Draw freely upon your imagination – denzuke
Nokia Lumia 900 versus Samsung S3 Comparison Chart
22 Reasons for the Samsung Galaxy S3
Also known as: Samsung I9300 Galaxy S III
| OS | ||||
| Plays Adobe Flash | Yes | vs | No | Adobe Flash with Video and Sound is supported in the phone’s browser |
| Significantly more apps available | 400,000 | vs | 35,000 | 11.4x more apps available |
| CONNECTIVITY | ||||
| Has DLNA | Yes | vs | No | It can stream videos and movies to other devices over-the-air |
| Has NFC | Yes | vs | No | Near-field-communication (NFC) allows wireless transactions like payments |
| Has an HDMI output | Yes | vs | No | Video and movies can be watched on a TV with HDMI input |
| Has a MicroSD slot | Yes | vs | No | Internal Storage can be extended with MicroSD cards |
| Explicitly newer Bluetooth Version | 4.0 | vs | 2.1 | 1.9 newer Bluetooth Version |
| POWER | ||||
| Wireless charging | Yes | vs | No | It can be charged w/o any plugs and wires similar to electric shavers or toothbrushes (as extra) |
| More battery power | 2,100mAh | vs | 1,830mAh | 15% more battery power |
| Has a removable battery | Yes | vs | No | The battery is removable and can be replaced by the user if broken |
| CAMERA | ||||
| Clearly more megapixel (photo, front camera) | 1.9 | vs | 1.0 | 1.9x more megapixel (photo, front camera) |
| Has a back-illuminated sensor | Yes | vs | No | |
| Considerably better video recording quality | 1080p @30fps | vs | 720p @30fps | 1.5x better video recording quality |
| SCREEN | ||||
| Bigger screen size | 4.8″ | vs | 4.3″ | 12% bigger screen size |
| Explicitly higher screen resolution | 720 x 1280 px | vs | 480 x 800 px | 2.4x higher screen resolution |
| Higher pixel density | 313ppi | vs | 252ppi | 25% higher pixel density |
| MEMORY | ||||
| Much more RAM memory | 1.0GB | vs | 0.5GB | 0.5gb more RAM memory |
| CPU | ||||
| Appreciably smaller semiconductor size/newer CPU | 40nm | vs | 45nm | 11% smaller semiconductor size/newer CPU |
| Explicitly faster CPU clock speed | 4x 1.4Ghz | vs | 1x 1.4Ghz | 4x faster CPU clock speed |
| PHYSICAL | ||||
| Substantially thinner | 8.6mm | vs | 11.4mm | 2.8mm thinner |
| Lighter | 133.0g | vs | 159.0g | 26.0g lighter |
| A little less body volume | 82.9cm³ | vs | 90.0cm³ | 8% less body volume |
Related posts:
| This entry was posted by admin on 16 June 2012 at 11:23 pm, and is filed under Tech. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed. |
Comments are closed.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments