Jump to content

Exynos processors and LTE question


Recommended Posts

There have been numerous sites that state the reason why AT&T went with a 1.5 Ghz Snapdragon S3 Qualcomm MSM8660 processor in the Galaxy Note instead of the dual core 1.4Ghz Exynos 4210 processor found in the International version is because their LTE does not work well with it.

 

So two questions...

 

1-Why doesn't the Exynos processor work well with LTE (and by LTE I am referring to both the AT&T/Verizon)

 

2-Would the Sprint LTE have the same issue with Exynos processors?

 

Reason I ask is because Sprint is suppose to get the Galaxy Note, (as per rumored highly reliable) sources have mentioned. But no one would knows what the internal components would be. If Sprint were to get the European processor which by all test results is better than the US version, I feel it would have an advantage over AT&T and Verizon. Thus bringing in more customers.

Edited by davianny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been numerous sites that state the reason why AT&T went with a 1.5 Ghz Snapdragon S3 Qualcomm MSM8660 processor in the Galaxy Note instead of the dual core 1.4Ghz Exynos 4210 processor found in the International version is because their LTE does not work well with it.

 

So two questions...

 

1-Why doesn't the Exynos processor work well with LTE (and by LTE I am referring to both the AT&T/Verizon)

 

2-Would the Sprint LTE have the same issue with Exynos processors?

 

Reason I ask is because Sprint is suppose to get the Galaxy Note, (as per rumored highly reliable) sources have mentioned. But no one would knows what the internal components would be. If Sprint were to get the European processor which by all test results is better than the US version, I feel it would have an advantage over AT&T and Verizon. Thus bringing in more customers.

 

Not at my computer so I can't check right now. But i hadn't herd that those chips didn't work with lte...

If the Note has the MSM S3 chip then it also has an MDM chip for the lte as that's how they did it with thunderbolt...

 

At this point if it had an lte chip I would expect it to be S4 based and then it'll be 10x better than the current exynos used in world notes...

 

Though I don't follow much on that Exynos chips I'm surprised to hear no lte support...does the galaxy nexus have Qualcomm chip in it too?

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at my computer so I can't check right now. But i hadn't herd that those chips didn't work with lte...

If the Note has the MSM S3 chip then it also has an MDM chip for the lte as that's how they did it with thunderbolt...

 

At this point if it had an lte chip I would expect it to be S4 based and then it'll be 10x better than the current exynos used in world notes...

 

Though I don't follow much on that Exynos chips I'm surprised to hear no lte support...does the galaxy nexus have Qualcomm chip in it too?

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

 

The Galaxy Nexus has a TI OMAP 4460 running at 1.2ghz.

 

The same CPU also powers the Motorola RAZR.

 

Both devices are more or less on-par with the Exynos Galaxy S2 and are far better performers than the Qualcomm S3 powered variants.

Edited by RoccoM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i am only going by what i read thus the question for the experts here. I figure you guys know the LTE system much better.

 

These are the links where its been mentioned that AT&T went with Snapdragon instead of Exynos due to it not working well with their LTE network.

 

phandroid

"The AT&T version uses a dual-core Snapdragon for better 4G LTE capabilities where the international version uses Samsung's dual-core Exynos but features no compatbility with LTE."

phonedog

"The Galaxy Note comes to the States with a 1.5 GHz dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon processor in place of Samsung's Exynos chip (due to it not supporting LTE technology). "

engadget

"We were a bit concerned when we learned that the AT&T Galaxy Note would not be rolling with Samsung's own 1.4GHz Exynos processor and would instead have a 1.5GHz Snapdragon chip inside. The clock speed may be higher but the performance is indeed lower. "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In other forums comments such as this was made...

AT&T forum

"Main advantage of the Qualcomm platform compared to Exynos platform is faster network data transfer, Qualcomm chipset allows network downloads up to incredibly 42 Mbps while Exynos platforms allows half of that. On the other side, Exynos has GPU advantage, Adreno 220 GPU isn’t a match for the Mali 400MP GPU.

So Qualcomm has stronger CPU, clocked at 1.5 GHZ with chipset that offers faster 42 Mbps network downloads, on the other side it has slower GPU but it will still run every game smooth and little if any visible lag compared to the International version. "

 

 

 

androidspin

The processor switch probably has something to do with LTE/GSM. There's only been a little bit of coverage about it. but apparently the Samsung Exynos processor doesn't play nice with LTE/GSM, especially the higher-speed variatns of GSM. That's why T-Mobile's Galaxy S II has a Sanpdragon processor, while Sprint has the Exynos.

 

So I don't know, even MobileTechReview made a mention of it in their video. But like i said I wanted to pass the question to you guys which I think would know more about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats deff interesting there...ima qualcomm fan personally so i tend to follow their stuff pretty close. the first time i realized anyone doing this was with HTC OneX and i figured the ONLY reason they even did the Tegra3 at all was just to be able to say they had a quad-core phone as the dual-core S4 Qualcomm is better chip imho anyway as its a newer better process chip than the older tegra3...

 

crazy seeing Samsung using 3 different chip makers when they have their own line themselves....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of Qualcomm, it seems to support both FDD and TDD LTE. in this article about China delaying 4g LTE and how it impacts Sprint and Clearwire, it states that of the two types of LTE,

FDD (frequency division duplex) and TDD (time division duplex), FDD is favored by GSM operators (such as Verizon and AT&T), TDD is what Clearwire is using if I am not mistaken, yet Sprint is also going for a FDD setup. That right there confuses me, but still, I feel the article is interesting none-the-less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of Qualcomm, it seems to support both FDD and TDD LTE. in this article about China delaying 4g LTE and how it impacts Sprint and Clearwire, it states that of the two types of LTE,

FDD (frequency division duplex) and TDD (time division duplex), FDD is favored by GSM operators (such as Verizon and AT&T), TDD is what Clearwire is using if I am not mistaken, yet Sprint is also going for a FDD setup. That right there confuses me, but still, I feel the article is interesting none-the-less.

 

Problem I have with that article is that it states "...sprint created clearwire..." which is not the truth from what i understand.

Clearwire was created way back in 2003/2004...and not by Sprint. It wasn't till 07 when sprint announced their partnership with clearwire...

 

Don't think the China thing will effect sprint one bit. Only thing it might of helped was $ with clearwire overall and maybe help fund their buildout over here some? ...

 

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
    • Yep, you can see the site was taken down between Aug 2022 and Apr 2023.
    • Verizon site at Woodbury Commons finally got C-band. I'm seeing upwards of 600Mbps there, a massive improvement over the <1Mbps I used to see. LTE is now at 10-20Mbps which is significantly better than before where speed tests would often fail. My only complaint is that C-band is super inconsistent. Not sure if it's a software issue but sometimes I'm connected to it and get the 600Mbps speeds previously mentioned and other times I connect and only see 15Mbps. Seems like whatever load balancing the network is trying to do is still shoving a ton of people to LTE, even in conditions where I have a strong C-band signal.  — — — — — You're absolutely right. The site on top of Bais Sarah Hall at 6101 16th Ave got decommissioned. Sad that they haven't installed a new site to fill in that coverage gap.  — — — — — In other news a carrier reached out to the board of my grandmother's building in Brooklyn about installing antennas on top of it so she called me today because she knows I map cell towers and she said a lot of people in her building, especially the folks on the upper floors, are worried about the health effects lol. I asked her if she knew what carrier it would be but she said she doesn't know. A quick glance at Cellmapper tells me it's either Dish or AT&T since Verizon and T-Mobile both have sites within a two block radius of her building but AT&T barely builds new sites so I'm leaning Dish. They're asking for a 25-year lease with an option to renegotiate the lease after 10-years. The board of her co-op said that if they do it, maintenance fees will go down since they'll be offset by the rent that the carrier would be paying them. She said she already voted in favor of it but she thinks that a lot of the older people in her building are against it.
    • Galaxy S7 FE most certainly doesn't have the same level of NR CA (if at all), it also looks like it doesn't have SA NR, so it's is inherently going to be much slower since most of the spectrum is now focused on NR rather than LTE. It's likely the same generation radio as the S21 (or maybe S20). Having trouble finding which it would be.
    • T-Mobile seems to be paying close attention to how much of B2 they refarm for NR, as on this trip down to South Padre Island I saw both 20x20 n25 and 20x20 B2 (but not both simultaneously) at various points on the trip. At South Padre itself, seems like someone else has 2.5 GHz licensed so the n41 setup here is 20+80 MHz. Speeds are still decent, but VZW has 100+60 MHz n77 live (and AT&T has some 80+40).
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...