U.S. Galaxy S III Might Not Have Quad-core CPU with LTE

News
By Jane McEntegart
published

Quad-core Exynos won't play nice with LTE.

The cell phone industry has been buzzing about Samsung's upcoming Galaxy S III for months and yesterday Sammy proudly confirmed what we already knew from the countless rumors: When the phone does become available, it will pack Samsung's powerful quad-core CPU, the Exynos 4 Quad. However, it seems not everyone buying a Galaxy S III will get an Exynos 4 Quad phone. Heck, if these rumors are true, they won't even get a quad-core phone.

AndroidCommunity reports that similar to the HTC One X, which got a dual-core Snapdragon for the U.S. but a quad-core Tegra 3 for International markets, the Galaxy S III may also see a spec change for the American market. The story goes that an unnamed Samsung exec spoke to the Korea Times and spilled the beans that though the European GSIII would have the Exynos, the U.S. model would be Qualcomm-powered instead because the quad-core chips aren't yet compatible with America's LTE networks.

Samsung hasn't officially commented on the report, but with the phone scheduled to launch on May 3, we don't have long to wait before we find out the truth. Rumored specs for the Galaxy S III include a 4.6-inch Super AMOLED capacitive touchscreen display, a quad-core CPU, 1GB of RAM, an 8-megapixel camera, a 1.3-megapixel camera for video calling, 16GB of storage, microSD, Bluetooth 4.0, WiFi, and support for microUSB.

Follow @JaneMcEntegart on Twitter.   

Jane McEntegart
See more CPUs News
46 Comments Comment from the forums
  • halcyon
    Well, as long as they're not made by Apple a lot of folks will like the Galaxy III just fine, no matter what the specs are. It'll sell just fine here, in the US, quad-core or not.
    Reply
  • ang1dust
    I WANT A QUAD CORE?! sigh they KNOW americans pay TOP DOLLAR for their phones and will even break contracts to switch carriers for a particular phone due to specs or capability, why dont they make thier phones compatable with the us first?! jeez thats annoying. I have been putting every extra quarter in my piggy bank for over 4 months and im ready to get it!
    Reply
  • Turk021
    Could someone shed some light on this please? Why downgrade the hardware for US sales? I want a quad core phone...
    Reply
  • halcyon
    I'm embarrassed to recount how many times I've broke a contract to switch to a phone I liked better or wanted to try. However, only us hardcore technophiles are gonna do that...not the majority. TBH, Android shouldn't need quad cores to be fast and smooth. The fact that it does is a problem to me.
    Reply
  • ang1dust
    turk021Could someone shed some light on this please? Why downgrade the hardware for US sales? I want a quad core phone...
    it says " the U.S. model would be Qualcomm-powered instead because the quad-core chips aren't yet compatible with America's LTE networks."
    Reply
  • ang1dust
    Halcyon TBH, Android shouldn't need quad cores to be fast and smooth. The fact that it does is a problem to me.
    NO PHONE needs quad core, the fact that its quad core is specifically added becuase the architecture allows it. this is a 32nm iir and is much less power expensive. Not to mention most of the time you can turn other cores off to make it less power hungry.
    Reply
  • If its similar to the HTC one X, the dual-core chip from Qualcomm (2x Krait) will be faster than the quad-core from Samsung (2xARM Cortex-A15 vs 4xARM Cortex-A9)
    .
    Reply
  • halcyon
    ang1dustNO PHONE needs quad core, the fact that its quad core is specifically added becuase the architecture allows it. this is a 32nm iir and is much less power expensive. Not to mention most of the time you can turn other cores off to make it less power hungry.I disagree, from my experience with GB phones that had single and dual cores they were not smooth operating. ...often locking up and crashing. Now if you're saying ICS alone would resolve all of that, we'll have to see. I most recently had a Razr Maxx and it loved to freeze and need a reboot. It wasn't slow, but often choppy. Maybe a quad-core would've had no impact.
    Reply
  • dimar
    So they mess up the audio chip in Galaxy S II, and now it's gonna be the messed up audio chip + dual core, insead of quad, for Galaxy S III. Nice going Samsung. Looks like I'm sticking with my original Galaxy S using Slim ICS ROM, which works super great. I'd rather make donations to the Slim ICS developer, than buying a crippled phone.. It's like the movies, where they get the first one right, but the sequels suck, except for some nice special effects.
    Reply
  • halcyon
    dimarSo they mess up the audio chip in Galaxy S II, and now it's gonna be the messed up audio chip + dual core, insead of quad, for Galaxy S III. Nice going Samsung. Looks like I'm sticking with my original Galaxy S using Slim ICS ROM, which works super great. I'd rather make donations to the Slim ICS developer, than buying a crippled phone.. It's like the movies, where they get the first one right, but the sequels suck, except for some nice special effects.Now wait just a cotton-pick'n minute. I've been reading in these forums how superior Samsung phones are. Are you certain you have your account of things straight?
    Reply