The SGS2, SGS3 and SGS4. Which one was the biggest upgrade?

I

ItaliaFerrari

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
133
A lot of myths I've noticed on some forums. One of them was that the SGS4 is not a big upgrade over the SGS3. If you're comparing this upgrade to the SGS3 over the SGS2, then it is completely irrational to say that the SGS4 is any lesser of an upgrade over the SGS3.

In reality, the SGS4 is a huge upgrade over the SGS3 in comparison with the upgrade of the SGS3 over the SGS2.

For the non-believers:

SGS2 specs:
CPU: Dual core Cortex-A9
GPU: MALI-400 MP
Display: 4.3" Super AMOLED 217PPI
RAM: 1GB RAM
Camera: 8MP

SGS3 specs:
CPU: Quad Core Cortex-A9 or Dual Core Snapdragon S4 Krait*
GPU: MALI-400 MP or Adreno 225*
Display: 4.8" Super AMOLED 306PPI
RAM: 1GB RAM or 2GB RAM*
Camera: 8MP

SGS4 specs:
CPU: Quad Core Cortex-A15 PLUS Quad Core Cortex-A7 or Quad Core Snapdragon 600 Krait 300*
GPU: PowerVR SGX 544MP3 or Adreno 320*
Display: 5" Super AMOLED 441PPI
RAM: 2GB RAM*
Camera: 13MP

*These specs depend on whether the devices are the US or International versions.

The SGS4 is a big upgrade.

The SGS3 was a relatively small upgrade over the SGS2. This is why I'm surprised the SGS3 did so well. I guess it's just marketing.

Logically speaking, the SGS4 should do even better because the SGS4 is actually a larger upgrade over the SGS3 than the SGS3 was over the SGS2.

In terms of aesthetics, the SGS4 has a taller and slimmer design with more screen to bezel ratio. This means the screen occupies a larger proportion over the area. This is exactly how I wanted it to be because more screen = less distracting bezel.

Furthermore, the SGS4 has a less curved design which makes it look slightly more masculinized than the SGS3.

The addition of aluminum edges is a big plus, however won't add anything advantageous to the phone in terms of hardware quality. I guess Samsung did it for the aesthetics and consumer demand.

The big selling points of the SGS4 for me are the removable battery, microSD expansion and the hardware features.

In an ideal world I would have preferred a matte finish to the back of the SGS3 similar to what HTC does with their phones but that has its own advantages and disadvantages.
 
Last edited:
SGS4 seems like the biggest upgrade of them to me, dumping the old-ass Cortex A9. Hopefully the GPS chip included is also a lot better than the POS GPS of my SGS2 Epic 4G Touch... I will probably be upgrading to SGS4 later this year myself, unless something else I like even more comes out in the meantime

Edit: Not touching SGS4 after all. Snapdragon 600 is not Cortex A15. I am not buying the ARM equivalent of the Cyrix 6x86. I will go non-Samsung when I upgrade my phone.
 
Last edited:
dandragonrage said:
SGS4 seems like the biggest upgrade of them to me, dumping the old-ass Cortex A9. Hopefully the GPS chip included is also a lot better than the POS GPS of my SGS2 Epic 4G Touch... I will probably be upgrading to SGS4 later this year myself, unless something else I like even more comes out in the meantime
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. I've also got the E4GT and am due for an upgrade in September or October.
 
I'm in the same boat as you guys with the E4GT with an upgrade this year. I'm kind of underwhelmed at the SGS4 though...
 
Went from a Motorola Razr (flip phone) to the SGS2 way back when, so that was a monumental upgrade. SGS2 to current SGS3 was a nice improvement primarily due to screen size. Whether I go to SGS4 don't know as I'm flipping between the SGS3 and a Nexus 4 currently.

Looks like a nice improvement as the S4 is slightly smaller physically than the S3 but the S4 has a larger screen with less bezel around the edges. The rest of the improvements are great, but the S3 is already fast enough and with multiple batteries and storage options, it can do everything I need and more.
 
FaRKle0079 said:
I'm in the same boat as you guys with the E4GT with an upgrade this year. I'm kind of underwhelmed at the SGS4 though...
Click to expand...

Coming from an E4GT/GS2, I dunno why you would be underwhelmed. The GS4 will get more (official and unofficial) support than anything else except maybe a Nexus. Throw any AOSP-based ROM on there and you'll have the best overall phone available until the next Nexus phone. The only thing the One really has over it (that we can see right now) is the nice front facing speakers. Everything else is comparable or better from what I can see (though I'm sure some here will debate that, esp with the display as they always have).

What were you expecting? A completely different looking phone and UI?
 
Its also important to note the type of ram being used, as well as resolution.

The S4 in terms of gpu power won't be much more then the competition, but the international one will be crazy.
 
All dat specs just to run basic computer functions. ;)
"You can now browse the web even faster with our brand new quadcores!"
 
The SGS2 was a bigger leap from the SGS1 than the SGS3 was from the SGS2, so that gets my vote.... the 512MB and single core of the SGS1 really hurt it in futureproofing

the SGS4 is still a massive upgrade from the SGS3 when you look at the tech that goes into it, but in terms of biggest leap, my money still goes to the SGS2...

hell, an i9100G (SGS2) running AOSP is even better than a Galaxy Nexus in many ways (SD card support, better battery life, smaller size, and, arguably, lower resolution, stressing the underpowered SGX540 much less than the GNex's HD res)

edit: hell, all the generations were substantial upgrades over the previous ones..... I just wish Samsung stuck with their derivative SoCs for the SGS2 (OMAP4), SGS3 (S4), and SGS4 (Snapdragon 600 or S4 Pro) over their shit-tastic in house Exynos SoCs
 
They probably will for the US versions. The exynos at this point will most likely stay over seas and may act as a test for BIG.little.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
The SGS2 was a bigger leap from the SGS1 than the SGS3 was from the SGS2, so that gets my vote.... the 512MB and single core of the SGS1 really hurt it in futureproofing

the SGS4 is still a massive upgrade from the SGS3 when you look at the tech that goes into it, but in terms of biggest leap, my money still goes to the SGS2...

hell, an i9100G (SGS2) running AOSP is even better than a Galaxy Nexus in many ways (SD card support, better battery life, smaller size, and, arguably, lower resolution, stressing the underpowered SGX540 much less than the GNex's HD res)

edit: hell, all the generations were substantial upgrades over the previous ones..... I just wish Samsung stuck with their derivative SoCs for the SGS2 (OMAP4), SGS3 (S4), and SGS4 (Snapdragon 600 or S4 Pro) over their shit-tastic in house Exynos SoCs
Click to expand...

I still have my SGS2 and yes the SGS2 was a huge upgrade over the SGS1.

But I think the SGS4 is just as huge of an upgrade over the SGS3.
 
I am against popular thought here..

The GS4 is certainly a large upgrade on paper, but in real world usage there will not be anything monumentally better about it then the GS3. Infact each generation of the galaxy S phones have become a smaller upgrade then the previous for actual real world usage for most folks..

I look at it like this, My eyes cant see the pixels on anything above about 200ppi unless I am way closer to the screen then I should be.

a octo core isnt going to load my gmail or this forum on chrome any faster then the quad & its just marginally faster then a dual core..

4.8 to 5" is noticeable ONLY when your comparing them next to each other. Hold either against a 4" from the Galaxy s1 or even the 4.3" from the GS2 & they seem massive. Almost too much so..
 
Screen is monumentally better then the s3, regardless of resolution.

The exynos isn't octo, its dual quad, one for ultra low power consumption, the other task heavey (this is big)

The snapdragon 600 is a very efficient soc as well improving battery life as well a supporting all carriers.

The phone is lighter and generally the same size while giving a bigger screen.

what is marginal?
 
You left out the US variations of the S2 that used Snapdragon as well. So anyway, here's a little CPU comparison.

Overseas CPU: I left out the S2 variants running Tegra 2 and OMAP4 as they were not as common.

Galaxy S - 1ghz Cortex A8 = 2,000 DMIPS

Galaxy S II (Exynos version) - 1.2ghz dual-core Cortex A9, 3,000 DMIPS per core, 6,000 DMIPS total

Galaxy S III - 1.4ghz quad-core Cortex A9, 3500 DMIPS/core. 14,000 DMIPS total

Galaxy S IV - 1.6ghz quad-core Cortex A15 (let's ignore "little" in the performance aspect), 5600 DMIPS/core, 22,400 DMIPS total

So, S1 --> S2 = 200% increase, S2 --> S3 = 133% increase, and S3 --> S4 = 60% increase. Theoretical numbers, of course. But, let's see the US counterparts.

US CPU: The S1 used Exynos here, and the S2 used Exynos or Snapdragon S3, depending on carrier. I'll use the more common configurations.

Galaxy S - 1ghz Cortex A8 = 2000 DMIPS

Galaxy S II - 1.5ghz dual-core Scorpion = 3,150 DMIPS/core, 6,300 DMIPS total

Galaxy S III - 1.5ghz dual-core Krait = 4,950 DMIPS/core, 9,900 DMIPS total.

Galaxy S IV - 1.9ghz quad-core Krait - 6,260 DMIPS/core, 25,080 DMIPS total.

So, S1 --> S2 = 215% increase, S2 --> S3 = 57% increase, and S3 --> S4 = 153% increase.

Conclusion: As is true in many cases, the biggest jump in CPU performance was from the first generation to the second generation product. However, since the US got a watered-down S3 in many aspects, and is getting the superior S4 (in CPU raw power), they US will see a meaningful jump from S3 to S4.
 
Medion said:
Conclusion: As is true in many cases, the biggest jump in CPU performance was from the first generation to the second generation product. However, since the US got a watered-down S3 in many aspects, and is getting the superior S4 (in CPU raw power), they US will see a meaningful jump from S3 to S4.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I think you should factor in that the US S3 had 2 GBs of RAM compared to the International S3 with 1 GB of RAM. I think having more RAM does more for the user experience than the CPU does (at least when you're only talking about up to 2 GBs, past that I don't think it would make much of a difference at the moment) between those two S3 variants. It did for me coming from a Gnex to the Note 2; this is the first phone I've had where I don't have to worry about background apps getting closed arbitrarily. I can open my browser at almost any time and my page is still loaded, same for most games when I come back to them so I can start back right where I left off.

So for International S4 users, I think it's still a considerable jump from the S3 to the S4 with the extra RAM they're getting.
 
I was in a hurry as that was just a CPU analysis. I will do more later.
 
Trimlock said:
The exynos isn't octo, its dual quad, one for ultra low power consumption, the other task heavey (this is big)
Click to expand...

Nvidia tried this with Tegra 3, it didn't really work. We'll see if Samsung's approach works any better.

ItaliaFerrari said:
A lot of myths I've noticed on some forums. One of them was that the SGS4 is not a big upgrade over the SGS3. If you're comparing this upgrade to the SGS3 over the SGS2, then it is completely irrational to say that the SGS4 is any lesser of an upgrade over the SGS3.
Click to expand...

If you live in the US the "upgrade" is from a dual core Krait to a quad core Krait - the slight clock speed bump will be the only useful aspect of the CPU difference (dual vs. quad really doesn't matter, the extra 2 cores will be idle 99% of the time - with the 1% being when you run benchmarks), and the Adreno 320 is great at 1280x720, but now you bump that to 1920x1080 and eh... not so much.

Thus the reason people are saying it's not a big upgrade - the people saying that are probably in the US. Not a myth that it's not a big upgrade for those people.
 
Since exynos is compatible with LTE, and shortages are the only reason that are keeping it in korea, is it plausible to think that the exynos will make its way into the US?
 
kllrnohj said:
Nvidia tried this with Tegra 3, it didn't really work. We'll see if Samsung's approach works any better.
Click to expand...

The approaches are completely different. Tegra used a 5th companion core that was the same core (Cortex A9), but throttled. It was also active most of the time. ARM's (not Samsung's) Big.Little approach relies on two separate quad-core CPUs (Cortex A15 and A7), one for higher performance, and one for power efficiency. Tegra's approach slightly boosted standby battery life, if that. ARM's will significantly boost battery life under standby and most typical usage loads.

The main problem with Big.Little is the latency during load switches. ARM has said that this won't be noticeable to users, but we'll see. This is the first device to use this approach, and it's not out yet.

kllrnohj said:
If you live in the US the "upgrade" is from a dual core Krait to a quad core Krait - the slight clock speed bump will be the only useful aspect of the CPU difference (dual vs. quad really doesn't matter, the extra 2 cores will be idle 99% of the time - with the 1% being when you run benchmarks),
Click to expand...

Wrong. Even in a mobile OS, there are multiple simultaneous processes and threads running. Adding more cores allows for better distribution for better efficiency, and no lag when the OS needs to ramp up. The S2 to S3 saw only a 200mhz bump on the same core, but went from dual to quad. There is a HUGE difference between the two phones in regular performance.

kllrnohj said:
and the Adreno 320 is great at 1280x720, but now you bump that to 1920x1080 and eh... not so much.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But it will be more than enough for most users. We're not running Unreal Engine 4 on these devices.

kllrnohj said:
Thus the reason people are saying it's not a big upgrade - the people saying that are probably in the US. Not a myth that it's not a big upgrade for those people.
Click to expand...

It will be a substantial upgrade. Per core boost of 400mhz (27%), and then adding two more cores. Even the most conservative estimates of real world usage would give this a 50% boost. On top of that, the GPU is a substantial upgrade. The S III used the Adreno 225 paired with LPDDR2. The S IV uses the Adreno 320 (literally an overclocked 225) with LPDDR3. GPU performance should be more than double what the 225 was capable of, granted, it wasn't a good GPU.

Overall, the upgrade for US users will be huge. If all you're doing is checking Facebook and Email, then no, performance won't seem much better. We've gotten to the point where the basic apps on most Android phones are nearly iPhone smooth these days. But start doing something demanding (smart stay + web browsing, for example), and the performance becomes noticeable.
 
Some interesting Dhrystone results for the Exynos 5 (not directly comparable to the numbers released by vendors since their compilers and code are unknown):

Code: 
   Processor                      MHz  Cores    VAX    MIPS
                                               MIPS    /MHz
   Sam  Exynos4412   Cortex-A9   1400     4    1740    1.24 
                                 1400     4    1937    1.38
   TI   OMAP4430     Cortex-A9   1200     2    1409    1.17
                                 1200     2    1662    1.39  
   nV   Tegra 3      Cortex-A9   1300     4    1610    1.24
   Sam  Exynos5250   Cortex-A15  1700     2    3200    1.88  
                                 1700     2    3687    2.17
   QSn  S1 QSD8250   Scorpion    1000     1     880    0.88
   QSn  S4 APQ8064   Krait       1500     4    2417    1.61
                                 1500     4    2555    1.70
   QSn  S4 MSM8960   Krait       1500     2    2229    1.49


As a sidenote, my MSM8960 (HTC One XL) running at stock gets about 1.7DMIPS/MHz

Source: http://www.roylongbottom.org.uk/android benchmarks.htm#anchor10


The Snapdragon 600 results (APQ8064T) don't seem to be available yet but we know it'll be about 30% greater than the current Snapdragon S4's so I'd expect around 2.1/MHz
 
Last edited:
As far as I know the companion core in the tegra line its purely for stand by.
 
ChronoReverse said:
The Snapdragon 600 results (APQ8064T) don't seem to be available yet but we know it'll be about 30% greater than the current Snapdragon S4's so I'd expect around 2.1/MHz
Click to expand...

We'll see. The current Snapdragon 600 implementations (like the HTC One) are still paired with DDR2 instead of DDR3. Seems like they're just going to be an effective clock speed bump.

The Galaxy S IV is speculated to use LPDDR3, but that's only because the 600 supports it. Many of us thought the same of the HTC One before the tear down and other confirmations.
 
The SG1 to SG2 upgrade was the biggest. I think people are forgetting about how problematic the SG1 was with it's horrible BT, unreliable GPS, and signal issues. Those issues getting fixed along with a phone that saw much better support made for a bigger upgrade IMO.
 
I think in terms of feel the Biggest jump will be the S2. Now hear me out, I think from S3 to S4 is a minor jump because all phones that have similar specs to the S3 are already so damn fast, that nothing you do will really tax the hardware. Its like having a Core i5 proc and jumping to Core i7 extreme but all you do is web browse. The average user wont feel a thing most likely. Now they might see the improved OS, and better camera and better battery life. But in terms of performance the S1 to S2 was more like P4 to Core architecture. Just my $.02.
 
Blown 89 said:
The SG1 to SG2 upgrade was the biggest. I think people are forgetting about how problematic the SG1 was with it's horrible BT, unreliable GPS, and signal issues. Those issues getting fixed along with a phone that saw much better support made for a bigger upgrade IMO.
Click to expand...
Totally right. People forgot what a crap device that original galaxy was.
 
Blown 89 said:
how problematic the SG1 was with it's horrible BT, unreliable GPS, and signal issues.
Click to expand...

SGS2, at least in the Exynos variants, has a pretty awful GPS as well, better to get a Sirfstar III/IV box for the car than use it. BT and signal issues perhaps...
 
The question was only SGS2, SGS3 and SGS4 no? I think it was a given the jump from SGS1=>SGS2 was hugest.
 
ATT Captivate (SGS1) to ATT SGSII was the biggest upgrade

However the real upgrade for me was away from Android and to iOS. Force Close what?
 
dandragonrage said:
SGS2, at least in the Exynos variants, has a pretty awful GPS as well, better to get a Sirfstar III/IV box for the car than use it. BT and signal issues perhaps...
Click to expand...

This is new to me. While I heard about the SGS1 GPS issues, I've never heard or nor experienced any issues with my SGS2's GPS, and I use it as a GPS on a very regular basis.
 
Medion said:
The approaches are completely different. Tegra used a 5th companion core that was the same core (Cortex A9), but throttled. It was also active most of the time. ARM's (not Samsung's) Big.Little approach relies on two separate quad-core CPUs (Cortex A15 and A7), one for higher performance, and one for power efficiency. Tegra's approach slightly boosted standby battery life, if that. ARM's will significantly boost battery life under standby and most typical usage loads.

The main problem with Big.Little is the latency during load switches. ARM has said that this won't be noticeable to users, but we'll see. This is the first device to use this approach, and it's not out yet.
Click to expand...

You are comparing Tegra 3's reality vs. ARM's BIG.little theory.

Like I said, we'll see if ARM's theory works out any better than Nvidia's theory did. They both made the same theoretical claims - Nvidia's just turned out to be wrong, we'll see if Samsung did any better

Also you have that backwards, the main problem with Nvidia's companion core was latency, which BIG.little is supposed to *fix* (Samsung claims it can switch it 20 µs, which is kind of really, really fast - if true)

Wrong. Even in a mobile OS, there are multiple simultaneous processes and threads running. Adding more cores allows for better distribution for better efficiency, and no lag when the OS needs to ramp up. The S2 to S3 saw only a 200mhz bump on the same core, but went from dual to quad. There is a HUGE difference between the two phones in regular performance.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not wrong. Yes there are lots of processes and threads, but they are not *active*, or at least not CPU bound, just like they aren't on your average desktop/laptop. Dual vs. quad is going to be completely unnoticeable except in benchmarks and *maybe* a handful of apps if that.

S3 vs. S2 has nothing to do with dual vs. quad - just look at the US version of the S3 which is a dual core, not a quad.

Agreed. But it will be more than enough for most users. We're not running Unreal Engine 4 on these devices.
Click to expand...

Actually driving a 2D UI is harder in some ways for the GPUs than running a game is. 2D has lots of overdraw and needs higher fillrates and memory bandwidth than games do. Simply pushing 1920x1080 is *very* taxing on these GPUs.

It will be a substantial upgrade. Per core boost of 400mhz (27%), and then adding two more cores. Even the most conservative estimates of real world usage would give this a 50% boost.
Click to expand...

No, again, that's not how that works. The CPU bump will only help things that are CPU bound, and there are very, very few things on a mobile device that is CPU bound. Web browsing will be about the only place where it'll make any difference at all, and it'll help by pretty much 27% as webkit is not multithreaded (and the UI & GPU compositing threads are not CPU bound)

On top of that, the GPU is a substantial upgrade. The S III used the Adreno 225 paired with LPDDR2. The S IV uses the Adreno 320 (literally an overclocked 225) with LPDDR3. GPU performance should be more than double what the 225 was capable of, granted, it wasn't a good GPU.
Click to expand...

More than double sounds great (judging by the recent 3dmark benchmarks it looks like double is about right), until you realize the pixel count *also* more than doubled. Meaning graphics performance at native resolution as a result did *NOT* improve, as all the extra GPU speed was spent on a higher resolution screen.
 
kent said:
ATT Captivate (SGS1) to ATT SGSII was the biggest upgrade

However the real upgrade for me was away from Android and to iOS. Force Close what?
Click to expand...

lol, I almost forgot about those. The Thunderbolt had them constantly, so did my Droid 2 Global, Droid X. Was less frequent when I got the Gnex so I just dealt with it. My Note 2 crashes often when using the samsung apps. My personal iPhone 5 is much more stable then all of the phones before it.
 
seanclayton said:
All dat specs just to run basic computer functions. ;)
"You can now browse the web even faster with our brand new quadcores!"
Click to expand...

Funny thing is that quad cores won't really help with that, it'll be thanks to 4.2.2 and faster single thread performance.

Even most desktop PC applications don't use quad cores, and mobile doesn't really benefit from things like multitasking given how it usually works (one full screen app while backgrounded apps like music players or downloaders don't use that many resources).

At best its just marketing speak, and at worst it is an unnecessary drain on battery life.
 
dandragonrage said:
SGS4 seems like the biggest upgrade of them to me, dumping the old-ass Cortex A9. Hopefully the GPS chip included is also a lot better than the POS GPS of my SGS2 Epic 4G Touch... I will probably be upgrading to SGS4 later this year myself, unless something else I like even more comes out in the meantime

Edit: Not touching SGS4 after all. Snapdragon 600 is not Cortex A15. I am not buying the ARM equivalent of the Cyrix 6x86. I will go non-Samsung when I upgrade my phone.
Click to expand...

+1.
The highest frequency of 1.9 GHz Exynos eight core processor 5410 or 1.6 GHz qualcomm quad-core processors
PowerVR SGX544MP3 GPU
2 gb of RAM, 16 grom
4.99 -inch Super AMOLED FULL HD resolution (1920 * 1080) .
 
radeon962 said:
Went from a Motorola Razr (flip phone) to the SGS2 way back when, so that was a monumental upgrade. SGS2 to current SGS3 was a nice improvement primarily due to screen size. Whether I go to SGS4 don't know as I'm flipping between the SGS3 and a Nexus 4 currently.

Looks like a nice improvement as the S4 is slightly smaller physically than the S3 but the S4 has a larger screen with less bezel around the edges. The rest of the improvements are great, but the S3 is already fast enough and with multiple batteries and storage options, it can do everything I need and more.
Click to expand...

Same here. I actually upgraded from a Epic 4G Touch (Galaxy S) to the S3 so that was a huge upgrade. I skipped the S2 with Sprint. The S3 is a fantastic phone and does everything I want. I just hope we get the dual screen mode update soon.

My next upgrade will be either the S5 or the Note 3 or 4 depending on release schedule and time of upgrade. I can actually upgrade this October but I am still more than satisfied with my S3. I'll probably get the new Note when it comes out. I really don't think the S5 will be able to go up in screen size because then it's on phablet territory and would cannibalize the Note.
 
fredlove said:
The highest frequency of 1.9 GHz Exynos eight core processor 5410 or 1.6 GHz qualcomm quad-core processors
Click to expand...

The Exynos is 1.2ghz on big core and 1.6ghz on small core, the Snapdragon 600 is running at 1.9ghz.

Of a very slight detriment to the screen, it is still pentile, but at 1080p there is no way you could see this with out having a very expensive camera to take super resolution shots at amazing zoom lengths.
 
Trimlock said:
The Exynos is 1.2ghz on big core and 1.6ghz on small core, the Snapdragon 600 is running at 1.9ghz.

Of a very slight detriment to the screen, it is still pentile, but at 1080p there is no way you could see this with out having a very expensive camera to take super resolution shots at amazing zoom lengths.
Click to expand...
They surprisingly calibrated the display this time though. That was unexpected. So now they actually could have accurate colors to go with their superior contrast (infinite ratio due to black being 0) if you select the Adobe profile.

But they ain't gonna get any Anandtech Editor's Choice Gold like the HTC One did, or any award.
 
Went from SGS1 -> SGS3. Didn't upgrade to SGS2 because the resolution didn't increase. Next phone will probably be SGS5, because SGS4 is kind of pricey (649-699€).

Biggest upgrades:
1. SGS2 -> SGS3
2. SGS3 -> SGS4
3. SGS1 -> SGS2

P.S. There is no US vs International version with SGS4. Most countries will receive I9505 at least at the beginning. That's also one reason not to upgrade.
 
GS2 was the phone that got people behind the galaxy brand while earning Samsung loads of fans. GS original was probably the worst flagship phone of any brand during its time. Someone already mentioned it before but it's seriously conveniently ignored like revisionist history or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top