I don't work for Samsung or any provider but if I was a betting man I would go with profit margin, portability, timeline projections and oh yeah profit margins.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
just curious...
I don't work for Samsung or any provider but if I was a betting man I would go with profit margin, portability, timeline projections and oh yeah profit margins.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
In the US, they went with the S4 because of better compatibility with US 4G networks. The quad core chip that is used in the European and Asian models does not play nice with the US 4G Radio Chip.
=> Read my reviews for the Samsung Droid Charge, HTC ThunderBolt, and Casio G'zOne Commando.
=> VX8000 at Disney World:Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.
When you mean 4g, you mean lte right? Not the hspa that they keep masking as 4g beside the signal bar...
T-mo doesn't have lte yet. So why did it got s4 too?
They did it because Qualcomm makes the most power efficient LTE modems and the S4 has the LTE modem on the same die as the processor. The quad core Exynos (and Tegra 3) would require a separate LTE modem that would result in poor battery life. The reason T-Mobile got the S4 version is because Samsung wanted to sell/support one phone that would work on all North American carriers. Europe doesn't have LTE yet so they get the quad core GSM-only version.
I don't think it hurts that the Krait core in the MDM8960 S4 is almost twice the core of the A9's used in quadcore alternatives and is more comparable to the A15 core. Add in the fact it's all fabbed at 28nm for smaller chip and lower power and it's really kinda a no brainer. Sure there is a benchmark here and there where these devices with S4 suffer due to lack of cores, but overall I think they are far better products than you would get with some quadcore and a separate baseband.
Bookmarks