Share this Story

Galaxy SIII With Quad-Core and LTE Coming to Korea July 9, Will We Ever See One?

Up until now, the general consensus is that quad-core and LTE radios do not play well with each other. The Tegra 3 and Exynos quad-core processors that have been found in international versions of phones, have been swapped out for a Snapdragon S4 dual-core processor here in the States so that we can have our awesome LTE. It looks like that soon is going to change.

Coming to Korea next week is a version of the Galaxy SIII that has the best of all worlds. Quad-core Exynos processor, LTE connectivity and 2GB of RAM on-board as well. It seems that Samsung has worked out the issues between the radio and processor well enough to release this phone, and should attract a lot of attention for the full spec sheet. Would you prefer this S3 to the dual-core one if it got released in the States?

Via: Engadget

  • Sully

    Only if it was a “skinless” Nexus device.

  • Bionic

    I dont think you would really see any improved performance between the 2 chips, there are not many apps or functions optimized for quad core or even dual core yet

  • AlexKCMO

    I’ll care when I see real performance numbers. Until I see some side by side comparison, I don’t care to be honest.

  • mustbepbs

    I DON’T want this! I want my pre-ordered GS3 in pebble blue, and I don’t want to think about smartphones for my whole contract. I want off this never ending run around. I just want to be happy with the one I’ve got until it’s time to upgrade. No more selling and buying and selling and buying and haggling and new lines…makes my head spin and my stomach hurt.

    I want satisfaction.

    • Trevor

      It’s like a disease, isn’t it? A technologically extraordinary disease.

      • mustbepbs

        It is a disease. You make all of these justifications (excuses) to get the next best thing, even though what you’ve got is more than adequate. I can understand the mentality last year, when new techs like dual core and higher resolution screens were taking off, but now, I just want to relax and enjoy what I’ve got.

        The S3 is super smooth, super fast, and very powerful. Jelly Bean is a huge improvement to the OS, and it is a much needed optimization. Pretty ridiculous seeing any kind of stuttering with the hardware we have now. Once the S3 gets it, it’ll be very hard not to be satisfied.

        I think the decision from OEMs this year to have less devices is less of a pro-consumer choice and more a forced choice due to hardware plateauing. Things just seem to be getting incremental upgrades. I like that.

        What Android really needed was JB. Once we have more devices on JB, these hardware tweaks are going to be less noticeable in every day things like swiping, opening apps, and menu-spelunking, but more noticeable in the games department. It’ll be interesting to see where things go from here.

        • Trevor

          Haha yeah, the justifications can be a bit extreme too. I know I’m guilty of that.

          I agree with what you said about JB. It’s what Android needed to get rid of the little hiccups and stuttering and make it a smooth-running OS (not that it was bad before by any means, but there were definitely annoyances). I’ve never used JB, so I’m basing this completely off what I’ve read and videos I’ve watched.

          • michael arazan

            I can’t wait to see in 5-6 months if there is going to be a phone that can trump the S3. The new nexus phones has some serious competition ahead of them. I don’t know if anything can unless they can get a quad core and terrific battery together in one, may be a year or longer. But the S3 is def a great 2-3 year phone, prob a 4 year phone or more.

          • Trevor

            Well, just with the way technology evolves, I imagine we are almost guaranteed to see a phone that will be “better” (this can be sort of a subjective term at times) than the S3. But it sounds like Samsung really has a winner with this one, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it makes a lot of people happy for a longer period of time than most phones. For me personally, I could never make it 2-3 years with the same phone, but that’s because I’ve got a bad case of the aforementioned disease.

    • It is a disease. I thought I would never find satisfaction…until I got the Galaxy Note. Man. Once you go Note you never go back.

    • Chronon7364

      I’ll be just fine with my GS3 for at least a year minimum. By then, there will likely be quad-cores and such everywhere. The idea that a phone can play PSX or N64 games without a hiccup sufficiently blows my mind. Throw in a 64gb SD card, all the accessories, roms, Jelly Bean(!) etc, and I bet we’ll be good to go for quite some time.

      Also, due to Verizon’s new pricing schemes, upgrading at full retail can be done anytime rather than the usual two year itch.

  • PC_Tool

    I’m constantly amazed that there can be such an outpouring of rage towards Apple re: banning devices while no-one even mentions Qualcomm’s monopoly on the major US networks.

    Want LTE in the US? Want your modem on the same die as the CPU? Want to use something other than Qualcomm? Tough sh*t. You’re out of luck. Qualcomm owns the patents and isn’t in a sharing mood.

    Qualcomm has effectively banned more mobile hardware in the US than Apple could ever dream of.

    • blood

      Well at least their s4 is good. It even outperforms the tegra 3 which is a quad core.

      • it out performs it on a per core basis though, besides never believe benchmarks.

      • PC_Tool

        Being good enough doesn’t excuse it in the slightest.

    • Mike

      The difference is, QC is not a patent troll. You want to play, you have to pay. Samsung has chosen not to pay for the rights to use their chipset in the past…oh well.

      Apple goes out and patents things THEY DID NOT INVENT, only to bring suit against those that actually did (in some instances). Then, they only selectively enforce “their” IP rights onto their biggest competitor. You dont see RIM getting sued, or LG, or Huawei…

      This is why there is so much hatred towards apple.

  • Gimp_Ninja

    Personally, I prefer the S4 to the Exynos. I’m not as likely to notice the speed increase as the battery life increase on Verizon’s LTE.

    • Trevor

      Yeah, I’m interested in the battery life of the dual-core LTE vs quad-core LTE versions.

  • MLSchleps

    Good Lord! Who wouldn’t want this?

  • Javis Sullivan

    At this point I am patiently waiting for the one I pre-ordered and couldn’t care less for any other version of the s3, as i am in need to relieve my trusty rooted thunderbolt of its duty.

    • trixnkix637

      I feel ya. I’ve got a Droid-X that’s been on the front lines for far too long and is showing signs of PTSD.

    • trixnkix637

      I feel ya. I’ve got a Droid-X that’s been on the front lines for far too long and is showing signs of PTSD.

      • patrat

        Right there with ya, brother. Retiring my Droid X this afternoon!

  • Julian Coronado

    I think we’ll need to wait until next year at least. If Samsung brings out another S3 version to the US then most buyers will get mad. Because they already bought the original.

  • fauxshizzl

    As much as I would like to have one I almost don’t want to see it happen. It would just start the same game Moto did. If they put the quad core version in the states what will it be? The Samsung GSlll Maxx? One variation will do thanks, I just wish it would have been the proper one to begin with.

  • zepfloyd

    First off, it wasn’t that the new Exynos didn’t play with LTE, it wasn’t integrated together like S4 (think major battery drain). Tegra 3 was the one that doesn’t play nice. The other issue is yield and fabrication performance and needed demand. Just isn’t there yet. So no we won’t see it stateside.

  • I’d like a quad core Exynos T-Mo w/2GB RAM. Don’t care about LTE at the moment. 🙁

  • I honestly think political reasons are what’s keeping Exynos processor’s coming Stateside. I see no reason as to why Samsung’s LTE radio isn’t compatible with LTE’s frequency here in the United States.

    It’s just that Qualcomm has a heavy presence in the United States. I think this is the issue, not a technical limitation.

    • completely wrong. The frequencies are VERY different. Don’t think so? go ahead and buy one and try it out. You’ll be in for a nasty surprise.

    • From http://www.tmonews.com/2012/05/editorial-why-a-snapdragon-s4-galaxy-s-iii-is-awesome/

      “But if you are thinking that other carriers will get SoCs other than Qualcomm’s in the future, you’d probably be wrong. Most LTE modems do not support U.S. Digital Dividend frequencies, which means the LTE networks of AT&T, Verizon Wireless, and most regional carriers will be stuck with Qualcomm’s modems. T-Mobile can use non-Qualcomm LTE modems because the AWS band T-Mobile is using is a standardized band that is well-supported. Verizon Wireless, Sprint, and most regional carriers operate CDMA2000 networks, which means they have no choice but to use Qualcomm’s modems, since no one else makes CDMA2000 modems because Qualcomm owns all the IP rights to the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 technologies. Maybe once CDMA2000/LTE carriers start offering devices that don’t support CDMA2000, then we’ll see non-Qualcomm Snapdragon LTE devices on those networks, provided that U.S. Digital Dividend, ESMR+Cellular 850, and Extended U.S. PCS bands are all supported by non-Qualcomm modems by then.”

      • mog386

        “Verizon Wireless, Sprint, and most regional carriers operate CDMA2000 networks, which means they have no choice but to use Qualcomm’s modems, since no one else makes CDMA2000 modems because Qualcomm owns all the IP rights to the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 technologies.”

        So by that statement, the VZW Galaxy Nexus shouldn’t exist. It doesn’t use a Qualcomm modem at all it uses a VIA modem for 1xRTT/EVDO and uses a Samsung modem for the LTE…

        EDIT: I see that the article you quoted is one that you wrote. I would think twice before using your own article, especially when it contains completely incorrect information.

        • Well, apparently there are exceptions. VIA modems aren’t very good though. Obviously VIA decided to license the IP from Qualcomm. Though there’s only one reason why they did that at all: to preserve platform hardware compatibility with the HSPA+ Galaxy Nexus. A substandard CDMA modem with a low-volume specialty LTE chip for the LTE Galaxy Nexus is used only to maintain as much of the original reference hardware as possible.

          As far as I know, Qualcomm and VIA are the only CDMA chip makers. Samsung only makes Digital Dividend LTE chips when it has to, because it is inordinately costly to do so and since B13 is Verizon-only, that makes it even worse.

          • mog386

            While that is more than likely true, it doesn’t mean that the assertions in the quote are not false.

          • I didn’t want to re-write everything, so I just linked to it (for context’s sake). If that is a problem, I won’t do it again.

            I also only found out about VIA making CDMA chips after I wrote that. Long after.

            The grand majority of the CDMA devices in the world use Qualcomm’s platform. I only know of four devices in the U.S. that use a non-Qualcomm CDMA2000 radio. The rest all use Qualcomm SoCs or Qualcomm radios. They are all made by Samsung, too. CDMA SGS and SGS2, Galaxy Nexus CDMA/LTE, and Nexus S 4G.

            Motorola also makes LTE B13 radio chips for Verizon DROID devices, due to the special contract they have with Verizon Wireless.

        • doesn’t matter whatsoever since the siii doesn’t use VIA.

  • nope. we’ll never see a quadcore siii