New leak indicates Galaxy S5 will demolish iPhone6 spec-wise

[nicehat]

 

Apparently a very convincing source, (KDB Daewoo Securities-A top South Korean brokerage), has detailed the S5 in a recent note to clients. Keep in mind that this firm has a long history of revealing accurate details surrounding unannounced devices long before debut.
 

With that background out of the way, the S5 specs sheet indicates that it will be powered by either a 2.5 GHz quad core Snap Dragon or an octa core 64 bit Exynos SoC clocked @ 2 GHz. Other specs indicate that it will include a 5.2 inch AMOLED display with WQHD resolution (2560 x 1440 pixels), 3 GB RAM, 32/64/128 GB storage options, a 16 MP rear camera, a 3.2 MP front facing camera and a big 3200 mAh battery...

Oh yeah, all metal case

• CPU: 2.5 GHz quad core or 2 GHz octa core (2 discrete versions available)
• Screen: 5.2 inch AMOLED @ 2560 x 1440
• RAM/Storage: 3 GB with 32/64 storage expansion options
• Camera: 16 MP rear, 3.2 front
• Battery 3200 mAh
• Debut: Q1 or Q2 this year

 

 

Again KDB indicates that we are looking at a 4.7/4.8 inch screen while the larger model will sport a 5.5 inch screen. The display will have full HD screens (1920x1080) while the phablet will reah 2k quad HD territory (2272 x 1280 pixels). Other highlights include 16 GB, 32 GB, 64 GB and 128 GB internal storage options, 2 GB RAM, 8 MP rear facing cameral, a 3.2 MP front facing camera, and 1800 mAh battery

• CPU: A8 64 bit processor
• Screen: 4.7/4.8 inch HD @1920 x 1080
• Storage: 2 GB RAM with 32/64/128 storage depending on phone/phablet
• Camera: 8 MP rear, 3.2 front
• Battery 1800 mAh
• Debut: Q2 Q3 this year

http://bgr.com/2014/02/03/galaxy-s5-specs-leak-kdb/

http://bgr.com/2014/02/03/iphone-6-specs-leak-kdb/

 

 

 

 

 

Go BlackBerry!

[Joshyy]

1440p, sigh. I can't even get that on my PC yet for a reasonable price. 

[YouRezz]

i like the look of SGS5..

But the specs arent anything that blows the roof of todays stuff

[helping]

moar cores

 

specs from a year ago are still perfectly fine today, hopefully they'll fix some of the other crap associated with smartphones (probably not cuz gotta flail around massive #1 specs peen)

 

I'll never understand. This is getting kind of ridiculous, the res isn't needed and I can't imagine what on Android would need 8 mobile cores. Battery life, software, and usability are so much more important it's not like you freaking need alien technology specs in a phone to make it a good phone. If that phone can last two days without a charge I'll be happy. 

 

I'm definitely not going to be buying a Samsung phone. At this point you may as well ignore the specs of the phones in the comparisons since the performance differences are going to be marginal at best outside of phone benchmarking (lol) 

[MatheusSanzo]

You mean as it always did, right?

[Mo5]

time and time again it has showed that "best" specs doesn't mean best experience

[Misanthrope]

moar cores

 

specs from a year ago are still perfectly fine today, hopefully they'll fix some of the other crap associated with smartphones (probably not cuz gotta flail around massive #1 specs peen)

 

Even older: The Moto X is perfectly fine. This is one thing that I hope Samsung tones down with their new "We won't keep forking Android into our own OS" deal with google and actually put more money on stuff we actually need, i.e. Less cores, more battery

 

Edit: The more telling part is that 1800mAh battery on the iPhone 6.

Seriously? Are they going for something as thin as cardboard? WHY! Why is it so damn difficult to get this right: Give me more battery time, I'll take some bulk on my phone vs the bulk of constantly carrying a charger and juicing up twice as day.

[nicehat]

I'll never understand. This is getting kind of ridiculous, the res isn't needed and I can't imagine what on Android would need 8 mobile cores.

 

Alot of people said the same thing when 1080p tech came out to usurp 720...Not disagreeing with you, but who knows, consumers might look back at 1080 phones and scoff like many do at 720 today

[lufihengr]

moar cores

 

specs from a year ago are still perfectly fine today, hopefully they'll fix some of the other crap associated with smartphones (probably not cuz gotta flail around massive #1 specs peen)

 

I'll never understand. This is getting kind of ridiculous, the res isn't needed and I can't imagine what on Android would need 8 mobile cores. Battery life, software, and usability are so much more important it's not like you freaking need alien technology specs in a phone to make it a good phone. If that phone can last two days without a charge I'll be happy. 

 

I'm definitely not going to be buying a Samsung phone. At this point you may as well ignore the specs of the phones in the comparisons since the performance differences are going to be marginal at best outside of phone benchmarking (lol) 

But just think of the people (like me) who don't mind doing some tweaking and putting lets say Ubuntu on a phone. Then the 8 cores will be more relevant. But still awaiting for the Note 4 (S series phones are too small for me)

[helping]

Alot of people said the same thing when 1080p tech came out to usurp 720...Not disagreeing with you, but who knows, consumers might look back at 1080 phones and scoff like many do at 720 today

I wasn't really around for that argument, but when monitors become bigger, the changes in resolution become more apparent, right?

 

When phone screens don't become that much bigger, what's the point of increasing the resolution more and more for almost no gains except for more icons at the cost of requiring more power?

 

But just think of the people (like me) who don't mind doing some tweaking and putting lets say Ubuntu on a phone. Then the 8 cores will be more relevant. But still awaiting for the Note 4 (S series phones are too small for me)

Maybe, but that's such a niche market. What about most normal people like myself (majority by large amounts) who just want a functional phone to work decently out of the box without having to mess around with the software yourself or have a power brick strapped to your pants?

 

I'd hope 3200mA battery would alleviate that, but it could have been better.

 

If you look at it closely, you can tell the difference with like your eyes. Name 1 popular app or game on the play store that would leverage 8 cores....thought so. Hell you'd be hard pressed to find many pc games right now in 2014 that fully use more than 2 or 4 cores.

He's not opposing but making a statement. Games could use 8 cores on a phone if they felt like coding for that, but that's pretty candying stupid. I didn't buy a phone to play games on. 

[Misanthrope]

Alot of people said the same thing when 1080p tech came out to usurp 720...Not disagreeing with you, but who knows, consumers might look back at 1080 phones and scoff like many do at 720 today

 

If you look at it closely, you can tell the difference with like your eyes. Name 1 popular app or game on the play store that would leverage 8 cores....thought so. Hell you'd be hard pressed to find many pc games right now in 2014 that fully use more than 2 or 4 cores.

[Misanthrope]

I wasn't really around for that argument, but when monitors become bigger, the changes in resolution become more apparent, right?

 

When phone screens don't become that much bigger, what's the point of increasing the resolution more and more for almost no gains except for more icons at the cost of requiring more power?

 

Maybe, but that's such a niche market. What about most normal people like myself (majority by large amounts) who just want a functional phone to work decently out of the box without having to mess around with the software yourself or have a power brick strapped to your pants?

 

I'd hope 3200mA battery would alleviate that, but it could have been better. 

Raising a generation of people with severe eyestrain for looking at 4k movies on 5 inch screens? Maybe it's an American thing: a health care conspiracy to get more eye surgery.

[nicehat]

I wasn't really around for that argument, but when monitors become bigger, the changes in resolution become more apparent, right?

 

When phone screens don't become that much bigger, what's the point of increasing the resolution more and more for almost no gains except for more icons at the cost of requiring more power? 

 

 

No I totally agree with what you are saying about monitors and sizes. Now if I cant see the pixels @ 1080, why do I need a better res especially with the hit to the battery? Well I would argue that the first generation with these > 2k display will suffer a bit but not for long. Granted that the extra horsepower of the S5 will be necessary to power this display. But in generations to come, the battery, graphical fidelity and overall media experience will get better. A > 2K display will look alot better than a 1080p display just as a 1080p phone will look alot better than an iPhone's 640p display. Although pixel density is a big component of visual quality, there are more variables to consider.

 

If you sit 10 feet from a 4k tv and a 2k tv, you will definitely say that the 4 k tv looks better even tho you cant see the pixels in either case. If you havent seen a 4k then we could make the same example with > 2k vs 1080p

[nicehat]

If you look at it closely, you can tell the difference with like your eyes. Name 1 popular app or game on the play store that would leverage 8 cores....thought so. Hell you'd be hard pressed to find many pc games right now in 2014 that fully use more than 2 or 4 cores.

 

Like I said in the previous post. I think the extra horsepower is there to leverage the extra resolution. You also need an extra big battery which is what they have done. All Samsung is trying to do is bring better looking screens mainstream. They will take a hit this generation but the next will be more refined, more efficient and better looking. You might even ask how we got along with 1080p screens. I dont know, its my guess. 

[Misanthrope]

Like I said in the previous post. I think the extra horsepower is there to leverage the extra resolution. You also need an extra big battery which is what they have done. All Samsung is trying to do is bring better looking screens mainstream. They will take a hit this generation but the next will be more refined, more efficient and better looking. You might even ask how we got along with 1080p screens. I dont know, its my guess. 

 

Fair enough. Although prior to the very recent aforementioned statement of them tunning down on touch wiz, my best guess was that Samsung was pushing specs only to be able to keep up with their own bloatware.

[nohuevos]

How do the 5S specs destroy the iphone specs? The Iphone 5s has a dual core A7 chip which runs circles around the S4's quad core.

[nicehat]

How do the 5S specs destroy the iphone specs? The Iphone 5s has a dual core A7 chip which runs circles around the S4's quad core.

 

Objectively speaking, the S5 specs above are looking alot better than the iPhone 6's. Now, if in the real world shows a different case with those specs, then thats a different story. But I think most would agree that the specs themselves are unquestionably better as they are listed above.

[DLM_012]

Lol 3 hour battery life. I'm calling it right now folks.

[LAwLz]

moar cores

 

specs from a year ago are still perfectly fine today, hopefully they'll fix some of the other crap associated with smartphones (probably not cuz gotta flail around massive #1 specs peen)

 

I'll never understand. This is getting kind of ridiculous, the res isn't needed and I can't imagine what on Android would need 8 mobile cores. Battery life, software, and usability are so much more important it's not like you freaking need alien technology specs in a phone to make it a good phone. If that phone can last two days without a charge I'll be happy. 

 

I'm definitely not going to be buying a Samsung phone. At this point you may as well ignore the specs of the phones in the comparisons since the performance differences are going to be marginal at best outside of phone benchmarking (lol) 

I usually agree with you but right now you're just being flat out stupid.

How many times do I have to say this? NEVER NEVER EVER say that "x is enough" when it comes to processing power. Never.

You are just like the people saying 1GHz processors in desktops were unnecessary back in 2000. We will never get new software features unless the hardware is good enough.

I have already debunked the "we can't see more than 1920x1080 on phones" several times so that's completely invalid as well. There is a pretty big diminishing return right now, but the difference is still there.

 

We also need better CPUs and GPUs simply because faster is better. Why wait 1 second for a web page to render when we could bring it down to 0.5 seconds? Why settle for 30 fps if we can have 60 fps? Why settle for "good enough" when we can have "really good"?

It's "64k ought to be enough for everyone" all over again.

 

Also, faster chips gives you longer battery life. It's called "race to idle" and what it means is that instead of having the CPU at 100% load for a long period of time, let's say 10 seconds, you can instead have a very powerful CPU do the same work in 2 seconds, and then idle. Sure it might use more power during those 2 seconds than what the other CPU used in 2 seconds, but it goes back to idle much quicker and saves power in the long run.

 

Do you want longer battery life? Then you should be excited about faster chips.

Do you want better software? Then you should be excited about faster chips.

 

 

 

 

How do the 5S specs destroy the iphone specs? The Iphone 5s has a dual core A7 chip which runs circles around the S4's quad core.

We don't know the architecture the S5's SoC uses. It is most likely much faster though if you count raw performance.

How does the iPhone 5S' dual core run circles around the S4's quad core? Last time I checked the S4 was faster.

 

 

 

Lol 3 hour battery life. I'm calling it right now folks.

People with Galaxy S 3s said the same thing when they say the specs of the S4 but as it turns out the S4 has longer battery life than the S3.

 

 

Why are so many computer enthusiasts so ignorant about smartphones? Seriously, I rarely meet anyone who actually know what they are talking about when it comes to phones.

[NickTheMajin]

The iPhone is always behind when it comes to the specs on paper. Hell, the 5S's specs look similar to the Galaxy SII. Real world performance though always puts it above just about anything else available. 

[dizmo]

@LAwLz glad to see someone else understands what you do!

I'll add to that the fact that higher numbers attract more people to the product because 98% of the market believes higher numbers are better.

We could easily have cars that push 200mpg. However the keep upping the horsepower (and overall size of the vehicle) instead. Because for the most part, higher numbers sell.

 

One thing that disappoints me is the 3200mah battery size in the S5. Oppo is planning a 4000mah, Lenovo has 4000mah, hell even Motorola has a phone with a 3500mah on a 1080p device.

Seems like a huge oversight.

I'm also betting we never see the 128gb model in real life. Maybe, maybe the 64gb. Hopefully they don't overcharge on storage like Apple does.

[helping]

I usually agree with you but right now you're just being flat out stupid.

How many times do I have to say this? NEVER NEVER EVER say that "x is enough" when it comes to processing power. Never.

You are just like the people saying 1GHz processors in desktops were unnecessary back in 2000. We will never get new software features unless the hardware is good enough.

I have already debunked the "we can't see more than 1920x1080 on phones" several times so that's completely invalid as well. There is a pretty big diminishing return right now, but the difference is still there.

 

We also need better CPUs and GPUs simply because faster is better. Why wait 1 second for a web page to render when we could bring it down to 0.5 seconds? Why settle for 30 fps if we can have 60 fps? Why settle for "good enough" when we can have "really good"?

It's "64k ought to be enough for everyone" all over again.

 

Also, faster chips gives you longer battery life. It's called "race to idle" and what it means is that instead of having the CPU at 100% load for a long period of time, let's say 10 seconds, you can instead have a very powerful CPU do the same work in 2 seconds, and then idle. Sure it might use more power during those 2 seconds than what the other CPU used in 2 seconds, but it goes back to idle much quicker and saves power in the long run.

 

Do you want longer battery life? Then you should be excited about faster chips.

Do you want better software? Then you should be excited about faster chips.

You do bring up some very valid points, and mobile is not my forte. 

Maybe I didn't express myself clearly enough, I don't have a problem with them tacking on better and better specs, what I do have a problem with is them raising specs without putting much into it in terms of battery life and user experience. 

 

Perhaps it would vary from user to user, but in this case X IS enough for me, I honestly can't imagine a scenario where I need that high end of a phone processor, or anyone else currently really. Yes, it improves battery life, but are we really at that point where that is the most efficient use of money? Exclude the money from adding that, exclude R&D costs since it's unrelated, reduce the phone price or put it elsewhere (UI development, better software functionality, more efficient software, better battery life.) I'd love if smart phones went towards more pragmatic growth instead of making it into an expensive toy that does cool things while looking really nice. I'd like a phone that isn't a brick and can survive a 3 foot fall. 

 

The flagship phone does not need flagship components, if you get what I'm trying to say. The specs should be one general aspect in regards to how a phone functions and how well it serves those needs. I will settle for "good enough" in one aspect if we can instead transmute the gains towards making a terrible aspect into something decent. 

 

A phone with good specs and shit everything else is not worth buying in my eyes. I shouldn't have to compromise aspects of a phone while paying a small fortune for characteristics that I don't want today, but might need in the future where it's already out of date. For reasons like this is why if an iPhone weren't as chained to the ground as it is by Apple (not in terms of hardware), it would take strong consideration as a phone for me. 

[TopWargamer]

>iPhone 6

>1080p screen

>1800MaH battery

 

Apple, you serious? That's going to get drained SO FAST. 

[AlexGoesHigh]

>iPhone 6

>1080p screen

>1800MaH battery

 

Apple, you serious? That's going to get drained SO FAST. 

to put that on contrast i have a WP8 whit a 1950MaH battery (last 2 days whit very light use like 2 or 3 phone calls and some internet browsing but i drains stupidly fast as soon as you launch a 3D game) and its the most cheap one (is 200$ off contract) specs are nothing to be impressed but if a cheap phone can have a bigger battery, its blatantly stupid that the premium that apple charges on iphones give you a worst battery that a low end handset

[XTankSlayerX]

Rumor-CEPTION.

 

Kinda interested to see how this turns out though.

 

Although 1440p is a bit much...