Kısa inceleme: Samsung Galaxy A3 (2016) akıllı telefon

Name: Samsung Galaxy A3 2016
Brand: Samsung

İyi hisset. Önceki modelin öne çıkan özelliği aluminyum birleşik kasası idi. Yeni modelde ise Samsung cam kullanmış. Orta sınıf cihazın ekranı da elden geçmiş.

Andreas Kilian, ✓ Tanja Hinum, Published 03/13/2016 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of Samsung Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 (Galaxy Seri)

İşlemci

Samsung Exynos 7578 4 x 1.5 GHz, Cortex-A53

Grafik kartı

ARM Mali-T720 MP2

Bellek

1536 MB

Görüntü

4.70 inç 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel, capacitive touchscreen, Super AMOLED, parlak: evet

Harddisk

16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB

, 10.7 GB Boş

Bağlantılar

1 USB 2.0, Ses çıkışları: 3.5 mm headset jack, Kart okuyucular: micro-SD max. 128 GB, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Alıcılar: accelerometer, proximity sensor, pedometer, gyroscope, compass, WiFi Direct, DLNA, MirrorLink, USB-OTG, nano-SIM

Network

802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.1, GSM quad-band (850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G quad-band (850/900/1900/2100), LTE (B1/B3/B5/B7/B8/B20/B40) Cat.4 (max. 150 Mbit/s download & 50 Mbit/s upload), SAR body: 0.492 W/kg, SAR head: 0.621 W/kg, LTE, GPS

Boyut

yükseklik x genişlik x derinlik (mm): 7.4 x 134.5 x 65.2

Batarya

9 Wh, 2300 mAh

İşletim sistemi

Android 5.1 Lollipop

Camera

Primary Camera: 13 MPix (auto focus f/1.9, 1080p videos @ 30 FPS)
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix (fix focus f/1.9, 1080p videos @ 30 FPS

Ek özellikler

Hoparlörler: mono speaker lower edge, Klavye: virtual, power supply, USB cable, in-ear headset, slot tool, Microsoft Office, Galaxy apps, MyGalaxy, Smart Manager, Samsung KNOX, S-Voice, 24 Ay Garanti, fanless

Ağırlık

131 g, Güç kaynağı: 57 g

Fiyat

329 EUR

Bağlantılar

Samsung anasayfa
Samsung notebook kısmı

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 Huawei P8 lite Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Wiko Highway Pure OnePlus X Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 Samsung Galaxy A3 DIN A6 ❌

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

Samsung Galaxy A3

OnePlus 2

Apple iPhone 6S Plus

Canon EOS 70D (Referenz)

click to load images

Samsung Galaxy A3

OnePlus 2

Apple iPhone 6S Plus

Canon EOS 70D (Referenz)

click to load images

Samsung Galaxy A3

OnePlus 2

Apple iPhone 6S Plus

Canon EOS 70D (Referenz)


427 cd/m²	392 cd/m²	381 cd/m²
414 cd/m²	386 cd/m²	374 cd/m²
412 cd/m²	387 cd/m²	376 cd/m²

Parlaklığın yayılımı

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maksimum: 427 cd/m² (Nits) Ortalama: 394.3 cd/m² Minimum: 2.13 cd/m²
Aydınlatma: 88 %
Batarya modunda parlaklık: 386 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Siyah: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.11 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.34 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.12

	Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 1280x720 px 4.71'' (AMOLED)	Samsung Galaxy A3 940x540 px px 4.5'' (AMOLED)	Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 1280x720 px 5.0'' (IPS)	OnePlus X 1920x1080 px 5.0'' (AMOLED)	Huawei P8 lite 1280x720 px 5.0'' (IPS)	Wiko Highway Pure 1280x720 px 4.8'' (AMOLED)	Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo 1920x1080 px 5.1'' (AMOLED)
Screen		-47%	-84%	-203%	-143%	-203%	-59%
Brightness middle	386	434 12%	418 8%	312 -19%	365 -5%	298 -23%	334 -13%
Brightness	394	433 10%	407 3%	314 -20%	353 -10%	298 -24%	341 -13%
Brightness Distribution	88	96 9%	95 8%	91 3%	93 6%	96 9%	91 3%
Black Level *			0.49		0.42
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	1.11	2.98 -168%	3.92 -253%	6.28 -466%	5.2 -368%	6.81 -514%	2.84 -156%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	3.35
Greyscale dE 2000 *	1.34	2.68 -100%	3.81 -184%	8.24 -515%	5.85 -337%	7.53 -462%	2.91 -117%
Gamma	2.12 ^104%	2.44 ^90%	2.27 ^97%	2.12 ^104%	2.17 ^101%	2.15 ^102%	2.01 ^109%
CCT	6441 ^101%	6603 ^98%	7361 ^88%	8145 ^80%	7252 ^90%	8348 ^78%	6432 ^101%
Contrast			853		869
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)					70.86
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)					91.25

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

240.4 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 240.4 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 240.4 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8719 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 4 ms rise
9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 21 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 3 ms rise
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 4 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 16 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms).

AnTuTu v5 - Total Score
OnePlus X	40256 Points +27%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	37854 Points +19%
Huawei P8 lite	34247 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	31762 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	23242 Points -27%
Wiko Highway Pure	21063 Points -34%

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3330 Points +51%
OnePlus X	2570 Points +17%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	2201 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	1563 Points -29%
Wiko Highway Pure	1429 Points -35%
Samsung Galaxy A3	1409 Points -36%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
OnePlus X	913 Points +30%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	721 Points +3%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	703 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	528 Points -25%
Wiko Highway Pure	482 Points -31%
Samsung Galaxy A3	474 Points -33%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Huawei P8 lite	2754 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	1561 Points
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Huawei P8 lite	588 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	526 Points

Linpack Android / IOS
Multi Thread
OnePlus X	634 MFLOPS +164%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	247.7 MFLOPS +3%
Wiko Highway Pure	240 MFLOPS 0%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	240 MFLOPS
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	207.7 MFLOPS -13%
Single Thread
OnePlus X	425.5 MFLOPS +371%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	117.1 MFLOPS +30%
Wiko Highway Pure	105 MFLOPS +16%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	95.6 MFLOPS +6%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	90.4 MFLOPS

BaseMark OS II
Web
OnePlus X	843 Points +12%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	756 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	733 Points -3%
Wiko Highway Pure	637 Points -16%
Huawei P8 lite	616 Points -19%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	484 Points -36%
Graphics
OnePlus X	1975 Points +376%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	488 Points +18%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	415 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	324 Points -22%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	315 Points -24%
Huawei P8 lite	303 Points -27%
Memory
Huawei P8 lite	816 Points +84%
OnePlus X	662 Points +49%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	569 Points +28%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	443 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	434 Points -2%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	394 Points -11%
System
OnePlus X	2225 Points +61%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	2095 Points +52%
Huawei P8 lite	1467 Points +6%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	1380 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	1166 Points -16%
Wiko Highway Pure	1030 Points -25%
Overall
OnePlus X	1252 Points +89%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	808 Points +22%
Huawei P8 lite	687 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	662 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	551 Points -17%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	515 Points -22%

Smartbench 2012
Gaming Index
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	4368 points
OnePlus X	4069 points -7%
Samsung Galaxy A3	3862 points -12%
Huawei P8 lite	3753 points -14%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3500 points -20%
Wiko Highway Pure	3295 points -25%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	3234 points -26%
Productivity Index
OnePlus X	9286 points +63%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	6719 points +18%
Wiko Highway Pure	6307 points +11%
Samsung Galaxy A3	6034 points +6%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	5706 points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	4962 points -13%
Huawei P8 lite	2941 points -48%

PCMark for Android - Work performance score
OnePlus X	4450 Points +10%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4134 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	4051 Points
Huawei P8 lite	3717 Points -8%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	3701 Points -9%
Wiko Highway Pure	3216 Points -21%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen
OnePlus X	23 fps +15%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	20 fps
Huawei P8 lite	15.3 fps -23%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	14 fps -30%
Samsung Galaxy A3	13 fps -35%
Wiko Highway Pure	10 fps -50%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	9.5 fps -52%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
OnePlus X	21 fps +75%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	14 fps +17%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	12 fps
Huawei P8 lite	9.9 fps -17%
Samsung Galaxy A3	5.3 fps -56%
Wiko Highway Pure	5.3 fps -56%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	5.3 fps -56%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
OnePlus X	10 fps +19%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	8.4 fps
Samsung Galaxy A3	6.4 fps -24%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4.8 fps -43%
Wiko Highway Pure	4.2 fps -50%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	3.7 fps -56%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
OnePlus X	8.6 fps +110%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4.8 fps +17%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	4.1 fps
Samsung Galaxy A3	1.8 fps -56%
Wiko Highway Pure	1.8 fps -56%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	1.7 fps -59%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score
OnePlus X	15051 Points +108%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	8030 Points +11%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	7229 Points
Huawei P8 lite	5629 Points -22%
Samsung Galaxy A3	4505 Points -38%
Wiko Highway Pure	4440 Points -39%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	4402 Points -39%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score
OnePlus X	14541 Points +123%
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	7536 Points +16%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	6522 Points
Huawei P8 lite	5167 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy A3	3939 Points -40%
Wiko Highway Pure	3872 Points -41%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	3789 Points -42%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
OnePlus X	17156 Points +47%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	11653 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	10424 Points -11%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	10148 Points -13%
Wiko Highway Pure	9152 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy A3	9071 Points -22%
Huawei P8 lite	8206 Points -30%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Graphics
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	4449 Points +13%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	3937 Points
Huawei P8 lite	3676 Points -7%
Wiko Highway Pure	2230 Points -43%
Samsung Galaxy A3	2207 Points -44%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	2135 Points -46%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Score
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	5090 Points +11%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	4585 Points
Huawei P8 lite	4138 Points -10%
Wiko Highway Pure	2679 Points -42%
Samsung Galaxy A3	2646 Points -42%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	2580 Points -44%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Physics
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	10827 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	10270 Points -5%
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	9544 Points -12%
Wiko Highway Pure	8877 Points -18%
Samsung Galaxy A3	8700 Points -20%
Huawei P8 lite	7399 Points -32%

Legend

Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 Samsung Exynos 7578, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy A3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 8 GB eMMC Flash

OnePlus X Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 MSM8974AA, Qualcomm Adreno 330, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Huawei P8 lite HiSilicon Kirin 620, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Wiko Highway Pure Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus X	4810 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3627 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	3566 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	3296 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	2864 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3	2782 Points
Huawei P8 lite	2483 Points

Sunspider - 1.0 Total Score
Huawei P8 lite	1986 ms *
Wiko Highway Pure	1639 ms *
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	1573 ms *
OnePlus X	1509 ms *
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	1413 ms *
Samsung Galaxy A3	1330 ms *
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	735 ms *

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Huawei P8 lite	15866 ms *
Samsung Galaxy A3	13998 ms *
Wiko Highway Pure	13234 ms *
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	11843 ms *
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	11796 ms *
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	11603 ms *
OnePlus X	7264 ms *

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
OnePlus X	85 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	68 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	64 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	52 Points
Huawei P8 lite	47 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	46 Points

Google V8 Ver. 7 - Google V8 Ver. 7 Score
OnePlus X	5328 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	3765 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	3499 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	3125 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	2852 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3	2832 Points
Huawei P8 lite	2352 Points

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
OnePlus X	28 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	23.1 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	22.1 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	20.83 Points

* ... smaller is better

AndroBench 3-5 | BaseMark OS II

AndroBench 3-5
Random Write 4KB
OnePlus X	14.22 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	11.07 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	10.27 MB/s
Huawei P8 lite	8.32 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3	6 MB/s
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	5.11 MB/s
Wiko Highway Pure	5 MB/s
Random Read 4KB
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	22.79 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	22.57 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	21.92 MB/s
Huawei P8 lite	18.46 MB/s
OnePlus X	16.31 MB/s
Wiko Highway Pure	14 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3	11 MB/s
Sequential Write 256KB
Samsung Galaxy A3	71 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	57.9 MB/s
Huawei P8 lite	52.8 MB/s
OnePlus X	49.31 MB/s
Wiko Highway Pure	39 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	27.27 MB/s
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	22.33 MB/s
Sequential Read 256KB
OnePlus X	235.5 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	215.9 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	168.8 MB/s
Huawei P8 lite	139.5 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy A3	132 MB/s
Wiko Highway Pure	132 MB/s
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	131.4 MB/s

BaseMark OS II - Memory
Huawei P8 lite	816 Points
OnePlus X	662 Points
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo	569 Points
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016	443 Points
Wiko Highway Pure	434 Points
Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541	394 Points

Maksimum yük

Bekleme


34.7 °C	33.4 °C	31.5 °C
34.5 °C	32.9 °C	31.2 °C
33.7 °C	32.6 °C	31 °C

Maksimum: 34.7 °C
Ortalama: 32.8 °C


31.3 °C	32.5 °C	33 °C
31.3 °C	32.4 °C	32.8 °C
30.5 °C	31.1 °C	31.6 °C

Maksimum: 33 °C
Ortalama: 31.8 °C

Güç kaynağı 28.6 °C | Oda sıcaklığı 22.2 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.8 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.7 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.8 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Anlık tüketim

Kapalı / Bekleme modu	0 / 0.15 Watt
Boşta	0.96 / 1.39 / 1.45 Watt
Çalışırken	2.65 / 3.51 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Gossen Metrahit Energy

Batarya ömrü

Boşta (WLAN kapalı, minimum parlaklık)		32h 58min
WiFi Websurfing		10h 28min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		14h 23min
Çalışırken (maksimum parlaklık)		6h 16min

	Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7578, 16 GB eMMC Flash	Samsung Galaxy A3 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 8 GB eMMC Flash	OnePlus X Adreno 330, 801 MSM8974AA, 16 GB eMMC Flash	Huawei P8 lite Mali-450 MP4, Kirin 620, 16 GB eMMC Flash	Wiko Highway Pure Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash	Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Battery Runtime		-36%	-25%	-29%	-53%	-41%	-9%
Reader / Idle	1978	1080 -45%	1364 -31%	968 -51%	715 -64%	1235 -38%	1615 -18%
H.264	863	602 -30%	677 -22%	514 -40%	369 -57%	465 -46%	773 -10%
WiFi v1.3	628		526 -16%	549 -13%	351 -44%	472 -25%	546 -13%
Load	376	256 -32%	264 -30%	339 -10%	194 -48%	164 -56%	402 7%
WiFi		568

Artılar

+ Çok iyi kasa kalitesi

+ Harika ekran

+ İyi telefon özelliği

+ Tutarlı dokunmatik ekran

+ Düşük sıcaklık üretimi

+ micro-SD slotu

+ NFC & USB-OTH

+ makul hoparlör

+ Çok uzun batarya ömrü

Eksiler

- Kameranın düşük ışık performansı

- Bildirim ışığı yok

- 5 GHz WiFi yok

- Miracast veya MHL desteği yok

- Kasanın arkası kaygan

- Batarya değiştirilemiyor

In review: Samsung Galaxy A3 (SM-A310F). Review sample courtesy of Samsung Germany.

Samsung'un Galaxy A3 modelini yeniden ele alışı birçok avantaja sahip. Hala yüksek kalitesi bir kasaya sahip olmasının yanında artık metal ekran çerçevesinin yanında yuvarlatılmış cam yer almakta. Bu tasarımın kötü yanı ise bataryanın değiştirilemiyor ve arka kapağın kaygan oluşu.

Ama cihaz teknik olarak birşeyler sunuyor. Harika ekran, 16 GB depolama alanının genişletilebilmesi, uzun batarya ömrü tatmin edici özellikleri arasında. NFC, dahili WiFi, Samsung'un yeni quad-core sistem çipi bunlardan bazıları.

Buna karşın kullanılan kamera modülleri biraz karışık izlenim veriyor. İyi ışık koşullarında güzel fotoğraflar çekmek mümkünken, karanlıkta hayal kırıklığına uğramak mümkün.