Why did Samsung have to apply GOS? Why was the heat dissipation treatment insufficient?

Many consumers speculate that Samsung Electronics' excessive cost reduction and Samsung Foundry's poor yield, which have worsened since President Roh Tae-moon took office, since the Galaxy Note 20 - Galaxy S21 series.

Why did Samsung choose GOS as the solution to fever?

While the latest APs of Android smartphones slowed down due to heat generation and heyday in the 2020s, Samsung Electronics attempted to cut costs by removing Vapor Chamber and Copper Heat Pipe on the premise of GOS and neglecting heat generation management. Although the software update caused some heat generation, after the controversy broke out, more and more consumers are angry, saying, "In fact, Samsung liked to solve the heat generation by applying strong GOS restrictions, but didn't we drink skull water?"

In the Galaxy S22+ and Galaxy S22 Ultra, the Vapor Chamber has returned, but the area of the Vapor Chamber is still much smaller than that of competitors with the same AP. This is also limited to Plus and Ultra models, and in the case of the Galaxy S22, it is not much different from the S21 because heat pipes and vapor chambers are still missing, except that the area of thermal sheets has increased and new materials have improved heat dissipation performance. On the other hand, there are many opinions that it is really incomprehensible about Samsung MX division's policy of installing parts by lineup, such as providing SD card slots and charger adapters, apart from not supporting UFS cards.

Did Samsung use GOS to reduce costs?

After a while, many related benchmarks and experimental articles have been released, and in addition, many opinions are being suggested that they tried to cover it with GOS by receiving a lot of defective APs mass-produced by Samsung Foundry's poor yield. In general, the yield of Samsung Foundry is expected to be 20-30%, or the yield of Qualcomm's 4-nanometer is expected to be 35%. Currently, Snapdragon 888/8 Gen.1 chipsets installed in the Galaxy S21/S22 are supplied by Qualcomm after production at Samsung Foundation as designed by Qualcomm, so the chipset QC is determined by Qualcomm, not Samsung.

However, even if a chip that has passed QC is received, there is a difference in performance even though it is an industrial product due to semiconductor characteristics. And considering this, it is naturally the manufacturer's capability to design and manufacture the final product so that there is not much difference between the industrial products. However, the S22 series has a huge difference between good and bad products. For example, if you look around the community a little bit, Geekbench's score is 1250 for a good product and 3,800 for a multi product, while for a defective product, it drops to 3,000 for a single in the late 1100s. In terms of multi-core alone, it has reduced performance by more than 20%. In the end, other companies sold devices that should have been filtered from any part of the design to the final release of the product on the market. Therefore, they lowered all the products to match the lowest-performance products that failed to be selected. Of course, this can also be seen as part of cost reduction to reduce the loss rate by lowering the product disposal rate.

Do other manufacturers using the same AP have similar problems?

As a simple example, compared to other devices using the same AP, the Galaxy S22U has the lowest average frame (FPS) and takes the most frame drops. In other words, other manufacturers who received the same chip pulled out the final industrial product well enough. Since it is the best ultra standard among the 22 series, it is possible to infer that normal or + will have lower performance.

On the other hand, Xiaomi 12, which has a large area of Vapor Chamber, claims that "AP is a defect and cannot be solved by heat dissipation design" based on the app being turned off during benchmark execution, but this case was only an initial firmware problem. At this time, even if the maximum load was applied, the surface temperature was only 36-37 degrees. The Xiaomi 12 delivers excellent performance, with 93.8% stability in stress tests in the latest patched firmware. In other words, Xiaomi 12 clearly proves that the low performance of the Galaxy is due to Samsung's cost reduction and poor design, rather than being exempted from GOS.

Samsung devices that fall behind in performance even without GOS?

Even if the S22 normal type is released from GOS, it turns out that the performance of the Motorola X30 without a vaper chamber is also disastrous. In addition to the difference in FPS (frame per second) based on game odin, S22 was higher even in temperature. It is hard to believe that they used the same AP.

▶︎How to disable Game Optimizing Service (GOS) on Samsung Galaxy phones