S2 - Lite
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or HiPhone 5

Sp1tfire said:
Or HiPhone 5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to break the myth, it already exists

It's no GS2.

which is better ((galaxy S)) OR ((S plus)) OR ((SL))

which is better ((galaxy S)) OR ((S plus)) OR ((SL)) ??

fathyazhary said:
which is better ((galaxy S)) OR ((S plus)) OR ((SL)) ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you want good community support and planty of xda activity Galaxy S is unbeatable.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

I9000 of course

I9001 > I9000 > I9003
Personally like I9000.....

If you are into Modding and flashing, then go for S. If you want performance go with S+. If you want the phone to cost less ,choose SL.
Sent from my Galaxy S running MIUI ICS!

The original Samsung Galaxy S i9000.
i9000 (PowerVR SGX540) > i9001 (Adreno 205) > i9003 (PowerVR SGX530).

Galaxy s. As said, better community, more stuff and custom roms

SGS i9001 (the quallcomm one) is supposed to be faster - i think i 've read somewhere that it's based on a single fast memory chip and don't have i9000's lag problem. i9003 is the worse than both.

Why don't u even consider the galaxy r in ur list ???

From the choices given, i9000 is still MUCH better than the Plus and SL version.
Just exclude the SL from that list because its ... frankly ... Teh ****zz from company. A lame attempt to sell the name "Galaxy" i.e. Their Flagship Device.
Galaxy S Plus has a faster CPU. It'll be a better performer in day to day tasks than i9000.
However, i9000 is still has a better hardware OVERALL. Becaues it also has a better GPU i.e. SGX540. While rest of the specs are same as Plus version.
Conclusion: From the above given choices, choose the i9000.
BUT ... If you can consider other options say Galaxy R, look into it as well. (If you can live without a SuperAMOLED display ... well, i cant )

i9001 is better, but no one making roms for it.

no
no..i9000 is way better than i9001

inozako said:
no..i9000 is way better than i9001
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you just compare hardware i9001 is of course better, but the Android community of i9000 is awesome, so it is just a matter of taste

yaya, this is what i meant, cause there are more custom roms out there..

Galaxy S in terms of support of course

specs-wise= sgs+
short on $$$= sgsl
dev support=sgs
you choose.

aakaashjois said:
If you are into Modding and flashing, then go for S. If you want performance go with S+. If you want the phone to cost less ,choose SL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly what I wanted to write I still prefer I9000 S cause it was my first phone but the S+ is a beast

I9003 is highest but I love my I9000!

S and S+ rocks
I personally have a Galaxy S , with its CPU at 1.3Ghz , more or less equalling CPU performance with the S Plus.
They would have done better if they had given the S+ with 1.4Ghz CPU + PowerVR SGX540 , that would really be killer. When I bought my S , it was priced at 22k INR and the SL was 18k . The SL was much laggier in general operation, but thats debatable cause the S was using 2.3.3 , whereas the SL was 2.2.1 . I saw the S+ too , 24k , was more or less same in performance with the S.
I went with the S due to much higher GPU performance, with value pack XXJW4 , Semaphore 2.7.4sc , 1.3GHz CPU i get 33.2fps in Nenamark2 , with 1Ghz , i get 32.8fps

I9000 as it has more support
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda app-developers app

Exynos 5450!!!

The next Galaxy S4 will sport the new Samsung Exynos 5450 processor: Quad [email protected] with the latest Mali GPU...so guys expect the next Galaxy Note 3 with something similar like 2.5GHz Quad Core and Mali T6XX GPU...i dont care i will get it next year...
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...-5-inch-display-exynos-5450-processor-126575/

yoniinfante said:
The next Galaxy S4 will sport the new Samsung Exynos 5450 processor: Quad [email protected] with the latest Mali GPU...so guys expect the next Galaxy Note 3 with something similar like 2.5GHz Quad Core and Mali T6XX GPU...i dont care i will get it next year...
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...-5-inch-display-exynos-5450-processor-126575/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If production starts end of this year, it will never make it by march. Most likely it will have the Exynos 5250 (Exynos 5 Dual) dual core 32nm 2.0Ghz. And you gotta understand Samsung's Galaxy S team is like the A-Team, and everything is secondary. So Most likely the 5450 won't be on the Galaxy Note 3 either. It will just have an overclocked 5250.
So if you're saying you're going to wait for the Galaxy Note 3, by then Galaxy Note 4 will be around the corner when the Galaxy Note 3 is available. Don't really understand the logic. There will be something always better in a few months. What's the point of waiting for a device based on speculation?

I understand, But, i dont think Samsung is gonna downgrade on their Flagship smartphones...we just need to wait and see....

i dont get the logic of some people, why do you always have to get the latest and greatest? is there's a hole in your life that this gadget will fulfill? the Note 2 is crazy smooth and fast, why do you really need a 1080P 5" screen that i bet you wont notice the difference and hardware that doesn't has software to take advantage of?

if it wont give better battery life, then i dont care to be honest. Performance note 2 has more than enough. With more software optimization, note 2 would be even faster than now.

yoniinfante said:
The next Galaxy S4 will sport the new Samsung Exynos 5450 processor: Quad [email protected] with the latest Mali GPU...so guys expect the next Galaxy Note 3 with something similar like 2.5GHz Quad Core and Mali T6XX GPU...i dont care i will get it next year...
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...-5-inch-display-exynos-5450-processor-126575/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OOOH Now we are talking....

for sure :silly:

those are some awesome specs. glad my note 2 will at least last 2 to 3 more years. just like my q6600 + 9600GT which is perfect even after 4 years lol

Finally samsung will have a phone as fast as galaxy nexus.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium

There needs to be significant improvement (or something wrong with my current phone) in order for me to "upgrade".
That's why I said MEH when I saw the SGS3, but decided to upgrade when I saw the SGN2. I have an Android phone, not an Apple... I don't need to buy the latest iteration of my phone to feel special.

You don't need the latest apple product to feel special. I still have my iphone 4 running just fine though i think this is a bit offtopic.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app

Forget about updating. Why am I sticking with Samsung for this long? It's AMOLED! Note 2 is one of those adorable babies, and not many I had, yet I owned plenty. Other must mentions are (were),SE P910i, Xperia X1, BB Bold 9000, iPhone 4S, Samsung Wave S8500 and GS II. And now, this one.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

Next time in upgrading is for the note 3
Sent from my Note Dos (;

I'll most likely upgrade to the note 3 next year when it hits if my finances allow it.
That is unless it has less battery life than my current note 2.
Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2

[Q] snapdragon 600 x exynos 5

hi friends, i have a i9500, but i have a question that is boring me:
when i bought the i9500 i tought that it has a better cpu than i9505, but after that, i run some tests in antutu, 3dmark, quadrant and i realize that snapdragon 600 is better than the exynos 5... why? everyone said in reviews that the A15 cores from exynos is better than the snapdragon 600...
well, in older antutu i made 28000, but now, in the new one, i never passed from 25500...
in quadrant, i made 13400
in 3dmark 9900...
i saw here in xda some users with i9505 making 29000 in the new antutu and more than 10000 in 3dmark... why is this happening?
thanks!

Hello
I noticed that too. I had 25000 with old Antutu, and the newest I have 29132. I think it's a marketing thing or something. This happend for me when I bought my Galaxy Nexus. I had to choose between Nexus and Galaxy S2. In Antutu nexus was better than the S2, but after 2 months the S2 got almost twice the score of Nexus. I think you shouldn't really care about these scores , they are not always right
Sent from my GT-I9505 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

popab said:
Hello
I noticed that too. I had 25000 with old Antutu, and the newest I have 29132. I think it's a marketing thing or something. This happend for me when I bought my Galaxy Nexus. I had to choose between Nexus and Galaxy S2. In Antutu nexus was better than the S2, but after 2 months the S2 got almost twice the score of Nexus. I think you shouldn't really care about these scores , they are not always right
Sent from my GT-I9505 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes friend, i noticed that, looks like the scores were inverted. btw, i like the i9500 performance, but i expected more... i came from a i9300.