the difference of perfoemance is only on paper. i have tested myself both verions,BOTH ARE IDENTICAL FAST IN REALITY. i work at orange. the difference of stand-by and talk time combined is very big between the quad and octa: the quad last one day more, over the octa version. plus octacore doesn't have lte. octacore is pure and simple USELESS
Yuriy Samorodov, 28 May 2013SHV-E300 seems to be fine until it comes to sound quality while SHV-E300 suits Yamaha DAC, whi... moreNow that you mention Yamaha DAC, Qualcomm and Wolfson DAC's and stuff, you mind telling us more about it please?
I really appreciate it so we can somehow fill some Dimwit's empty heads around here ^_^
Galaxy Exynos won in every aspect against Galaxy Qualcomm and its documented in a video by very trusted channel in Youtube "pocketnowvideo"
Note than Exynos is clocked to 1.6 GHZ while Qualcomm to 1.9 GHZ so Qualcomm has 1.2 GHZ.
1-In 02:05 Exynos boot up faster than Qualcomm.
2-In 02:55 Exynos won in 8/7 of benchmarks.
3-In 03:26 Qualcomm shows stutters when all feature of Galaxy S4 are on while Exynos run with no stutters.
4-In 04:00 Exynos opens apps faster than Qualcomm.
5-In 04:33 Qualcomm lags in HD games while Exynos doesn't.
6-In 05:12 Exynos proved to have longer battery life than Qualcomm, and note they disabled LTE in Qualcomm to make the test fair enough 06:29.
Lotus Ravenmoore, 28 May 2013You can like forget all this stress/debate/argument/whatsoever if you can spend a little bit m... moreSHV-E300 seems to be fine until it comes to sound quality while SHV-E300 suits Yamaha DAC, which is worse than both Qualcomm and Wolfson DAC's
ThomasCarlsson, 28 May 2013Android, since ICS, does not lag at all! WP8 is only mostly "dead" gigantic app icon... moredude, android rocks but that doesnt mean that it didnt lag, i have xperia p and a nexus 4, they are both good phones but they both lag
FYI, they are having JB
I9500 is available in my country and I was thinking about buying it. But now I'm really disappointed. They made octa core chipset to be more power efficient, not to consume more energy... And they failed...
I9505 will be a better choice.
The soft Voice of, 28 May 2013Can't wait to prove to my Friend who has a single core running 7.8 on a Lumia 900 that Android... moreAndroid, since ICS, does not lag at all! WP8 is only mostly "dead" gigantic app icons and even bigger font that allow very little info on each screen, but it is still not able to run on Lumia 900 even though this simple/boring ui should not lag... ony any weak or old... hardware! WP8 can not even handle 1080p screen! WP8 totally sucks and can not be compared with Android!
You can like forget all this stress/debate/argument/whatsoever if you can spend a little bit more money and purchase the Korean Version S4 (SHV-E300) which is already available in my country(PH) for P29,500 = roughly $710..
32GB internal memory
free battery charghing dock (worth $50)
and extra battery.
its an 8-core variant so who cares about running out of battery a little bit faster than i9505 if you got a spare in your pocket ayt?
question at hand is, is this version already available in your country?
Peace out people ^_^
Your audio measurement misses the bug in 9505: at low impedance loads it gives a crackled sound at higher volumes.
Please retest with 10-15ohm load.
I believe Samsung down played the I9500 variant due to the production problems they were facing. If you remember well, the Cortex-A15 was to be clocked at 1.8Ghz. However, this was down clocked to 1.6Ghz to ensure the performance difference is minimal between the 2 variants. Anyway, I believe this will change down the line with updates to the 2 variants.
Jr, 28 May 2013Hi guys! i9500 has slight battery and heat problems but has slight better performance than I95... moreExynos 5 Octa (ARM big.Little) was meant 4 boosting battery life. That's supposed 2 be it's main strength over other architectures. If it fails so horribly in it's main aim, then ARM needs to go back to the drawing board. You can always crank up the power/performance, but, it's all about power efficiency. Maybe the Android software isn't yet optimized for handling the big.Little architecture, but, ARM and Samsung need 2 put their act together as the main selling point of this whole architecture is the battery life gains along with snappier performance.
Hi guys! i9500 has slight battery and heat problems but has slight better performance than I9505. So I9505 is cooler, better battery performance, however it's slightly low on benchmarks (which I don't really care it depends on how you use it on the real world) so. which one do you have? or will you buy? I'm thinking of buying the i9500 since LTE is still on works here in the PH, so I think the i9505 is not good for me. I'm also thinking if... what if you're just doing small tasks, what would be better? still i9505 or i9500 with what they say that has powersaving Quad A7 cores? sorry or my bad english thanks :)
The soft Voice of, 28 May 2013Can't wait to prove to my Friend who has a single core running 7.8 on a Lumia 900 that Android... moreAnd Im sure it could the same thing for WP, IOS, Windows, and Mac too. Until then. All phones and computers lag.
Grow up, quit lying, and deal with it like a mature/normal human being.
ava1, 28 May 20134 hours difference only!!!
the difference between talk time is 4hurs + 0.5 hr of browsing +... moreCommon sense dude, they put a7 quad in gt-i9500 to have a better battery life in standby mode.
The rest hours in endurance test refers to standby or light task like texting and etc.
Definitely 1.9ghz consumes more power in standby mode than the a7 quad.
If you have the i9500 variant, you may tell everyone that you have a phone with eight cores and people will get wowed by it depending on how you deliver your spiel. Some tech geeks won't even buy it coz I for one wouldn't mind a little difference in benchmarks because the real life performance is what matters. I would rather have the i9505 as the battery lasts longer and I'm gonna be worry free too as it doesn't have any problem with LTE band compatibility here in the Philippines. In our country we have both variants but the ones powered by S600 are more popular. The Octa name is just all gimmick as only one pair of quad core will be working at a time depending on the task you're gong to throw at it. If all eight cores will work at the same time in every task then that won't be a gimmick but in order to do that the manufacturer should be able to make a big battery to compensate on the power. If the OEM wants a thin device then it will be possible put it in a tablet as tabs can accompany big batteries without sacrificing the thickness of the device just like the Xperia Tablet Z which is even thinner than the iPhone 5. Now if the OEM wants it to be at least in a 5 inch category then the phone is likely gonna end up thick like the Samsung Galaxy camera. Number of cores I believe isn't the answer for the phones to be lag free but, it is in the optimization of the software and if OEMs will be ready to sacrifice their bloated UIs in exchange of a stock android then it will be the best answer to the lag and buggy problems of their flagship devices. Besides they are now starting to do it nowadays right? I was able to read it somewhere that either HTC or Sammy will make a One with stock android UI or an S4 with a stock UI. It was somewhere here at GSM Arena so even if a device will only be powered by a dual core chip, there will still be a great chance it will run smoothly on Android. Stock UI for the win!
Can't wait to prove to my Friend who has a single core running 7.8 on a Lumia 900 that Android can be lag free as well.
Until then i pretend it great in public and look for
lagfixs and custom ROMs in XDA along with thousands of others that are going WTF?!
Was Jelly Bean's Forced 60Hz GPU animation rendering and triple buffering a lie all along?
Or they need better GPUs as well as CPUs?
I'm confident a 12Core with 4GB ram should stop the lags right guys?
i really lost my respect with those quad core. having those cpu's, why is that still some people complain lags in that s4. i think the problem is in the OS. not in cpu.
I wish they just did 4 core Exynos without the companion cores and just kept it simple at least until they figured it all out.