• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

galaxy or spica

R

Ryou

Lurker
which should i buy? galaxy or spica? galaxy has amoled screen, 5mp camera and 8gb internal memory (good for android), but spica has more processor and ram, than its more fast for videos and games i think
 
None of them if you ask me. If you live in UK or somewhere in Europe wait for Nexus One from google or just import it full cost. At this moment Spica and Galaxy are so far behind on hardware that next gen Android applications just won't run on them.
 
if i was looking for a new phone atm, i'd prolly go for the acer liquid or wait for the nexus
 
I'd say wait for the Nexus as well, but if you're definitely getting one of the Galaxys, I'd say go for the Spica. I have one and the touchscreen is great, battery life is pretty decent, and it's very fast and responsive, the extra processor power really makes a difference. When Samsung bring out 2.0 (fingers crossed), I think the Spica is more likely to get it because the hardware is so much better.

The downsides to the Spica:
  • * Camera - doesn't make a difference to me, 3.2 megapixels is more than enough for me, I'm not entering any photography competitions
  • * Internal Memory - Not that big a deal, just buy a bigger SD card, can pick them up cheap enough
  • * Community Support - The biggest issue. There aren't many Spica owners out there (just look at the spica forum on this site). If you're planning on rooting the phone, you might need to do some hacking on your own. I haven't gotten round to rooting mine yet (no time), so don't know what will be involved, if the i7500 methods will work on it or not
 
the processor has a higher clock speed but its not a better cpu or chipset than the msm7500 in the galaxy
the processor architecture is different much like a 3.6 ghz pentium4 D over a 2.4ghz core2duo the core2 is a better chip

spica has more ram but thats it

im not a galaxy fan boi but lets make that clear

also look at the droid over other new wave android products. the cpu is far slower but is a better architecture and thus out powers the other products
 
Rastaman-FB said:
the processor has a higher clock speed but its not a better cpu or chipset than the msm7500 in the galaxy
the processor architecture is different much like a 3.6 ghz pentium4 D over a 2.4ghz core2duo the core2 is a better chip

spica has more ram but thats it

im not a galaxy fan boi but lets make that clear

also look at the droid over other new wave android products. the cpu is far slower but is a better architecture and thus out powers the other products
Click to expand...
First of all, the Galaxy runs the Qualcomm MSM7200A, not the MSM7500 (which is even older). The Spica runs the Snapdragon QSD8250 chipset, the same chipset that's in the Xperia X10a, the Acer Liquid A1, the HTC Bravo and the Nexus One. The Spica's chipset is 2 generations newer than the Galaxy's, and uses the latest ARM instruction set (v7 to the Galaxy's v6).

While it's certainly not purely down to clock-speed, the Spica's processor is much better than the Galaxy's
 
28064212 said:
First of all, the Galaxy runs the Qualcomm MSM7200A, not the MSM7500 (which is even older). The Spica runs the Snapdragon QSD8250 chipset, the same chipset that's in the Xperia X10a, the Acer Liquid A1, the HTC Bravo and the Nexus One. The Spica's chipset is 2 generations newer than the Galaxy's, and uses the latest ARM instruction set (v7 to the Galaxy's v6).

While it's certainly not purely down to clock-speed, the Spica's processor is much better than the Galaxy's
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the Spica has the same CPU like the Moment, Samsung S3C6410 - CPUlist | PDAdb.net - Comprehensive Database of PDA, PDA Phone, Smartphone, PNA & Mobile Device Specifications
 
thats odd, i was pretty sure it was not a snapdragon and it has 128megs of ram?

something wrong there

also the chipset was off the top of my head from what i remembered but still afaik its not snapdragon

that wiki link says it has a higher camera resolution? wtf its 3.2 not 5

id love for someone to actually pull it apart as ive found PDADB to be unreliable of late.

infact PDADB says its got amoled?

anyway its not the cpu that is the problem with the galaxy its the RAM of which we have 192 not 128 like spica apparently has so if thats the case what makes you so sure it would port to spica 1st?
 
Spica doesnt have a snapdragon - Thats qualcom. It uses the samsung chipset - because its cheaper. The MSM720x series is better.

If you want to buy a galaxy i'm selling mine for a very low price :) PM me
 
lazarus101 said:
I'm pretty sure the Spica has the same CPU like the Moment, Samsung S3C6410 - CPUlist | PDAdb.net - Comprehensive Database of PDA, PDA Phone, Smartphone, PNA & Mobile Device Specifications
Click to expand...
Rastaman-FB said:
thats odd, i was pretty sure it was not a snapdragon and it has 128megs of ram?

something wrong there

also the chipset was off the top of my head from what i remembered but still afaik its not snapdragon

that wiki link says it has a higher camera resolution? wtf its 3.2 not 5

id love for someone to actually pull it apart as ive found PDADB to be unreliable of late.

infact PDADB says its got amoled?

anyway its not the cpu that is the problem with the galaxy its the RAM of which we have 192 not 128 like spica apparently has so if thats the case what makes you so sure it would port to spica 1st?
Click to expand...
Did a bit more digging around in my Spica, lazarus101 is right, the chipset is the S3C6410. An early rumour probably had it as Snapdragon and that got spread around. In fairness to PDADB, they do have it marked as "Preliminary specifications".

Even so, the Spica still looks to be better. The CPU cores of both are almost identical: The Galaxy's ARM1136J(F)-S versus the Spica's ARM1176JZ(F)-S (the Spica's one is slightly newer, just has a couple of feature extensions). Which means the clock speeds are directly comparable, so Spica's blows the Galaxy out of the water there. The Galaxy does have a 2nd core though, a much-lower spec and older 256MHz processor, so it will gain a performance boost through multi-tasking.

Who wins with the rest of the chipset features is up for debate. For anyone who's interested in reading more, the datasheet for the MSM7200A is here (PDF), and the homepage for the S3C6410 is here (there's some good PDFs near the bottom of the page under specification data).

Not sure who wins in the RAM stakes, I've seen multiple different figures from multiple different sources. Can't seem to find the info on my Spica either
 
28064212 said:
Did a bit more digging around in my Spica, lazarus101 is right, the chipset is the S3C6410. An early rumour probably had it as Snapdragon and that got spread around. In fairness to PDADB, they do have it marked as "Preliminary specifications".

Even so, the Spica still looks to be better. The CPU cores of both are almost identical: The Galaxy's ARM1136J(F)-S versus the Spica's ARM1176JZ(F)-S (the Spica's one is slightly newer, just has a couple of feature extensions). Which means the clock speeds are directly comparable, so Spica's blows the Galaxy out of the water there. The Galaxy does have a 2nd core though, a much-lower spec and older 256MHz processor, so it will gain a performance boost through multi-tasking.

Who wins with the rest of the chipset features is up for debate. For anyone who's interested in reading more, the datasheet for the MSM7200A is here (PDF), and the homepage for the S3C6410 is here (there's some good PDFs near the bottom of the page under specification data).

Not sure who wins in the RAM stakes, I've seen multiple different figures from multiple different sources. Can't seem to find the info on my Spica either
Click to expand...
yeah i thought it wasnt snapdragon. this is the problem with alot of the sites, they take facts from rumoured specs and then dont follow it up to correct them.

like i said the issue isnt the cpu on the galaxy, its speedy as long as the ram is not dying on its arse.
do you have a galaxy?
if you did you would know the cpu is not a problem even out of the box, the custom roms make it even faster
the issue is with multiple programs eating ram and the galaxy slows down a bit
compared to a hero which has 288 and a behold which has 320 the galaxy only has 192.

i know how you got the arm chip version from the s3c6410 but where did you get the msm7200A arm chip code from
 
the galaxy amoled screen really makes any diference? i checked the acer liquid and it looks really good, you guys think its a better option than the galaxy or spica? thx =D
 
i couldnt tell you, the amoled over other screens look good but only when directly comparing in hand. in alot of cases its too bright

im not sure on the acer, i personally wouldnt move to someone new to this game after my experience from samsung although the acer liquid is snapdragon
 
I have to say Amoled is amazing compared to a normal screen.

Brand new I would definatly pick liquid over galaxy or spica. But galaxy's are cheap on ebay and second hand, and for the price its worth it in my opinion.

A Galaxy at full retail price isnt worth it, if you want to pay that money get a liquid. Or even consider paying more and getting a nexus one.

Shamless self advert - I've dropped my galaxy price to 200 EUR shipped to anywhere in europe.
 
kam187 said:
Spica doesnt have a snapdragon - Thats qualcom. It uses the samsung chipset - because its cheaper. The MSM720x series is better.

If you want to buy a galaxy i'm selling mine for a very low price :) PM me
Click to expand...
Drakaz wants one:

Searching for a galaxy at very very low price to work on 2.0 / 2.1. Anyone to help me to find one ?

@drakaz on twitter...
 
28064212 said:
Not sure who wins in the RAM stakes, I've seen multiple different figures from multiple different sources. Can't seem to find the info on my Spica either
Click to expand...

Install Quick System Info and you'll see the total memory available for applications and we can compare with the other devices, on the Galaxy it's 93.85, G1 96.6, Moment 146, Magic 193
 
I have Galaxy and Spica. Spica is faster. In memory of Spica more.

Spica memory: ~150,423
Galaxy memory:~96,xxx
 
GPP[c];244572 said:
This is not true... Samsung S3C6410 faster.
For Spica Samsung promises Android 2.0, but for the Galaxy no.
Click to expand...
please read
faster does not make it better
for a start the galaxt has a 528 core and a 256 second core
it also has dedicated graphics chip where as the samsung chip does everything on the one core.

like i said it goes back to the old pent vs core2duo analogy

the memory seems right though as i was sure the spica had more memory due to the removing other things that were a cost on the galaxy
 
Yup what Rastaman-FB said :)

Also these reports about what phone will get what keep getting confused. Samsung now said galaxy will get 2.0 :-/

Still trying to sell mine :P
 
I'm on loads of forums and I seem people pointing to links all the time. I'll try to dig one out :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom