Remember Tablet have a different Aspect Ratio. And even an 7" iPhone will be ~40% smaller than the smallest iPad Display. That is excluding the casing size difference.
Indeed. It was easy to equate phone size with screen size when everything was 16:9, but the tall aspect ratios changes things up. My 5.8" Galaxy S8 feels considerably smaller in hand than my 5.7" Note 4.
That's why i like gsmarena comparisons. They have screen area which combined with aspect ratio is much more relevant information, than just lenght of the diagonal line. I would also appreciate effective screen area for common aspect ratios of content (ie what area will normal 16:9 cover, same for older 4:3, cinematic 1.85:1 and 2.4:1).
The smallest "tablets" I would call a tablet would be the Nexus 7" with a 16x10 aspect ratio. This is a 6.7" phone but the 20x9 aspect ratio makes it much less tall in landscape.
So in summary it is still a phablet, not a tablet, but this phone is actually a little bit "longer" than the nexus 7 on an internal screen basis (though due to smaller bezels the total device size of the Samsung Galaxy A70 is 1.4" shorter in length.)
The clock speeds suggest the SoC is either Snapdragon 670 or 675, with the 670 looking more likely to me. Definitely not the Exynos 7904, since the A50 is on the Exynos 9610. By that logic, can we expect the A90 to have the SDM710 at least?
The main sensor could be the S5KGD1 - 1/2.8", 0.8um pixel size, PDAF, no pixel-binning. On paper the camera looks disappointing, just like it has always been for the A series. Even the A9. The gap between the supposedly mid range A series and flagship S & Note series continues to be huge.
On the other hand, yay for plastic! Great that Samsung finally realised their A series' pricing had been ridiculous, so at least there's some attempts to bring it down. What's the point of a glass back if there's no wireless charging and ingress protection, right?
I have a 5.2" phone but it is 73.5mm wide. Because the screen is using the whole front it is only 4% wider with a 28% larger screen. This is from from a phablet. The original phablet samsung galaxy note was 83mm wide.
Sure AMOLED looks better, but I wouldn't pay double (or more) for it. I don't see it as *that* much better. And the IPS on the Mi Max 3 is far from terrible - https://www.gsmarena.com/xiaomi_mi_max_3-review-18...
A70 is listed at 370€ for the 128GB/6GB version from Amazon.de. The 64GB/4GB Mi Max 3 is 236€ from the Xiaomi Ebay store and 245€ from other reputable .de sellers. Not that big of a difference and definitely a good price for the Samsung in my eyes. Especially since old A-series used to be priced rather high for the offered specs.
Oh, one other thing needed for this to be a winner. Is this using a beautiful flat display, or the distorted curved garbage that has infected the Galaxy S and Note lines?
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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
21 Comments
Back to Article
Inteli - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
At what point does it just become a tablet?HardwareDufus - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
The size becomes significant at 7" and beyond.jlgomez2667 - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
Dude its a Phablet..ksec - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
Remember Tablet have a different Aspect Ratio. And even an 7" iPhone will be ~40% smaller than the smallest iPad Display. That is excluding the casing size difference.GTRagnarok - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
Indeed. It was easy to equate phone size with screen size when everything was 16:9, but the tall aspect ratios changes things up. My 5.8" Galaxy S8 feels considerably smaller in hand than my 5.7" Note 4.qap - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
That's why i like gsmarena comparisons. They have screen area which combined with aspect ratio is much more relevant information, than just lenght of the diagonal line. I would also appreciate effective screen area for common aspect ratios of content (ie what area will normal 16:9 cover, same for older 4:3, cinematic 1.85:1 and 2.4:1).urbanman2004 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
At least 7 inchesRoland00Address - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
The smallest "tablets" I would call a tablet would be the Nexus 7" with a 16x10 aspect ratio. This is a 6.7" phone but the 20x9 aspect ratio makes it much less tall in landscape.In landscape mode, nexus 7 vs a70
3.71 inches tall, 5.94 inches wide Nexus 7.
2.75 inches tall, 6.11 inches wide Samsung Galaxy A70.
So in summary it is still a phablet, not a tablet, but this phone is actually a little bit "longer" than the nexus 7 on an internal screen basis (though due to smaller bezels the total device size of the Samsung Galaxy A70 is 1.4" shorter in length.)
sbrown23 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
When it's 7" diagonal with a 16:9 or 3:2 aspect ratio. That is a significantly larger and wider device than 6.7" 20:9.olde94 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
it's almost ironic how this is a "phone" at 6.7" and the galaxy fold is a tablet at 7.3"Gemuk - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
The clock speeds suggest the SoC is either Snapdragon 670 or 675, with the 670 looking more likely to me. Definitely not the Exynos 7904, since the A50 is on the Exynos 9610. By that logic, can we expect the A90 to have the SDM710 at least?The main sensor could be the S5KGD1 - 1/2.8", 0.8um pixel size, PDAF, no pixel-binning. On paper the camera looks disappointing, just like it has always been for the A series. Even the A9. The gap between the supposedly mid range A series and flagship S & Note series continues to be huge.
On the other hand, yay for plastic! Great that Samsung finally realised their A series' pricing had been ridiculous, so at least there's some attempts to bring it down. What's the point of a glass back if there's no wireless charging and ingress protection, right?
luisxfx - Monday, April 1, 2019 - link
Thanks, I was wondering what the SoC was, I was hoping it was a Snapdragon, still not convinced with Exynos chips.Death666Angel - Monday, May 20, 2019 - link
S675 is now confirmed. The A80 gets the 730.martineb72 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
I have a 5.2" phone but it is 73.5mm wide. Because the screen is using the whole front it is only 4% wider with a 28% larger screen. This is from from a phablet. The original phablet samsung galaxy note was 83mm wide.Haawser - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
Just saying, the notchless Mi Max 3 is <$250 if you shop around. 6.9", 5,500mAh. Probably <1/2 the price of the A70.patel21 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
Without Samsung's Gorgeous AMOLED screen, that makes a night/day difference at this size when consuming media.Haawser - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
Sure AMOLED looks better, but I wouldn't pay double (or more) for it. I don't see it as *that* much better. And the IPS on the Mi Max 3 is far from terrible - https://www.gsmarena.com/xiaomi_mi_max_3-review-18...Death666Angel - Monday, May 20, 2019 - link
A70 is listed at 370€ for the 128GB/6GB version from Amazon.de. The 64GB/4GB Mi Max 3 is 236€ from the Xiaomi Ebay store and 245€ from other reputable .de sellers. Not that big of a difference and definitely a good price for the Samsung in my eyes. Especially since old A-series used to be priced rather high for the offered specs.GreenMeters - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
If Samsung includes a headphone jack and allows users to unlock the bootloader then this would be a real winner.PeachNCream - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
You should brace yourself for disappointment.GreenMeters - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
Oh, one other thing needed for this to be a winner. Is this using a beautiful flat display, or the distorted curved garbage that has infected the Galaxy S and Note lines?