"The Nokia 6 comes in a black 6000-series aluminum uni-body chassis with flat edges that are milled using a CNC machine from a single brick of aluminum. Nokia says that the enclosure is then anodized twice and polished five times."
That sounds like a lot of work for something that's only going to be relevant for one to two years during which it'll become uninteresting and then obsolete or end up getting dropped into a toilet bowl. At least the cost is relatively low, but still, why bother with all the effort?
Somehow given the quality that you can get out of speakers this size I don't think it matters where they are placed. Might as well be on the moon for all that it matters.
Yeah, and people around you can hear that even better. Front facing speakers, even if it's just one, is a huge deal. There's absolutely no reason why the sound should be blasted in any other direction than towards you. If this phone comes with straight vanilla Android I actually want one.
This massively overpriced generic Chinese smartphone (with terrible specs and Nokia branding) is a huge deal because it has a single squeaker pointed at you?
The quality isn't as important as being able to hear it.. If you're using it at home or in bed, or to show someone something (A youtube video, or playing a game) you want to be able to hear WTF you are doing.
I guess a lot of customers buy based on looks. Performance is important to "power" users, but for everyday texting, Skyping, emailing - and calling - mid-range is more than fast enough for majority.
Yup. This phone has got Nokia DNA written all over it. Top build quality then cut corners as much as possible. But, I'm not surprise with the old guards running the company.
Oh yeah. The aluminum unibody reminds me of the N8 or E7, both solidly built phones with cut price internals. ARM11 because Symbian didn't need multicore processors, yeah right Nokia.
Anyway, for $250, you can get Chinese phones with much faster and more efficient processors, larger batteries and equally dubious Android skins. A Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 costs less and stomps all over this thing. Nokia never learns.
I thought they hired some ex-Nokia engineers to supervise the team? Well, I'm not sure how much say they have on the design since they are just "supervising".
exactly. And maybe a few $ more for a micro sd/dual sim.
I got a moto z droid, 32gig with microsSD for $120 (no contract) over black friday weekend. Its a snap 820 FFS. Totally trashes a low/midrange like this.
Welcome to the ODM name stamping game. HMD you now start from zero and get to work on catching up to the likes of BLU and a hundred of others that write a check to the Chinese factory and have a branded commodity phone pop out.
sorry nokia,but snapdragon 430 for 250 usd is a lot,there a multitude of smartphones with better chipsets than this and a lot cheaper.sure, it has 4gb of ram,but between 3 and 4 it is less to no difference,but between a snapdragon 650 or 652 and 430....huge. and those chipsets were used in midrange smartphones a year and more ago! so,from where i stand, this seems like a lost race at this specs and with this price.and i am a nokia fan,i was quite eager to see what they have to offer....a bit of a letdown this is.hope they can do better,they have to be more competitive,it is a huge market the midrange smartphone market.and it doesn't take any prisoners.
SD 625 would have been ok at this price point. 650/652 would have been great! Sorry HMD Global, but the market you are targeting, has similar spec-ed phones being sold at half the price you are quoting.
SD 430 only appeared in devices mid 2016 :-). I'd think this is still a fine chip, in particular in contrast to the SD 410 (which is the one everybody was using) or the really lame SD 425 (which is actually newer than the SD 430) it has full featured graphics (Adreno 505) rather than the really aging and slow Adreno 30x (Adreno 505 is also ~2-3x as fast as those Adreno 30x). However, you are right that this is a low-end SoC, and the nokia phone in question doesn't exactly have low-end price. A SD 650 would probably have been more appropriate, or at least a SD 625 (it should be noted the latter is actually pretty much exactly the same as the SD 430 as far as the cpu and gpu are concerned, but thanks to being manufactured on 14nm LPP vs 28nm LP it reaches quite a bit higher clocks and is more energy efficient).
But my point is (and you apparently agree with me) is that any SoC using those A53 cores built on 28nm process are both ancient and mediocre. Their single core geekbench 3 score is about on the level of a 2013 original iPhone 5. I understand these cores being used in new devices in 2015 and 2016, but in 2017? Please. The new standard bearer for the budget smartphone in 2017 is now Huawei 6X. It uses A53 cores, but built with a modern 16nm process, resulting in performance that can compare to a three year old Snapdragon 800. This is not great, but at least some progress.
According to the info here: https://www.nokia.com/zh_int/phones/nokia-6 - LTE speeds are ”150Mbps DL/50Mbps UL“ - it does support "up to 128 GB microSD cards" - it has a fingerprint sensor (I believe this was not mentioned in the article)
It has a lot of memory, it has good body, it has relative slow prosessor and reasonable battery. I would call this very good phone for relatively light usage. So it is good phone to majority of users. Heavy users and gamers will definitely look something else. But you can take a lot of photos, make calls and text message and maybe read weather and some e-mail with this. So I would call this sensible phone, without any wow factor to any normal phone user.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
36 Comments
Back to Article
BrokenCrayons - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
"The Nokia 6 comes in a black 6000-series aluminum uni-body chassis with flat edges that are milled using a CNC machine from a single brick of aluminum. Nokia says that the enclosure is then anodized twice and polished five times."That sounds like a lot of work for something that's only going to be relevant for one to two years during which it'll become uninteresting and then obsolete or end up getting dropped into a toilet bowl. At least the cost is relatively low, but still, why bother with all the effort?
Michael Bay - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
Because it`s the only differentiator in this race to the bottom they`ve got.close - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
They did save on the USB Type C though. They probably used that money to double polish the phone... Or something.flyingpants1 - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
That's completely stupid. The differentiators are front speakers, 5000mah battery, SD card, wireless charging and waterproofing.If someone made a 5.2" phone with 4000mah battery, and front speakers, it would sell out immediately
Alexey291 - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
Why do front speakers matter on a smartphone again sorry?xdrol - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
I don't usually put my phone on the desk face-down. Or watch videos on the backside. I literally don't even why are the speakers on the back.vastac13 - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
Ask Samsung.. hahaha!Alexey291 - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
Somehow given the quality that you can get out of speakers this size I don't think it matters where they are placed. Might as well be on the moon for all that it matters.Murloc - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
this.I can hear the sound of videos perfectly fine with a rear facing speaker.
If I want to put down the phone while I listen I can just put it down face down.
niva - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
Yeah, and people around you can hear that even better. Front facing speakers, even if it's just one, is a huge deal. There's absolutely no reason why the sound should be blasted in any other direction than towards you. If this phone comes with straight vanilla Android I actually want one.Alexey291 - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
A huge deal? Really?This massively overpriced generic Chinese smartphone (with terrible specs and Nokia branding) is a huge deal because it has a single squeaker pointed at you?
Wow.
flyingpants1 - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
Oh dear jesus, are you serious?Please don't comment here anymore.
Alexey291 - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
No no please tell me why tiny shitty quality speakers should ever be used for anything other than a ringtone or the notification sound.Murloc - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
they don't get it, they're like those 13 years old kids who listen to rap music on the phone in their pocket because they think it looks cool.flyingpants1 - Wednesday, January 11, 2017 - link
The quality isn't as important as being able to hear it.. If you're using it at home or in bed, or to show someone something (A youtube video, or playing a game) you want to be able to hear WTF you are doing.nikon133 - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
I guess a lot of customers buy based on looks. Performance is important to "power" users, but for everyday texting, Skyping, emailing - and calling - mid-range is more than fast enough for majority.ks.yeoh - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
Yup. This phone has got Nokia DNA written all over it. Top build quality then cut corners as much as possible. But, I'm not surprise with the old guards running the company.serendip - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
Oh yeah. The aluminum unibody reminds me of the N8 or E7, both solidly built phones with cut price internals. ARM11 because Symbian didn't need multicore processors, yeah right Nokia.Anyway, for $250, you can get Chinese phones with much faster and more efficient processors, larger batteries and equally dubious Android skins. A Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 costs less and stomps all over this thing. Nokia never learns.
hyno111 - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
It is designed by Foxconn, though.ks.yeoh - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
I thought they hired some ex-Nokia engineers to supervise the team? Well, I'm not sure how much say they have on the design since they are just "supervising".Alexey291 - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
It looks like a very generic render of a 'typical Chinese smartphone'I've no idea where you got the amazing build quality from.
lilmoe - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
Would it have killed them to put a snapdragon 650 in there and charged $10 more?HideOut - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
exactly. And maybe a few $ more for a micro sd/dual sim.I got a moto z droid, 32gig with microsSD for $120 (no contract) over black friday weekend. Its a snap 820 FFS. Totally trashes a low/midrange like this.
Gunbuster - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
Welcome to the ODM name stamping game. HMD you now start from zero and get to work on catching up to the likes of BLU and a hundred of others that write a check to the Chinese factory and have a branded commodity phone pop out.Lolimaster - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
I remember when $250-350 meant top of the line smartphone.TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, January 12, 2017 - link
what, back in the flipphone days? Smarphone flagships have been $650+ for a LONG time. Both the original iphone and the first galaxy S were $600.lev04 - Monday, January 9, 2017 - link
sorry nokia,but snapdragon 430 for 250 usd is a lot,there a multitude of smartphones with better chipsets than this and a lot cheaper.sure, it has 4gb of ram,but between 3 and 4 it is less to no difference,but between a snapdragon 650 or 652 and 430....huge. and those chipsets were used in midrange smartphones a year and more ago! so,from where i stand, this seems like a lost race at this specs and with this price.and i am a nokia fan,i was quite eager to see what they have to offer....a bit of a letdown this is.hope they can do better,they have to be more competitive,it is a huge market the midrange smartphone market.and it doesn't take any prisoners.cyberfrost - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
SD 625 would have been ok at this price point. 650/652 would have been great! Sorry HMD Global, but the market you are targeting, has similar spec-ed phones being sold at half the price you are quoting.UtilityMax - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
Great specs ruined by what is now an obsolete and mediocre SoC. SD 430 in 2017? Please. This was acceptable in 2015 Moto G3, but not in 2017..Keep this device in Chinese market-only please.
mczak - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
SD 430 only appeared in devices mid 2016 :-).I'd think this is still a fine chip, in particular in contrast to the SD 410 (which is the one everybody was using) or the really lame SD 425 (which is actually newer than the SD 430) it has full featured graphics (Adreno 505) rather than the really aging and slow Adreno 30x (Adreno 505 is also ~2-3x as fast as those Adreno 30x).
However, you are right that this is a low-end SoC, and the nokia phone in question doesn't exactly have low-end price. A SD 650 would probably have been more appropriate, or at least a SD 625 (it should be noted the latter is actually pretty much exactly the same as the SD 430 as far as the cpu and gpu are concerned, but thanks to being manufactured on 14nm LPP vs 28nm LP it reaches quite a bit higher clocks and is more energy efficient).
UtilityMax - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
But my point is (and you apparently agree with me) is that any SoC using those A53 cores built on 28nm process are both ancient and mediocre. Their single core geekbench 3 score is about on the level of a 2013 original iPhone 5. I understand these cores being used in new devices in 2015 and 2016, but in 2017? Please. The new standard bearer for the budget smartphone in 2017 is now Huawei 6X. It uses A53 cores, but built with a modern 16nm process, resulting in performance that can compare to a three year old Snapdragon 800. This is not great, but at least some progress.Hans-B - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
According to the info here: https://www.nokia.com/zh_int/phones/nokia-6- LTE speeds are ”150Mbps DL/50Mbps UL“
- it does support "up to 128 GB microSD cards"
- it has a fingerprint sensor (I believe this was not mentioned in the article)
haukionkannel - Tuesday, January 10, 2017 - link
It has a lot of memory, it has good body, it has relative slow prosessor and reasonable battery.I would call this very good phone for relatively light usage. So it is good phone to majority of users.
Heavy users and gamers will definitely look something else. But you can take a lot of photos, make calls and text message and maybe read weather and some e-mail with this.
So I would call this sensible phone, without any wow factor to any normal phone user.
zodiacfml - Wednesday, January 11, 2017 - link
Interesting combination of specs. They did all they can to make it attractive at the lowest price, hence, low-end chipset.ihatelolcats - Monday, July 3, 2017 - link
snapdragon 430? suckscarloshansell5 - Thursday, August 10, 2017 - link
Nice article pure informative and knowledgeable thank you for sharing it. http://www.vidmateapks.com/