Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

comparedial.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 151 posts

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#31

Post by the_snooze »

Darmody wrote: post #15

I can't believe how bad Samsung has become. You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance. 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 d…

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications.

It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way around. Samsung software is just so damn needy and won't get out of the way.

And it's not like these things are cheap either! The user is very much a paying customer, not a freeloader who's a product to be sold to other businesses.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#35

Post by mardifoufs »

loufe wrote: post #10
nicolas_t wrote: post #5

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) Getting an Exynos galaxy means more thermal throttling, lower performances and is just not competitive with other brands for the budget.

For now, at least. I imagine they'll have caught up before too many generations. Samsung clearly has the resources to keep up.

Samsung has been promising that for almost 8 years now. For some reason they absolutely cannot figure out how to design a proper high end SoC. I'm not familiar with the design of exynos chips but I don't understand how they barely do better than Mediatek. They have control over the entire design of their devices and should have performances that is closer to Apple than it is to low/mid-end off the shelf designs.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#36

Post by skavi »

mardifoufs wrote: post #27
nicolas_t wrote: post #5

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) Getting an Exynos galaxy means more thermal throttling, lower performances and is just not competitive with other brands for the budget.

I thought both samsung and qualcomm dropped their custom cores for exynos and snapdragon at this point. So is there still such a huge difference between the two? Aren't both of them using the best arm licensed core? I get that for some reason apple sillicon like performance won't happen but this is just sad from samsung. Also samsung seems to be doing something fishy with benchmark results. It seems like exynos has b…

there are still many potential points of differentiation on each SoC. For flagships, the cores are pretty much identical, but the cache sizes, fabric, process, GPUs, etc. can change.

For the SoCs being compared here, the new Exynos model has half the big cores of the Qualcomm model.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#37

Post by marcusjt »

the_snooze wrote: post #31
Darmody wrote: post #15

I can't believe how bad Samsung has become. You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance. 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 d…

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications. It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way aroun…

I recommend running Universal Android Debloater [1] on all Samsung devices (I have 2 of them) plus other manufacturers are even worse (e.g. Xiaomi) and the same accept works wonders on them too.

[1] https://www.xda-developers.com/universal-android-debloater-u...

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#38

Post by _fat_santa »

nicolas_t wrote: post #5

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) Getting an Exynos galaxy means more thermal throttling, lower performances and is just not competitive with other brands for the budget.

I remember with my S9, even though the Exynos was slower, that's the device everyone wanted because the bootloader could be unlocked.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#39

Post by k8sToGo »

Darmody wrote: post #15

I can't believe how bad Samsung has become. You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance. 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 d…

Also the US gets fast Snapdragon while the rest of the world gets inferior Exynos CPUs for the same price.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#40

Post by sdoering »

the_snooze wrote: post #31
Darmody wrote: post #15

I can't believe how bad Samsung has become. You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance. 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 d…

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications. It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way aroun…

I still use my old Pixel2 as my work phone from my employer. The reason?

I can only select Samsung devices as mobile phones from my employer.

I just won't.

Post reply on HN