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
Battery Life
Battery life remains probably the single largest differentiator for devices lately, and of huge concern to enthusiasts and normal shoppers alike. We’ve already caught a glimpse of how well 8974 fares from a power perspective inside the LG G2, a device that posted some seriously impressive battery numbers. The Note 3 we’re looking at is also 8974 based since it’s a T-Mobile model, and thus we expect the same kind of battery life.
With this generation of Note, battery gets even larger. The Note started with a then quite large 9.25 watt hour battery, then Note 2 moved to 11.78 watt hours, and Note 3 now moves to a very large 12.16 watt hour battery with of course the newest 3.8V chemistry and all that comes along with it. Display size goes up, but those power gains are offset in other places.
After we talked about the panel self refresh features in the G2 a few people reached out and let me know that this feature has been shipping for a while in some phones, and it’s easy to check for. If we look under the display subsystem we can see that the same MIPI_CMD_PANEL type 9 is used, which refers to this type of interface.
Qualcomm HWC state: MDPVersion=500 DisplayPanel=9
define MIPI_CMD_PANEL ‘9’
Our battery life tests are unchanged and consist of a set of popular webpages that are loaded on a schedule with the display set to exactly 200 nits and repeated until the battery runs out and the device dies on both WiFi and cellular data connections. In this case that means T-Mobile LTE which is 10 MHz FDD in my market, I haven’t had a chance to run the Note 3 on HSPA+ yet, or complete the call test (which is starting to get ridiculous, and probably breaks 24 hours in the case of the Note 3).
On LTE the Note 3 does very well, coming just shy of the pack of iPhones, at just over 8 hours. Interestingly enough it’s just north of the G2s as well, which do have a smaller battery but also smaller display. The Note 3 also is the first device to ship with Qualcomm’s QFE1100 envelope tracker solution from the RF360 front end portfolio, which lowers power consumption by up to 20 percent and heat dissipation by up to 30 percent by allowing the power amplifiers to follow the desired output waveform. There’s more on that later in the cellular section.
On WiFi the Note 3 does better by 22 percent, but not the kind of huge jump I’m used to seeing between cellular and WiFi testing. This tells me the Note 3 battery life is really gated by the display, which is almost always the largest consumer of power in a device. That said the Note 3 does very well all things considered, especially in comparison to the APQ8064 (Fusion 3) phones which came before it, like SGS4. New silicon and new process inside MSM8974 definitely helps move battery life forward here with the race to sleep game.
Charging is an interesting story on the Note 3, but primarily because of what doesn’t change. The Note 3 continues to use Samsung’s tablet charging specification and charger, which has 2 amps of maximum output. The Note 3 draws 2 amps over a considerable amount of the charging curve, like other Samsung devices (in the linear part of the charge curve). USB 3.0 doesn’t change things up here quite yet with the new supported charge voltages that are coming eventually with the power delivery specification.
The Note 3 does charge faster overall compared to the SGS4 however thanks in part to the new PMIC (PM8941) which is part of the overall 8974 platform story.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
302 Comments
View All Comments
Impulses - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
Android fanboy here... Personally I think the plastic and finish/design used for both the 5c and the Note 3 both suck. Glossy finish on the 5c = yuck and if it wasn't Apple they'd be getting called out for it more. Faux stitching on the Note 3 = beyond yuck. Seriously, why does Samsung keep trying to masquerade their plastics (faux leather, faux metal band on the SGS4, etc). Just use something like what the Nokias, Moto X, One X, etc use. Feels just fine, I guess it can be harder to implement soft touch when you don't have a unibody design but still...ddriver - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
Well, the big problem of samsung was the glossy finish, the faux leather fixes that. And faux leather with faux stitches is not all that bad, certainly better than real leather and real stitches (considering they are purely cosmetic and serve no actual purpose). Faux leather without the faux stitches would actually look a tad worse.The note 2 was mighty ugly, I agree, but the note 3 looks significantly better.
Aluminum is not really all that better, it is not expensive, it is not hard, it is not durable or scratch resistant, engineering-wise it offers no advantage to polycarbonate, except it is a good heatsink, which apple might be interested in considering how tiny their phones are.
I don't think Moto X looks any better than the note 3, and I've been a professional designer for 9 years. But hey, let's not forget samsung is a Korean company, people there are quite wacky in lots of ways. That may be the reason samsung is doing all that stuff with plastic, which other cultures perceive in a very different way than the native market.
ddriver - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
Last but certainly not least, since the back cover is actually replaceable you can just wait a few weeks and get whatever finish you want. If faux leather with faux stitches is really such a downer for you, you are not out of choice (unlike with the direct competition).I don't mind the faux leather when it comes to its looks, however, I feel the white one will get quite dirty quite fast, and overall it will capture dirt in the "pores" and "folds" of the "leather" and it will be harder to clean.
darkcrayon - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
You realize repeating stuff like "fanboy" makes you sound even less intelligent than your conclusions suggest? This is a tech discussion site, you might want to start acting like it instead of out of childish anger.ddriver - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
So you fanboy are out of any actual arguments, clutching to the straw that is your ridiculous claim that the use of the word fanboy dictates poor intellect. Fanboy is a very descriptive term, that is the reason I prefer it because it is indicative of stupidity, but not of the one who uses the term but the one, targeted by it.Or maybe it was officially accepted that only dumb people use "fanboy" and I missed it?
As you can plainly see, I am not absent of argumentation, you said "not all plastic is the same" but the plastic of the 5c and all the samsung devices IS the same, you said the 5c is low-end but its price certainly isn't. You on the other hand seem to have nothing on me, so ... make the conclusion if you can ;)
bji - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
It's officially accepted that only dumb people use "fanboy". You missed it.steven75 - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
The feel of the plastic on a 5C or Lumia is not at all the same and Anand and Brian agree on this. You are BY FAR the outlier here!Both of those devices have essentially plastic unibodies while the Samsung devices always have a rinky dink shell that feels like something from a happy meal toy.
imaletufinish - Wednesday, October 2, 2013 - link
Now you sound like Billy Mays. "BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE...THIS PHONE IS MADE FROM SPACE-AGE PLASTIC POLYMERS!!!"Gunbuster - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
Giant screen Windows Phones are just around the corner.darwinosx - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
Another hunk of derivative plastic junk from Samsung.