The exynos vs snapdragon issue is a long standing issue with Samsung. There's also very significant differences between the flagship phones like the S22 ultra sold in EU (exynos) and the ones sold in the US or Asia (snapdragon)<p>Getting an Exynos galaxy means more thermal throttling, lower performances and is just not competitive with other brands for the budget.
Day to day, anything past an iPhone 6s or 7 and phones pretty much feel the same speed.<p>If you game or edit pics or anything else that <i>needs</i> a faster proc, sure, you'll notice not having the fastest phone. But if you email, reddit, HN, twitter, etc, you're really not going to notice much.<p>Rumors are the iPhone 14 will have the same A15 and only the Pro will get the A16. I think you'll see a bunch of people freak out about this, but honestly, phones really don't need to be faster at this point.
If the Note 9 is any indication, it's not the hardware, it's the bloody software - Samsung is seemingly terrible at it!<p>The North American Note 9 used a Snapdragon 845 SoC while the European version used Samsung's own Exynos 9810. The Exynos consistently benched lower, had worse battery life and ran hotter. The upside was that the Exynos version has an unlocked bootloader, which is huge imo.<p>With a custom kernel made by hobbyists in their spare time, you can have the 9810 on par with the SD845 or even better. It has great undervolting and overclocking potential on both the CPU and GPU. The difference between the stock Samsung kernel and Zeus for example, is mind boggling.<p>Sadly, flashing a custom ROM on it involves tripping an eFuse and losing some Samsung functionality, but if you don't care about Samsung Pay and whatever other "secure" garbage they offer, it's worth it.
I can't believe how bad Samsung has become.<p>You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance.<p>I'm still using a Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition and even if it's slow, it still works pretty well. It has some stuff in it that I can't get rid off but overall is a great tablet. I've used countless Samsung devices ever since and I only see the quality going down.
This is similar to my experience when S22 was launched and I've got down voted for that [1]. In my case, my two years old (two gen older) S20 entry level smartphone has actually more RAM and better display screen resolution compared to the newly launched S22.<p>[1] Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30286186" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30286186</a>
It is not at all surprising to me that the A52s’ 768G benches higher since it has 4 A78s vs the 1280’s 2. It is surprising that it seems to do better in power as well, since the 1280 is manufactured on a superior process.
I was just thinking that Samsung's recent chip manufacturing capabilities appear to look somewhat disappointing on paper. Didn't expect a confirmation right away.<p>I used to buy their products, because back in the early 2010s they we're successful as an alternative to Apple - in terms for bang/buck ratio at least.<p>I won't be switching anytime soon because my Galaxy S8 is holding up decently, but news such as these here will make me think twice about choosing them again.
I actually got one of these a few weeks back to replace the shitshow that was Oneplus Nord.<p>It's working prefectly fine so far and I don't really need to run prime95 on it but this sucks from Samsung.
as usual European getting scammed, when the leaders will understand that?<p>the US doesn't want koreans to develop their own chip anymore, so they sell their stock of scuffed exynos to EU market
So happy I ditched Samsung just under two years ago because their Exynos was just kak. Much happier with my OnePlus 8 Pro. I won't have to upgrade my phone for another 3 years hopefully.
Fight me: Single-core performance is <i>still</i> much more important than multi-core performance for most things you do on a phone, including web browsing.