?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
Rounding up the Usual Suspects
Steve's Livejournal

My main project today was researching phones. I looked at a fairly wide range of phones, and came up with this chart of options:

  • Samsung Galaxy Note 3, $69 (to fix the charging port on my current phone so it's more reliable, no "band 12"); 3 GB RAM, 64 GB storage, four cores at 2.3 GHz; speed 1.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 4, $189 (refurbished, no US warranty, no "band 12"); 3 GB RAM, 32 GB storage, eight cores at 1.9 GHz; speed 1.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 5, $248 (refurbished, 90 day warranty); 4 GB RAM, 64 GB storage, eight cores at 2.1 GHz; speed 1.7
  • there never was a Samsung Galaxy Note 6, for marketing reasons
  • Samsung Galaxy Note FE, $312 (a Note 7 with the battery problem fixed, no US warranty); 4 GB RAM, 64 GB storage, eight cores at 2.3 GHz; speed 2.6
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 8, $409 (refurbished, 90 day warranty); 6 GB RAM, 64 GB storage, eight cores at 2.35 GHz; speed 3.4
  • One Plus 6T, $550 (new phone, one year warranty); 8 GB RAM, 128 GB storage, eight cores at 2.8 GHz; speed 4.3
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 9, $637 (refurbished, 90 day warranty); 8 GB RAM, 128 GB storage, eight cores at 2.8 GHz
  • Samsung Galaxy Note 9, $899 (new phone, one year warranty); 8 GB RAM, 128 GB storage, eight cores at 2.8 GHz
The prices are what I found today, on my carrier's site for the new phones, mail order for the refurbished phones, and at a local phone repair store for fixing my Note 3. The speed ratings are according to the "Basemark OS II" benchmark. (I couldn't find Basemark numbers for the Note 9, other tests show it's similar to the 6T.

Of the phones I looked at, two are obvious rejects. The Note 4 has no warranty, and doesn't do "band 12", which is important for good data performance on my carrier (but a tolerable limitation of my current phone, as long as it charges). The Note FE is also a dud, with no warranty and too little advantage over the Note 5 to justify the added cost. I think a new Note 9 is also a reject; stretching the warranty from 90 days for the reconditioned model to a year isn't worth the extra cost.

The tempting models are the Note 5 (modest price, about twice as fast), the Note 8 (middle price, about four times as fast, a zoom telephoto camera, in addition to the regular camera and the selfie camera), the Note 9 (really fast, zoom telephoto Keeping my current Note 3 until it dies is tempting because that's the least expensive option.

The Note 5 is tempting because it's about twice as fast (Basemark says 1.7 times faster; Antutu says 2.1 times faster), and because it's the cheapest that can use "band 12".

The Note 8 is tempting because it's about four times as fast as my current phone, it adds a zoom telephoto camera with optical image-stabilization to earlier phones' wide-angle main and selfie cameras, and it's in the middle on price.

The Note 9 is tempting because it's the latest and fastest Samsung Note model, has the best screen of any phone (so say reviews, anyway), has the third camera, and does more with the stylus (though I'm not sure just what), but it's also expensive.

The 6T is tempting too, but it's complicated. One clear point of superiority is that it charges really fast, as long as one uses the same brand charger (which don't cost extra, and can charge other phones at normal rate). It has a better version of Android (according to reviews, but sticking with familiar Samsung may be easier). It's as fast as the Note 9, with the same processor, and sometimes faster when its software speed-ups are usable. Its screen is almost as great as the Note 9's, but its third camera apparently doesn't quite beat the Note 8 or Note 9. And of course it costs less for a new one than a refurbished Note 9.

This is a tough call. And because my old Note 3 has been behaving better in the past few days than it had been, my earlier sense of urgency is somewhat diminished.

Tags: ,

2 comments or Leave a comment