Yeah... no.

Great. How about comparing it to a NEXT GEN chip then? Not to mention power consumption - which is its Achilles heel - still can't compare to THE LAST GEN ARM CHIP.

Exactly. And the current crop mostly have 45/40nm fab. How will it compare to the 32/28nm fab, quad core and A15 based ARM processors? Will Intel still be trying to get the power consumption down to acceptable levels then?

Sure, it's great, and compares well to this gen of processors (which are all at the 45/40nm fab (the exynos 4210 is 45nm, not 32nm as vr-zone incorrectly states)).
But what about the next gen chips that will have 32/28nm fab?

And how will it compare to the Quad-Core A9 processors (Tegra 3), higher clocked dual core A9 processors (Exynos 4212) or A15/A15 based designs? (Exynos 5250 and Krait/Snapdragon S4)

It beats the current crop of dual core ARM processors (Exynos, snapdragon s3 and Tegra 2) in one benchmark that "leaked".

Nothing fishy about that at all.

Wait, why is it superior?

Oh, right

Hey, 90% of the world used to use internet explorer too...

Quadrant is such a flawed benchmark.

P.S. You took my post way too seriously.

Well, it' s T-Mobile phone, not a Samsung phone.

Dude, you just lost all credibility in my eyes.

Well, I only have experience of the European phones, and yes GPS is a sore point for all of the first gen Galaxy S phones.

As for you Faux G not working on AOSP ROMs, it was like that for all of the WiMax phones until someone wrote a driver for it a while back (IIRC)

You should theoretically be able to flash w/e modem file you want to it, IIRC.

Oh, and you're lucky with the GPS performance. I had one of the very first Galaxy S phones, and the GPS would always drop, and never get a proper lock. It was utterly useless for navigation, because it always assumed I was somewhere else.

1. Android
2. Google Account
3. Chrome Store

hah, I've had many people and a few ROM/CM developers say Galaxy S was a paid beta for Galaxy S II ;-). When I got it, my friend even said the next one will be 10x better. Given my relative naivety at the time, I didn't think it'd be possible...

The shocking thing is that even though it was a beta, Galaxy S was arguably the best android phone on the market for at least 6 months. It did many things right: Decent internal memory size, Best in class GPU, proper multi-touch touchscreen (no bs dual-touch like Nexus One/Desire/Incredible/Droid), ~1.8GB for app installs (150ish MB was the norm back then). Brilliant video playback and codec support.

But 1GB RAM, dual core 1.2ghz A9, 8MP camera with 1080p and flash, flawless high profile 1080p playback and even 1080p flash playback (youtube). Like anandtech said: The Best, Redefined.. and that review was 5 months after the phone launched!

No, it wasn't a rebuttal post. If I wanted to rebut, I could have simply stated: IMHO was regarding the three issues that plagued it, not about GPS being one of the issues. 99/100 people would probably have GPS as one of the main issues.

Sigh. From the top: I don't know of how they've changed RFS over the last few months, but it was shitty when I used it. Does it still lock up where there is I/O going on, like media scanner running? That's what I always noticed with it.

GPS sucks: It is my opinion, and it just happens to coincide with what majority of the problems other people have. There are people that are perfectly happy with the way their GPS works too...

The RAM issue is real. I could feel the pinch, but others might think it's okay and perfectly normal. Had the same problem on Samsung based ROMs, and CM7/AOSP ROMs. I've never felt like that for Galaxy S II