Samsung 'G906S' appears in benchmark results with 1440p display, Snapdragon 805
The article can be read here.
http://m.androidcentral.com/samsung-g906s-phone-appears-benchmark-results-1440p-display
Looks like this could be a beastly variant of the s5. Thoughts?
Sent from my SCH-I545 using xda app-developers app
Could be very possible, or it could be faked.
what i am intrigued about is, has there ever been a different variant of a flagship device with differences such as camera and screen size?
Could it maybe be a different line of product like maybe galaxy round 2 or something? :S
There was a benchmark a couple months ago for SM-900S with a 5.2in QHD display, 3GB, Snapdragon 805, etc...so I'm not holding my breath over this latest "benchmark".
I think it' fake. The score is too low.
Sent from my GT-I9500
S as in Android Silver edition? A reason why we haven't heard anything about the GPE S5? Just throwing that out there
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
dragon135 said:
I think it' fake. The score is too low.
Sent from my GT-I9500
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcomm only just started sampling the 805 chips, so it's only fair that benchmark scores are low. I think it's real, far too many indications were out there for months, and several SM-G900 leaks turned out to be accurate. The reason for no confirmation of the SM-G906 is because, in my view, Samsung is holding out for higher QHD yield and the SD805/A420 to support the high resolution. Hence no announcement just yet. Also, because the S5 was announced earlier than S-series before, there's a larger time gap between the year's top phone and phablet, where the premium series could fit just in, around May or June. It all makes sense.
BoneXDA said:
Qualcomm only just started sampling the 805 chips, so it's only fair that benchmark scores are low. I think it's real, far too many indications were out there for months, and several SM-G900 leaks turned out to be accurate. The reason for no confirmation of the SM-G906 is because, in my view, Samsung is holding out for higher QHD yield and the SD805/A420 to support the high resolution. Hence no announcement just yet. Also, because the S5 was announced earlier than S-series before, there's a larger time gap between the year's top phone and phablet, where the premium series could fit just in, around May or June. It all makes sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it doesn't. If QC is just sampling them now, you think their mass production will be ready by may or june?
degast said:
Actually it doesn't. If QC is just sampling them now, you think their mass production will be ready by may or june?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see why not, if Samsung, Nokia etc. got their hands on the 805 samples in March, that leaves them 4 months until a June launch to get drivers ready, plenty of time. Early QHD benchmarks ran on SD800 and only recently the SD805 popped up, indicating Sammy got the samples in the past couple of weeks, and they are already running the benchmarks so drivers are in a healthy state.
BoneXDA said:
I don't see why not, if Samsung, Nokia etc. got their hands on the 805 samples in March, that leaves them 4 months until a June launch to get drivers ready, plenty of time. Early QHD benchmarks ran on SD800 and only recently the SD805 popped up, indicating Sammy got the samples in the past couple of weeks, and they are already running the benchmarks so drivers are in a healthy state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At any rate, I don't see why they would just want to create a QHD screen, that brings literally no improvement over the current displays, it just brings disadvantages (more battery use, more CPU/GPU intensive,...). It would be better for them to improve other statistics of the phone.
E.g.: keep 1080p display and soon the 3Dmark benchmarks will run at 60fps with newer SoCs.
Look at it this way: the S5 with Sn-801 SoC will run just as performant as the S5(+?) with Sn-805, and that all because of a screen that draws 60% more power but looks the same.
degast said:
At any rate, I don't see why they would just want to create a QHD screen, that brings literally no improvement over the current displays, it just brings disadvantages (more battery use, more CPU/GPU intensive,...). It would be better for them to improve other statistics of the phone.
E.g.: keep 1080p display and soon the 3Dmark benchmarks will run at 60fps with newer SoCs.
Look at it this way: the S5 with Sn-801 SoC will run just as performant as the S5(+?) with Sn-805, and that all because of a screen that draws 60% more power but looks the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I'm not all that excited about a QHD screen on a ~5"ish screen, ppl. comparing the Oppo Find 7's QHD phablet screen to a Note 3' 1080p did say it's sharper and text is easier, smoother to read. Besides, contrary to logic, there is no correlation between screen resolution and battery drain, the Galaxy S4's, Note 3's and G2's larger-than-predecessor FHD screens are each more efficient than the S3's Note 3's and Optimus G's 720p. So there is no battery disadvantage.
BoneXDA said:
While I'm not all that excited about a QHD screen on a ~5"ish screen, ppl. comparing the Oppo Find 7's QHD phablet screen to a Note 3' 1080p did say it's sharper and text is easier, smoother to read. Besides, contrary to logic, there is no correlation between screen resolution and battery drain, the Galaxy S4's, Note 3's and G2's larger-than-predecessor FHD screens are each more efficient than the S3's Note 3's and Optimus G's 720p. So there is no battery disadvantage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a big (read huge) battery difference:
1080p screen: 2.073.600 pixels
QHD screen: 3.686.400 pixels
In other words 78% more pixels.
And you are saying that doesn't drain more battery?
degast said:
There is a big (read huge) battery difference:
1080p screen: 2.073.600 pixels
QHD screen: 3.686.400 pixels
In other words 78% more pixels.
And you are saying that doesn't drain more battery?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've already said that the larger / higher pixel count S4 / N3 / G2 screen is more efficient than the S3 / N2 / OptG, that's cause the screen area didn't change much (more pixels needing less light to bright it up), while energy saving improved faster than resolution. Which is why the S5 AMOLED is larger, brighter AND more efficient than the S4, which is larger, brighter, higher res AND more efficient than the S3's, which is larger, brighter, higher res AND more efficient than the S2.
So yeah, there is no direct correlation between resolution and battery drainage increase. Whatever effect it may have power saving technology is advancing faster. A QHD AMOLED should do just fine.
BoneXDA said:
I've already said that the larger / higher pixel count S4 / N3 / G2 screen is more efficient than the S3 / N2 / OptG, that's cause the screen area didn't change much (more pixels needing less light to bright it up), while energy saving improved faster than resolution. Which is why the S5 AMOLED is larger, brighter AND more efficient than the S4, which is larger, brighter, higher res AND more efficient than the S3's, which is larger, brighter, higher res AND more efficient than the S2.
So yeah, there is no direct correlation between resolution and battery drainage increase. Whatever effect it may have power saving technology is advancing faster. A QHD AMOLED should do just fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Until battery tests show up, I'm not going to discuss it anymore, but you will find that it will require a lot more CPU/GPU power to deliver similar quality compared to current devices.
degast said:
Until battery tests show up, I'm not going to discuss it anymore, but you will find that it will require a lot more CPU/GPU power to deliver similar quality compared to current devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No need to discuss, I've already told you how it's so. Each year Samsung increased screen size and pixel count (S5 not counting, but it's far better than the S4), and decreased power consumption. They know what they are doing mate, see video playback hours (least CPU intensive screen-on test).
BoneXDA said:
No need to discuss, I've already told you how it's so. Each year Samsung increased screen size and pixel count (S5 not counting, but it's far better than the S4), and decreased power consumption. They know what they are doing mate, see video playback hours (least CPU intensive screen-on test).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still, it's going to require more GPU ticks to give a similar performance than on lower pixel devices.
It's fake. No point in arguing/debating over a fake benchmark. Move along folks. Nothing to see here.
degast said:
Still, it's going to require more GPU ticks to give a similar performance than on lower pixel devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anywhere but heavy gaming it won't show, Adreno is efficient in 2D tasks. Gaming will be affected, but the S5 posted some of the best gaming battery results. Trust me on this, if it comes, and surely with 3000mAh at least, the phone will have similarly good endurance as the latest Sammies.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
There is most definitely a difference in battery life with a bigger screen. You are comparing apples to oranges by comparing last year's models battery life to this year's. What you should be thinking about is would the battery life be affected in the s4 if it was the same specs with an qhd v hd screen? Of course it would, both the processor and the gpu have work harder to power the extra pixels. What would be way cooler would be instead of wasting a years worth of efficiency gains on screen resolution, use those gains for improved performance and battery life. I think those specs are soon going to be the spec war targets.
Sent from my LG-D801 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
[
QUOTE=djdurban;51669376]There is most definitely a difference in battery life with a bigger screen. You are comparing apples to oranges by comparing last year's models battery life to this year's. What you should be thinking about is would the battery life be affected in the s4 if it was the same specs with an qhd v hd screen? Of course it would, both the processor and the gpu have work harder to power the extra pixels. What would be way cooler would be instead of wasting a years worth of efficiency gains on screen resolution, use those gains for improved performance and battery life. I think those specs are soon going to be the spec war targets.
Sent from my LG-D801 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app[/QUOTE]
Seriously?dont even look at other phones just look at note 3 and yet the s5 outlasts it that means everything,
I don't think so... Maybe that spects will be realeased about Q3/Q4 2014, with the Note 4 (with bigger display of course), LG G3 or Nexus 6.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 N9005 using xda app-developers app
Related
I'm trying to understand how a G2 that uses the same Snapdragon 800 and Adreno 330 could be faster than Nexus5.
Is seems that G2 is faster than N5.
Ridiculusly there are many test where Galaxy S4 beats N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3uZdVsND1E&feature=youtube_gdata_player
GS4 runs on a Snapdragon 600, how can be faster than N5?
Not sure why you are comparing benchmarks on phones http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/
The only thing I care is real world performance and thermal throttling.
How is it running Real Racing 3 and other super-demanding games?
& this is why benchmarks are pure BS.
Here is a more realistic comparison in speed between the Galaxy S4 & the N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-F6bJ218Bc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4
ste1164 said:
Not sure why you are comparing benchmarks on phones http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very funny, I lost that article.
Android manufacturers are known to optimize for specific benchmarks, Anandtech did an article on this. I will only trust real world performance and analysis by reputable tech sites like AT.
sblantipodi said:
I'm trying to understand how a G2 that uses the same Snapdragon 800 and Adreno 330 could be faster than Nexus5.
Is seems that G2 is faster than N5.
Ridiculusly there are many test where Galaxy S4 beats N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3uZdVsND1E&feature=youtube_gdata_player
GS4 runs on a Snapdragon 600, how can be faster than N5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google has always throttled their devices. So when you push it to the extremes in benchmarks for 5 min straight it throttles back the CPU therefore giving a lower score. Like said real world performance is what matters.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Even a 'cheating' S600 phones shouldnt be near an S800 phone. The N5 does seem to have very aggressive throttling indeed, indeed my HTC One beats my N5 in just about all benchmarks. Something im sure the devs will fix soon enough.
ChrisM75 said:
Even a 'cheating' S600 phones shouldnt be near an S800 phone. The N5 does seem to have very aggressive throttling indeed, indeed my HTC One beats my N5 in just about all benchmarks. Something im sure the devs will fix soon enough.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't have any throttling at all.
They just don't play the benchmark game like OEMs do.
The N5 is noticeably faster than an S4 in all tasks yet the S4 scores higher on Antutu for example.
benchmark apps are pure BS.
Which is better - having the fastest smoothest phone available or being slower at everything yet scoring higher on a benchmark app?
People need to get their priorities right.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4
chrisjcks said:
It doesn't have any throttling at all.
They just don't play the benchmark game like OEMs do.
The N5 is noticeably faster than an S4 in all tasks yet the S4 scores higher on Antutu for example.
benchmark apps are pure BS.
Which is better - having the fastest smoothest phone available or being slower at everything yet scoring higher on a benchmark app?
People need to get their priorities right.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ALL phones have thermal throttling, thats not up for debate, what is up for debate is how aggressively they set the limits.
What many here fail to realise is that the 'cheating' that goes on is just thermal management tricks, nothing more than that. Samsung and the others have programs that detect benchmarks launching, and then set the thermal management to very light limits. In the case of the S4 they clock the GPU to the maximum rated limit and dont throttle it down (533MHz), whereas its normally limited to 480 for thermal management reasons. 533 is not an overclock, 480 is an underclock.
An N5 should be faster than an S4 even if the S4 is at 533, so either Google is heavily throttling the N5, or its got some serious optimisation work to do.
Benchmarks mean fcuk all and too be honest if that's all the op cares about them the nexus ain't for him.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
ChrisM75 said:
ALL phones have thermal throttling, thats not up for debate, what is up for debate is how aggressively they set the limits.
What many here fail to realise is that the 'cheating' that goes on is just thermal management tricks, nothing more than that. Samsung and the others have programs that detect benchmarks launching, and then set the thermal management to very light limits. In the case of the S4 they clock the GPU to the maximum rated limit and dont throttle it down (533MHz), whereas its normally limited to 480 for thermal management reasons. 533 is not an overclock, 480 is an underclock.
An N5 should be faster than an S4 even if the S4 is at 533, so either Google is heavily throttling the N5, or its got some serious optimisation work to do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again - look at the video link I posted above against the S4.
Which is better - faster phone throughout or a nice pretty score in a free benchmark app?
When will people learn - these apps are absolute junk and in No Way do they reflect the speed of the device or the power of the internals inside.
It seriously sounds like you'd accept a slower less powerful phone as long as it scored higher on the pretty charts in these apps.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Anandtech pointed out that OEMs like Samsung boost CPU & GPU clocks during benchmarks, that's why you get higher numbers.
For Gods sake, it's the same SoC.
sblantipodi said:
I'm trying to understand how a G2 that uses the same Snapdragon 800 and Adreno 330 could be faster than Nexus5.
Is seems that G2 is faster than N5.
Ridiculusly there are many test where Galaxy S4 beats N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3uZdVsND1E&feature=youtube_gdata_player
GS4 runs on a Snapdragon 600, how can be faster than N5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus 5 is absolutely faster than Galaxy S4 in real life usage, no doubt about it. When it comes to G2 its more even between the two.
chrisjcks said:
Again - look at the video link I posted above against the S4.
Which is better - faster phone throughout or a nice pretty score in a free benchmark app?
When will people learn - these apps are absolute junk and in No Way do they reflect the speed of the device or the power of the internals inside.
It seriously sounds like you'd accept a slower less powerful phone as long as it scored higher on the pretty charts in these apps.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not what I said. Read again..
SOME benchmarks are purely about number crunching and the fact is the S800 should wipe the floor with the S600, if its not, something is going on.
While it doesnt matter if the device is smooth in real world usage it still points to the fact that the software needs a lot of optimisation to be done yet.
ChrisM75 said:
Thats not what I said. Read again..
SOME benchmarks are purely about number crunching and the fact is the S800 should wipe the floor with the S600, if its not, something is going on.
While it doesnt matter if the device is smooth in real world usage it still points to the fact that the software needs a lot of optimisation to be done yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not just about smoothness.
Go look at some comparisons of the N5 vs Galaxy S4.
N5 is faster at booting, browsing speed, smoothness, speed of loading of apps, gaming frame rates & loading speeds - basically EVERYTHING!
so you either believe the benchmark app or the actual speeds of the devices.
Simply put - you'd prefer a slower phone so long as it scores higher in these apps.
If you want one of these s600 phones like the S4 & ONE - go & get one! - but don't expect anything to be faster than the N5 just because these free benchmarking apps tell you so.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4
You should change the title. " Galaxy S4 and G2 are faster than G2 "
Lol.
This is the Nexus 4 performance discussion all over again.
Other Manufacturers use specific Dalvic patches that grearly improve performance in benchmarks.
If you really want to compare performance of the SoC use something like Geekbench that runs native
code and not ontop of the Dalvic Virtual Maschine.
---------- Post added at 06:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:46 PM ----------
aletto said:
You should change the title. " Galaxy S4 and G2 are faster than G2 "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It should be changed to "Galaxy S4 and G2 perform better then the N5 in useless Benchmarks that don't reflect real world performance"
The only thing obvious from the video comparing the N5 to the G2 is the on screen black levels.
Blacks seem blacker on the G2 in menus and in game, the N5's blacks are grayer.
Google doesn't seem to be interested in calibrating their Nexus line screens
Why does my golden retriever outperform my cat in the fishing dead ducks out of the pond test?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
http://m.gsmarena.com/lg_nexus_5-review-1011.php
This includes battery results , display labor results , camera results
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Short summary:
Poor battery
Poor Contrast
They confirm that g2 is using an other panel
Numbers make no sense when compared to the LG G2. The LG G2 gets twice the battery life with a battery that is only 30% larger? Apparently LG's software is RIDICULOUSLY efficient. . . .
muyoso said:
Numbers make no sense when compared to the LG G2. The LG G2 gets twice the battery life with a battery that is only 30% larger? Apparently LG's software is RIDICULOUSLY efficient. . . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it does seem rather strange, isn't 4.4 meant to be more efficient in general as well? This should close the gap not increase it!
muyoso said:
Numbers make no sense when compared to the LG G2. The LG G2 gets twice the battery life with a battery that is only 30% larger? Apparently LG's software is RIDICULOUSLY efficient. . . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take a more efficient screen into the account (the G2's LCDD posts VERY impressive power results), less throttling and some alternatives to Google services. Nexus battery life always sucked on stock, something is up with Google services, they are unoptimized or some ****. Nothing surprising here really.
BoneXDA said:
Take a more efficient screen into the account (the G2's LCDD posts VERY impressive power results), less throttling and some alternatives to Google services. Nexus battery life always sucked on stock, something is up with Google services, they are unoptimized or some ****. Nothing surprising here really.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Almost none of that is relevant for the call time test. I just don't get how the G2 with a 30% higher battery can have double the call time.
muyoso said:
Almost none of that is relevant for the call time test. I just don't get how the G2 with a 30% higher battery can have double the call time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are lot of variables. What goes on in the background, how much resources the dial app takes and what services it starts, how hot the phone gets during call, powering the microphones and speaker - and then there's reception. I trust GSM Arena does the test at the same place, so if the Nexus 5's antenna isn't as good at getting signal as the G2 for whatever reason (different module, different construction, different placement etc.), results can be vastly different.
"Those who favor more natural reproduction will certainly be happy with the Nexus 5 screen, though."
I'm all for natural reproduction....
did not need a review to confirm these details for me.. heh.
phone has left me less than impressed.
Tung_meister said:
Yes it does seem rather strange, isn't 4.4 meant to be more efficient in general as well? This should close the gap not increase it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who said 4.4 was supposed to be more efficient? What I saw for the past few weeks were random forum members making assumptions. No official statement at all. In addition to that, people making assumptions that skins use more battery. I think a lot of us knew deep down inside this was going to happen, more or less.
Also note, the G2 has the GRAM feature that they advertised as a battery saver.
cyburke said:
did not need a review to confirm these details for me.. heh.
phone has left me less than impressed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. I'm still using my Moto X because the N5 just doesn't do it for me. I pick it up and fiddle with it from time to time but that's about it.
_MetalHead_ said:
Same here. I'm still using my Moto X because the N5 just doesn't do it for me. I pick it up and fiddle with it from time to time but that's about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you like so much about the moto x? I prefer talking to real life people rather than to a phone...
caribouxda said:
What do you like so much about the moto x? I prefer talking to real life people rather than to a phone...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't even use the touchless control, it's been disabled since day one. I love the screen, the feel in the hand, the build quality, ridiculously good battery life, and the icing on the cake- active notifications. Sure the N5 is slightly faster (barely), but this day and age that's not enough. The Moto X is the full package, the N5 is just... meh. Of course that is just my opinion. If the Moto X wasn't around, I'd likely be singing praises about the N5. But since I have the X to compare it to, it doesn't fare so well.
Comparing the battery results it looks like the biggest difference between Nexus 5 and LG G2 is in video playback and web browsing, so when the screen is on and not as much on 3G talk time, when the screen is off.
So, i wondered how these tests are done and according to here http://www.gsmarena.com/gsmarena_lab_tests-review-751p6.php, it looks like they are done on 50% brightness. But, after searching a bit more, i found this post http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=47174975&postcount=42, which shows that the Nexus screen is fairly brighter than G2.
In the gsmarena review http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_nexus_5-review-1011p3.php, in the comparison table on the bottom of the page, the nexus seems twice as bright as the G2 at 50% brightness.
So, correct me if i am wrong, but where i am trying to conclude is that doing the tests in the same brightness through each phone's settings isn't very accurate and thus the bigger than expected difference between the two smartphones.
giannis_ch said:
Comparing the battery results it looks like the biggest difference between Nexus 5 and LG G2 is in video playback and web browsing, so when the screen is on and not as much on 3G talk time, when the screen is off.
So, i wondered how these tests are done and according to here http://www.gsmarena.com/gsmarena_lab_tests-review-751p6.php, it looks like they are done on 50% brightness. But, after searching a bit more, i found this post http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=47174975&postcount=42, which shows that the Nexus screen is fairly brighter than G2.
In the gsmarena review http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_nexus_5-review-1011p3.php, in the comparison table on the bottom of the page, the nexus seems twice as bright as the G2 at 50% brightness.
So, correct me if i am wrong, but where i am trying to conclude is that doing the tests in the same brightness through each phone's settings isn't very accurate and thus the bigger than expected difference between the two smartphones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm with you. Screen battery tests should be calibrated by brightness, not by percentage. Otherwise, dim screens win by default, which is absurd. Nexus 5 display is very bright. VERY. I had to install Lux to just dim it a bit as auto-brightness was too aggressive out of the box.
Having said that, for me battery life is pretty good. I am coming from Galaxy Nexus and N5 gives me close to double battery life in my everyday usage. I'm sure we will see battery saving ROMs pretty soon too, so folks who need to bleed their phones to the last drop will have the opportunity.
I find battery reviews massively subjective - I just want a phone that won't die if I don't charge it after getting out of bed @ 7am, before 10pm.. after a few calls and 2 hrs of screen on, fbook, texts, etc. My N5 has been on battery almost 13hrs now and is at 66%... my old SGII would be at 10%, so personally this is a massive improvement.
If you always want the latest and greatest all around, Nexus phones typically aren't going to fill the boot. If you upgrade your phone every year and a bit or less and are logical enough to factor in price, they will.
Interesting that the G2 is over 4x brighter at 100% brightness than at 50% brightness according to GSMArena. That probably helped its battery life score with them a fair bit.
http://blog.gsmarena.com/apple-iphone-5s-battery-test/
iphone 5s 10 hrs web browsing ..
I love nexus ... but 4 .. seriously ?
_MetalHead_ said:
I don't even use the touchless control, it's been disabled since day one. I love the screen, the feel in the hand, the build quality, ridiculously good battery life, and the icing on the cake- active notifications. Sure the N5 is slightly faster (barely), but this day and age that's not enough. The Moto X is the full package, the N5 is just... meh. Of course that is just my opinion. If the Moto X wasn't around, I'd likely be singing praises about the N5. But since I have the X to compare it to, it doesn't fare so well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its funny because I came from the moto x and I couldn't disagree more... It just goes to show that everyone is different and likes different things I guess haha
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Fatelord said:
http://blog.gsmarena.com/apple-iphone-5s-battery-test/
iphone 5s 10 hrs web browsing ..
I love nexus ... but 4 .. seriously ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Iphone 5s screen is also half as bright as nexus 5 at 50% brightness.
For most people this kind of batt life is fine (Stock)
http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/18/korean-samsung-galaxy-s5-has-qhd-snapdragon-805
Only for Korean market.
Oh Dear.... soon to be an influx of Samsung haters, saying the usual things like Samsung can go to hell, Samsung betrayed us ect ect ect.
Me i will continue to enjoy my bog standard S5, until i decide next year what to replace it with.
Too bad it's a korean exclusive for now
I still don't see how anyone could be surprised about that.
Or has everyone forgotten about the S4 Advanced LTE-A already?
Honestly people, business as usual...
ShadowLea said:
I still don't see how anyone could be surprised about that.
Or has everyone forgotten about the S4 Advanced LTE-A already?
Honestly people, business as usual...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did S4 advanced have a better screen than S4 ?
Out of interest, will it ACTUALLY be that much/if any faster anyway?
Would be interested if anyone with the tech knowledge could chime in....because it seems to me that the slightly faster snapdragon 805 is probably 'cancelled out' in effectiveness by the fact that the handset is now having to power a quad hd screen instead of standard 1080p.
Thoughts?
I can tell you for a fact that my gf's older macbook pro is snappier in day-to-day ui movements than my newer retina mbp which I'm guessing must be due to the added strain of those extra pixels.
jodvova said:
Did S4 advanced have a better screen than S4 ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So?? I don't get your logic.
paddylaz said:
Out of interest, will it ACTUALLY be that much/if any faster anyway?
Would be interested if anyone with the tech knowledge could chime in....because it seems to me that the slightly faster snapdragon 805 is probably 'cancelled out' in effectiveness by the fact that the handset is now having to power a quad hd screen instead of standard 1080p.
Thoughts?
I can tell you for a fact that my gf's older macbook pro is snappier in day-to-day ui movements than my newer retina mbp which I'm guessing must be due to the added strain of those extra pixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's been quite a bit of discussion in the M8 comparison thread about the impact of QHD on the LG G3. Cliff notes:
- Performance on S-801 took a pretty big hit
- Battery life took a hit
- Display contrast, black levels, and reflectivity all took hits
S-805 isn't a minor upgrade. It and Adreno 440 should allow QHD to perform as well and most likely better than S-801/1080P. So battery life and the quality of Samsung's QHD display are questions left to answer. The M8 thread also has discussion on the value of going from 1080P to QHD which is really pretty limited.
paddylaz said:
Out of interest, will it ACTUALLY be that much/if any faster anyway?
Would be interested if anyone with the tech knowledge could chime in....because it seems to me that the slightly faster snapdragon 805 is probably 'cancelled out' in effectiveness by the fact that the handset is now having to power a quad hd screen instead of standard 1080p.
Thoughts?
I can tell you for a fact that my gf's older macbook pro is snappier in day-to-day ui movements than my newer retina mbp which I'm guessing must be due to the added strain of those extra pixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Performance isn't 'canceled out' since the 805 can handle Ultra HD (4K) screens. The following scteenshot is from Qualcomm's site which summarizes the specs of both the 801 and 805. Snapdragon 805 breakdown
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
However, QHD content is currently limited to whatever bloat comes pre-installed from Samsung and wallpapers you can find online . As a result, people can't yet take full advantage of of that high res screen until app developers update their apps and there are very little YouTube videos above 1080p.
3GB RAM vs 2GB in the S5.
Great Samsung. Great.
That phone is a beast. But so is the regular galaxy S5. I don't think ppl should be upset really, its business. If you enjoy your phone then just enjoy it.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
There will be little or no QHD (2K) native content. Commercial content will be 1080p or UHD (4K). That means it'll be up and down scaled which impacts image quality. QHD is a marketing ploy of questionable value. Lots of reasons supporting this in the M8 comparison thread.
This is indeed a good read regarding Snapdragon 805's cpu and gpu power.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8035/qualcomm-snapdragon-805-performance-preview
From there I got couple important points:
The 805 can handle a QuadHD resolution device at the same frame rate and with same performance that an 801 can drive a 1080p device.
It is said to use 20% less power and provide 40% more performance compared to an 800 SoC
The 805 has small (comparatively) cpu boost and significant gpu and video engines boost.
The GPU tests were there. It nailed pretty much everything.
The 805 has HEVC HW decoder, but no HEVC HW Acceleration until the 810 SoC comes out in H1 2015.
I personally did not know what HEVC was. It is actually H.265 codec that provides magnificent video output at much lower bitrate than ax264/h.264 encoded video.
I curiously downloaded Big Buck Bunny 1080p encoded with HEVC that sized only 130 MB. The h.264/x264 encoded video was available at the Big Buck Bunny's official website to download which was roughly 700 MB. The 130 MB file indeed provided great output compared to its regular 700MB variant!
The only thing I´d like in my S5 is 3GB ram. I do not want a QHD display which will only drain extra battery without me even being able to tell the difference.
Apoxx said:
The only thing I´d like in my S5 is 3GB ram. I do not want a QHD display which will only drain extra battery without me even being able to tell the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would you like 3gb of ram? Have you ever run out of it on your S5?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Yeah alot of times, many apps have to reload when multitasking, it´s clearly not as good at multitasking as the note3 for instance.
WizeGuyDezignz said:
Why would you like 3gb of ram? Have you ever run out of it on your S5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So true. Someone above wants S-805 because it's "faster." Faster at what? 85% of apps don't use more than two cores according to Qualcomm. Screen transitions and app openings certainly don't need S-805. In every upgrade cycle (720p/S-600<>1080p/S-800<>QHD/S-805) the potentially huge gains in performance and battery life ended up minor because of the resources consumed by the display. Let's see some benchmarks from the SGS5 LTE-A before everyone wets themselves over it. Display quality took a big hit on the LG G3. Let's see how Samsung does.
BarryH_GEG said:
So true. Someone above wants S-805 because it's "faster." Faster at what? 85% of apps don't use more than two cores according to Qualcomm. Screen transitions and app openings certainly don't need S-805. In every upgrade cycle (720p/S-6001080p/S-800QHD/S-805) the potentially huge gains in performance and battery life ended up minor because of the resources consumed by the display. Let's see some benchmarks from the SGS5 LTE-A before everyone wets themselves over it. Display quality took a big hit on the LG G3. Let's see how Samsung does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that's exactly why I asked. I don't think people understand how ram works, they just want more because it sounds good.
Unused ram is exactly that, unused ram. No matter how many apps I've had open at once, I've never reached near 2gb of usage.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
WizeGuyDezignz said:
Yeah, that's exactly why I asked. I don't think people understand how ram works, they just want more because it sounds good.
Unused ram is exactly that, unused ram. No matter how many apps I've had open at once, I've never reached near 2gb of usage.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. And it's a Korea exclusive, I don't know why people are whining.
Enviado do meu Galaxy S5
WizeGuyDezignz said:
Yeah, that's exactly why I asked. I don't think people understand how ram works, they just want more because it sounds good.
Unused ram is exactly that, unused ram. No matter how many apps I've had open at once, I've never reached near 2gb of usage.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That´s because the phone hibernates apps before it ever reaches full RAM usage. More RAM = more open apps which allows for faster multitasking. You´d think this was basic knowledge by now.
I´m sure you all have switched to an open app only to have it reload like it was first opened.
Coming from an iPhone with 1GB of ram I am overly aware of this issue.
And no I do not want the new S5, I just wish Samsung had put 3gb in the S5 in the first place, like they did in the note3.
I'm going to downscale the device resolution to 1080p for a few days if the 2K screen really affects the battery that bad.. If you want to do this, download Resolution Changer from Google Play, and set the screen res to 1080x1920 480 dpi, apply and reboot (important to reboot, if not, the UI will be messed up)
Going to edit this in 3 days. Cheers!
Unless you only use up exactly 1920x1080 pixels on the screen battery life is not going to change much.
Right now that resolution just causes the screen to upscale so the only battery savings would be from the gpu working less driving a lower resolution. The screen which is the main batt hog will still be drawing power as per normal.
Unless you are 3D gaming at 2K then there will be little savings if any. 2D is pretty easy to render at 2K Resolution. And the GPU is probably optimized for 2K and NOT 1080p. So you might actually see a performance decrease running lower resolutions like the old days of Voodoo2 GPU on PC. I dont know... benchmark it and see.
Sublation said:
Unless you are 3D gaming at 2K then there will be little savings if any. 2D is pretty easy to render at 2K Resolution. And the GPU is probably optimized for 2K and NOT 1080p. So you might actually see a performance decrease running lower resolutions like the old days of Voodoo2 GPU on PC. I dont know... benchmark it and see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no such a optimization for a specific resolution.
Lodix said:
There is no such a optimization for a specific resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good job you work for Samsung and are privvy to their device drivers etc and cleared that up for us.
Jonathan-H said:
Good job you work for Samsung and are privvy to their device drivers etc and cleared that up for us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly that.
To the moderator's, just close this thread before it becomes a cesspool.
scoopdreams said:
Unless you only use up exactly 1920x1080 pixels on the screen battery life is not going to change much.
Right now that resolution just causes the screen to upscale so the only battery savings would be from the gpu working less driving a lower resolution. The screen which is the main batt hog will still be drawing power as per normal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
unfortunately, this is the correct response. even though the human eye cannot spot the difference between 2K and 1080p if the screen isn't right on your eyes (there have been several articles about it on XDA portal..interesting reading), lowering the resolution on this device is useless as your phone will power the extra pixles(they are still there) but the GPU just won't process them.
2K was and will be a marking gimmik to sell more phones. just like 64 bit.
hopefully we'll see a 5.5' flagship this year with 1080p- same view as 2K on 5.5' screens and with 6+ SOT easily.
scoopdreams said:
Unless you only use up exactly 1920x1080 pixels on the screen battery life is not going to change much.
Right now that resolution just causes the screen to upscale so the only battery savings would be from the gpu working less driving a lower resolution. The screen which is the main batt hog will still be drawing power as per normal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is correct, but there's one more thing:
the GPU won't work less. Whatever power is saved not having to draw the full size of the screen, will be spent upscalling the 1920x1080 image to 2560x1440. I bet that this upscalling can draw even more power from the battery than simply let it work on its native resolution.
So, if your intention is to save power, reducing the resolution is a bad idea, and it is totally useless.
The only reason to lower the resolution is if you have eyesight problems.
tal123 said:
unfortunately, this is the correct response. even though the human eye cannot spot the difference between 2K and 1080p if the screen isn't right on your eyes (there have been several articles about it on XDA portal..interesting reading), lowering the resolution on this device is useless as your phone will power the extra pixles(they are still there) but the GPU just won't process them.
2K was and will be a marking gimmik to sell more phones. just like 64 bit.
hopefully we'll see a 5.5' flagship this year with 1080p- same view as 2K on 5.5' screens and with 6+ SOT easily.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With Snapdragon 810 forget about it xD
The LG G Flex 2 has a poor battery life taking in mind the Full HD+ 3000mAh + the supposed lower power Snapdragon 810.
Lodix said:
With Snapdragon 810 forget about it xD
The LG G Flex 2 has a poor battery life taking in mind the Full HD+ 3000mAh + the supposed lower power Snapdragon 810.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
''Thankfully, the battery isn't as persnickety as the rest of the phone: It typically managed about 13 hours on a single charge, all while I was futzing around in HipChat and Hangouts, firing off emails from CloudMagic and playing the occasional documentary in the background on YouTube. When it came time for our standard video-rundown test (all together now: looping a 720p video with screen brightness set to 50 percent), the new G Flex held out for ten hours and 13 minutes before needing a top-up. As it turns out, the charger's no slouch either; it takes the phone from 0 to 50 percent in about an hour, and it'll top off the battery completely in less than an hour after that.''
http://www.engadget.com/2015/02/18/lg-g-flex-2-review/
I'm reading mixed reviews about the LG F Flex 2. however all in all I don't think 10 SOT at 50% brightness is less than amazing (they didn't put a chart showing comparisons to other phones, but personally I don't get more then 5.5 SOT on the note 4 no matter what)
tal123 said:
''Thankfully, the battery isn't as persnickety as the rest of the phone: It typically managed about 13 hours on a single charge, all while I was futzing around in HipChat and Hangouts, firing off emails from CloudMagic and playing the occasional documentary in the background on YouTube. When it came time for our standard video-rundown test (all together now: looping a 720p video with screen brightness set to 50 percent), the new G Flex held out for ten hours and 13 minutes before needing a top-up. As it turns out, the charger's no slouch either; it takes the phone from 0 to 50 percent in about an hour, and it'll top off the battery completely in less than an hour after that.''
http://www.engadget.com/2015/02/18/lg-g-flex-2-review/
I'm reading mixed reviews about the LG F Flex 2. however all in all I don't think 10 SOT at 50% brightness is less than amazing (they didn't put a chart showing comparisons to other phones, but personally I don't get more then 5.5 SOT on the note 4 no matter what)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personal usages are subjective and I don't care about them.
It is not 10hours of SOT in normal usage, it was a test.
In GSMarena where they do pretty well battery Test comparisons, they show a mediocre scores from what you should have expected.
At The same standard-test, Engadget says that Note 4 get 13h.
But 50% brightness on Note 4 is two times higher (291nits) than on the GFlex 2 (152nits).
So results are pretty poor on the Gflex 2 considering the fact that both have the same max brightness.
tal123 said:
.......
2K was and will be a marking gimmik to sell more phones. just like 64 bit.
hopefully we'll see a 5.5' flagship this year with 1080p- same view as 2K on 5.5' screens and with 6+ SOT easily.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once you use phone with Gear VR you will know that even 2K is not enough.
Sent from my SM-N910T using XDA Free mobile app
And you also have to take in mind pentile matrix. A RGB panel with the same resolution looks more shaper.
galaxynote2 said:
I'm going to downscale the device resolution to 1080p for a few days if the 2K screen really affects the battery that bad.. If you want to do this, download Resolution Changer from Google Play, and set the screen res to 1080x1920 480 dpi, apply and reboot (important to reboot, if not, the UI will be messed up)
Going to edit this in 3 days. Cheers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Antutu results:
48715 with 2k resolution
52553 with 1080
Interesting.. but the samsung keyboard size is bad. How can i fix it¿?
Thanks
nacholo said:
Antutu results:
48715 with 2k resolution
52553 with 1080
Interesting.. but the samsung keyboard size is bad. How can i fix it¿?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get 52526 at 2K:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Amazing score! It,s possible to get more than 56k in your phone at 1080!!
Enviado desde mi SM-N910F mediante Tapatalk
My N910F scored lower in 1080p then it did in 2k.
The highest score is default resolution.
Does anyone have any thoughts about the long term use of this processor.
Just to explain my query better, I usually keep my phone's for at least 3 year's. I currently have the Huawei P20 PRo which has been a brilliant phone and still runs flawlessly.
I would like to go back to pixel, the pixel 5, because of the software and the simplicity and beauty of the photos.
A concern I have is the processor. Will it be as good in 2 to 3 year's? Obviously you can't guess at future of software and programs which may need greater processing power.
I don't have a technical background so this question may be a bit basic and not easy to answer.
But I would just be interested in anyone's thoughts on this.
My two cents, we've gotten to a point where phone processors are great and software isn't getting massively more intense. Of course it will be "slower" than newer "top end" cpus, but one of the things to highlight from the review here on xda was the app opening time benchmark and compare between the S20 and the P5. Note how the P5 crushes the S20. You can also compare to the OP8T. Yes, the OP8T is faster. But are you really going to notice the difference between 20ms and 10ms to open Chrome? I won't...
P5
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
S20
OP8T
I think the longevity of a phone nowadays is based on the battery life.
And the pixel 5 with this tremendous battery life has this well covered.
Some people will even put maybe 1 cycle every two days. So this also means that after 3 years. The battery should have much more health
(My pixel 2 has 70-75% health and my pixel 4 93% health. Both had similar battery life when they were brand new)
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Gibsonflyingv said:
My two cents, we've gotten to a point where phone processors are great and software isn't getting massively more intense. Of course it will be "slower" than newer "top end" cpus, but one of the things to highlight from the review here on xda was the app opening time benchmark and compare between the S20 and the P5. Note how the P5 crushes the S20. You can also compare to the OP8T. Yes, the OP8T is faster. But are you really going to notice the difference between 20ms and 10ms to open Chrome? I won't...
P5
S20
OP8T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, it's not an easy question to answer I know and I suspect I wouldn't notice the difference either
thesebastian said:
I think the longevity of a phone nowadays is based on the battery life.
And the pixel 5 with this tremendous battery life has this well covered.
Some people will even put maybe 1 cycle every two days. So this also means that after 3 years. The battery should have much more health
(My pixel 2 has 70-75% health and my pixel 4 93% health. Both had similar battery life when they were brand new)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps longevity was not quite the right word to use , as I was really looking at the processor life and performance over time rather than the battery. I don't know what the battery health is like on my P20 but it's still lasting more than a day after 3 year's so hopefully the 5 will be as good if not better
i think it is hard to say and it really depends on how google maintains the software and optimizes it especially for this phone. If google has success with their own soc the pixel might look comparatively week in 1-3 pixel generations. Comparing the pixel 5 to other phones is hard because pricing differs so much around the world, but if you can get something like the onplus 8T for the same price? It's a hard sell to be honest.
I am still using my oneplus 3 which is still absolutely fine for day to day use. So you should be able to use the pixel until it won't get any updates anymore. Which is what i would say is the real limit of longevity on modern phones. The only reason i still enjoy my oneplus is that the community support is amazing and i already have a choice of multiple android 11 roms.
The oneplus only shows it's age when it comes to gaming and image processing times. So overall i wouldn't rely too much on a synthetic benchmark like the ones posted here because i don't think a few milliseconds in app opening times is ever going to be a problem. App opening is just something that is easy to compare but i think it's a more or less useless benchmark. So overall the pixel 5 should easily last a few years, it is a fine phone.
But if you are into gaming or just processing heavy tasks i don't think the Pixel is a great choice because other phones for the same price* just pack a bigger punch.
*depending on where in the world you are
Floge999 said:
i think it is hard to say and it really depends on how google maintains the software and optimizes it especially for this phone. If google has success with their own soc the pixel might look comparatively week in 1-3 pixel generations. Comparing the pixel 5 to other phones is hard because pricing differs so much around the world, but if you can get something like the onplus 8T for the same price? It's a hard sell to be honest.
I am still using my oneplus 3 which is still absolutely fine for day to day use. So you should be able to use the pixel until it won't get any updates anymore. Which is what i would say is the real limit of longevity on modern phones. The only reason i still enjoy my oneplus is that the community support is amazing and i already have a choice of multiple android 11 roms.
The oneplus only shows it's age when it comes to gaming and image processing times. So overall i wouldn't rely too much on a synthetic benchmark like the ones posted here because i don't think a few milliseconds in app opening times is ever going to be a problem. App opening is just something that is easy to compare but i think it's a more or less useless benchmark. So overall the pixel 5 should easily last a few years, it is a fine phone.
But if you are into gaming or just processing heavy tasks i don't think the Pixel is a great choice because other phones for the same price* just pack a bigger punch.
*depending on where in the world you are
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your reply, I don't do gaming or anything particularly heavy, watch videos and you tube, social media and emails, although I do have quite a few apps
Another example I have was my brother's Pixel 1.
The phone was as fast as day 1. The only issue he had was the battery life, after 4-5 years was destroyed.
He tried to replace it and he failed (broke the screen) otherwise he would be still enjoying Pixel 1 with a nice battery life and smooth performance
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
nchesh said:
Does anyone have any thoughts about the long term use of this processor.
Just to explain my query better, I usually keep my phone's for at least 3 year's. I currently have the Huawei P20 PRo which has been a brilliant phone and still runs flawlessly.
I would like to go back to pixel, the pixel 5, because of the software and the simplicity and beauty of the photos.
A concern I have is the processor. Will it be as good in 2 to 3 year's? Obviously you can't guess at future of software and programs which may need greater processing power.
I don't have a technical background so this question may be a bit basic and not easy to answer.
But I would just be interested in anyone's thoughts on this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plenty of people in the world still happily using phones with a SD 835 (and even older to be fair). My Nokia 8.1 uses the SD 710 and feels just as snappy as my Pixel 5 and that is 2 years old.
MrBelter said:
Plenty of people in the world still happily using phones with a SD 835 (and even older to be fair). My Nokia 8.1 uses the SD 710 and feels just as snappy as my Pixel 5 and that is 2 years old.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure it is, I've always been one for going for the best processor I could afford, my Nexus 6p was a brilliant phone as is my present Huawei p20 pro, so it would a change for me to go for a so called lesser chip but the phone seems so good in all aspects, looking forward to it.
thesebastian said:
Another example I have was my brother's Pixel 1.
The phone was as fast as day 1. The only issue he had was the battery life, after 4-5 years was destroyed.
He tried to replace it and he failed (broke the screen) otherwise he would be still enjoying Pixel 1 with a nice battery life and smooth performance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Nexus 6p was brilliant too
nchesh said:
I'm sure it is, I've always been one for going for the best processor I could afford, my Nexus 6p was a brilliant phone as is my present Huawei p20 pro, so it would a change for me to go for a so called lesser chip but the phone seems so good in all aspects, looking forward to it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not necessarily about the fastest chipset. Like computers it's more about the marriage of components. And I think Google have achieved this with the Pixel 5. I'm finding mine just as fast if not faster than my one year old Samsung S10e. The OS and SoC really work hand in hand on this phone.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
17-apg said:
It's not necessarily about the fastest chipset. Like computers it's more about the marriage of components. And I think Google have achieved this with the Pixel 5. I'm finding mine just as fast if not faster than my one year old Samsung S10e. The OS and SoC really work hand in hand on this phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, I've ordered mine today so will look forward to receiving it and seeing how well it does
Frankly I do not understand this fantasy with the fastest chipset. When we are buying pcs how many of us actually buy a core i9 processor with 32gb ram and the best dedicated graphics? I bet like me most will stick to an i3 or i5 and by stats those are the ones most people buy.
Same goes with phones. I believe in a few years people will realize this and simply go with the mid end processor line up which just like the core i5 is good enough for everything most of the people will need anyway.
1000 plus for a flagship mobile phone every two years is pretty ridiculous in my opinion. The user experience should factor in a lot more than just the specs!
no, the processor isn't going to slow down in a few years.
battery is the main killer with aged phones.
don't worry about the processor.