- Weak camera in less-than-perfect lighting
- Low display resolution for the price
- Rear shell is a fingerprint magnet
- RAM low for heavy multitasking
Featuring a high-end look with mid-tier specs and pricing, Samsung hopes the Galaxy A3 will attract buyers looking for a premium feel to their mobile without the power or cost of a top tier model.
While the phone looks great, does it have what it takes to make reviewers recommend it? Opinions are rolling in. Let’s see what they’re saying!
With its glass back and metal sides, reviewers all agreed that the A3 looks like a flagship phone. There’s also IP68 water and dust resistance and a front-mounted fingerprint scanner. The curved back impressed reviewers. TechRadar noted, “... it simply feels great in the hand.”
Some reviews mentioned issues with slipping and fingerprints. But no one had any issues with phones breaking or cracking.
Heading around front, reviews of the 4.7-inch 720p AMOLED panel are split. While reviewers loved the brightness and vivid colors on offer, some felt that the display lacked the detail and clarity of similarly priced competitors. TechRadar said, “... [the display] doesn’t show visual media at its best.”
Powering the phone, you’ll find a 1.6Ghz octa-core Exynos processor paired with 2GB of RAM. Reviewers noted slight delays loading apps due to the lack of RAM. Otherwise, performance reviews were solid. Recombu said, “General usage is fast and fluid whilst most 3D games play comfortably in the phone's native resolution…”
The phone ships with 16GB of internal storage with only 9.5GB or so available after the pre-loaded software. If you plan to keep media for offline viewing or listening or play games, take advantage of the microSD port.
Speaking of software, the phone ships with a slightly dated version of Android—6.0.1. However, reviewers found Samsung’s TouchWiz UI easy to use and relatively bloat-free.
As with most mid-tier phones, reviews for the phone’s 13MP rear camera and 8MP front-facing lens are good—if the lighting is good. However, once lighting dims, so does your potential to take good pictures. Trusted Reviews summed up issues and opinions well, saying, “The camera lacks optical image stabilisation, so with shots taken in poor light especially, you’ll need to keep the phone fairly still. In addition, the camera here simply isn’t as smart as those featured in Samsung’s more expensive devices.”
Battery life received high marks across the board. Despite the smaller 2350mAh battery, most reviewers hit a day and a half on a single charge. Some even pushed it to two days. While the phone lacks quick charging features, the smaller battery capacity means you can get a full recharge in under two hours.
Overall, the A3 impressed reviewers—though some wish the screen and camera were better. Most would recommend the phone at its current price. TechRadar noted, “For casual users looking to make a stylish statement… it’s well worth considering.”