Comments on: Galaxy S III Exynos quad-core benchmarked http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/ Feeding Your Gadget and Tech Obsessions Thu, 17 May 2012 17:46:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Anon http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-208278 Anon Sat, 05 May 2012 02:37:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-208278 THIS! Why is quadrant still in existence?

]]> By: RahulPrasad2012 http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207986 RahulPrasad2012 Fri, 04 May 2012 17:58:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207986 I’d love to see how this ARM 9 based Exynos quad core processor will stack up against the new ARM 15 based dual core processor from Texas Instruments. 
At the MWC 2012, TI was showing their processor wiping the floor with the Tegra 3, which is also an ARM 9 based quad core processor. TI said that the devices based on that processor will be out later this year. 

]]> By: Corrosion http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207804 Corrosion Fri, 04 May 2012 10:45:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207804 Yet it will still struggle to scroll smoothly.

]]> By: hot_spare http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207624 hot_spare Thu, 03 May 2012 21:41:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207624 The most definitive benchmark is that on GLbenchmark 720p Egypt it scores 99fps. Tegra3 is around 65fps!

]]> By: Guest http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207616 Guest Thu, 03 May 2012 21:27:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207616 Tegra is weak, my SGS2 gets 4500!

]]> By: Guest http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207610 Guest Thu, 03 May 2012 21:24:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207610  In the real world Exynos will be better, its just smoother and nicer. Tegra is borken, always was, still is. S4, thats a good match

]]> By: TrentBradley http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207606 TrentBradley Thu, 03 May 2012 21:22:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207606 Holy crap! That blows away the One X, international and LTE! Dang Samsung…

]]> By: ph00ny http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207597 ph00ny Thu, 03 May 2012 21:12:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207597 CPU scores are close enough
3D scores are limited by the v-sync

You probably wouldn’t want to get into antutu since other aspects of the system gets taxed and Tegra3 is poorly designed in that regard

]]> By: Stats Professor http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207583 Stats Professor Thu, 03 May 2012 20:51:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207583  Yeah except Tegra 3 wins in CPU and 3D. 

The rest don’t really matter as i/o is easily manipulated.

Samsung is looking weaker and weaker.  Run antutu.

]]> By: KingKwon http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207571 KingKwon Thu, 03 May 2012 20:00:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207571 Does it really matter?  LOL!  I don’t think Tegra 3 would have much of a chance anyhow on the other benchmark.

]]> By: Snacks http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207555 Snacks Thu, 03 May 2012 19:36:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207555 For Pete’s sake, use Antutu. 

]]> By: Snacks http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-s-iii-exynos-quad-core-benchmarked-03226078/#comment-207556 Snacks Thu, 03 May 2012 19:36:00 +0000 http://www.slashgear.com/?p=226078#comment-207556 Err, Antatu

]]>