Reviews - Reader comments

Samsung Galaxy S III vs. Galaxy S II: Intergalactic

23 May 2012 | Read the review | Post your comment
Samsung Galaxy S III vs. Galaxy S II: Intergalactic - read the full textWith the dust still settling from one of the most exciting smartphone battles the industry has seen, and clouds of stardust swirling around a complete review, it's time to step back and take a sober look at two great phones. Two glorious chapters in...

 

Sort by:

Why does this review not mention the fading blue pixels on the S2 as a Con?
Why are fading blue pixels not mentioned at all in the review?

How can Samsung say that the S2 was an improvement because it had more subpixels?
How can Samsung say that the S3 is an improvement because less subpixels and a pentile format suffers from less colour degradation over time?

Please don't remove this post. They are fair questions.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 13:45
  • vxKC

and GLBenchmark 2.1 Egypt Offscreen 720p =63
http://www.facebook.com/photo....&theater

SunSpider JavaScript 0.9.1 =1737
http://www.facebook.com/photo....&theater

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 12:27
  • ij9u

my Quadrant Standard =4278 sgs 2 samsung 4.0.3 stock speed
http://www.facebook.com/photo....&theater

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 12:17
  • ij9u

> In reply to r 3 b 3 l @ 2012-05-26 02:36 from fsVe - click to read& you'll wet ur pants when Crapple does so, & claimed everything that they renamed are better & new Tech! get a grip!

some folks said who need removable batt & sd cards?
seriously? then who need a new phone? just stick to the Legendary N95 will you?!

i own S2 ( & used Note, so i believe a 4.6-4.8" screen is perfect for me) & will get this.
so sorry for those who just can't afford it.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 12:11
  • uC31

Staying with my s2 until sammy releases something better that has the same size or 4". S3 is a great phone but way to big for me.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 12:09
  • PSvX

Was waiting for a review like. Only thing, you should have added the One X into the mix (Yes, I know the SIII and One X are compared on the site). The way its currently priced (atleast in India), the HTC is smack middle in between the SII and the SIII. If a faster processor, HD screen, Bluetooth4, NFC and better resale value are the only advantages the SIII has over the SII, the HTC checks all the boxes and is quite a bit cheaper. The 4+1 core architecture should make for more battery life just as soon as HTC get the software side resolved

I feel, at a certain point in hardware, a faster processor is really not much of an advantage. Hey, its a mobile handset not a F1 car. You dont expect to use it like a computer (or drive it down the highway for that matter). So, while the One X may not be as fast as the SIII in synthetic benchmarks, doubt that the user will notice the difference in daily working. Ask us guys still using the 600mhz ARMs in their phones.

The real disadvantage of the One X is it main distinguishing feature- the unibody- it means you cannot put in an aftermarket battery or upgrade / change the storage. Thats why I am waiting out for the SIII myself, if for nothing than the likelyhood that the One X and SII will drop in price further in response. One I can demo the SIII, I will make the purchase decision myself

As for the SII, it still is a great handset with a lot of features at a good price. For someone looking for the best value without wanting to attract attention walking down the street (yes, there are people like that), its an ideal handset- it fits in the shirt pocket easily and doesnt draw unnecessary attention. The difference between the SII and the HTC is about $50, so not too much when you consider you are purchasing a $550 handset and the added features, thats a factor for me atleast. If Samsung drops the price of the SII by $40-$50 after the SIII launches, it will continue to sell very well

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 11:31
  • YTFY

> In reply to porojo moja @ 2012-05-26 10:49 from N9WV - click to readgood question, I got S2 and it takes over 3 hours to Recharge if u don't use it while charging. If you use it while charging it takes forever basically. I think it should be included in reviews

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 11:07
  • 7sH1

GS2 is the best option, better looks, slimmer, lighter and gives you all the speed that you need. one thing we were not told. how long does the GS3 battery takes to charge from 0 - 100% ?

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 10:49
  • N9WV

> In reply to Dave @ 2012-05-26 09:01 from 3G@4 - click to readCan't find the review for S2 vs. Iphone, if u know the link please post it thanx

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 10:07
  • 7sH1

> In reply to GSM @ 2012-05-26 08:57 from 7sH5 - click to readThey don't need to. They did Galaxy S 2 vs iphone and they will do S3 Vs iphone 5

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 09:01
  • 3G@4

Gsm arena, can u please do the Android fanboys a favour and do an Iphone vs. Sgs3, so it will save our breathe from repeating how good the S3 is against the current Iphone... much appreciated in advance

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 08:57
  • 7sH5

the best.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 08:40
  • vj1g

s2 is the winner for me....
| 4.3 is better than 4.8 (3.5-4.3 is enough)
| s2 is smaller and slimmer (good size for the pocket)
| dual core is better than quad core (dual core offers great performance...why take quad core?...quad core might only use 2 cores cuz theres no reason to use 4 cores for an app.)
| s2 has better battery life ( its using 1650 mah while s3 2100 / 1 hour difference )
| s2 has better design than s3 (brick type looks better than a curved brick)
|||||| s2 for me....if they will make s4 bigger like note then s2 is the best for its size and design||||||

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 08:19
  • t7Xr

> In reply to Anonymous @ 2012-05-26 05:50 from v6uH - click to readI can list 10 better phones for me. Each person has their own needs and for many people the S3 is just too big.

To say this phone is outright better is just fanboy talk

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 06:58
  • vxKC

> In reply to Anonymous @ 2012-05-26 05:50 from v6uH - click to readThe HOX is just about on par with the GS3 if you don't need removable battery or expandable memory and it's a few hundred dollars cheaper. Samsung way overpriced this turd.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 06:48
  • q}eZ

Great review guys! Thanks for all the info.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 05:52
  • YhkH

> In reply to Anonymous @ 2012-05-26 01:10 from TK4F - click to readyeah id like to know what you think is good as nothin g is better than the Galaxy s3

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 05:50
  • v6uH

nice phone but ill stick to the S2 for a while, interested to see what the note2 brings to the table, maybe 1080 super amoled screen

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 03:29
  • vp6$

Thank you for the comparison. Frankly if you are not a gaming freak with a head in the sand, there is no compelling reason to buy the SIII over the SII. The average person wants a good signal and voice clarity (remember the days when this was important) now a decent camera, perhaps video, ease of texting, and occasion access to the internet. Most apps are a waste of time as are games. I have a Note and a BB, but would be happy just with a larger and workable BB, so hopefully it will happen

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 03:15
  • y$gT

S beam, Direct call, Smart stay.. . . WTF! The folk at samsung seem like a bunch of 4 year olds giving silly names to every little feature.

  • Reply
  • 2012-05-26 02:36
  • fsVe
Sort by:

Note: Sponsored advertising links are in green.