Are four cores better than two? That's one of
the questions to ask yourself, now that Samsung has announced its
long-awaited, quad-core Galaxy S III
smartphone. The Galaxy S III is a powerful, great-looking phone, no
doubt, but how does it compare to the current king of the Android crop,
the HTC One X for AT&T? We've compiled specs for each phone in the table below to find out.
The first thing to keep in mind is that the specs announced for the Galaxy S III aren't necessarily specs for the device we'll be getting when the phone makes its way over to the U.S. this summer; these are specs for the European version. However, much like the initial release of last year's Galaxy S II overseas, it's a good indication of what we can expect.
So taking these specs at face value, which phone is better? Four cores or not, the answer isn't as clear as you might think.
Let's start with the displays. The HTC One X has a gorgeous, 4.7-inch Super LCD 2, 1280-by-720 display. That works out to 316 pixels per inch. It's kind of huge, but the Galaxy S III is even larger, with a 4.8-inch HD Super AMOLED display with the same 1280-by-720 resolution (and 306 pixels per inch, by extension). We'll need to see them next to one in another in person to make a judgment, but on paper, they're pretty darn similar.
Size-wise, we're at another stalemate. The Galaxy S III measures 5.4 by 2.8 by 0.3 inches (HWD) to the HTC One X's 5.3 by 2.8 by 0.4 (HWD). So the One X is a touch thicker, but it's also lighter, at 4.6 ounces compared to the Galaxy S III, which weighs 4.7 ounces. The difference is negligible, and both phones look sleek and beautiful, so you'll probably be happy to carry either one, at least from an aesthetic point of view.
The biggest difference between these two titans is the processor. The HTC One is powered by a dual-core, 1.5-GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon S4. We've tested it, and it's screaming fast. It's 15 percent faster than the Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket, and 25 percent faster than the HTC Vivid, which are both speedy phones in their own right. But with a quad-core, 1.4-GHz Samsung Exynos processor, you'd automatically think the Galaxy S III will be more powerful by default. That may indeed be the case, but until we get a chance to benchmark the phone, this one is still a draw. In testing Qualcomm's S4 chip back in February, for instance, PCMag's Sascha Segan discovered that it performed comparably to Nvidia's quad-core, 1.2-GHz Tegra 3 processor. Four cores may be better than two, but the jury's still out.
The first thing to keep in mind is that the specs announced for the Galaxy S III aren't necessarily specs for the device we'll be getting when the phone makes its way over to the U.S. this summer; these are specs for the European version. However, much like the initial release of last year's Galaxy S II overseas, it's a good indication of what we can expect.
So taking these specs at face value, which phone is better? Four cores or not, the answer isn't as clear as you might think.
Let's start with the displays. The HTC One X has a gorgeous, 4.7-inch Super LCD 2, 1280-by-720 display. That works out to 316 pixels per inch. It's kind of huge, but the Galaxy S III is even larger, with a 4.8-inch HD Super AMOLED display with the same 1280-by-720 resolution (and 306 pixels per inch, by extension). We'll need to see them next to one in another in person to make a judgment, but on paper, they're pretty darn similar.
Size-wise, we're at another stalemate. The Galaxy S III measures 5.4 by 2.8 by 0.3 inches (HWD) to the HTC One X's 5.3 by 2.8 by 0.4 (HWD). So the One X is a touch thicker, but it's also lighter, at 4.6 ounces compared to the Galaxy S III, which weighs 4.7 ounces. The difference is negligible, and both phones look sleek and beautiful, so you'll probably be happy to carry either one, at least from an aesthetic point of view.
The biggest difference between these two titans is the processor. The HTC One is powered by a dual-core, 1.5-GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon S4. We've tested it, and it's screaming fast. It's 15 percent faster than the Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket, and 25 percent faster than the HTC Vivid, which are both speedy phones in their own right. But with a quad-core, 1.4-GHz Samsung Exynos processor, you'd automatically think the Galaxy S III will be more powerful by default. That may indeed be the case, but until we get a chance to benchmark the phone, this one is still a draw. In testing Qualcomm's S4 chip back in February, for instance, PCMag's Sascha Segan discovered that it performed comparably to Nvidia's quad-core, 1.2-GHz Tegra 3 processor. Four cores may be better than two, but the jury's still out.
Post a Comment