The Exynos version of the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra is being hammered with complaints

[midian182]

Why it matters: Samsung is facing more criticism over the Exynos chip found in overseas models of the Galaxy 20 Ultra. Many owners of these devices have complained that the expensive handsets are displaying a slew of problems not found in the Snapdragon version.

Gizmodo reports that owners of Exynos-powered Galaxy S20 Ultras have experienced overheating, poor autofocus performance, limited battery life, and incompatibility issues that have stopped games such as Pokémon Go from working. Some users have also reported that the phones are showing a heavy green tint, though it only happens in 120Hz mode and when the battery is under 25 percent, so it may be a software issue.

South Korea is one of several countries that usually get the Exynos version of the Galaxy phones, but this year saw it receive the Snapdragon-powered S20 series. As Samsung designed and fabricated the Exynos 990, some claim this is evidence the company knew it was an inferior SoC and wanted the superior Snapdragon version in its home nation.

Last month, a petition was launched demanding Samsung stop selling Exynos phones. It claims that phones with Exynos chips “perform slower, have less battery life, use inferior camera sensors and processing, overheat and throttle faster, amongst other issues.” It’s quickly closing in on its 50,000-signature target, having almost reached 43,000 names.

The petition does have a point; several benchmarks have shown the Snapdragon 865 performing better than the Exynos 990 in almost every test. If Samsung’s chip is causing technical problems in addition to being inferior to Qualcomm’s product, convincing people to buy an Exynos-powered $1,400 S20 Ultra will be even harder.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/84872-exynos-version-galaxy-s20-ultra-hammered-complaints.html

 

[gigantor21]

"If Samsung’s chip is causing technical problems in addition to being inferior to Qualcomm’s product, convincing people to buy an Exynos-powered $1,400 S20 Ultra will be even harder."

That's what makes it especially ridiculous.

It would be more than bad enough if the phones were priced well, but there is ZERO excuse for it when the phones are so expensive.

 

[Fearghast]

"Always opt for the Snapdragon version"
Easy for you to type
But in Europe there is only Exynos version.

 

[Shadowboxer]

It must cost Samsung a lot less to make a phone with an Exynos chip in it than a snapdragon part. They should be selling the exynos version cheaper.

Maybe call it the S19 or something?

 

[captaincranky]

Overheating phones are sort of becoming Samsung's "thing", as it were, ever since the one that exploded in your pocket.

 

[poohbear]

Saving them money to use their own in-house CPUs but you gotta pass some of that money on to the consumers. Exynos based phones need to be 20-30% cheaper.

 

[captaincranky]

Saving them money to use their own in-house CPUs but you gotta pass some of that money on to the consumers. Exynos based phones need to be 20-30% cheaper.

From a historical perspective, Apple found out its CPUs didn't really measure up to Intel's, and they were forced to abandon them for the latter.

Apple hasn't, "passed any savings on to the consumer", And frighteningly , their prices and profit margins have escalated with Intel.

But then, "it just works". (At least if you're holding it right).

 

[mattferg]

From a historical perspective, Apple found out its CPUs didn't really measure up to Intel's, and they were forced to abandon them for the latter.

Apple hasn't, "passed any savings on to the consumer", And frighteningly , their prices and profit margins have escalated with Intel.

But then, "it just works". (At least if you're holding it right).

Two things wrong here:

1. PowerPC was IBM, not Apple, in the same way their current CPUs are Intel. Apple got custom chips from IBM, but they get some custom chips from Intel too (the Mac Pro, for one)
2. Apple sells iPhones with significantly better SoCs for the same price as other major flagships.

The real test will be if (hopefully never) ARM MacBooks happen. If these are cheaper it'll show Apple is passing on discounts.

 

[captaincranky]

...[ [...The real test will be if (hopefully never) ARM MacBooks happen. If these are cheaper it'll show Apple is passing on discounts.

It's often said, "if wishes were horses beggars".

Whomever made Apple's earlier chips, wouldn't you agree their Intel powered stuff is superior?

 

[PEnnn]

Another black eye for Samsung?? They're running out of eyes!!

 

[Palladium1987]

"If Samsung’s chip is causing technical problems in addition to being inferior to Qualcomm’s product, convincing people to buy an Exynos-powered $1,400 S20 Ultra will be even harder."

That's what makes it especially ridiculous.

It would be more than bad enough if the phones were priced well, but there is ZERO excuse for it when the phones are so expensive.

Over here in Singapore, the demand for the S20 is so bad that the Ultra has dropped from a launch MSRP of US$1350 to US$900 in just a month. Even so, $900 is still insulting for a bloody 2020 "flagship" with only 128GB of native storage, much one with so many half baked and half assed features.

 

[Porkous]

The issue might also be that people buy the brand, ie Apple. For how long apple did not produce their own hardware, but rather get it from someone and then just pack it nicely, for example Macs? Now days when Other competitive companies have a down turn, they (the average biased fanboy) bash their complex onto these competitive companies even more. Maybe apple is doing so well, while others don't (when they should) because apple affords to, to pay a -> premium to have the premium, while Samsung for example, with its vast expenditure and talent, it just can't... and that is so ridiculous, Samsung cannot put expensive processors into their phones because people would still buy apple, especially in America. Why I am telling this? Because it became obvious that now Apple is a powerhouse with the best components, and high price to justify, but this gap wasn't so obvious as it is now, and you can see people acting as biased fanatics, when non biased people recommend something other then apple, the bash rises even more to new levels.

Is counter intuitive, but Samsung might be forced to sell the less powerful phone just to make a profit (they got lots of costs, from fab to chip, etc), but you can see that in their mainstream phones, they offer quite the value. Is not apparent because they price their phones in accordance with the price segment, if they would lower the price, then it would fall in a different price segment, and the client won't consider the phone as the premium at the premium price, a thing "for those who can afford it" halo.

Samsung, and other companies, just need to have better support of Android on their phones, and I mean the way apple has with its "metal". So a sort of collaboration with google to optimize Android for a particular phone. Also, if the processors become too expensive, as snapdragon became, then just invest more in your in house processor to make it a powerhouse, to have more marketing and publicity, now days no one knows what exynos is capable of, and is not believed to be more powerful brand than snapdragon is.


Just don't try to be so biased, as it hits on some other aspects (the law of compensation).

Why no one states that Macs have ridiculous prices and performance for its price? As compared to other laptops, for example

My two cents.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

"If Samsung’s chip is causing technical problems in addition to being inferior to Qualcomm’s product, convincing people to buy an Exynos-powered $1,400 S20 Ultra will be even harder."

That's what makes it especially ridiculous.

It would be more than bad enough if the phones were priced well, but there is ZERO excuse for it when the phones are so expensive.

Are you kidding, in countries like Australia which get crapnyos, the phone costs $2200, and is also super expensive in Europe. We get third rate SoC and much higher prices for the privilege. I won’t have a bar of crapnyos.

 

[captaincranky]

The issue might also be that people buy the brand, ie Apple. For how long apple did not produce their own hardware, but rather get it from someone and then just pack it nicely, for example Macs? Now days when Other competitive companies have a down turn, they (the average biased fanboy) bash their complex onto these competitive companies even more. Maybe apple is doing so well, while others don't (when they should) because apple affords to, to pay a -> premium to have the premium, while Samsung for example, with its vast expenditure and talent, it just can't... and that is so ridiculous, Samsung cannot put expensive processors into their phones because people would still buy apple, especially in America. Why I am telling this? Because it became obvious that now Apple is a powerhouse with the best components, and high price to justify, but this gap wasn't so obvious as it is now, and you can see people acting as biased fanatics, when non biased people recommend something other then apple, the bash rises even more to new levels.

Is counter intuitive, but Samsung might be forced to sell the less powerful phone just to make a profit (they got lots of costs, from fab to chip, etc), but you can see that in their mainstream phones, they offer quite the value. Is not apparent because they price their phones in accordance with the price segment, if they would lower the price, then it would fall in a different price segment, and the client won't consider the phone as the premium at the premium price, a thing "for those who can afford it" halo.

Samsung, and other companies, just need to have better support of Android on their phones, and I mean the way apple has with its "metal". So a sort of collaboration with google to optimize Android for a particular phone. Also, if the processors become too expensive, as snapdragon became, then just invest more in your in house processor to make it a powerhouse, to have more marketing and publicity, now days no one knows what exynos is capable of, and is not believed to be more powerful brand than snapdragon is.


Just don't try to be so biased, as it hits on some other aspects (the law of compensation).

Why no one states that Macs have ridiculous prices and performance for its price? As compared to other laptops, for example

My two cents.

Two cents, huh? It's more like a dollars worth of run on sentences. That made me out of breath just from reading it.

 

[Kimbridge]

I have the s10 plus and love in Australia and it's very good. Much better than my s9 plus. I wanted the ultra but at $2000. Here I gave it a miss mainly because of the exynos chip this year. Maybe next year with AMD maybe we will see. Still loving the s10 plus though

 

[maestro0428]

From a historical perspective, Apple found out its CPUs didn't really measure up to Intel's, and they were forced to abandon them for the latter.

Apple hasn't, "passed any savings on to the consumer", And frighteningly , their prices and profit margins have escalated with Intel.

But then, "it just works". (At least if you're holding it right).

Wrong, Apples cpus were made by IBM, not in house. They do make there own phone cpus though.

 

[captaincranky]

Wrong, Apples cpus were made by IBM, not in house. They do make there own phone cpus though.

My bad. I'm more of an Apple-ophobe than an Apple-ophile.

It does bring up the question as to whether they moved to Intel because of performance, or price.

 

[neeyik]

It does bring up the question as to whether they moved to Intel because of performance, or price.

There's actually a Wikipedia article on the matter:

Mac transition to Intel processors - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This is a good read too:

Steve Jobs predicted the Mac's move from Intel to ARM processors | AppleInsider

The Mac shifting to ARM may come as soon as a full decade after Steve Jobs died. Yet, as well as championing and managing the Intel move in the 2000s, he also considered these major computer hardware architecture changes to be essential every decade or so.

appleinsider.com

 

[Pop Mihai Ioan]

It's likely more a Qual..... sponsored hype to cripple competition, which is a very bad thing. For me the most annoying problem with S20 ultra is the astronomical price point.
Imagine the pricing of phones got even more absurd due to only one chip supplier, which by the way, is almost a reality.
Even 2 identical android phone could be actually different due to disponibility of ram, nand-flash and electronics at the time of fabrication, not to mention different software versions.