Samsung today announces the new Galaxy Alpha, a mid-range "premium" built device that creates a new range in Samsung's lineup. The Alpha totes a 4.7" 1280x720 AMOLED screen, coming with either a yet unnanounced Exynos 5430 SoC with 4 A15 cores running at 1.8GHz and 4 A7 cores running at 1.3GHz and a Mali T628MP6 GPU for the international market, or with a Snapdragon 801 SoC for select markets such as the US. Both versions come with 2GB of memory on board.

A new 12MP rear sensor and a 2.1MP front camera can be found. 

The device comes in a new aluminium frame, marking this as a change in build material from Samsung's usual plastic. The phone is extremely thin at only 6.7mm and weighing a lightweight 115g. The footprint of 132.4 x 65.5mm matches the 4.7" screen format of the phone. The back cover is removable and sports a 1860mAh replaceable battery. Strangely, Samsung omitted a microSD card slot in this device which comes at a standard 32GB of internal storage space. We find the same fingerprint and heatbeat sensor as on the S5, however it lacks the waterproofing of the former. It's shipping with Android 4.4.4 KitKat version with the same TouchWiz iteration as the S5.

More interestingly the international version of the device should sport LTE-A category 6 with help of an Intel XMM7260 modem. This would be the first device announced with Intel's new LTE modem and mark a break from Qualcomm's dominance in the sector.

The Alpha is an intriguing device that apparently to wants to fill in a gap in Samsung's lineup which has seen device size go up with each iteration of the S-series. The 720p screen, its slimness and design seems to target directly the iPhone instead of other high-end Android handsets, pricing should also end up in the higher end.

Source: SamsungTomorrow

POST A COMMENT

64 Comments

View All Comments

  • steven75 - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    That was a strange comment for sure. The processor certainly isn't better than the year-old 5S. It's likely the camera isn't either. Reply
  • TETRONG - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    Not to mention that Samsung has absolutely zero shame. I mean look at that picture - it's an exact copy of the design Apple has been selling for two years.
    It's undeniable at this point.. way too close for comfort.
    Reply
  • identity - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    Apples been making 4.7 phones the entire time? Tell me more... Reply
  • FATCamaro - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    0.7" completely invalidates design language? Tell me more... Reply
  • TETRONG - Thursday, August 14, 2014 - link

    That design is Apple - You don't even have to squint to see it.
    Apple are free to make their devices in whatever size the market desires.
    What Samsung is doing here is simply shameful.. you can't just straight up copy somebody elses entire product. There are laws against that for a reason.
    No honor whatsoever..they should be ashamed of themselves and people who buy these devices are contributing to this dishonorable practice.
    Reply
  • Nagorak - Thursday, August 14, 2014 - link

    Seriously? It's a rectangular phone. My mid-range LG looks almost exactly the same as it. All of these phones end up looking very similar. It was absurd when Apple was trying to win infringement claims based on their appearance.

    What makes this phone different is that when you turn it on it's got Android instead of iOS. The software side is a big enough distinction between products.

    For what it's worth I own a fair amount of APPL stock, so I have plenty of reason to be biased in favor of them, but I can't get worked up about this. At this point most phones look close to identical.
    Reply
  • lilmoe - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    - Using a *browser benchmark* for measuring CPU performance is... well, uninformed. Sorry. Especially cross platform. You use these benchmarks to test the performance of multiple browsers on the same device. That was their initial purpose when they debuted back during Chrome's launch, and still is. There isn't a universal mobile benchmark for CPUs as of today, and Geekbench's results are just questionable.
    - Mali GPUs are optimized for OpenGL ES 2.0 and other specific extensions, and generally perform better than any other at that intended area (ARM was criticized for their lack of driver optimization for OpenGL 3.0, but they make it a point that 90%+ of mobile games are optimized for OpenGL ES 2.0 first and foremost as of 2014). You can watch the entire interview with their GPU design chief here on this site.
    - CPU performance != platform performance. It's true that the end experience is what generally counts, but vertical integration here is a huge factor (credit for Apple). I've been criticized before for saying that Android is crippling all these powerful new SoCs because of all the overhead and strain that comes along with its VM. "Specialists" said that there shouldn't be any overhead whatsoever. Well guess what, It turns out that I was right, and Delvic (for starters) will soon be replaced by a ART, and current Android hardware should now score anywhere from 30-100% faster at same benchmarks that argued that Apple's Ax processors are faster... It's also a fact that Android graphics and touch drivers aren't as robust as they should be.
    - Camera on the iPhone 5S better? Well, that's yet to be seen, but it's generally accepted that Galaxy cameras are better than iPhone cameras (well at least outside the "tech" world).
    - Fingerprint scanner is debatable. But I generally prefer Apple's implementation.
    - Screens are a matter of taste, and I prefer AMOLED over LCD any day. I love what Samsung's been doing with their AMOLEDs lately, and on auto-brightness, they can get just as bright (probably brighter?) than iPhone screens.

    Anyway, this isn't my next device whatsoever, and it sure is confusing why Samsung would debut such a design as an entirely new model. But I like what Samsung did here, and I hope it only gets better with time. So yea, I don't believe this Alpha is a midrange device whatsoever.
    Reply
  • soccerballtux - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    no, definitely not accepted that Galaxy cameras better than iPhone. Reply
  • melgross - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link

    I don't know what you mean when you say "out of the tech world". But a better camera than the 5S? No. Every review shows the opposite. As we should know by now, more pixels doesn't make a better image by itself.

    Even this AMOLED screen isn't as bright as the average LCD screen.
    Reply
  • bigstrudel - Sunday, August 17, 2014 - link

    Auto-focus speed and low light performance is not up to par compared to the 5S. More megapixels is great if you want to print 8 x 10's. Otherwise, its hardly what matters. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now