Reviews and Problems with Samsung Galaxy Ace 3 / S7270 / S7272 / S7275
Showing 1-10 of 38
Battery performance 10
Gaming performance 3
Review Samsung Galaxy Ace 3 GT-S7275R Smartphone
22 November 2013
Summary: Hot smartphone. Samsung is offering the Galaxy Ace 3 GT-S7275R for less than 260 Euros (~$352) but this is no cheap piece. In fact, we are surprised by the high quality of the 4-inch smartphone which even offers an LTE module.
Pros: High-quality workmanship, System performance is good enough for all the latest games and apps, Bright display, Fast internet connectivity thanks to LTE, Stays cool, Battery can be removed, Good run times, Cheap, The overall package is a good one. Samsung has provided good workmanship, a nice screen, decent performance and a fluid interface.
Cons: Average camera, Relatively low resolution display, Too power-hungry while off or in standby, A better camera: A 5 MP camera takes decent pictures, but their quality is average.
Conclusion: Looking at the Ace 3 merely from a specifications standpoint, it's hard to see it as a very worthy upgrade over the already excellent Galaxy Ace 2. After all, for a device that follows its predecessor by more than a year, you'd expect more than merely an extra 200 MHz under the hood, 0.2 inches added to the screen, and 256MB more RAM. But hey, we guess those specs Samsung deemed worthy for the Ace lineup in 2013.
Pros: Quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE; dual/quad-band 3G with HSPA, Quad-band LTE support (for LTE version), 4" 16M-color WVGA capacitive touchscreen; 233ppi, Android OS v4.2.2 Jelly Bean with TouchWiz UI, Dual-core 1GHz (3G) / 1.2GHz (LTE) Cortex-A9 CPU, VideoCore IV GPU; Broadcom BCM21664 chipset, 1GB of RAM, 5 MP autofocus camera with LED flash, 720p video recording @ 30fps, continuous autofocus, 0.3 MP front-facing camera, VGA video recording, Dual-band Wi-Fi b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direc...
Cons: Very minimal upgrades over predecessor, Low internal storage, Tired and exhausted design, no differentiation whatsoever, No Air View, Air gestures or Multi-view
Summary: The Ace 3 is positioned decisively in the mid-range sector, available free on contract from around £15 per month. That makes it good value. It's cheaper than the S4 Mini, but does mostly the same with just a few reductions in spec, most of which don't impact on day to day use. The Ace 3 has no particular standout feature, but is a well-balanced all-rounder. If the price falls to below £15 per month on contract, than it will be an even better buy.
Excerpt: Despite the abundance of low and mid-range Samsung handsets and the granularity to which each differentiates itself from the next, the Ace family has always proved to standout to consumers on the high street. The original Galaxy Ace was the first widely successful Android mid-ranger in Samsung’s lineup, so can the new Galaxy Ace 3 instil the same values and draw the same audience?
Pros: Highly customisable user experience, Removable storage and battery, Solid build quality, 4G connectivity
Cons: Inconsistent performance, Unimaginative design, 4G use cripples battery life, Display could be brighter
Summary: The Samsung Galaxy Ace 3 — is it a worthwhile device or is it just another handset in Samsung’s quest to make all the phones? While I wouldn’t get super excited over this device, it’s still pretty decent, despite it being like every other Samsung device. I’ve got some serious deja-vu going on because I could swear we’ve reviewed this phone before, but it was probably just another very similar model.
Conclusion: The Samsung Galaxy Ace 3 is a pretty decent midrange phone, with an okay screen, reasonably fast processor and better than average camera. But the game has changed with the Google-backed Motorola Moto G, and the midrange has shifted up in spec and down in price. In that context, the Ace 3 doesn't quite cut it, though some may be swayed by the 4G network access and expandable memory.
Pros: 4G connectivity, expandable memory, decent camera
Conclusion: The Samsung Galaxy Ace 3 brings good performance and excellent battery life to buyers on a budget, but its screen resolution isn’t fantastic and some of its software additions are fairly superfluous. There are simply better handsets available, the Moto G is an obvious choice but it currently lacks 4G network support.