The new Samsung device which is the Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 was unearthed by the AnTuTu which is a very popular benchmark known to several people the world over.
AnTuTu is most popularly known to unearth some of the databases that are yet to be announced and this time round it was pretty good to come up with the information about the Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 which most of the people have speculated to be the next generation Galaxy.
This Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 is expected to be the successor of the most popular Samsung flagship which is the Samsung Galaxy S4.
Some of the features of the Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600
The Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 is running on the Android 4.3.2 version of the Jelly Bean operating system which was actually introduced recently the new Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 also has a processor that is actually clocked at 1.4 GHz making it a very wonderful device to have and use for efficiency.
This Android 4.3.2 Jelly Bean operating system version that this Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 is speculated to run has not yet actually been out of the gate which this information from AnTuTu to be a bit tricky to explain.
The other features about this Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 has not yet been revealed but keep in the watch as you will definitely get posted any time the details come up.
Is this Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 a Galaxy S4 plus or Galaxy S5?
This Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600, according to the source seems like the glimpse of the Galaxy S4 plus even though there have been two galaxy S plus devices which are the I9105 Galaxy S and the I9001 Galaxy S.
There have been rumours about the coming of the new Galaxy S5 but no tangible information on the same but this Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600 is peculated to be just another Galaxy S Plus. The two mentioned Galaxy S plus devices has the model numbers which are different from the original flagships with the numbers in the last digits while the second ones are just fine.
This Samsung Galaxy GT-I9600falls under the mid-range devices but the model number that it has does not portray that as it is very unlikely for the mid-range kind of device to have such kind of the model number. So it is not clear whether the records are not quite well explained and identified or the early firmware is not actually correct.