Remember the leaked Samsung roadmap that showed what's coming in the first half of the year? It listed a few low- to mid-range handsets that should fit the bill if you are looking for an affordable Jelly Bean device - the Galaxy Pocket 2, the Galaxy Star, the Galaxy Young, and the Galaxy Frame, in addition to the mysterious GT-I9150/2.
The Galaxy Young (GT-S6310/S6312) features a more common 1GHz Qualcomm processor and an HVGA display, while the Galaxy Star (GT-S5282) goes exotic on the silicon front, and will come powered by a Spreadtrum processor with Mail-300 graphics and a humble 320 x 240 display.
The most exciting entry remains the Galaxy GT-B9150, which was listed with a dual-core 1.7 GHz Exynos 5 Dual processor, and a 1920 x 1080 Full HD display. All in all, Samsung isn't resting on its laurels the first half of the year, and it is evident that the promised move to alternative chipsets for its low- and midrange devices is in full swing.
Now the GLbenchmarks for these handsets are up, and reveal a bit more on the specs front. The GT-I9150/2 sports a Broadcom SoC, has a qHD screen, and runs Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean.
The same chipset is powering the Galaxy Pocket 2, or GT-S5310/S5312, but it shows a budget 320 x 240 pixels display. Stepping it up a bit from the Pocket 2 is the Galaxy Frame - again Broadcom SoC, but an HVGA screen - with the S6810P version sporting NFC, and the S6810 without.
The Galaxy Young (GT-S6310/S6312) features a more common 1GHz Qualcomm processor and an HVGA display, while the Galaxy Star (GT-S5282) goes exotic on the silicon front, and will come powered by a Spreadtrum processor with Mail-300 graphics and a humble 320 x 240 display.
The most exciting entry remains the Galaxy GT-B9150, which was listed with a dual-core 1.7 GHz Exynos 5 Dual processor, and a 1920 x 1080 Full HD display. All in all, Samsung isn't resting on its laurels the first half of the year, and it is evident that the promised move to alternative chipsets for its low- and midrange devices is in full swing.
source: GLBenchmark
No comments :
Post a Comment