Nokia Lumia 830 Review
by Brett Howse on November 25, 2014 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Microsoft
- Lumia
Final Words
When the Lumia 830 launched as an “affordable flagship” at IFA 2014, I thought it would be just another midrange phone. But the Lumia 830 has some great features that make it feel like a flagship. The device has a premium feel in-hand, and is much nicer to carry and hold than the actual 930 flagship due to the thickness of the device. It is reasonably light, and keeps the distinctive Lumia polycarbonate back. A real bonus over the 930 is that the back is removable as well, which also allows the device to more easily gain microSD support, which it has.
But the SoC inside the Lumia 830 can detract from the flagship feel. Windows Phone has always had great support for low end phones, so the Snapdragon 400 has no issues with basic animations. It is when you launch apps and do work inside of apps where you can see it struggling for performance. My biggest complaint with the Lumia 830 is that it is too slow to be marketed where it is. There is a huge chasm in performance between the low end Lumias (530, 630, 730, 830) and the high end Lumias (930, 1520). It would be nice to see a progression in speed at some point in the lineup but it is just not there. The SoC does not cripple this device in any way, but after using the Lumia 930 for a while it sure shows that Cortex A7 at 1.2 GHz is pretty pokey.
But the package as a whole is very good if you can overlook the couple of extra seconds it takes to open Skype. The fit and finish of this device is right up there with the high end Lumia phones despite the removable back. It takes a bit of work to get it snapped on, but once it is there it has no flex or creaking of any kind. The camera on the Lumia 830, although a far cry from the 930 and 1020 as far as pure performance, is quite good and has decent low light performance due to the OIS.
I am a bit surprised how much I do like the 830 overall, despite the SoC. The combination of the metal band, a thin chassis, a light weight, a decent display, and a decent camera make for a phone that is very good for the right price.
And with the price we get to the crux of the issue. The Lumia 830 is a great phone for the right price, but it seems that the pricing for it is too high for most locations. As an on-contract phone, the Lumia 830 needs to be at or around $0 on contract. AT&T has it for $99 on contract, which is simply too much for this device. In Canada, it is a different story though with the 830 being $0 on a 2-year contract from all carriers. For an outright price, we are seeing some pretty powerful phones coming in at or around the $400 mark where the 830 is around. Once again, AT&T is a bit higher, but this device needs to be around $350 or so. It has a premium feel, but clearly there were some corners cut so the price should reflect this more.
If you are looking for a midrange Windows Phone today though, the Lumia 830 is certainly one you want to check out.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
98 Comments
View All Comments
kspirit - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
In addition: I am aware that the design of the 830 probably hadn't started at the time of the acquisition. But I can't believe the same Nokia who put glance and camera buttons on even the 620 two years ago wouldn't do it in the x30 refreshes. Especially considering that those were unique, signature capabilities that competing manufacturers don't offer. MS must have had some input in this phone. I'm sure they would have cared about cost cutting on the company they were just on the brink of acquiring. No?cheshirster - Friday, November 28, 2014 - link
Glance and camera button obviously presented on L830 :)You should be really high on something to blame it for having features that 730 and 630 are missing.
retrospooty - Monday, December 1, 2014 - link
Yeah, I dont think he is grasping the Tiered model#'s and the concept of price points. He seems to be assuming newer is always higher end, even on a lower end model.Now if the 925 replacement came out and was lesser than the 925 he would have a great point. But the 830 is NOT the 925 replacement model.
Sabresiberian - Tuesday, November 25, 2014 - link
Keep in mind that Microsoft/Nokia hasn't released anything intended to be more than a midrange or low-end phone since the Icon/930. It may look like they are cutting back to those of us interested in flagship devices - but it isn't really the case. :)close - Tuesday, November 25, 2014 - link
Well... they are using the same low-end SoC on 4 of their product lines which is disappointing (5xx, 6xx, 7xx, 8xx). And for a smart phone some CPU performance is a must otherwise the experience is really frustrating. More so than not having some niche features like glance. I'm not talking about intensive 3D games, but it should allow the user to comfortably run applications without feeling the performance hit. I was expecting the 830, maybe even the 730, to have the 600 series SoC. MS/Nokia have skipped the mid-range and went from low-end to high-end. Although the premium build and other features don't really compensate for the distinct lack of snappiness in applications.It's like building a premium sedan with a 1l engine.
melgross - Tuesday, November 25, 2014 - link
I imagine they're trying to save money. Considering g how small sales are, they need to buy fewer parts in larger quantity to have any hope of a profit, which, from looking at Microsoft's financials shows isn't likely happening.They are also concentrating on lower priced models in order to attempt to get sales in China, where they've fallen to 0.6%, and India, where sales are down as well. Samsung seems to be working on the same strategy, from their last announcement.
PubFiction - Tuesday, November 25, 2014 - link
They need to stop thinking about making money and start thinking about releasing an attractive product and actually getting people to buy their stuff. Nickel and diming right now is not going to work.cheshirster - Friday, November 28, 2014 - link
Their sales are two-three times larger then HTC and larger then Moto for many quarters (if you think moto g's and e's are selling in BIG quantities you a wrong)Alexvrb - Tuesday, November 25, 2014 - link
Doesn't sound like you've really used one. :/ Don't get me wrong, I do game and I wouldn't buy one as a result. But you specifically said "I'm not talking about intensive 3D games". So, taking those out of the equation... even with the "slow" CPU, it does everything you're talking about just fine. They really run great, and the OS has superb SD card support - which negates the only major drawback I could hurl at this phone, the lack of storage.But again, since I do game occasionally on my phone, I would want a flagship. The Icon and M8 are both very nice models. However even those are going to need replacement in the not-so-distant future, and I hope Verizon stops being a Big Red Baby and works hand in hand with MS on future phone releases and updates alike.
close - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
Actually I did get the chance to test drive one of these (I do some hardware compliance so I get to test drive most relevant devices on the market, at least to get a rough idea about them). The OS itself is more than snappy on this CPU. But try to use it as any normal person would use a smartphone and it starts to choke. Loading applications or switching between application takes a long time. It's just not the experience I was expecting. Don't get me wrong, the device doesn't become unusable. It's just that at this price point at given the 8xx series position in MS's product lineup I have some higher expectations when using the phone.MS was careful to create an OS that runs great on low-end hardware but this isn't the case for software makers. And your smartphone is defined by the applications it runs and how it runs them.
Bottom line, it's a nice phone but given the competition it's too expensive for its worth.