Back to Article

  • AbhijeetC - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Why is the S3 not compared with Tegra based HTC One X in the table? Just curious to know why would one compare a S3 with dual core HTC One X? Reply
  • JasonInofuentes - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Honestly, because I was in a rush to put the table together. Will add the international One X later today. Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    You guys do a good job. I'd rather see a little bit of CORRECT information than a greater amount of incorrect information.

    For example, I'd glad that I finally got to see the size of the battery. I checked Engadget and The Verge, but struggled to find the information between their bitching about the Pentile RGBG display...
  • alfreddelacruz - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    I was just about to purchase HTC's One X through AMazon, now I think I'll wait a while to see this S3's performance. Can't wait to upgrade my dying Samsung Impression! Reply
  • RussianSensation - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Looks like the S3 made quick work of both versions of HTC One S and X:
  • SamsungAppleFan - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - link

    Yeah, Sammy never fails to deliver.. Even the design the more i look at it, the more Im loving it. So thin and so powerful. My next phone in June for sure. Reply
  • aegisofrime - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    UAs a Galaxy S II user I was expecting great things from the S3. Unfortunately it looks like Samsung has pulled a 4S.

    Regarding the Pentile screen, I dare say one would be able tell the difference. I was able to notice the red sub pixels on the Galaxy Nexus. Seeing as the S3 is the same resolution but has a bigger screen logically it would be more noticeable. Engadget did report the red sub pixels on the S3 is smaller though, wonder how much of a difference this will make.

    The other point of contention is the camera. Now I understand that more megapixels isn't always better but I wished that the sensor was more advanced. A F2.0 lenses with BSI would benice but it seemed like Samsung focused on the software aspect. I do hope its not the same sensor as the S2; that suffered from a red dot in the middle and frame rate issues in video recording.

    Lastly regarding the SOC, well no surprises. I would have liked a S4 as well but understandably Samsung would want their flagship SoC for their flagship phone. I just feel that the S3 is uncomfortably close the the next generation A15 parts. :/
  • scaramoosh - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    You can see ho bad Pentile looks when they do camera close ups and you see the cotton textured look to single colours. That's basically me sticking with the GS2 for another year, just not worth upgrading to a subpar screen.

    Also the GPU must be the Mali 400 again or something as bad because they never mentioned anything GPU wise.
  • Zilendar - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Pentile has some major advantages, too. Higher efficiency and excellent brightness to name two.

    Though I am certainly not advocating anyone settle for a less-than-stellar display, The GSIII doesn't appear to be targeted at GSII owners anyway.

    Frankly I applaud Samsung's approach with this. Giving the consumer more choice in an already winning platform.
  • Skiddywinks - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    Higher efficiency when not displaying white, you mean. Reply
  • vision33r - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    The Mali400 ain't so bad, it's unfortunate that the best looking Android games run on Tegra. Because of the lack of uniform Graphics library and tools made the devs all work on Tegra.

    The S3 just looks like a smaller shaped Galaxy Note.
  • antef - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Very disappointed Samsung put a menu key on this idea what they're thinking. Google is working hard to move developers away from that because it's unintuitive. Now devs might keep using it because they think it's okay. And even if an app does switch to use the action bar + overflow 3 dots button, that button will not display and will instead be called up by the Menu key for devices that have one (like the S III). So you're basically forced into the old Gingerbread usage pattern. Real smart... Reply
  • phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Phones with only 3 hardware buttons (back, home, menu; in that order) make perfect sense to everyone I talk to.

    Back buttons always point to the left, so it makes sense to put it on the left. That's where it is in browsers, the most common application used on desktops, laptops, etc.

    Home buttons should be in the middle, as they take you back to the home screen, and it provides symmetry between Android, iOS, WebOS, Blackberry, etc, etc.

    And then you're left with the right button, which acts just like the right mouse button, popping up context menus in applications.

    Adding a fourth "search" button is just dumb, and breaks the symmetry of using odd numbers of buttons. Putting the buttons in any other order also makes it confusing. Especially when the back button is on the right.

    Unfortunately, it seems there are no logical thinkers in the hardware design groups at the phone manufacturers. :(
  • antef - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    I agree with your last's really sad.

    Regarding the buttons, I agree 3 buttons is the way to go, and I don't really care if they're on-screen or physical, but they should Back, Home, and RECENT APPS, not Menu, like on the Galaxy Nexus. This is Google's position and I agree with it. Long-press for the task switcher is annoying...a dedicated button is faster. And the problem with Menu is you never know if it contains things or not, and it's also "off screen"/out of mind. With Action Overflow, you a) know there are things behind it to see, and b) see it right alongside other functions on the action bar, leading your eyes to it. It just makes more sense and Samsung is staying in the less intuitive Gingerbread era by sticking with Menu.
  • Skiddywinks - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    How do I right click then? Reply
  • antef - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    What are you talking about. There is no "right click". Old-style apps have a hidden menu. New style apps have the action bar and overflow. If you used to equate the menu to "right click", just think of that as the action overflow now. If you used to equate long-press to "right click", you can still do that. Reply
  • Skiddywinks - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    I'm sorry if I sound dumb, but I am still rocking my SGS1, and haven't seen ICS in action. I don't suppose you wouldn't mind just quickly explaining what the fuck you are talking about, or linking me to/telling me what to search for to find a video that will? Reply
  • phoenix_rizzen - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    I'll reserve judgement until I use an ICS-enabled device and can see the "action bar/overflow menu" in action. Reply
  • antef - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    You don't need an ICS device to see the action bar. Just use any new-styled app like Voice or the Play Store. The action bar is right up top. If you're on Gingerbread, you don't see the overflow button because it is hidden when you have a menu key. Without the menu key, you get 3 vertical dots on the right end that pulls up a menu with more to do. This button only shows when there are things to put there. For example when you turn to landscape, all the buttons might fit on the action bar, so the overflow button can disappear. Reply
  • jjj - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    is the GPU confirmed or assumed? - if it's confirmed i guess it's clocked higher than in the S2.
    also for the S3 you are listing it as ARM Mali400MP4 while for the S2 just as ARM Mali400 but it's the same thing.
  • dagamer34 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Mali GPU in the S2 is clocked at 266Mhz, whereas its highly likely to be 400Mhz in the S3. Regardless, Samsung already promised 50% improvement in graphics. Reply
  • zorxd - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    It's an assumption.
    Also the clock speed should be higher on the new Exynos quad.
  • uhuznaa - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    An exciting phone this is not. More of the same, not really bad, will sell nicely... but nothing really new. Reply
  • sonci - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    We should wait as always for A... for new ideas.. Reply
  • sonci - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    actually, the exterior look seems worse than S2 Reply
  • GTaudiophile - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Glad I bought my Galaxy Nexus a week ago with Pentaband 3G.

    Posting from my Nexus in the Gospel Tent at Jazz Fest.
  • niva - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Right on, the galaxy nexus is a work of art, esp the software on it. Was thinking of holding off until the S3 came out but I've forsworn anything but pure google. I don't want to be at the mercy of manufacturers like Samsung or carriers to get the latest software/fixes. Reply
  • EarlyMon - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    If I read that right, the SGS2 is listed as using an Exynos, when depending on carrier, region and variant, it had an Exynos, OMAP or S3.

    Is there any word on the SGS3 being able to maintain use of Exynos no matter what?

    I heard rumors of Sammy going with it's own LTE silicon to settle the issue - but still - not sure.

    Thanks! :)
  • EarlyMon - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Nevermind - I must be blind today!

    I see that it's Exynos or S4 - thanks.
  • Midwayman - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    I expected Samsung to pull out the stops with all the secrecy around this phone. Its just another me too phone for the current gen. Oh well. There is always note 2 maybe in the fall? Reply
  • michaelheath - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    "I suspect the first comment has appeared below bemoaning the lack of a '+' at the end of the display's nomenclature."

    Actually, I'd hardly care about the quality of the screen in the face of the fact that it, like HTC One X, has a nearly 5-inch screen.

    Why on Earth would I want a phone with a 5-inch screen? The 4-inch Samsung Galaxy phone I've used for nearly 2 years barely fits in the back pocket of my pants, but at least it's still comfortable to hold during a call and for reading. The 4.5-inch Samsung Note a co-worker was testing literally stretches my longish fingers, and I'd be hard pressed to find an article of clothing I wear with a pocket large enough to fit it (except for cargo pants/shorts, but that would have the phone banging against my knee as I walk around).

    Seriously, I wouldn't even bother with this phone based on size alone. At this size, it's not a phone anymore: It's a small tablet that does phone-like things.
  • jwcalla - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    If you measure the "wrap-around length" for holding it in your palm (2x depth + width) it's only a few mm bigger than the original Galaxy S.

    It's a little bit taller but most of the action happens in the center of the screen anyway.

    A lot of the "screen size" increases are coming because they're trimming back the bezel / logo areas.
  • 1ceTr0n - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    Meh. I dropped my Verizon contract and years worth of being a customer I wanted the sexy 5.3'' Galaxy Note that bad and I don't regret. Keep your teeny bopper sized phones, I can never go back to smaller now.

    Oh, and it fits in all my existing clothes pockets, so please spare me the "How will I carry this big phone BS"
  • tijag - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    I have an SGSI and the screen is far too small for me. In using the GNex and SGSII I prefer the larger size of the GNex.

    Thankfully we can be sure that there will continue to be smaller screen size phones made for people such as yourself who have small hands are want to wear really tight pants. For some of us the large size isn't a problem, even for one handed operation.

    I don't understand why people who *don't* want the large screen act as if no one could ever want a large screen. That's just your personal preference, you don't need to act so shocked/dismayed because it's large.

    Also, note that the bezel decreased in this iteration, so that the phone is only slightly larger than the outgoing model.
  • steven75 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Please point us to the flagship Android phones that have smaller than a 4.5" display. We'll be here waiting.

    Thanks in advance,
    Everyone That Likes Android But Doesn't Want A Phablet.
  • ViRGE - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Agreed. I feel like phone engineers have been watching 80s TV and have suddenly decided that the brick phone was a good form factor after all. Phones need to be small enough to easily fit in a pocket and to easily be one handed; no smaller and certainly no bigger. Reply
  • Shuxclams - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Was looking forward to this. Will wait to see the review, mean while i'll be happy with my S2 Reply
  • jwcalla - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Looks like they put a lot of focus on the software stack. Have to see what the reviews say.

    Also noticed a removable battery and microSD slot, unlike the HTC One X.
  • ueharaf - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    you should do another update review cause there is a soft update to 1.28 of 30mb
  • DukeN - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    URL says galaxy=s-ii (instead of s-iii) Reply
  • ThisWasATriumph - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    My theory is that the US versions wont be here until summer because the LTE Exynos chips are not ready yet. Somehow it seems unlikely that they would use the S4 after hyping the quads so much. Reply
  • redchar - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    While I think it's nice to see that quad cores can be put in phones (the theoretical performance should be all very nice) it's just that all too often I don't think it will be put to use in a way that makes it a better choice from a dual core.

    I had a discussion months back about the tegra 3 on this. That although over time we should be able to continue to add more cores to both desktop and mobile CPUs, I just don't think the type of things people do now, and plan to do in the foreseeable future, are things that should be done with quad cores.

    Short and long term as far out as I can see, companies developing phones should ideally be restricting themselves to dual cores. Either they could do this to have amazing battery life, or they could do this to get excellent per-core performance by having large cores versus many cores.

    So, when I heard the rumors that the S III would have a quad core, and when I heard people excited about that, I was a bit disappointed in those people. Now that it's confirmed, I'm also disappointed in samsung's choice - but also surprised that a krait version will exist.

    The Krait version will probably be the one to get, even though the quad core version seems likely to have the best GPU. The only thing is, with the best version using a Krait, it's not terribly different from HTC's One X/S line. Galaxy S's were getting to be well known, brand name items that everyone expected a lot out of, which is saying something in the world of Android where it's hard to differentiate. Only now, if their best version is the Krait version, then it won't be quite as special as the previous ones.

    Now, I won't be getting either the SGS III nor the One X as I have little girl hands. I previously thought I couldn't use things as big as 4.3", but now that I have I'd say it's probably the max for my hands. These 4.7" and 4.8" devices are not meant for me.

    However, I do love those OLED screens. It's unfortunate that it isn't the pentile-less PLUS version, and I'm also uncertain about the battery life relative to the One X, as although blacks save energy, in the past whites on OLEDs were said to use much more. I suppose the larger battery has to help though. Although ideally I wish companies would stop making thin phones. Design something thin, then add a big battery to get to normal thickness - like a razr maxx. Good idea, there.

    Overall though with OLED, a larger battery, and a microsd slot, I'd say that it's better than a One X, and without knowledge of anything else coming out, I'd say it's the best phone so far - but just not by as large a margin as the S II and S were.
  • scaramoosh - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Tegra 3 is better
  • scaramoosh - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Tegra 3 is better
  • RussianSensation - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Depends on which benchmarks you use.

    Here S3 > Tegra 3 without problems.
  • scaramoosh - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Individual core performance is lower so I expect most programs to not use Quad core giving Tegra 3 the edge. The GPUs are also pretty much the same in benchmarks but we all know Nvidia have the better support and drivers. Reply
  • RussianSensation - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Ya NV does have some cool unique apps for Tegra.

    I think the two biggest deal breakers for the S3 are cost cutting on external materials/designs and launch timing in US. If this thing drops around June, the iPhone 5 may not be too far off. In the mean time a lot of people will just grab HTC One X and not wait for 2-3 months for the S3 in US.

    Also, in the quick video on the Verge, the HTC One X has a nicer screen in the video. The colors look warmer/more natural as opposed to having a bluish tint that the S3 seems to have:

    I think they overhyped the phone too much. If it had a more innovative design / much higher quality materials and wasn't offered in a weird dark blue color, it would have been a much better hit.

    The hardware is class leading or at minimum it trades blows with HTC One X. Having microSD slot is also huge for people who listen to music/watch videos.
  • Skiddywinks - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    You think *they* over hyped the phone too much? They didn't say shit! Once again, it was the rabid masses that expected 1080p screens and the like that over hyped it. Reply
  • Kepe - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    I've been wondering, what is the real-world benefit of having four cores on Android? What are the usage scenarios where all four cores are active and doing more than a good dual core (Krait) can do with two cores? Is it purely for the most demanding games? I just don't get it. I don't know about others, but 99,9% of the stuff I do on my phone can be handled perfectly by two cores. Can someone please tell, what do you need those four cores for (other than cool benchmark numbers in Linpack multithreaded)? Is Android really doing so much stuff in normal usage that we need four cores to do it? Are there so many demanding threads firing up at the same time? AFAIK, listening to music while browsing the Internet doesn't require four modestly fast cores. I think it's a lot better to have two very fast cores instead.

    A fast GPU I can understand. Better GPU -> faster rendering in Android UI, browser and games.
  • Kepe - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    Or are quad cores just a marketing gimmick saying "This phone has 2x the cores your old one has! This phone must be 2x better! BUY NOW!!"
    BTW, my HTC Sensation (Pyramid/3G) gets 43,4 MFLOPS in single threaded Linpack. That's not far behind the 48 MFLOPS of a single Tegra 3 core, and not very far from the 51 MFLOPS of the Exynos 4 core. The SoC in the Sensation is from 2010...
  • NeoteriX - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    Well yes. That's the point. The quad core SoCs are four cores of the same A9/Scorpion generation cores. This is in the same way that the dual cores of 2010 were two A9/Scorpion cores.

    What is your point?

    You can't just snap your fingers and jump to a next generation CPU architecture whenever you want. The architecture like A9, A15, Scorpion, Krait... these are designed to last for several production cycles and scale with the use of multicore SoC applications.
  • NeBlackCat - Saturday, May 05, 2012 - link

    > I've been wondering, what is the real-world benefit of having four cores on Android?

    For my money, when used as a smartphone, very little.

    See "Ubuntu for Android" for when they become useful (actually essential) though.
  • UltraTech79 - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    How large is going to be too large for SmartPhones? I worry about how this is going to feel in my hand/pocket, and we will inevitably see the first 5" screen in the next year. Reply
  • 1ceTr0n - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    Uh, its already out. The Galaxy Note has a 5.3'' screen and I freaking love it. Everything else seems so small and toyish now. Reply
  • 3DoubleD - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    I thought you should correct the table for the SIII. During the video presentation, there was a specification slide that included the specs for the microSD slot. It said it was SDXC compatible up to 64 GB wish exFAT support. This is pretty important information missing in your chart. Reply
  • 3DoubleD - Thursday, May 03, 2012 - link

    You can view the slide from the engadget liveblog at 2:53 (I know it's an annoying way to find the slide... but whatever).
  • Mugur - Friday, May 04, 2012 - link

    In late 2010 when I got my Dell Streak 5, everybody was laughing at me the moment I had my phone in my hand. At the time, I made a bet with my co-workers that in a generation, most flagship phones will be at around 5". I am glad I was right.

    I think that the more you use the "smart part" of the phone, you need more screen real estate and more battery. Typing something on my kid's 3" screen phone is painful, not to mention reading a web page. And I don't have big hands nor I'm farsighted or something like that. I have no problem fitting in each pocket I may have the Streak, which is like 30% thicker and 70% heavier than those new 4.7"-5.3" beauties.

    That's unfortunate for those who prefer smaller phones, but there are and will be a lot of midrange 3.5"-4". Just not the latest and greatest.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now