In this second and final part of our review, we discuss the design and performance aspects of the Samsung Galaxy S3, one of the most successful smartphones ever released.

S3 design

The Galaxy S3 is surprisingly light and thin considering the size of the screen. It’s just 8.6mm thick (the Galaxy S2 was 8.9mm thick) and weighs 133g. By comparison, the HTC One X measures 8.9mm and weighs 130g, while the iPhone 5 is 7.6mm thick and weighs just 112g. The new Galaxy S4 with its Sony Xperia Z rivaling 5-inch display is 7.9mm thick and weighs 130g.

A softer, more rounded appearance debuts on the S3 taking over from the more rectangular appearance of its predecessor, the S2. The pebble-like casing reminds us of the Galaxy Nexus smartphone, and while it doesn’t look as modern, the smooth curves allow the hand to mold to the device. It’s good to see that the camera is now almost flush with the main body of the phone, as opposed to the slightly ugly and awkward raised-lens housing that the S2 sports.

As is now standard Android smartphone fare, the three back, home, and menu buttons are at the bottom of the screen, with only the physical home button, the other two being touch-sensitive. The other keys are the power or lock key and the volume rocker switch, both located on the top right of the case.

For a top-of-the-range device, the S3 feels a bit cheap. Too much plastic is definitely the culprit and while it’s good quality, without nicer materials like aluminium, titanium or Kevlar (as found in the Motorola Razr i XT890), it really struggles to feel premium. We’d rather have a little extra weight if it means we can lose a little plastic.

The acres of smooth plastic don’t help with handling the device either, as it’s often too shiny and slippery to hold firmly. For those looking for a more luxurious feel, the HTC One, iPhone 5 and Sony Xperia T are three smartphones that offer more premium materials.

The S3 is available in blue or white, but as with most of Samsung’s popular phones, look out for special edition colors like red, pink, or silver in future.

S3 performance

The S3 packs a 1.4GHz quad-core processor inside its slim casing, and while the phone has since been superseded by the S4 (though not replaced, it’s now considered a “budget” model), it still packs more punch than sufficient, both in terms of data processing and graph rendering. HD video handles extremely well, and overall performance in use feels very slick, without the sluggishness often seen on lower-end phones like the Nokia Lumia 520 or Sony Xperia J. It also manages to beat the Motorola Razr i similarly priced, largely because the Razr relies on a fast but single-core CPU.

The S3 even compares well to newer phones like the iPhone 5 and Sony Xperia Z, and the S3 has enough power to tackle most games on the Google Play store.

Large HD screens, multi-core processors, and the desire for slimmer phones are all enemies of decent battery life. To combat this, Samsung has given the S3 a power saving mode to squeeze the most out of the battery by limiting CPU usage, wireless activity, screen brightness, altering background colors, and limiting vibrations and sound feedback. This, coupled with the user-removable 2100 mAh battery, allows Samsung to achieve more than acceptable battery performance.

It’s worth noting that Samsung sells a larger 3000mAh replacement battery for around £45. Those who might be interested in this product should note that the battery is slightly larger than the standard so which comes with a slightly thicker back cover.

conclusion

The Galaxy S3 can be seen as an evolution of its predecessor, with notable improvements such as a larger screen, more CPU power, and a slimmer design.

The fact that the new Galaxy S4 and Xperia Z haven’t really made the S3 look dated is testament to the specs packed into this phone. With a powerful processor and a 4.8″ screen, the S3 will be a relevant phone for years to come. It also begs the question whether top-tier smartphones like the Google Nexus 4, HTC One or Sony Xperia Z are really worth the money. . additional cost.