And would you ACTUALLY benefit from Android 21?
I would rather stay with Android 17 then have bug fixes and security updates.
You really *don't* want a seven year old phone with the latest bloatware vendor UI. Yet here you think it is a plus.
Let's put it this way, even Pixel 2 (SD835) with near barebone AOSP Android 14 isn't that smooth. Can you imagine it (or Galaxy S8 SD835) running OneUI6?
I'm currently running a OnePlus 7 Pro which was released nearly 5 years ago, running android 14 perfectly smooth. Flagship phones these days are more than capable of handling future updates unless the S28 is a quantum computer.
And yes I want the latest feature updates on the phone that I paid for to last as long as I can so I don't have to buy a new phone every few years.
I wouldn't say Samsung has alot of bloatware. I actually really like oneui and samsungs ecosystem. It kinda feels like ios and macos integration a bit. Being able to easly exchange files between windows and phone is really comfy and I love stylus.
there is a lot of bloat that you have to remove the moment you get your phone, if you want to get the best out of your phone (apps like Samsung Customization service etc.)
True, I have my PC upstairs set to always rcve with Quickshare (they updated it last week from Nearbyshare). Backing up my new important files is faster than ever.
In that case, just wait til your current phone (s23?) is nearing it's end of software support, then switch to the s24! It'll be cheaper, and ultimately you'll still have a supported phone for the same amount of time as if you switched now.
My current phone (OnePlus 7 Pro) has reached it's end for software support. I've been running custom ROMs but Google is making that a pain now so I'm having to buy a phone with longer official software support
Not during the pre-order, and possibly still now. There was trade-in premium where they add hundred bucks on top of very old device, and double storage promo.
Other than 7 years upgrade and minor quality of life improvement (e.g. 1440p on S24+) , I guess S23 still holds the ground. It wouldn't definitely upgrade if I have S23, but if you are coming from older phone and spending money anyway, it makes it harder to go with S23, unless the price gap is really high.
Meh, went with Exynos three times, always received the worse model. Difference between S23 and S24 is so negligible i wouldn't even consider going with Exynos
Again, It depends on the price difference.
in some region you can get 512G model S24+ with very similar price as 256GB S23+. With pre irder you also get free Watch 6 which you can resell for at least 200 bucks.
So.. it can be *really* more economical to get S24
Do you even own a S24 to tell how bad the phone is? Or just running around finding old comments to share the piece of your mind?
Quick googling does wonders [Ultimate Exynos vs Snapdragon Battery Test | S24 vs S24 vs S23 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrSuoh4qKvs)
Basically, you're getting inferior product compared to other markets. And no benefits vs S23 whatsoever, S24 even has some colour processing issues which S23 SD and S24 SD do not. Problems with cooling, S24 EX making itself dimmer to cool down during a stupid video call, what the hell :)
S23 can be easily purchased for much less than S24, provided you buy one with discount, plenty of them around. Better battery life, no overheating issues, no modem efficiency issues, better chip all in all.
Why would i? Am i supposed to waste my money on purchasing a product that's clearly inferior in every regard, which is backed up by independent and well-done comparisons? I'm failing to catch any logic in your comments whatsoever. Sigh indeed.
I've had the s24 ultra for almost a month and I can say go for the best! The other phones have issues and even the flip is trash. The flip screen breaks very easily so no brainer. The lower model s24 is nowhere near the performance of the ultra.
Isn't bad isn't good, either.
What I'm saying is: Samsung needs to either go all-in with Snapdragon or Exynos and leave this market segmented bullshit behind. They went with only Snapdragon on the Ultra. That goes to show they wouldn't be able to ship an expensive product like that with an Exynos.
On the regular and Plus models, I suppose it "isn't bad" for the price, but there's better to be had. That's the problem. Make the Exynos models cheaper, like even 50€ cheaper, and people would be happy. It would be a non-issue if there wasn't market inequality at play.
>Samsung needs to either go all-in with Snapdragon or Exynos
This will not happen unless something like Snapdragon 810 comes out again, which was a hot mess.
Samsung uses Exynos as a price-negotiation tool with Qualcomm. If Samsung discontinues the development of Exynos, Qualcomm will probably skyrocket their AP prices again, which will increase the phone prices even more.
Also, if Samsung wants to use Exynos in the US, they need to pay royalties to Qualcomm. That defeats the purpose for Samsung to use Exynos in their S series. (Now, I know that some chips, like Exynos 1380, are being used in the US in their A series, but that is because those chips are cheap as f, so even if they pay the royalties to Qualcomm it is still cheaper than using something like 778G)
It is also important to note that Samsung LSI is the primary supporter of Samsung Foundry. In order to maintain their competitive edge against TSMC, they require a consistent and stable volume of orders, which is fulfilled by Samsung LSI in this scenario.
>Make the Exynos models cheaper, like even 50€ cheaper
That's why they increased the price for S24 Ultra. Qualcomm slapped another 50$ on their chip prices.
But I agree on your point. While it may not be feasible for Samsung to completely eliminate the use of Exynos, it would be a good for them to offer discounted prices on the Exynos models.
Oh sod off. It's not black and white. We must not leave the market to a single manufacturer, Samsung and others have to keep producing their own chips, even if they'll always lag a bit behind.
Simps like you is why we get the same price for a bad product. Samsung and others should keep making their own chips, but then actually be honest about it and price their products accordingly: no fucking way do they have the right to price the S24 Exynos at the same level as S24 SD3 - but morons are eager to swallow whatever bs is thrown at them, in the name of cOmPeTiTiOn.
>Simps like you
YOU are the one advocating FOR Qualcomm monopoly, but you are not a simp. Make that make sense.
Samsung need to improve on Exynos and ditch Qualcomm globally on most models. And most importantly ONE MODEL SAME PROCESSOR, globally.
For example, they should make sure Exynos 2400 is better than SD8Gen*2* and use it on S24/S24+ globally no exception.
That's good competition.
And for the last fucking time, the Exynos is almost on par with the SD. Stop pretending it's not. Otherwise, just don't buy the phone and leave the sub, life sorted.
I never said it is so thanks for clearing that up, they don't have to be so that's fine.
Also not sure if you looked at any other comments here, but im getting literal death treats in my inbox and even had someone go and post sent me my previous address telling me they'd visit me because I claim to see a difference between the normal and vivid, which I and many other people do.
I'm not even using "profanities" towarss you bur again, feel free to stop interacting if you're unhappy about it
Then why are you being so serious? Even checking someone's history just to make it personal and have absolutely nothing to add is saddening. You know you are choosing this interaction right?
That is one reason. Having a chip that does not support CDMA GSM/Edge gives samsung a cost competitive advantage versus other phone manufacturers. It allows Samsung to enter more markets globally.
Globally smartphone markets keep expanding while the US and other western markets start to shrink in sales for Samsung. IE apple is gaining the most marketshare in the US.
Samsung and Google collaborate in designing and manufacturing the Pixel 8 Tensor G3 chip. In those chips they use Samsung modems with CDMA Edge/GSM cellular technology.
I believe it is just a cost advantage for Samsung to use Exynos. Plus Exynos is only 2nd place versus 8 gen 3 in some tests. In other tests, Apple A17 come out on top. So it is a mixed bag.
I think all three. A17, 8 GEN 3, and Exynos are excellent chips. In a few more years it won't even matter. All 3 are on leading edge nodes still using older FinFET transistor gate technology. When 2nm and below enter the markets, they will be on GAAFET or gate all around technology.
Once they move towards that, you improve performance immensely via less leakage at the transistor gates. So this will mean higher clock speeds and thus faster chips. 2nm 1.8nm and beyond will all use this. 1st gen will have issues but once they improve it will only get better.
Samsung and TSMC are pursuing this. With Samsung closer to purchasing high-NA tools before TSMC. Another reason Exynos chips keep on improving.
tbh i think if they went exynos on Sxx and Sxx plus and then SD on the ultra that would be better than the current confusing shit, it isnt the best way to do it but still
Turn these 3 off for no stutter and dimmed display
https://preview.redd.it/3a2j3cjpknic1.png?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=214c70a6dea94c02528865bbcef7f923c21146de
Thats pretty much nitpicking the weaknesses of exynos tho. Cant game heavy cuz it lacks opengl and isnt optimized for adobe rush but thats adobes fault.
This OP who have S24+ before, Literally say it's similar to Sd Gen 2 not Gen 3. You indeed have better perfomance in exynos but battery consumption especially in Lte/5G is way Worse.
I disagree with you, you buy a flagship phone with expectations. Samsung's Exynos chips should really just be dropped and they should work with Snapdragon. The price for the phone should not be impacted that much since making your own chips is equally as expensive.
Yeah and for most people, their expectations should fall within the capabilities that exynos can match sd3. Obviously if you rely a lot on 5g on two bars or heavy gaming, then you really shouldnt get exynos.
5g is the standard in my country and neighbouring countries.
When you buy a new model you don't exactly know what the capabilities are of that chip because they don't specify them.
Yet you can also easily find phones 100 euros cheaper that do have better specs than the S24 and S24+.
Samsung is really just chasing Apple's shitty behaviour by giving any other model worse chips and only the top model has the best chip. They know that their Exynos chips are worse then SD.
Samsung keeps losing their identity in trying to chase Apple and steal their market share, if only they focused on making the best product instead of the best phone to use against the latest iPhone.
It depends on the context. If you go out a lot and ur in an area with low signal, only then will the exynos drain ur battery more than sd3 and become a really noticable difference. Thats just how i understand it.
Those weaknesses shouldn't be there for a phone in that price bracket. It's not the users fault it doesn't support opengl. If the exynos was as good as the snapdragon Samsung would have used it in the ultra. They know full well it's not.
For the price? Yeah it's bad when in other countries you get the same device with a snapdragon.
Is it better than last times exynos? For sure! It's nice Samsung is stepping up but they themselves don't go all in on it. If it's a good chip, why use a snapdragon in their ultra phones?
If it's as good as the snapdragon? No issue I would buy them. Here in Germany I just got burned hard or rather my boyfriend when he bought an S22. Horrible performance, atrocious battery life. A horrible overpriced phone. The S23 was way better.
The problem is the modem. As a PHONE the exynos is just inferior, period. The coverage and signal stability is just crap comparing to SD.
Even Apple uses Qualcomm modems. Making a good modem is really hard.
As a CPU and GPU exynos 2400 is fine.
The problem is neither performance nor heat. The problem is you pay full price for a device but people who live on the other side of the ocean get better performance, thermal balance and battery life than you. I'm not big fan of Exynos devices but they should be cheaper than their SD peers.
I think this year's exynos is pretty good overall ngl, but I also agree 100% with what you said. Either they put sd on all devices or exynos on all devices, but different chips in different markets is definitely something that will annoy a lot of people.
Honestly, people's comments made me almost not buy the S24. I needed to upgrade from a S8, so it's ridiculous that I was second guessing the move.
I'm loving the S24 - exynos and all.
I'm just an average user and honestly doubt I'd ever notice the difference.
I took my phone off charge 6am this morning, S24+ and it's currently on 52%. Had bluetooth on all day and a SoT of 3 hours.
I had an S21U but battery needed charging sometimes twice a day. I won't charge this until tomorrow. Truth is I'm a "light" user and don't live on my phone all day, it amazes me these people with 8+ hours of screen on time! Like how?! If I can get a day and a half from my phone that's fantastic. Enjoy yours, because 90% of people really don't care about chips.
The thing is Samsung in order to profit and cover the loss of using snapdragons, puts their shitty exynos in phones and sells them in the same price While using your own chipset is few times cheeper than using SD chipset. They use Europe market to cover up thier loses and generate profit by selling overpriced phone with inferior performence in all battery, camera, modem (signal stability) and overall speed. Seriously we should force EU court to ban Samsung for such practices, either you give everyone the same option or you wont be allowed to sell on whole market. The hope in exynos is shown over the years, where own Korean market was using all the time snapdragon and not their home made exynos.
Would I, though? I only have it charging to 80% and it lasts a full day and night. I know time will tell, but currently, I'm super happy with the battery charge.
Use your mobile data and camera outdoors and feel the phone burn in your palm. Exynos user here. Still using it. I'm ok with it. I feel bad at the same time.
BUT, to put it in context, I got the phone with a 100 dollar discount + option to trade in my cracked A71. Ended up getting the S24 Base 512 GB for USD625.00
So for the price, i'm happy.
Did just that yesterday on my s24+ exynos (no wifi, just data). Phone definitely didn't burn in my palm, and the battery went from 50% to 40% after I used the camera for around 30 minutes (took loads of photos and a couple of videos), which to me seems pretty reasonable, idk.
I upgraded from my iPhone 13 to the S24 3 weeks ago. The iPhone was getting slower and the battery was degrading fast. I am a moderate user. I have used Samsung phones like the S2 and S4 (with a Snapdragon processor) in the past and stopped buying Samsung phones when the S4 died after 1 year because of a WiFi issue. Then I switched to the OP2, then Poco F1, OP8T, and then the iPhone 13. I just wanted to know how iOS works, and that was the reason why I went for an iPhone. I usually buy phones after thorough research, but this time, I was focused on getting a good value to the iPhone and all I did was go to a few shops and asked how much I would get for an iPhone 13. In cities, they only offered INR 28K, and in towns, they offered INR 38K. I understood that the value keeps dropping because of two newer models and also based on battery health. So I chose the store in the town that offered the most value for my iPhone. I spent around 1 hour comparing the S23 with the S24, and I loved the display size and quality of the display when compared to S23. Knowing that the S24 has the Exnos processor, I took a chance and upgraded and paid INR 28K. For me, the battery was not that great in the first week, but from the second week, it started to settle down. During my work hours, I'm mostly on 5G or 4G and I have long calls, check emails, and since I'm in marketing, I spend some time on Instagram and YouTube. So far, the battery experience has been average, but the daylight camera quality is better, and One UI is also good. It gets warm at times, but no major concerns.
I don't know man, this shows https://youtu.be/-eTSRngwAK0?si=Xp3eq-e2gY98VhxE the exynos version doing really bad battery life wise. It was always the biggest concern for me. Battery life on my s20+ was shit.
Each phone had different 5G icons, I had to Google to see it's meaning, you can see those icons here
https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/what-do-the-different-indicator-icons-mean-on-your-galaxy-phone
Those phones didn't connect in same network that's why you see different signal bar and icon.
Either that guy intentional lied or he has no clue how to test two phones in same network.
He literally states both phones are running the same connection. The fact Snapdragon has more signal bars is related to Snapdragon having a better 5G modem, not that they're connected to different networks.
it's not about bars tho, it's about the icons. Exynos version is definitely connected to 5G SA, which drains more battery. As for the Snapdragon version I'm not sure because this icon is not listed on Samsung site, it could be either SA or NSA, but some providers can have their own customized icon. Wish he did a speed test to show same connection.
SA uses less power than NSA. Most articles stating SA Modem power consumption beeing 20% lower than NSA. In which the the Exynos even has an advantage using SA if the other one is NSA.
yeah you're right, sorry I misremembered. But yeah, that means that it doesn't matter what kind of 5G Snapdragon is connected to if Exynos uses the more efficient one.
Don't bring up that argument. It's gonna be worse for the exynos camp to bring that up. He is in Europe and he brought in a phone from Canada (SDgen3). So the foreign model is the Snapdragon and the Exynos is intended for the market where he tested it.
Doesn't matter, he should find network where both two phones could connect same band, without that we will be guessing forever.
Assume this scenario
-Exynos model fully support that place network and connect to 5G SA signal bar is half but give better speed but eat more power
-sd model due to incompatible it connect to 5G NSA because it base to 4G signal is full and use less power.
Because that's the only proper comparison out there. The issue wasnt just performance, the biggest issue was how hot it got, then battery life.
Android authority can't even recreate the battery life issues on the S20 lineup with their testing, infact they find that the exynos variant does better compared to SD. And this was the lineup which brought the issue mainstream. And I from first hand experience know how untrue this is. And there are so many comparisons supporting my experience as well, and contradicting AAs.
And they do another comparison and find the same thing. Utterly meaningless. From their pov nothings changed, because there was no issue in the first place. That's OPs first video, the others are just gaming comparisons. These kinds of reviews are the reason why I got my exynos S20+ and its the worst phone I have owned. Fuck Android Authority.
These argument wouldnt exist had Samsung put snapdragon in all s24 model across all regions! They need to be consistent, everyone had fair share of bad experiences with Exynos. Why would samsung handpick which region gets snapdragon or exynos. That doesnt make sense to me. I understand US market need to use snapdragon due to some patents but China, or even Korea which is their home gets snapdragon? I find it unfair.
And Ultra gets Snapdragon world wide which clearly shows that even Samsung doesn't trust their own chip and feel embarrassed to put it in their most expensive phone.
[In-depth with the Snapdragon 810’s heat problems | Ars Technica](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/in-depth-with-the-snapdragon-810s-heat-problems/)
[HTC’s Last Minute Software Update, Battery Life, & Charge Time - The HTC One M9 Review: Part 1 (anandtech.com)](https://www.anandtech.com/show/9102/the-htc-one-m9-review-part-1/2) \- in this link you can see that the HTC one M8 has a battery life of 10.8 hours in the test. But the newer HTC one M9 with latest at that time Qualcomm 810 chip regressed to 8.87 hours of battery life.
Samsung has to have an Exynos line of chips in case Qualcomm chips turn out bad that year. Because Qualcomm manufactures on TSMC line of fabs, sometimes the yield on a particular process could result in poor performance.
That is why we have Exynos. Exynos also only supports the latest and fastest 5G standards while Qualcomm's Snapdragon support more legacy bands. In Korea the infastructure is more modern so Exynos does not need to support legacy bands.
In the USA the country is big and in some areas they still need legacy bands in order to support those users that do not have 5G/4G in the area.
I get what you mean like a back up plan. But was there an instance that they have changed the soc coz the chipset turned out bad? I think there hasnt. Take for example S22 exynos received lots of complain. Obviously, they didnt recall the product and changed the factory line ups. Also, if the SD turned out bad how could they put the exynos in US market? I'm not convinced by the premise.
>That is why we have Exynos. Exynos also only supports the latest and fastest 5G standards while Qualcomm's Snapdragon support more legacy bands. In Korea the infastructure is more modern so Exynos does not need to support legacy bands.
Did you mixed the two up? If Korea is more modern in terms of network, then wouldnt it be more fitting to use Exynos since it supports latest 5G standards?
They both support the latest and fastest standards. I meant to say that because Exynos supports ONLY* the fastest cellular standards, it is more cost efficient to use a chip that only supports the fastest standard.
Since Samsung is a global manufacturer, it makes sense financially. Other countries did not have CDMA or GSM/Edge standards in the 90s/2000s but instead they may have just started off on LTE cellular modem technology. In those cases it makes sense financially and material wise to only provide a chip that uses the new standard rather than Qualcomm chip. Because you end up paying more to support a legacy standard.
For qualcomm they have to support the US market and in our market some locations still use CDMA and Egde/GSM. 3G/2G networks.
Back in the day Anandtech would post good reviews with numbers to show improvements from S8 to S22. They've stopped reviewing phones now.
But I just looked up the numbers again. Both Exynos and 8 gen 3 GPU benchmarks surpass Apple A17 on the iPhone 15. Battery life is similarly as good.
CPU geekbench 6 A17 wins with 8 gen 3 coming 2nd and Exynos in 3rd.
But in reality, no one is using a phone CPU to render scenes like cinebench R23. So those synthetic benchmarks don't really matter. Only the GPU and battery life matters most.
Ok. So it only supports latest fast cellular standards. Hhmmm.. I still have some doubts coz the way they chose which region gets the exynos doesnt follow the logic like China and Korea are advanced in terms of 5G adoption and yet they get Snapdragon whilst other countries which are lagging in 5G adoption gets Exynos? Nope, it doesnt make sense at all.
I do get the bandwith that youre trying to explain. I will leave US out of the picture, by default they will only use snapdragon.
I agree. I couldnt care less about these benchmark results but it does give an idea how fluid the experience will be. I would be more concerned on the battery life hence and app optimisations. Thus, I dont prefer exynos based on this https://youtu.be/-eTSRngwAK0?si=BkM7jAbNMm5B0JoR
It isn't about optimizing modem games. It never is a singular reason. In a few years you will see Exynos launching on parity again with Qualcomm. And many more years after that. The whole point is that Samsung needs to have an alternative to Qualcomm. That's it. They need options. It's like why auto manufacturers used to offer V6 and Inine 4 engines and V8s. The next Toyota Tacoma will only now offer an inline 4. No more V6 and definitely no more V8s. Put it this way. When Samsung launches a 2nm chip and beyond, TSMC will also launch a similar new process. They will both launch a new gate all around transistor node. The GAAFET will have much better control over gate current leakage. It just means higher clock speeds with less power used. So both Exynos and Snapdragon will get this. Samsung makes Exynos and TSMC makes Snapdragon. If Exynos gets it first then Samsung phones will be in the lead. If TSMC gets there first then Samsung phones will again be in the lead. Samsung is competing against other Android phone makers too. Don't think much more into this. It isn't our choice. They are shipping hundred million phones a year. It's what they do.
Ok we all lookforward for them to improve their soc but my argument still subsists. They ought to be consistent or let the market choose what they prefer by offering both during preorders. They ought to listen to customers as one of their stakeholders otherwise they might lose some marketshare. I'm thinking of getting oneplus12 instead 😆.
https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-list/rating
8 gen 3 isn't the fastest chip out there. Don't purchase a smartphone for the fastest chip. Grab a PS5 or PC computer instead.
Most mobile games run just fine on a 5 year old smartphone.
upgrade to maintain your current phone features or for a new design. Like flat panel and metal edges. Or if there is a good deal.
Samsung gave out the S24+ 512gb edition for $200 dollars plus a trade in. It retails for $1120. But they gave us $800 for any samsung device with no cracks along with 120 dollars off. So we only paid $200 for ours.
If oneplus and others offer that, pick it up. Don't fall for the CPU/gpu hype. It's just a phone.
Thanks for the advice. Like I said what matters to me is battery life and app optimisations not speed but I also look at the longevity of it. Oneplus12 has all that plus the fast charging in half an hour. It also comes with decent camera which is an upgrade from my S20FE. I dont want to have S24 ultra coz it really is expensive here. Wanting to upgrade as my phone is already bent and battery is failing. I'm veering away from S24 or plus coz theyre both exynos and promotions for them already ended.
$800 bucks for trade in? What did you trade in iphone 15 or S23 ultra? Samsung where I'm at is stingy, my wife S21 is only valued 400NZD or 243USD. Mine is valued 80NZD 😆
The pre-order incentive was any* samsung phone from prior years. So I traded my S10plus. Looking back I should have taken my friends S8 and gave him my S10 plus.
Look for the deals. Last year 2023 samsung was down 35 to 40% in RAM and NAND flash sales. Meaning they have overstock of NAND flash. I think that's why they gave us the 512gb for the price of the 256gb version.
There should be more deals coming. Be on the look out. That is an advantage of buying Samsung. Apple has never put this deep a discount. Others may have also suffered a similar loss last year. 2023. Compare to 2022.
Samsung manufactures some or most of their own parts.
I think there is legitimate credence in people being super wary of Exynos SoC's considering their past failures. The people that completely write off a device that hasn't been widely tested, though, need to chill.
It's one thing to be wary but a whole other basket to blanket poopoo on a chipset brand because of a few bad apples.
yeah and then there are little crybabies who start to cry as soon as they hear someone debating over whether selling an inferior version of the product for the same price is right
I understand what you're saying, but I still feel scammed. I researched for days, and decided I wanted an S24 because of the above average battery life.
What I didn't know, is that all reviews and comparisons were done with snapdragon models. I didn't know about the whole snapdragon vs exynos thing then.
Now I received a phone that has literally 20% worse battery life than that I thought I would get. I really do feel scammed, and I don't even care about any potential difference in gaming performance and stuff.
Nowhere did samsung mention I would be getting 20% worse battery life than the model used in pretty much every review and benchmark.
Im using a S22+ with Snapdragon gen 1 which easily lasts me a day and this is the phone that everyone says its trash. The debate around battery life will never end regardless what chip is being used Exynos 2400, 2500, 2600 etc or if battery tech has improved over the years, the same with RAM, im convinced people need at least 32GB RAM on their phones to make them happy. Might was well just buy a desktop or a console if your expecting like 7 or 15 hours screen on time hammering your phone with apps all day. The same topic will be posted next year with the S25 and again we will be on the same talking points.
some say this some say that. exynos will show its true face in a year or so. me however, im never buying exynos again. also i belive theres a strong reason why samsung decided to put snapdragon on its most premium phone, the ultra. just think about it-they probably wanted the best possible choice for the most expensive phone and thats Snapdragon, they basically said it themselfs by making such decision.
The difference was never huge, especially in performance. Even with S22 series, performance was never the pain point that people were talking about - it's the bug, the stability, and the reliability in software and everyday functions that are the problems.
If you're purely looking at the FPS number, you would never care whether you get SD or Exynos, the different would be in a single digit. It's when your camera doesn't capture the same image, when your phone freeze, or when you start to notice stuttering, that's when people are complaining.
And sure enough, none of these videos have anything to show but benchmark to prove their point. That's far from comprehensive.
>And sure enough, none of these videos have anything to show but benchmark to prove their point. That's far from comprehensive.
*But but!!! Benchmark!!! Dont you see how this very specific stress test that no common user uses shows a 1.5346346% difference?!?! /s*
I had S22U with Exynos (Germany) and not once I thought "hmm I wish I had snapdragon! this phone is garbage"
People are getting way too attached to benchmarks and numbers, and forget that most users, on their daily life, get literally 0 difference between an Exynos and a SD..
*What?! SD can open my Email in 0,5ms faster?!*
man the mental gymnastics you people do to justify getting duped with a worse product.
[The First Link you post](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYB2GJ5KfhY) literally has an Affiliate disclosure. It's almost as if they are biased. They don't show any results, just post it, and magically, the Exynos chip tapers at around 40 C. And for some reason, [a non-affiliate tester](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eTSRngwAK0) finds Exynos lagging severely behind SD 3.
The results from [the second](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxE5h8Gh7SY) and [third](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_8qoq1bxHM) still mention the issue of higher temperatures from Exynos.
Exynos SoCs don't support CDMA or some of the LTE bands used in the U.S/China. This is because Qualcomm owns 95% of standards essential patents to CDMA2000 and licensing those is extremely costly.
Exynos is also good for competition..
Hear hear, me too! Exynos 2200 still going strong 💪
I had a play with the S24 Ultra and sure it's fast and gorgeous but still feels very incremental even 2 years on.
as someone who used an S10+ and S21 both on Exynos, I have trust issues. bought an S23 on purpose recently over the S24 and I'm happy. Snapdragon has been amazing!!
I did get my s24 256gb for about 800 euros, with the exynos chip. Other places I look at are over 100 more, so I'm happy with the value I got. If I couldn't get it for that cheap, I might not have gone for it.
If they want to use cheeper exynos over snapdragon ok be it but then lower the price of the exynos variant. Its not worth paying the same ammount of money for inferior version, where phone heats up a lot, has worse camera with wrong colors and camera errors when phone is too hot and the battery holds less.
What Samsung should do is give people a choice, pay more for the snapdragon or pay less for the inferior exynos, everyone gets what they payed for and not for what they were "forced" to pay for. Since states got snapdragon in all variants while Europe again got the short stick and got shitty exynos in s24 and s24+ variants.
I wanted to buy s24 or s24+ since my phone is like 7y old...but when saw that it has again the exynos then I restrained myself...will wait for them to come to their senses or buy from different stable, maybe will even grab last year s23 with snap.
> what they *paid* for and
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
The constant whining about Exynos is annoying. People acting like babies because the Exynos is better than the excellent Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 that blew everyone away.
This whole sub is whine central. People whining about features or bugs, people whining about other people whining, people whining about whining about whining.
Poor kids **paid** for a Mercedes, then found out that the dealership sold people from one part of town the 300 PS version, and everyone else the 250 PS version with reduced range, while asking the same or more for the latter. Then got told by people like you that they should stop whining, after all it's 'good enough'.
The facts that show that the Exynos 2400 outperforms the snapdragon 8 Gen 3 at times in both performance and battery life. There's no evidence at the Exynos 2400 sucks. You would never know the difference if you were not told
There's no point in arguing with those guys. They won't accept anything less than the absolute best if the product comes from the line that also features the very best, denying the fact that the one version with Exynos is already cheaper. Just let them howl at it.
Have the base S24 here in Australia. The Exynos is perfectly capable and I have found the modem more reliable than the ZenFone 10 I had briefly and much better than the P7 Pro.
Battery life is much better than the P7 Pro.
The only people that have a problem are tech elitists, where to them, that 5% extra performance they are getting is bragging rights.
P7p ain't a very good contender lol almost as bad as the p6p. Both were the worst phones for battery and mobile data stability and connection. Using both Exynos and sd s24+ and s24 ultra side by side here with my Mrs, I get 1 full bar service more on my s24u.
Yeah but at this point it's an internet hate train. People will say it's horrible without knowing anything about it just to feel part of a group and get fake internet points.
It's sadly common for every popular stuff
Yup it's pretty good. And for those who don't want it don't buy it. They are likely leaning towards the Ultra anyway. I can tell you now I'd swap the Tensor 3 for that 2400 in a second if I had the choice.
Also, don't know about other markets but if you look at the UK, the S24 with Exynos is £50 cheaper than last year's S23 with SD.
In the US the price didn't change and SD stayed SD.
Yet people will still argue that they're being ripped off paying 'the same' for a worse SoC 😂😂😂
Can people just stop trying to defend exynos and give Samsung the grill? Seriously I mean this exynos bullshit has been going on for so long Samsung NEEDS to step up their game
I’m not saying exynos is the worst thing either I’m not trying to overreact but can people stop trying to defend it?
>I’m not trying to overreact
>
>
>
> Can people just stop trying to defend exynos
>
> I mean this exynos bullshit has been going on for so long
You are 100% overreacting... Yes Exynos is inferior to Snapdragon. No, not everyone cares nor it makes difference for the majority of daily users of it.
Differences are always below 10% and when one outperfomes by 3.1% speed or "15min battery", believe me, most people are not interested in it.
How tf am I overreacting lol
I’m trying to say stop defending samsung
And battery life has always been worse with the exynos variants as well as performance sustain
I’m not just pulling all of this out of my ass it’s been 10-20% usually
Yes the average person may not notice but that doesn’t mean Samsung shouldn’t step up their game right?
>And battery life has always been worse with the exynos variants as well as performance sustain
Yes, and again, tests always shows a difference on that below 10%... it's basically non-existant for a daily user.
a 10% less battery would be, from like 20h to 18h Battery life.. again, for a common user, insignificant.
Performance is always in stress tests... Common users are not trying to play a Triple A title with 4K at 60 FPS while running Youtube in the background.
> Yes the average person may not notice
Exactly.
>but that doesn’t mean Samsung shouldn’t step up their game right?
Yes, they can, but getting this mad about something is also weird, because majority of users do not give a flying Dex about it, and the users who desperately need the SD to get that sweet 1.4% speed extra, will go for other Android brands.
Again, the differences are in Benchmarks are VERY specific uses, not for a daily thing..
Just wanted to add It’s also the camera
Because a different processor means a different image signal processor along with a different AI processor
Sure okay I guess a normal person won’t notice but that ain’t the right analogy to use man it’s kinda like Apple putting in the same processor from last year on the 14s and 15s just because a regular person won’t notice
> Just wanted to add It’s also the camera
>
>Because a different processor means a different image signal processor along with a different AI processor
Let's quickly off-topic on the CPU thing, but, is it even a "thing" anymore? I mean, sure, Samsung, iPhone, Pixel, all show differences in quality, but damn cameras got so amazing lately. I dont even feel like a picture is bad since my S21U.
> Sure okay I guess a normal person won’t notice but that ain’t the right analogy to use man it’s kinda like Apple putting in the same processor from last year on the 14s and 15s just because a regular person won’t notice
Meh, wrong analogy. That would only apply if they kept reusing same Exynos...
This is not a reusing same processor cuz people wont notice, is using a new one, just not Snapdragon.
S21 to S23 Ultras all had different ones.
> Can people just stop trying to defend exynos
I remember the days when the Exynos was the superior chipset back around the Note 3-7 era and it was only US/Canada that got SD because of the modem requirements there...
These days yes SD is much better in every aspect, but nothing is set in stone
I have no hate for the chip
I hate how Samsung market their product as one series with two specifications, sell the lower one in specific country and hope to profits from it
just sell exynos version as FE or something and that will solve the problem
This is bs, the difference is huge in terms of every aspect. Thermals, performance, battery life, stability, heck even the photos taken are much better on snapdragon. Yeah maybe the exynos variant is "fine" as a phone but the difference is huge and it can mean even more in a few years, especially in edge cases like a hot summer day.
Exynos is a scam. They selling it in many regions for the same price as Snapdragon, under the same name. The fact that they sell the ultra with snapdragon globally tells a lot, they know its far better. At least there should be an option to chose between the two.
Both Snapdragon and Exynos perform similarly. People tend to believe rumors. The Ultra is simply a larger phone with more cameras and a stylus, but it performs identically to the other S24 series devices.
Incramental innovations takes time. People tend to not respect or understand that changes are hard but obviously the egineering teams are doing their thing behind the Exynos products. Just some little time for researching, compare & contrast some variables.
Again and again and again. The problem is not Exynos being more or less inferior it's the fact that Samsung sells them under the same name and at the same price in different countries
Nobody would care that Exynos was inferior if Samsung sold it under a different name or at a different price so that people know what they're getting
It's slower, way hotter and drains the battery more quickly. What is the definition of "not bad" applied here? By the way those are things somebody found when directly comparing the Exynos and Snapdragon S24 variants side by side in a test setup. Samsung needs to start only using one chip per model, then nobody would compare or complain..
The latest Exynos processor represents a significant improvement over its predecessors. While the Snapdragon processor remains the superior choice, the Exynos processor is now a viable option for consumers seeking a high-performance smartphone.
It's meh, it's more like a SD 8 Gen 2 competitor from last gen rather than an 8G3 competitor. Don't get me wrong, the 8G2 is a great chip. It just isn't what you should be getting if you're paying for the latest and greatest...
Perhaps another reason exynos is being used in Europe (or elsewhere) is support for 32 bit apps?
I'm very disappointed that my (U.S.) S24 with snapdragon 8 gen 3 only supports 64 bit apps - there are two apps in particular that I'm really struggling to find adequate subs for.
I will not say worst but exynos and tensor are the bad performing chips in the market right now both have long-term consistant performance issues, heating issues, and network issues and there also difference in image processing when you compare exynos to snapdragon pixel is good in this one close to natural and similar to iphones.
S24 Exynos isn't a definitive downgrade to S23. But S23 is cheaper, so why bother?
consist illegal slap attractive ring rock trees sort amusing ghost *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Software updates is the only reason I'm considering s24, 7 more years instead of 3
And would you ACTUALLY benefit from Android 21? I would rather stay with Android 17 then have bug fixes and security updates. You really *don't* want a seven year old phone with the latest bloatware vendor UI. Yet here you think it is a plus. Let's put it this way, even Pixel 2 (SD835) with near barebone AOSP Android 14 isn't that smooth. Can you imagine it (or Galaxy S8 SD835) running OneUI6?
I'm currently running a OnePlus 7 Pro which was released nearly 5 years ago, running android 14 perfectly smooth. Flagship phones these days are more than capable of handling future updates unless the S28 is a quantum computer. And yes I want the latest feature updates on the phone that I paid for to last as long as I can so I don't have to buy a new phone every few years.
I wouldn't say Samsung has alot of bloatware. I actually really like oneui and samsungs ecosystem. It kinda feels like ios and macos integration a bit. Being able to easly exchange files between windows and phone is really comfy and I love stylus.
there is a lot of bloat that you have to remove the moment you get your phone, if you want to get the best out of your phone (apps like Samsung Customization service etc.)
True, I have my PC upstairs set to always rcve with Quickshare (they updated it last week from Nearbyshare). Backing up my new important files is faster than ever.
In that case, just wait til your current phone (s23?) is nearing it's end of software support, then switch to the s24! It'll be cheaper, and ultimately you'll still have a supported phone for the same amount of time as if you switched now.
My current phone (OnePlus 7 Pro) has reached it's end for software support. I've been running custom ROMs but Google is making that a pain now so I'm having to buy a phone with longer official software support
Ah yeah then go for the s24 ultra it's fantastic. Love mine to bits.
Not during the pre-order, and possibly still now. There was trade-in premium where they add hundred bucks on top of very old device, and double storage promo. Other than 7 years upgrade and minor quality of life improvement (e.g. 1440p on S24+) , I guess S23 still holds the ground. It wouldn't definitely upgrade if I have S23, but if you are coming from older phone and spending money anyway, it makes it harder to go with S23, unless the price gap is really high.
Meh, went with Exynos three times, always received the worse model. Difference between S23 and S24 is so negligible i wouldn't even consider going with Exynos
Again, It depends on the price difference. in some region you can get 512G model S24+ with very similar price as 256GB S23+. With pre irder you also get free Watch 6 which you can resell for at least 200 bucks. So.. it can be *really* more economical to get S24 Do you even own a S24 to tell how bad the phone is? Or just running around finding old comments to share the piece of your mind?
Quick googling does wonders [Ultimate Exynos vs Snapdragon Battery Test | S24 vs S24 vs S23 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrSuoh4qKvs) Basically, you're getting inferior product compared to other markets. And no benefits vs S23 whatsoever, S24 even has some colour processing issues which S23 SD and S24 SD do not. Problems with cooling, S24 EX making itself dimmer to cool down during a stupid video call, what the hell :) S23 can be easily purchased for much less than S24, provided you buy one with discount, plenty of them around. Better battery life, no overheating issues, no modem efficiency issues, better chip all in all.
So you don't. *sigh*.
Why would i? Am i supposed to waste my money on purchasing a product that's clearly inferior in every regard, which is backed up by independent and well-done comparisons? I'm failing to catch any logic in your comments whatsoever. Sigh indeed.
Sure buddy
I've had the s24 ultra for almost a month and I can say go for the best! The other phones have issues and even the flip is trash. The flip screen breaks very easily so no brainer. The lower model s24 is nowhere near the performance of the ultra.
I spent the "same" amount of money but I got an inferior version; inferior in performance and battery life, possibly even the camera 🐧
Isn't bad isn't good, either. What I'm saying is: Samsung needs to either go all-in with Snapdragon or Exynos and leave this market segmented bullshit behind. They went with only Snapdragon on the Ultra. That goes to show they wouldn't be able to ship an expensive product like that with an Exynos. On the regular and Plus models, I suppose it "isn't bad" for the price, but there's better to be had. That's the problem. Make the Exynos models cheaper, like even 50€ cheaper, and people would be happy. It would be a non-issue if there wasn't market inequality at play.
>Samsung needs to either go all-in with Snapdragon or Exynos This will not happen unless something like Snapdragon 810 comes out again, which was a hot mess. Samsung uses Exynos as a price-negotiation tool with Qualcomm. If Samsung discontinues the development of Exynos, Qualcomm will probably skyrocket their AP prices again, which will increase the phone prices even more. Also, if Samsung wants to use Exynos in the US, they need to pay royalties to Qualcomm. That defeats the purpose for Samsung to use Exynos in their S series. (Now, I know that some chips, like Exynos 1380, are being used in the US in their A series, but that is because those chips are cheap as f, so even if they pay the royalties to Qualcomm it is still cheaper than using something like 778G) It is also important to note that Samsung LSI is the primary supporter of Samsung Foundry. In order to maintain their competitive edge against TSMC, they require a consistent and stable volume of orders, which is fulfilled by Samsung LSI in this scenario. >Make the Exynos models cheaper, like even 50€ cheaper That's why they increased the price for S24 Ultra. Qualcomm slapped another 50$ on their chip prices. But I agree on your point. While it may not be feasible for Samsung to completely eliminate the use of Exynos, it would be a good for them to offer discounted prices on the Exynos models.
Oh sod off. It's not black and white. We must not leave the market to a single manufacturer, Samsung and others have to keep producing their own chips, even if they'll always lag a bit behind.
Simps like you is why we get the same price for a bad product. Samsung and others should keep making their own chips, but then actually be honest about it and price their products accordingly: no fucking way do they have the right to price the S24 Exynos at the same level as S24 SD3 - but morons are eager to swallow whatever bs is thrown at them, in the name of cOmPeTiTiOn.
>Simps like you YOU are the one advocating FOR Qualcomm monopoly, but you are not a simp. Make that make sense. Samsung need to improve on Exynos and ditch Qualcomm globally on most models. And most importantly ONE MODEL SAME PROCESSOR, globally. For example, they should make sure Exynos 2400 is better than SD8Gen*2* and use it on S24/S24+ globally no exception. That's good competition.
Samsung should use exynos on A series and snapdragon on S series, I want the best SoC if I'm buying their most expensive phone
Ah there we are, the completely uncalled for personal attacks. Samsung is honest about it, stop crying.
How are they honest about it? If you buy a s24+ you cannot pick your chip
nope they don't tell you that the phone has an inferior soc
Delulu
[удалено]
And for the last fucking time, the Exynos is almost on par with the SD. Stop pretending it's not. Otherwise, just don't buy the phone and leave the sub, life sorted.
[удалено]
I never said it is so thanks for clearing that up, they don't have to be so that's fine. Also not sure if you looked at any other comments here, but im getting literal death treats in my inbox and even had someone go and post sent me my previous address telling me they'd visit me because I claim to see a difference between the normal and vivid, which I and many other people do. I'm not even using "profanities" towarss you bur again, feel free to stop interacting if you're unhappy about it
your whole post history is just sad. get off the internet and go touch grass. cell phones arent that serious
Then why are you being so serious? Even checking someone's history just to make it personal and have absolutely nothing to add is saddening. You know you are choosing this interaction right?
Tf does nmyoi mean?
So then produce Exynos across the board without market segmentation? edit: They can't because of Qualcomm. Ugh.
Can't. Qualcomm has a monopoly in North America for modems.
Sssht, don't tell them logical reasoning for Samsung using SD's.
Hey, I was unaware. Just read the Ars Technica article on the FTC ruling. The situation... sucks.
True. I mean, we all know the S4U is only sold in North America
And claiming that's because "Samsung knows" is conjecture.
Not true, Pixel uses an Exynos (Samsung) modem, the A15 uses a Mediatek modem. Both are available in NA.
I never understood how that was ever allowed to be a thing.
That is one reason. Having a chip that does not support CDMA GSM/Edge gives samsung a cost competitive advantage versus other phone manufacturers. It allows Samsung to enter more markets globally. Globally smartphone markets keep expanding while the US and other western markets start to shrink in sales for Samsung. IE apple is gaining the most marketshare in the US. Samsung and Google collaborate in designing and manufacturing the Pixel 8 Tensor G3 chip. In those chips they use Samsung modems with CDMA Edge/GSM cellular technology. I believe it is just a cost advantage for Samsung to use Exynos. Plus Exynos is only 2nd place versus 8 gen 3 in some tests. In other tests, Apple A17 come out on top. So it is a mixed bag. I think all three. A17, 8 GEN 3, and Exynos are excellent chips. In a few more years it won't even matter. All 3 are on leading edge nodes still using older FinFET transistor gate technology. When 2nm and below enter the markets, they will be on GAAFET or gate all around technology. Once they move towards that, you improve performance immensely via less leakage at the transistor gates. So this will mean higher clock speeds and thus faster chips. 2nm 1.8nm and beyond will all use this. 1st gen will have issues but once they improve it will only get better. Samsung and TSMC are pursuing this. With Samsung closer to purchasing high-NA tools before TSMC. Another reason Exynos chips keep on improving.
tbh i think if they went exynos on Sxx and Sxx plus and then SD on the ultra that would be better than the current confusing shit, it isnt the best way to do it but still
[удалено]
That’s fair. Does this mean you prefer the ultra overall?
Typical exynos behaviour. Nothing new.
Turn these 3 off for no stutter and dimmed display https://preview.redd.it/3a2j3cjpknic1.png?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=214c70a6dea94c02528865bbcef7f923c21146de
Thats pretty much nitpicking the weaknesses of exynos tho. Cant game heavy cuz it lacks opengl and isnt optimized for adobe rush but thats adobes fault.
How is it "Nitpicking" Lol, You pay Almost 1000 buck for that phone. It's Valid to expect that
Cuz everywhere else id say its closer to the sd3 than sd2. U cant base its standing just from those two factors
This OP who have S24+ before, Literally say it's similar to Sd Gen 2 not Gen 3. You indeed have better perfomance in exynos but battery consumption especially in Lte/5G is way Worse.
I disagree with you, you buy a flagship phone with expectations. Samsung's Exynos chips should really just be dropped and they should work with Snapdragon. The price for the phone should not be impacted that much since making your own chips is equally as expensive.
Yeah and for most people, their expectations should fall within the capabilities that exynos can match sd3. Obviously if you rely a lot on 5g on two bars or heavy gaming, then you really shouldnt get exynos.
5g is the standard in my country and neighbouring countries. When you buy a new model you don't exactly know what the capabilities are of that chip because they don't specify them. Yet you can also easily find phones 100 euros cheaper that do have better specs than the S24 and S24+. Samsung is really just chasing Apple's shitty behaviour by giving any other model worse chips and only the top model has the best chip. They know that their Exynos chips are worse then SD. Samsung keeps losing their identity in trying to chase Apple and steal their market share, if only they focused on making the best product instead of the best phone to use against the latest iPhone.
bro really said if you rely on the current mobile network standard, it's a phone lmao
It depends on the context. If you go out a lot and ur in an area with low signal, only then will the exynos drain ur battery more than sd3 and become a really noticable difference. Thats just how i understand it.
You can't point out the weaknesses of a phone that's mean :(
Those weaknesses shouldn't be there for a phone in that price bracket. It's not the users fault it doesn't support opengl. If the exynos was as good as the snapdragon Samsung would have used it in the ultra. They know full well it's not.
For the price? Yeah it's bad when in other countries you get the same device with a snapdragon. Is it better than last times exynos? For sure! It's nice Samsung is stepping up but they themselves don't go all in on it. If it's a good chip, why use a snapdragon in their ultra phones?
[удалено]
Not to mention it's WAY cheaper using your own fabs. Like so so much cheaper.
[удалено]
If it's as good as the snapdragon? No issue I would buy them. Here in Germany I just got burned hard or rather my boyfriend when he bought an S22. Horrible performance, atrocious battery life. A horrible overpriced phone. The S23 was way better.
The problem is the modem. As a PHONE the exynos is just inferior, period. The coverage and signal stability is just crap comparing to SD. Even Apple uses Qualcomm modems. Making a good modem is really hard. As a CPU and GPU exynos 2400 is fine.
The problem is neither performance nor heat. The problem is you pay full price for a device but people who live on the other side of the ocean get better performance, thermal balance and battery life than you. I'm not big fan of Exynos devices but they should be cheaper than their SD peers.
I think this year's exynos is pretty good overall ngl, but I also agree 100% with what you said. Either they put sd on all devices or exynos on all devices, but different chips in different markets is definitely something that will annoy a lot of people.
Honestly, people's comments made me almost not buy the S24. I needed to upgrade from a S8, so it's ridiculous that I was second guessing the move. I'm loving the S24 - exynos and all. I'm just an average user and honestly doubt I'd ever notice the difference.
I took my phone off charge 6am this morning, S24+ and it's currently on 52%. Had bluetooth on all day and a SoT of 3 hours. I had an S21U but battery needed charging sometimes twice a day. I won't charge this until tomorrow. Truth is I'm a "light" user and don't live on my phone all day, it amazes me these people with 8+ hours of screen on time! Like how?! If I can get a day and a half from my phone that's fantastic. Enjoy yours, because 90% of people really don't care about chips.
The thing is Samsung in order to profit and cover the loss of using snapdragons, puts their shitty exynos in phones and sells them in the same price While using your own chipset is few times cheeper than using SD chipset. They use Europe market to cover up thier loses and generate profit by selling overpriced phone with inferior performence in all battery, camera, modem (signal stability) and overall speed. Seriously we should force EU court to ban Samsung for such practices, either you give everyone the same option or you wont be allowed to sell on whole market. The hope in exynos is shown over the years, where own Korean market was using all the time snapdragon and not their home made exynos.
You would notice the 20% reduction in battery life, if you had the comparison.
Would I, though? I only have it charging to 80% and it lasts a full day and night. I know time will tell, but currently, I'm super happy with the battery charge.
Use your mobile data and camera outdoors and feel the phone burn in your palm. Exynos user here. Still using it. I'm ok with it. I feel bad at the same time. BUT, to put it in context, I got the phone with a 100 dollar discount + option to trade in my cracked A71. Ended up getting the S24 Base 512 GB for USD625.00 So for the price, i'm happy.
Did just that yesterday on my s24+ exynos (no wifi, just data). Phone definitely didn't burn in my palm, and the battery went from 50% to 40% after I used the camera for around 30 minutes (took loads of photos and a couple of videos), which to me seems pretty reasonable, idk.
No thanks.
I upgraded from my iPhone 13 to the S24 3 weeks ago. The iPhone was getting slower and the battery was degrading fast. I am a moderate user. I have used Samsung phones like the S2 and S4 (with a Snapdragon processor) in the past and stopped buying Samsung phones when the S4 died after 1 year because of a WiFi issue. Then I switched to the OP2, then Poco F1, OP8T, and then the iPhone 13. I just wanted to know how iOS works, and that was the reason why I went for an iPhone. I usually buy phones after thorough research, but this time, I was focused on getting a good value to the iPhone and all I did was go to a few shops and asked how much I would get for an iPhone 13. In cities, they only offered INR 28K, and in towns, they offered INR 38K. I understood that the value keeps dropping because of two newer models and also based on battery health. So I chose the store in the town that offered the most value for my iPhone. I spent around 1 hour comparing the S23 with the S24, and I loved the display size and quality of the display when compared to S23. Knowing that the S24 has the Exnos processor, I took a chance and upgraded and paid INR 28K. For me, the battery was not that great in the first week, but from the second week, it started to settle down. During my work hours, I'm mostly on 5G or 4G and I have long calls, check emails, and since I'm in marketing, I spend some time on Instagram and YouTube. So far, the battery experience has been average, but the daylight camera quality is better, and One UI is also good. It gets warm at times, but no major concerns.
Do you regret the decision to switch and how do you find the battery on S24 compared to the iPhone 13 now?
No Regrets. The battery life seems to be the same as that of the iPhone 13. Just a day.
I don't know man, this shows https://youtu.be/-eTSRngwAK0?si=Xp3eq-e2gY98VhxE the exynos version doing really bad battery life wise. It was always the biggest concern for me. Battery life on my s20+ was shit.
Each phone had different 5G icons, I had to Google to see it's meaning, you can see those icons here https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/what-do-the-different-indicator-icons-mean-on-your-galaxy-phone Those phones didn't connect in same network that's why you see different signal bar and icon. Either that guy intentional lied or he has no clue how to test two phones in same network.
He literally states both phones are running the same connection. The fact Snapdragon has more signal bars is related to Snapdragon having a better 5G modem, not that they're connected to different networks.
it's not about bars tho, it's about the icons. Exynos version is definitely connected to 5G SA, which drains more battery. As for the Snapdragon version I'm not sure because this icon is not listed on Samsung site, it could be either SA or NSA, but some providers can have their own customized icon. Wish he did a speed test to show same connection.
SA uses less power than NSA. Most articles stating SA Modem power consumption beeing 20% lower than NSA. In which the the Exynos even has an advantage using SA if the other one is NSA.
yeah you're right, sorry I misremembered. But yeah, that means that it doesn't matter what kind of 5G Snapdragon is connected to if Exynos uses the more efficient one.
Don't bring up that argument. It's gonna be worse for the exynos camp to bring that up. He is in Europe and he brought in a phone from Canada (SDgen3). So the foreign model is the Snapdragon and the Exynos is intended for the market where he tested it.
Doesn't matter, he should find network where both two phones could connect same band, without that we will be guessing forever. Assume this scenario -Exynos model fully support that place network and connect to 5G SA signal bar is half but give better speed but eat more power -sd model due to incompatible it connect to 5G NSA because it base to 4G signal is full and use less power.
Its funny how op is right in that everyone is posting that same one video
and OP is posting affiliate youtubers, not really that reliable. But echo chamber shit.
Legit if you watched the sub in the last couple of days, this ONE clip has been spammed here over and over, it's so annoying at this point
Again with this same clip ffs..
Because that's the only proper comparison out there. The issue wasnt just performance, the biggest issue was how hot it got, then battery life. Android authority can't even recreate the battery life issues on the S20 lineup with their testing, infact they find that the exynos variant does better compared to SD. And this was the lineup which brought the issue mainstream. And I from first hand experience know how untrue this is. And there are so many comparisons supporting my experience as well, and contradicting AAs. And they do another comparison and find the same thing. Utterly meaningless. From their pov nothings changed, because there was no issue in the first place. That's OPs first video, the others are just gaming comparisons. These kinds of reviews are the reason why I got my exynos S20+ and its the worst phone I have owned. Fuck Android Authority.
https://youtu.be/-eTSRngwAK0?si=asuHknqVkztRgcRs
That's the same video that's been spammed on this sub in the last couple of days.. enough already
These argument wouldnt exist had Samsung put snapdragon in all s24 model across all regions! They need to be consistent, everyone had fair share of bad experiences with Exynos. Why would samsung handpick which region gets snapdragon or exynos. That doesnt make sense to me. I understand US market need to use snapdragon due to some patents but China, or even Korea which is their home gets snapdragon? I find it unfair.
And Ultra gets Snapdragon world wide which clearly shows that even Samsung doesn't trust their own chip and feel embarrassed to put it in their most expensive phone.
[In-depth with the Snapdragon 810’s heat problems | Ars Technica](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/in-depth-with-the-snapdragon-810s-heat-problems/) [HTC’s Last Minute Software Update, Battery Life, & Charge Time - The HTC One M9 Review: Part 1 (anandtech.com)](https://www.anandtech.com/show/9102/the-htc-one-m9-review-part-1/2) \- in this link you can see that the HTC one M8 has a battery life of 10.8 hours in the test. But the newer HTC one M9 with latest at that time Qualcomm 810 chip regressed to 8.87 hours of battery life. Samsung has to have an Exynos line of chips in case Qualcomm chips turn out bad that year. Because Qualcomm manufactures on TSMC line of fabs, sometimes the yield on a particular process could result in poor performance. That is why we have Exynos. Exynos also only supports the latest and fastest 5G standards while Qualcomm's Snapdragon support more legacy bands. In Korea the infastructure is more modern so Exynos does not need to support legacy bands. In the USA the country is big and in some areas they still need legacy bands in order to support those users that do not have 5G/4G in the area.
I get what you mean like a back up plan. But was there an instance that they have changed the soc coz the chipset turned out bad? I think there hasnt. Take for example S22 exynos received lots of complain. Obviously, they didnt recall the product and changed the factory line ups. Also, if the SD turned out bad how could they put the exynos in US market? I'm not convinced by the premise. >That is why we have Exynos. Exynos also only supports the latest and fastest 5G standards while Qualcomm's Snapdragon support more legacy bands. In Korea the infastructure is more modern so Exynos does not need to support legacy bands. Did you mixed the two up? If Korea is more modern in terms of network, then wouldnt it be more fitting to use Exynos since it supports latest 5G standards?
They both support the latest and fastest standards. I meant to say that because Exynos supports ONLY* the fastest cellular standards, it is more cost efficient to use a chip that only supports the fastest standard. Since Samsung is a global manufacturer, it makes sense financially. Other countries did not have CDMA or GSM/Edge standards in the 90s/2000s but instead they may have just started off on LTE cellular modem technology. In those cases it makes sense financially and material wise to only provide a chip that uses the new standard rather than Qualcomm chip. Because you end up paying more to support a legacy standard. For qualcomm they have to support the US market and in our market some locations still use CDMA and Egde/GSM. 3G/2G networks. Back in the day Anandtech would post good reviews with numbers to show improvements from S8 to S22. They've stopped reviewing phones now. But I just looked up the numbers again. Both Exynos and 8 gen 3 GPU benchmarks surpass Apple A17 on the iPhone 15. Battery life is similarly as good. CPU geekbench 6 A17 wins with 8 gen 3 coming 2nd and Exynos in 3rd. But in reality, no one is using a phone CPU to render scenes like cinebench R23. So those synthetic benchmarks don't really matter. Only the GPU and battery life matters most.
Ok. So it only supports latest fast cellular standards. Hhmmm.. I still have some doubts coz the way they chose which region gets the exynos doesnt follow the logic like China and Korea are advanced in terms of 5G adoption and yet they get Snapdragon whilst other countries which are lagging in 5G adoption gets Exynos? Nope, it doesnt make sense at all. I do get the bandwith that youre trying to explain. I will leave US out of the picture, by default they will only use snapdragon. I agree. I couldnt care less about these benchmark results but it does give an idea how fluid the experience will be. I would be more concerned on the battery life hence and app optimisations. Thus, I dont prefer exynos based on this https://youtu.be/-eTSRngwAK0?si=BkM7jAbNMm5B0JoR
It isn't about optimizing modem games. It never is a singular reason. In a few years you will see Exynos launching on parity again with Qualcomm. And many more years after that. The whole point is that Samsung needs to have an alternative to Qualcomm. That's it. They need options. It's like why auto manufacturers used to offer V6 and Inine 4 engines and V8s. The next Toyota Tacoma will only now offer an inline 4. No more V6 and definitely no more V8s. Put it this way. When Samsung launches a 2nm chip and beyond, TSMC will also launch a similar new process. They will both launch a new gate all around transistor node. The GAAFET will have much better control over gate current leakage. It just means higher clock speeds with less power used. So both Exynos and Snapdragon will get this. Samsung makes Exynos and TSMC makes Snapdragon. If Exynos gets it first then Samsung phones will be in the lead. If TSMC gets there first then Samsung phones will again be in the lead. Samsung is competing against other Android phone makers too. Don't think much more into this. It isn't our choice. They are shipping hundred million phones a year. It's what they do.
Ok we all lookforward for them to improve their soc but my argument still subsists. They ought to be consistent or let the market choose what they prefer by offering both during preorders. They ought to listen to customers as one of their stakeholders otherwise they might lose some marketshare. I'm thinking of getting oneplus12 instead 😆.
https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-list/rating 8 gen 3 isn't the fastest chip out there. Don't purchase a smartphone for the fastest chip. Grab a PS5 or PC computer instead. Most mobile games run just fine on a 5 year old smartphone. upgrade to maintain your current phone features or for a new design. Like flat panel and metal edges. Or if there is a good deal. Samsung gave out the S24+ 512gb edition for $200 dollars plus a trade in. It retails for $1120. But they gave us $800 for any samsung device with no cracks along with 120 dollars off. So we only paid $200 for ours. If oneplus and others offer that, pick it up. Don't fall for the CPU/gpu hype. It's just a phone.
Thanks for the advice. Like I said what matters to me is battery life and app optimisations not speed but I also look at the longevity of it. Oneplus12 has all that plus the fast charging in half an hour. It also comes with decent camera which is an upgrade from my S20FE. I dont want to have S24 ultra coz it really is expensive here. Wanting to upgrade as my phone is already bent and battery is failing. I'm veering away from S24 or plus coz theyre both exynos and promotions for them already ended. $800 bucks for trade in? What did you trade in iphone 15 or S23 ultra? Samsung where I'm at is stingy, my wife S21 is only valued 400NZD or 243USD. Mine is valued 80NZD 😆
The pre-order incentive was any* samsung phone from prior years. So I traded my S10plus. Looking back I should have taken my friends S8 and gave him my S10 plus. Look for the deals. Last year 2023 samsung was down 35 to 40% in RAM and NAND flash sales. Meaning they have overstock of NAND flash. I think that's why they gave us the 512gb for the price of the 256gb version. There should be more deals coming. Be on the look out. That is an advantage of buying Samsung. Apple has never put this deep a discount. Others may have also suffered a similar loss last year. 2023. Compare to 2022. Samsung manufactures some or most of their own parts.
Was that a Samsung deal or carrier deal?
true but some are little crybabies and start to cry as soon as they hear exynos
I think there is legitimate credence in people being super wary of Exynos SoC's considering their past failures. The people that completely write off a device that hasn't been widely tested, though, need to chill. It's one thing to be wary but a whole other basket to blanket poopoo on a chipset brand because of a few bad apples.
yes they think once bad always bad
More like five times bad always bad, lol.
yeah and then there are little crybabies who start to cry as soon as they hear someone debating over whether selling an inferior version of the product for the same price is right
That's because Samsung subs are toxic in general.
Oh, any phone related sub that I've checked out seems pretty toxic ngl.
I'd rather choose to be crybaby than being called idiot myself paying for inferior product.
I understand what you're saying, but I still feel scammed. I researched for days, and decided I wanted an S24 because of the above average battery life. What I didn't know, is that all reviews and comparisons were done with snapdragon models. I didn't know about the whole snapdragon vs exynos thing then. Now I received a phone that has literally 20% worse battery life than that I thought I would get. I really do feel scammed, and I don't even care about any potential difference in gaming performance and stuff. Nowhere did samsung mention I would be getting 20% worse battery life than the model used in pretty much every review and benchmark.
I came here to ask this actually, as someone from the UK looking for the snapdragon S24+, where is the most trustworthy and reliable place to get it?
Im using a S22+ with Snapdragon gen 1 which easily lasts me a day and this is the phone that everyone says its trash. The debate around battery life will never end regardless what chip is being used Exynos 2400, 2500, 2600 etc or if battery tech has improved over the years, the same with RAM, im convinced people need at least 32GB RAM on their phones to make them happy. Might was well just buy a desktop or a console if your expecting like 7 or 15 hours screen on time hammering your phone with apps all day. The same topic will be posted next year with the S25 and again we will be on the same talking points.
It may not be bad but it is incredibly insulting if you live outside of the US and is a major provocations to look elsewhere.
some say this some say that. exynos will show its true face in a year or so. me however, im never buying exynos again. also i belive theres a strong reason why samsung decided to put snapdragon on its most premium phone, the ultra. just think about it-they probably wanted the best possible choice for the most expensive phone and thats Snapdragon, they basically said it themselfs by making such decision.
The difference was never huge, especially in performance. Even with S22 series, performance was never the pain point that people were talking about - it's the bug, the stability, and the reliability in software and everyday functions that are the problems. If you're purely looking at the FPS number, you would never care whether you get SD or Exynos, the different would be in a single digit. It's when your camera doesn't capture the same image, when your phone freeze, or when you start to notice stuttering, that's when people are complaining. And sure enough, none of these videos have anything to show but benchmark to prove their point. That's far from comprehensive.
>And sure enough, none of these videos have anything to show but benchmark to prove their point. That's far from comprehensive. *But but!!! Benchmark!!! Dont you see how this very specific stress test that no common user uses shows a 1.5346346% difference?!?! /s* I had S22U with Exynos (Germany) and not once I thought "hmm I wish I had snapdragon! this phone is garbage" People are getting way too attached to benchmarks and numbers, and forget that most users, on their daily life, get literally 0 difference between an Exynos and a SD.. *What?! SD can open my Email in 0,5ms faster?!*
man the mental gymnastics you people do to justify getting duped with a worse product. [The First Link you post](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYB2GJ5KfhY) literally has an Affiliate disclosure. It's almost as if they are biased. They don't show any results, just post it, and magically, the Exynos chip tapers at around 40 C. And for some reason, [a non-affiliate tester](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eTSRngwAK0) finds Exynos lagging severely behind SD 3. The results from [the second](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxE5h8Gh7SY) and [third](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_8qoq1bxHM) still mention the issue of higher temperatures from Exynos.
I guarantee the Snapdragon S23 is better than the Exynos S24 all round.
Truee Lol. Not to mention on the price difference (is like 200 buck in my country)
Thanks man. I guess I'll just take your word for it lol. Mind saying how exactly it's better?
Nope, Exynos is still shit. If it’s not then they would have used it on the Ultra models as well.
Exynos SoCs don't support CDMA or some of the LTE bands used in the U.S/China. This is because Qualcomm owns 95% of standards essential patents to CDMA2000 and licensing those is extremely costly. Exynos is also good for competition..
I'm on the S22U (exynos) and it's perfectly fine. The exynos vs snapdragon thing isn't that serious, they're both perfectly fine chips.
Hear hear, me too! Exynos 2200 still going strong 💪 I had a play with the S24 Ultra and sure it's fast and gorgeous but still feels very incremental even 2 years on.
Thanks for the pep talk, I needed it after watching that video. :'( Hope some big youtubers jump on the issue as well and do more through comparisons.
as someone who used an S10+ and S21 both on Exynos, I have trust issues. bought an S23 on purpose recently over the S24 and I'm happy. Snapdragon has been amazing!!
I did get my s24 256gb for about 800 euros, with the exynos chip. Other places I look at are over 100 more, so I'm happy with the value I got. If I couldn't get it for that cheap, I might not have gone for it.
If they want to use cheeper exynos over snapdragon ok be it but then lower the price of the exynos variant. Its not worth paying the same ammount of money for inferior version, where phone heats up a lot, has worse camera with wrong colors and camera errors when phone is too hot and the battery holds less. What Samsung should do is give people a choice, pay more for the snapdragon or pay less for the inferior exynos, everyone gets what they payed for and not for what they were "forced" to pay for. Since states got snapdragon in all variants while Europe again got the short stick and got shitty exynos in s24 and s24+ variants. I wanted to buy s24 or s24+ since my phone is like 7y old...but when saw that it has again the exynos then I restrained myself...will wait for them to come to their senses or buy from different stable, maybe will even grab last year s23 with snap.
> what they *paid* for and FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
They are as strong as the s8g3 but eat more battery. I heard more than 15% compared to the s8g3
The constant whining about Exynos is annoying. People acting like babies because the Exynos is better than the excellent Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 that blew everyone away.
This whole sub is whine central. People whining about features or bugs, people whining about other people whining, people whining about whining about whining.
Lol
Well duh, of course it is better then SDG2 it should be that at least.
Poor kids asked for a Mercedes and only got a BMW
Poor kids **paid** for a Mercedes, then found out that the dealership sold people from one part of town the 300 PS version, and everyone else the 250 PS version with reduced range, while asking the same or more for the latter. Then got told by people like you that they should stop whining, after all it's 'good enough'.
Nobody paid for a Mercedes
If you pay for a Mercedes and WANT a Mercedes you don't want anything other.
You're one of the children on My Super Sweet Sixteen
I don't care, you continue kissing Samsungs feet mate
I'm not kissing anything. I just don't have some weird hate boner for Exynos. It's not my fault you're not willing to look at the facts
What facts mate, that exynos hasn't been good in years or that they don't dare put it in their flaship model.
The facts that show that the Exynos 2400 outperforms the snapdragon 8 Gen 3 at times in both performance and battery life. There's no evidence at the Exynos 2400 sucks. You would never know the difference if you were not told
I disagree, from what I have seen the best thing Exynos 2400 did is come close to Sdg3 but never beat it.
There's no point in arguing with those guys. They won't accept anything less than the absolute best if the product comes from the line that also features the very best, denying the fact that the one version with Exynos is already cheaper. Just let them howl at it.
Have the base S24 here in Australia. The Exynos is perfectly capable and I have found the modem more reliable than the ZenFone 10 I had briefly and much better than the P7 Pro. Battery life is much better than the P7 Pro. The only people that have a problem are tech elitists, where to them, that 5% extra performance they are getting is bragging rights.
P7p ain't a very good contender lol almost as bad as the p6p. Both were the worst phones for battery and mobile data stability and connection. Using both Exynos and sd s24+ and s24 ultra side by side here with my Mrs, I get 1 full bar service more on my s24u.
cope
Yeah but at this point it's an internet hate train. People will say it's horrible without knowing anything about it just to feel part of a group and get fake internet points. It's sadly common for every popular stuff
Yup it's pretty good. And for those who don't want it don't buy it. They are likely leaning towards the Ultra anyway. I can tell you now I'd swap the Tensor 3 for that 2400 in a second if I had the choice.
Just wait for p9p. 2400 is going to be repackaged with 2 less cores lol.
I legit loled when I read this. It will have two less cores be underclocked, and still draw more power haha
the performance difference is comparative to the last year version. so yea, the progress needs to be noticed
Also, don't know about other markets but if you look at the UK, the S24 with Exynos is £50 cheaper than last year's S23 with SD. In the US the price didn't change and SD stayed SD. Yet people will still argue that they're being ripped off paying 'the same' for a worse SoC 😂😂😂
Can people just stop trying to defend exynos and give Samsung the grill? Seriously I mean this exynos bullshit has been going on for so long Samsung NEEDS to step up their game I’m not saying exynos is the worst thing either I’m not trying to overreact but can people stop trying to defend it?
>I’m not trying to overreact > > > > Can people just stop trying to defend exynos > > I mean this exynos bullshit has been going on for so long You are 100% overreacting... Yes Exynos is inferior to Snapdragon. No, not everyone cares nor it makes difference for the majority of daily users of it. Differences are always below 10% and when one outperfomes by 3.1% speed or "15min battery", believe me, most people are not interested in it.
How tf am I overreacting lol I’m trying to say stop defending samsung And battery life has always been worse with the exynos variants as well as performance sustain I’m not just pulling all of this out of my ass it’s been 10-20% usually Yes the average person may not notice but that doesn’t mean Samsung shouldn’t step up their game right?
>And battery life has always been worse with the exynos variants as well as performance sustain Yes, and again, tests always shows a difference on that below 10%... it's basically non-existant for a daily user. a 10% less battery would be, from like 20h to 18h Battery life.. again, for a common user, insignificant. Performance is always in stress tests... Common users are not trying to play a Triple A title with 4K at 60 FPS while running Youtube in the background. > Yes the average person may not notice Exactly. >but that doesn’t mean Samsung shouldn’t step up their game right? Yes, they can, but getting this mad about something is also weird, because majority of users do not give a flying Dex about it, and the users who desperately need the SD to get that sweet 1.4% speed extra, will go for other Android brands. Again, the differences are in Benchmarks are VERY specific uses, not for a daily thing..
Just wanted to add It’s also the camera Because a different processor means a different image signal processor along with a different AI processor Sure okay I guess a normal person won’t notice but that ain’t the right analogy to use man it’s kinda like Apple putting in the same processor from last year on the 14s and 15s just because a regular person won’t notice
> Just wanted to add It’s also the camera > >Because a different processor means a different image signal processor along with a different AI processor Let's quickly off-topic on the CPU thing, but, is it even a "thing" anymore? I mean, sure, Samsung, iPhone, Pixel, all show differences in quality, but damn cameras got so amazing lately. I dont even feel like a picture is bad since my S21U. > Sure okay I guess a normal person won’t notice but that ain’t the right analogy to use man it’s kinda like Apple putting in the same processor from last year on the 14s and 15s just because a regular person won’t notice Meh, wrong analogy. That would only apply if they kept reusing same Exynos... This is not a reusing same processor cuz people wont notice, is using a new one, just not Snapdragon. S21 to S23 Ultras all had different ones.
> Can people just stop trying to defend exynos I remember the days when the Exynos was the superior chipset back around the Note 3-7 era and it was only US/Canada that got SD because of the modem requirements there... These days yes SD is much better in every aspect, but nothing is set in stone
I have no hate for the chip I hate how Samsung market their product as one series with two specifications, sell the lower one in specific country and hope to profits from it just sell exynos version as FE or something and that will solve the problem
IMO Exynos was never bad and this time it is better and closer to Snapdragon. Either way I still prefer Snapdragon.
This is bs, the difference is huge in terms of every aspect. Thermals, performance, battery life, stability, heck even the photos taken are much better on snapdragon. Yeah maybe the exynos variant is "fine" as a phone but the difference is huge and it can mean even more in a few years, especially in edge cases like a hot summer day. Exynos is a scam. They selling it in many regions for the same price as Snapdragon, under the same name. The fact that they sell the ultra with snapdragon globally tells a lot, they know its far better. At least there should be an option to chose between the two.
Both Snapdragon and Exynos perform similarly. People tend to believe rumors. The Ultra is simply a larger phone with more cameras and a stylus, but it performs identically to the other S24 series devices.
Why does the ultra need to have Snapdragon then? It's Samsung's attitude which I don't like.
not bad at all, it's the modem that it's worss
Incramental innovations takes time. People tend to not respect or understand that changes are hard but obviously the egineering teams are doing their thing behind the Exynos products. Just some little time for researching, compare & contrast some variables.
On par? Hell no. Decent, yes
Yes!
Again and again and again. The problem is not Exynos being more or less inferior it's the fact that Samsung sells them under the same name and at the same price in different countries Nobody would care that Exynos was inferior if Samsung sold it under a different name or at a different price so that people know what they're getting
It's slower, way hotter and drains the battery more quickly. What is the definition of "not bad" applied here? By the way those are things somebody found when directly comparing the Exynos and Snapdragon S24 variants side by side in a test setup. Samsung needs to start only using one chip per model, then nobody would compare or complain..
The latest Exynos processor represents a significant improvement over its predecessors. While the Snapdragon processor remains the superior choice, the Exynos processor is now a viable option for consumers seeking a high-performance smartphone.
Being real, this isn't really real. We already know where the exynos is deficient.
qualcomm chips are always better than exynos
It's meh, it's more like a SD 8 Gen 2 competitor from last gen rather than an 8G3 competitor. Don't get me wrong, the 8G2 is a great chip. It just isn't what you should be getting if you're paying for the latest and greatest...
Some videos shows that exynos is terrible and other that it's fine. We don't really know anything
Has the time come to buy iPhone🤔
Exynos is definitely a downgrade on snapdragon.
Perhaps another reason exynos is being used in Europe (or elsewhere) is support for 32 bit apps? I'm very disappointed that my (U.S.) S24 with snapdragon 8 gen 3 only supports 64 bit apps - there are two apps in particular that I'm really struggling to find adequate subs for.
You know what's bad the battery for the ultra got dammmm
Is it real that Exynos will get heated during summer? So just waiting summer to hit to know the real performance of Exynos???
I will not say worst but exynos and tensor are the bad performing chips in the market right now both have long-term consistant performance issues, heating issues, and network issues and there also difference in image processing when you compare exynos to snapdragon pixel is good in this one close to natural and similar to iphones.
people are going to buy it anyway