So there were rumors that we'd not get the Hummingbird CPU here in the U.S. with our "Galaxy S phones" and after running the app Quadrant Standard, I'm a little confused. Here's the results that confuse me and it could be a simple lack of my knowledge so if anyone has the answer then please feel free to clue me in without flaming.
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
So does this mean we are NOT running the Hummingbird CPU or is the application wrong?
jonathan3579 said:
So there were rumors that we'd not get the Hummingbird CPU here in the U.S. with our "Galaxy S phones" and after running the app Quadrant Standard, I'm a little confused. Here's the results that confuse me and it could be a simple lack of my knowledge so if anyone has the answer then please feel free to clue me in without flaming.
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
So does this mean we are NOT running the Hummingbird CPU or is the application wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe that the arm v7 is a part of the cortex a8 family of processors, or vice versa.
greengoldmello said:
I believe that the arm v7 is a part of the cortex a8 family of processors, or vice versa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, I wonder why the app differentiates the two CPU's like that. I'm not able to come up with much info from searching for that exact CPU name other than info on the Motorola Droid X. Go figure...
I ran the benchmark and I was interested.
I hit up ARM's website and the ARMv7 falls under the Cortex A8 platform.
Now is there a difference in CPU's between the I9000 and the Vibrant I honestly cannot say. Very Very interesting though.
I wonder if anyone with a captivate can tell us what there's says I am interested in this.
Do you guys think that Samsung could have cheapened out and gave us a crappier CPU?
EDIT: I did some digging and found out that Apples A4 processor which is pretty much a hummingbird is under the ARMv7 instruction set which is a Cortex A8 processor.
I was able to pull up the same info in regard to the iPhone 4. I found that quite interesting. However, I'm still curious about a Captivate's results. The GPU is exactly the same on the app's results but it's just the CPU thing that bugs me. Is it normal for the phone to be running at 400 MHz? I keep turning up with that same result.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
jonathan3579 said:
I was able to pull up the same info in regard to the iPhone 4. I found that quite interesting. However, I'm still curious about a Captivate's results. The GPU is exactly the same on the app's results but it's just the CPU thing that bugs me. Is it normal for the phone to be running at 400 MHz? I keep turning up with that same result.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The processor will throttle itself based on demand, so yes it is totally normal to see a number less than 1000MHz
jonathan3579 said:
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Vibrant shows Current frequency as 1000MHz.
Let's put it this way - T-Mobile and practically all marketing for the phones states it is in fact the 1ghz hummingbird CPU. If it isn't, then it is clearly false advertising.
gsvnet said:
Let's put it this way - T-Mobile and practically all marketing for the phones states it is in fact the 1ghz hummingbird CPU. If it isn't, then it is clearly false advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So do we have any definitive answers on whether it's the same CPU that EU has? I've turned up with inconclusive results.
jonathan3579 said:
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Cortex A8 is from the ARMv7 family of processors.
Think of it like Intel i7 family of processors, and individual processors being i7 965 or i7 920 or i3, or i5 or i9, etc. or better yet like intel processors being x86, then with all the different things they add on like mmx and hyperthreading and the like being additional instruction sets. so over time x86 gets tweaked for better performance, and the other instruction sets allow for specific tasks to be run faster. hence the difference between the different arm families. that and price tag.
any mobile processor will also dynamically clock itself based on requirements at the time. I don't know the exact frequencies because I haven't cared enough to find out, but the processor downclocks itself to something like 250mhz with the screen turned off, then up to 400mhz ish with the screen on, and then up to 800-1000mhz when running any applications or games or what have you. It does this to save battery life and not run too ungodly hot.
Laptops do the exact same thing, and desktop computers as well if you enable those settings to save on power consumption.
also the cortex a8 is just the cpu itself as far as i'm aware, that does not include the dsp nor the gpu.
ALL SGS phones run the same exact processor, Samsung's custom Hummingbird processor, with the cpu being 45nm based on the Cortex a8 (ARMv7 series) with some customizations, along with the SGX 540, i don't know what their dsp is off the top of my head though.
This is interesting!
I have an incredible. I've noticed the exact same description for my processor using two different apps. If anyone has an answer I'd love to here it!
rench32 said:
I have an incredible. I've noticed the exact same description for my processor using two different apps. If anyone has an answer I'd love to here it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon is also an ARM v7 CPU. basically ARM v7 is the CPU core, Snapdragon, OMAP, Hummingbird are all SoC(Systems on a Chip), where the CPU portion is ARM based.
Related
Motorola url: http://mediacenter.motorola.com/Fact-Sheets/Motorola-ATRIX-4G-Fact-Sheet-353b.aspx(Screenshot attached for those who are on device.)
Line of interest:
Processor: 2 processor cores running at 1GHz each
Nvidia url: http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-2.html
Lines of interest:
CPU: Dual-Core ARM Cortex A9
Frequency: 1 GHz, per core
Does this mean we have an effective 2GHz processing power in this device.
On a side note, my laptop is a quad core 2GHz, with each core at ~500MHz adding up to 2GHz in all. So that line got be confused thinking.
I've never heard of a 500Mhz quad core processor, but I have heard of a 2Ghz quad core processor, effectively providing 8GHz of processing power.
Nah, it really doesn't work like that. Each core will only run at 1ghz MAX, the benefit to having a second (or more) cores is that while you are doing something the second core is doing background stuff and you aren't getting bogged down. Or if the app supports it it can use both. Here's where things get fun....if your app uses both cores running at 1 ghz each it can TECHNICALLY process as fast as a 2ghz SINGLE CORE but its more like you get 50%-75% more performance from the second core. So I guess TECHNICALLY it would be the same as a single core 2ghz CPU...but at the same time not really? A 2ghz single would do things faster on single tasks, but multitasking the dual core is way better IMO. Hope that helps some.
harolds said:
I've never heard of a 500Mhz quad core processor, but I have heard of a 2Ghz quad core processor, effectively providing 8GHz of processing power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check in any CPU analyzer. Mine is a quad core, and each processor gets noted as ~500 MHz. I think u can find it even in 'device manager'.
Initially I too thought that I was getting 8GHz of power in my CPU, only to find later that it was infact 500x4.
Strange, my office system (desktop) is a dual core, and shows it at each core at 3GHz. Will check once more on my laptop when I get home. This is crazy!
But good to know. Even the graphics part of it has 8 cores. Was going through the specs. It rocks!
diablo009 said:
Check in any CPU analyzer. Mine is a quad core, and each processor gets noted as ~500 MHz. I think u can find it even in 'device manager'.
Initially I too thought that I was getting 8GHz of power in my CPU, only to find later that it was infact 500x4.
Strange, my office system (desktop) is a dual core, and shows it at each core at 3GHz. Will check once more on my laptop when I get home. This is crazy!
But good to know. Even the graphics part of it has 8 cores. Was going through the specs. It rocks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure your processor hasn't been underclocked as part of some sort of battery saving feature? I don't think most applications can even utilize all 4 cores, which would mean individual applications would perform...pretty slowly. Right?
chbearsrock said:
Are you sure your processor hasn't been underclocked as part of some sort of battery saving feature? I don't think most applications can even utilize all 4 cores, which would mean individual applications would perform...pretty slowly. Right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has always been baffling me. I'll check today evening n update here. But now I am super happy abt the processor in atrix.
if you are in windows run cpu-z and post a screen shot.
skaboss610 said:
if you are in windows run cpu-z and post a screen shot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here u go.
its this processor. each core runs at a clock of 2ghz
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=40480
according that screen shot, you have
2GHZ * 4CORES = 8GHZ
so... you had 8ghz all along!
Techcruncher said:
according that screen shot, you have
2GHZ * 4CORES = 8GHZ
so... you had 8ghz all along!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aaah!!! No wonder I paid $1300 for this laptop in July 2009. And no wonder games released even in 2011 are playing so well without any frame rate issue.
Thanks for clearing this up kind sir.
Hey guys,
When I fire up SetCPU, under CPU information it says I have an ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l).
Infact, each and every system information tool I've run on my phone keeps telling me the same thing.
These tools also keep telling me I have 1 processor core. Not 2. Got me really worried until the app "SystemPanel" showed me the activity of 2 CPU cores.
PHEW!!! Doesn't this phone have an ARM Cortex-A9 proccessor?
What do you guys see?
funeralcrows said:
Hey guys,
When I fire up SetCPU, under CPU information it says I have an ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l). Infact, each and every system information tool I've run on my phone keeps telling me the same thing. "SystemPanel" is the only app that showed me 2 CPU cores activity. Doesn't this phone have an ARM Cortex-A9 proccessor?
What do you guys see?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cortex-A9 is a ARMv7 chip. See here
Wow, my ass is officially cool now. Thanks a lot man =D
How donkey kong of me.
if you want to compare it to intel processors, saying that it's ARMv7 is like saying it's a Sandy Bridge processor. Saying it's a Cortex A9 is like saying it's an i5(as opposed to an i3 or an i7).
What is the EXACT FULL Brand name of the processor?
My phone also shows the processor as : ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v71)
This page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ARM_microprocessor_cores shows there are several sub classifications of ARMv7......so what exactly is the FULL brand name of this Processor? Is it really dual core? And is it good? Where does it stand when compared to Tegra and Exynos?
It's Samsung Exynos 4210 dual core
Doing a bit of enquiry, I found that both Exynos 4210 and Tegra 2 are SOCs (System-on-a-chip). These chips are jack of all trades, and amalgamate the ARM processor, GPU, anamnesis controllers and alien interfaces into a distinct chip. All SGS II phones with model number GT-i9100 have the Exynos 4210 and the model number GT-i9103 has the Tegra 2. Correct me if I'm wrong.
smaskell said:
if you want to compare it to intel processors, saying that it's ARMv7 is like saying it's a Sandy Bridge processor. Saying it's a Cortex A9 is like saying it's an i5(as opposed to an i3 or an i7).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No ARMv7 is the instruction set, that is different from Sandy bridge which is a cpu architecture. So sandy bridge and cortex A9 are more on the same level but not exactly the same. And i5 is similar to a specific version of Exonys, but I think there only is one version
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
How big is the performance difference between this SOCs? and even though 4460 is more powerful will we see performance changes because the Galaxy Nexus uses a higher pixel count?
Razr will have 4460 - the same CPU as Galaxy Nexus. Information about 4430 chipset - is just a first guess. Motorola and their distributors confirmed it will have 4460 version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
UPD: I was wrong. They changed information on motodev website. Now the specs says its 4430. http://developer.motorola.com/products/razr-xt910/
nailll said:
Razr will have 4460 - the same CPU as Galaxy Nexus. Information about 4430 chipset - is just a first guess. Motorola and their distributors confirmed it will have 4460 version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you cite that? Everything that I've been reading about the RAZR has suggested otherwise.
Also read this: http://androidforums.com/motorola-droid-razr/431262-4430-4460-update-2-does-not-have-4460-a.html
Explains the differences between the 2 chips.
They posted 4430 on motodev portal a few days ago
It's 4430.
http://developer.motorola.com/products/droid-razr-xt912/
Damn. Sorry. I was confused. http://www.droid-life.com/2011/10/1...with-full-specs-omap4460-processor-confirmed/
Galaxy Nexus uses TI OMAP 4460 at 1,2GHz CPU and 304MHz GPU.
It doesn't use full speed of 1.5GHz CPU and 384MHz GPU.
So frequencies are the same between Galaxy Nexus and Moto Razr.
Razr has lower resolution 960x540 vs 1280x720.
So Razr should be faster.
should the 4460 be more efficient than the 4430 at 1.2GHz？
Diagrafeas said:
Galaxy Nexus uses TI OMAP 4460 at 1,2GHz CPU and 304MHz GPU.
It doesn't use full speed of 1.5GHz CPU and 384MHz GPU.
So frequencies are the same between Galaxy Nexus and Moto Razr.
Razr has lower resolution 960x540 vs 1280x720.
So Razr should be faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where are you seeing that the GPU clock in the Galaxy Nexus is 304MHz?
Chirality said:
Where are you seeing that the GPU clock in the Galaxy Nexus is 304MHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here are the specs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_OMAP#OMAP_4
Galaxy nexus has 384 mhz
soremir said:
Here are the specs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_OMAP#OMAP_4
Galaxy nexus has 384 mhz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CPU and GPU frequencies are linked.
So i strongly doudt that with a 1,2 GHz CPU you can get 384MHz GPU.
Diagrafeas said:
CPU and GPU frequencies are linked.
So i strongly doudt that with a 1,2 GHz CPU you can get 384MHz GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What makes you think that the CPU and GPU clocks are linked?
Chirality said:
What makes you think that the CPU and GPU clocks are linked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They aren't... I don't know where he got that.
didibabawu said:
should the 4460 be more efficient than the 4430 at 1.2GHz？
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With emphasis on "should", yes. All things constant in the wild world of chip yields, the 4430 "should" require more effort to reach 1.2ghz. Not long to find out.
rushless said:
With emphasis on "should", yes. All things constant in the wild world of chip yields, the 4430 "should" require more effort to reach 1.2ghz. Not long to find out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the 4430 actually comes in two flavors, a 1ghz and a 1.2ghz. I don't believe they are taking the 1ghz processor and overclocking it.
My understanding is the 4430 and 4460 are from the same wafers. The 4430's are just the ones that did not run reliably at 1.5 but would at 1.2. Kind of the samw on pc processors. AMD had some quad cores that would only run reliably on 3 cores. Instead of throwing them away, change the model number and sell them. This has been common for years. So it could be possible someone's 4430 might run reliably at 1.4.
Oaklands said:
My understanding is the 4430 and 4460 are from the same wafers. The 4430's are just the ones that did not run reliably at 1.5 but would at 1.2. Kind of the samw on pc processors. AMD had some quad cores that would only run reliably on 3 cores. Instead of throwing them away, change the model number and sell them. This has been common for years. So it could be possible someone's 4430 might run reliably at 1.4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ That is all that needs to be said.
Oaklands said:
My understanding is the 4430 and 4460 are from the same wafers. The 4430's are just the ones that did not run reliably at 1.5 but would at 1.2. Kind of the samw on pc processors. AMD had some quad cores that would only run reliably on 3 cores. Instead of throwing them away, change the model number and sell them. This has been common for years. So it could be possible someone's 4430 might run reliably at 1.4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Usually when chips are binned this way, the higher binned and lowered binned chips tend to be released at about the same time. However, there's a several months gap between the release of OMAP4430-based devices and OMAP4460-based devices, which seems to indicate that they are manufactured separately. Granted, this is the SoC-market with long lead times and complicated device development cycles so perhaps the chips were available at the same time but it has just taken longer for OMAP4460 devices to reach market, but the big gap between release frames suggest to me that these two SoCs are developed separately.
Chirality said:
Usually when chips are binned this way, the higher binned and lowered binned chips tend to be released at about the same time. However, there's a several months gap between the release of OMAP4430-based devices and OMAP4460-based devices, which seems to indicate that they are manufactured separately. Granted, this is the SoC-market with long lead times and complicated device development cycles so perhaps the chips were available at the same time but it has just taken longer for OMAP4460 devices to reach market, but the big gap between release frames suggest to me that these two SoCs are developed separately.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's nothing preventing them from releasing them months apart.
zetsumeikuro said:
There's nothing preventing them from releasing them months apart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes there is, inventory. If they are binning chips off the same line but they are only selling the lower binned ones but holding off on selling the higher binned ones for several months, then they are piling up inventory of the higher clocked chips and not doing anything with them.
Now it is possible that the yield on the higher clocked chips is very low, such that only after several months of binning did they have enough inventory to move them to OEMs. But then this would mean that you'll probably have a harder time overclocking the 4430s due to how much difficulty they had with yields for higher clocked chips.
Hello I was looking through my specs with a app for system info and i noticed this:
CPU:
ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l)
current freq 500 Mhz
Max freq 1600 Mhz
Min freq 100 Mhz
Cores 1
Architecture 7
BogoMIP 1592.52
Hardware SMDKC210
Revision 1
Dunno if this is right or not considering i tought a Galaxy S 2 was a dual core Samsung Exynos 4210 processor?
Dunno if the GPU is correct also
openGL
vendor arm
renderer mali-400 mp
Version: OpenGL ES-CM 1.1
Some one who can enlight me if this is correct? or what it actually should be
RDDraco said:
Hello I was looking through my specs with a app for system info and i noticed this:
CPU:
ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l)
current freq 500 Mhz
Max freq 1600 Mhz
Min freq 100 Mhz
Cores 1
Architecture 7
BogoMIP 1592.52
Hardware SMDKC210
Revision 1
Dunno if this is right or not considering i tought a Galaxy S 2 was a dual core Samsung Exynos 4210 processor?
Dunno if the GPU is correct also
openGL
vendor arm
renderer mali-400 mp
Version: OpenGL ES-CM 1.1
Some one who can enlight me if this is correct? or what it actually should be
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
all is correct. quadrant does not give correct infos about the CPU cores. it might read 2 cores if you switch governor to performance.
Oke thank you. Is their any application(or any way) to figure out the correct info about ur phone specs?
Look at the sticker attached to the phone under the battery. If it shows the model as I9100 or I9100T, then it's definitely a dual-core Exynos.
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
blackbeast8 said:
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
justmpm said:
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every app I tried, including SetCPU and CpuSpy, shows 1,2 GHz as max frequency. As you can see on screenshots, Antutu benchmark shows in system info 1,8 GHz (1741 MHz actually), but in test it uses 1,2 GHz. TBH, the only place I saw 1,8 GHz was in Antutu, not anywhere else.
I contacted the seller, and he is trying to convince me that the phone has CPU Booster and that frequency is really 1,8 GHz. I now sent him screenshots in order to convince him that he is wrong...
I researched that cpu, mt5689 and its max freq is 1,2. mt5689T is 1,5 GHz, but this one is without T.
Kernel version is 3.4.5, from 19th June this year
Baseband version: MOLY.WR8.W1248.MD.WG.MP.V6.P4, 2013/05/04
Android version is 4.2.3
I found some info about ROM: 06_v89_hydy_dangdang_gemi
h ttp://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3662/kocl.png
h ttp://img5.imageshack.us/img5/4357/o0ph.png
If that anything means to you...
I am not trying to overclock my phone, I just want to be able to use what I've payed for. I could have bought 1,2 GHz, but I payed for this one and I want to use it, that's the poing...
Unfortunately, only after I bought it, I found all this. I didn't inform myself enough, before purchasing...
Thanks anyway
The seller is still trying to convince me that the max cpu freq is 1,8 GHz, with cpu booster, but I still cannot see or use it in any app, except that Antutu benchmark sees the 1,8 GHz as max, but still uses 1,2 GHz.
Chipset and cpu is rated to 1,2 GHz, as I saw on mt6589 reviews, so I think that I am fooled...
Good morning, my name is Jorge Martinez, I am another ezio buyer i95, I arrived with several flaws, the most serious the gps it is impossible to make it work, even after following many online tutorials.
The on / off button sometimes gets caught and resets.
The headphone connection is not good and sounds bad.
Reviewed this to the salesman told me they would give me support, etc, etc, told me I was going to wait to send another new model, gave me all kinds of options, but ultimately it only to gain time.
Once you pass the time of the vote, and has forgotten all its commitments and ripped me off.
I recommend everyone to not deal with the seller, who has only good words but deceives.
I hope my mistake serve for one to be saved from falling into this trap, but also effectively tells you it's quad core 1.8, it's actually 1.2.
Greetings all, I hope this information will be useful.
Demonstrating GPS reception via Device-Z-Test app. My S3 on the left and Ezio I95 on the right.
The latter, bought through eBay, was successfully returned to the Hong Kong exporter.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4
Ezio i95 Stock rom
Any one had ezio i95 stok rom?
ezio 95
hi,
I have read that some of the specs get rewritten within the operating system to fool antutu.
However I am also after a copy of the stock rom. I have a enzio s89 that I have bricked before I made a rom copy. This ezio i95 uses the same processor and is about the same size Maybe it will work in mine.
Are you able to download MTK droid tools and make a copy of your stock rom please. That is always worth doing in any case.