Samsung Galaxy Note 3 Review
by Brian Klug on October 1, 2013 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Samsung
- Mobile
- Android 4.3
- galaxy note 3
Conclusions
The Note 3 is an iterative product, that’s absolutely true, but the improvements in the Note 3 are pretty dramatic. It really does feel better, thinner, lighter all while having a bigger, more usable display. The silicon inside is incredibly quick, easily the fastest in the Android camp. It's also good to see Samsung on the forefront of RF technology here, implementing an envelope power tracker alongside Qualcomm's 3rd generation LTE modem. The combination results in a fairly robust, very high-end platform that is modern on both compute and modem/RF fronts. Given my affinity for the latter, I'm happy.
Battery life benefits from the large chassis and associated battery, as well as Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 platform which seems to manage power a lot better than the outgoing Snapdragon 600. I was also impressed by the Galaxy Note 3's IO performance. Although it didn't beat the Moto X in random write IO performance, it came extremely close and absolutely destroyed everything else in sequential write speed. Samsung clearly went all out with the Note 3 and pretty much tried to win all of our tests. The beauty of that approach is it should lend itself to an awesome user experience.
The S Pen experience continues to improve and I don't really have any major complaints about it on the Note 3. It's a novel addition that I can see resonating very well with the right type of user. Approximating pen/paper is tough and no one has really done a perfect job there, but the S Pen can be good enough in the right situations. The good news is that even if you don't use the S Pen much, it hides away quite unobtrusively and you can go about using the Note 3 just like a large Android device.
There are only three issues I'd like to see addressed with the Note 3. The move to USB 3.0 is interesting and could be a big benefit when it comes to getting large files off of the device (the NAND/eMMC isn't quick enough to make USB 3 any faster at putting data on the phone), but the hardware or software implementation of USB 3 on the Note 3 doesn't actually deliver any performance advantage (Update: In OS X, in Windows you can actually get USB 3.0 working). For whatever reason 802.11ac performance on the Note 3 wasn't as good as it was on the SGS4 or other 802.11ac devices we've tested. It's not a huge deal but for an otherwise very well executed device I don't like to see regressions. And finally, I would like to see Android OEMs stop with manual DVFS control upon benchmark detect, but that seems to be an industry wide problem at this point and not something exclusive to the Galaxy Note 3.
Whereas previous Notes felt like a strange alternative to the Galaxy S line, the Galaxy Note 3 feels more like Samsung's actual flagship. It equals the Galaxy S 4 in camera performance, but exceeds it pretty much everywhere else. There's a better SoC, better cellular/RF and even better industrial design. I suppose next year we'll see the Galaxy S 5 play catch up in these areas, but until then it's clear that the Note 3 is the new flagship from Samsung. Although you could argue that the improvements within are incremental, the Note 3 really defines what incremental should be.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
302 Comments
View All Comments
ESC2000 - Monday, October 7, 2013 - link
I'm not sure how anyone could consider the body of work on this site and conclude that it is biased in favor of Samsung.Spunjji - Tuesday, October 8, 2013 - link
They couldn't. But these guys are all weighing in after one single review that they did not read correctly.repoman27 - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
Anand, could you please hurry up and post your review of the new iMacs so I can read 150 comments about how this site is so Apple biased? I'm really tired of reading all these comments about how this is obviously no longer the best review site on the Internet because Ars Technica has uncovered something you've been reporting about continuously for 2 months now.Maybe all the long time readers who are so outraged by Brian's misrepresentation missed the past couple podcasts, or the article that really broke the whole story: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7187/looking-at-cpug...
1ndian - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
"whose awkward double lobed shape gives it forwards compatibility with microUSB 2.0" it should be "backward compatibility"Spunjji - Tuesday, October 8, 2013 - link
I think they meant what they said. The MicroUSB 2 cable is forwards-compatible with the MicroUSB 3 socket, whereas the MicroUSB 3 cable is not backwards-compatible with MicroUSB 2. Ir's a slightly different way of saying something similar.Truth.lover - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
Dear Anand. I Loved your site with their deep insightful reviews until today. You are hurting yourself so much by not explicitly stating who commits benchmark fraud and who doesn't. You should take down these benchmark numbers or replace them by accurate ones that arstechnica shows how to get. If not you shouldn't be surprised why samsung et al are not stopping the benchmark doping. You also should not be surprised why readers will leave you. We need journalism. The fourth pillar of democracy. Consider me gone.BMNify - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
Disappointed by Anandtech's decision of showing cooked benchmarks in the benchmark table which will be posted everywhere on the web as reality.wrkingclass_hero - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
People, quit bitching about the benchmarks and harassing Brian and Anand. Keep in mind who originally broke the story. In short order there will be an article on Anandtech discussing boosting in Android, and you will see that Samsung is not alone.I personally admire the tact that they have shown.
JMFL - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
Anand and Brian,I am so disappointed that you have apparently passed given Samsung a pass on their benchmark shenanigans. Simply stating that other manufactures do the same without pointing out which manufacturers do so is trite. It also encourages future shenanigans.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'm hoping that you both are simply preparing for a story that sheds light on the phone industry as a whole in terms of benchmark tweaking. If this is not the case, I think that your site has lost it's status as the premier site for technical reviews.
At the very least, on the benchmark charts, results for the Note 3 should be amended with a star noting that there is a tweak involved. Or better yet, also run the benchmarks in a manner that Arstechnica did and show both results. In fact, I can't see any credible reason why your wouldn't do this!
Squuiid - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
"I'm hoping that you both are simply preparing for a story that sheds light on the phone industry as a whole in terms of benchmark tweaking. If this is not the case, I think that your site has lost it's status as the premier site for technical reviews."Exactly my thoughts. I was hoping for the same, but it's almost as if Anand has pressed a self destruct button for his site. This sham review has done irreparable damage to Anandtech's reputation, and given the many comments backing this up, I cannot understand why Anand hasn't come out and clarified the situation by doing as you suggest. In fact, his comments have only made things worse by suggesting that 'everyone is doing it' and so it is ok not to flag it. Wha?!