Nokia Lumia 630 Review
The call quality of the Lumia 630 is not exceptional, and it is in fact disappointing in the earpiece where voices are hugely distorted and do not sound clear at all, so you’d have to listen extra carefully to understand what the person on the other end of the line is saying. The microphone output, however, is much nicer, with just a very slight digital undertone to voices, so to your callers, the voice appears very natural and loud enough.
The Lumia 630 comes with a 1850mAh battery with a quoted talk time of about half a day on 3G. In real-world usage, we had no problem going through a full day with the Lumia 630, and we can imagine using it for around a day and a half between charges. You should note that if you talk a lot, the lack of a proximity sensor is tricky, since the screen might not turn off, and the battery will run out of juice quicker. Just make sure to keep the phone really close to your face to have Nokia’s software detect you’re in a call and turn the screen off, and you should be fine.
Good news is that if you’re planning on going on a longer trip, the Lumia 630 does support user-removable batteries, so you can just pack in a second battery pack and exchange them when the first one runs out.
The Nokia Lumia 630 is a handset for the masses. Its full retail (off-contract) price stands at €160 ($200), on par with some very popular offerings like the Motorola Moto G.
Motorola’s handset is - naturally - the Lumia 630’s biggest rival. It runs on the competing (and richer in terms of apps) Android 4.4 KitKat, and has got a sharper 4.5” 720p display, slightly better camera, and is simialrly well-packed in terms of specs. An even cheaper option is the recently launched Moto E, a phone with just a slightly smaller, 4.3” display, but also with good performance, offering great value for the money. If you’re gunning for a larger display, Android again has you covered with the only slightly more expensive Samsung Galaxy Grand 2, a phone with a 5.25” display, Snapdragon 400 chip, and better, 8-megapixel camera.
On its own, the Nokia Lumia 630 has a lot to offer - the mostly smooth performance, more mature Windows Phone 8.1 with improvements from Nokia Cyan, the good display, and it’s definitely a good value for the money. Truth is, however, that Android has picked up the pace in the past few months, and now offers stronger performers that cost even less than Nokia’s handset. All in all, the Lumia 630 is not a bad phone - but unlike previous affordable Lumias (like the 520), where others had to chase it for its price, now, it feels like Nokia is playing catch-up.
- Windows Phone 8.1 with Nokia’s Cyan improvements showcases the best of Microsoft’s platform
- First Windows Phone with dual-SIM support
- Buttery smooth performance
- Offline navigation remains a big plus
- Sub-par camera with no flash, no front-facing cam
- Screen is less sharp than rivals
- Cheap-feeling plastic
- Only 512MB of RAM, a limitation for gaming
- Does not support 1080p video recording
- Poor in-box contents (no headphones, no USB cable)
1. BattleBrat (Posts: 1175; Member since: 26 Oct 2011)
Victor H, could you please be so kind as to contact me. I have an idea for an article
7. NotAGeek (Posts: 160; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)
I think that's only for the indonesian market
27. hideyaku89 (Posts: 1; Member since: 15 Oct 2011)
no, it's not,, I bought 630 3 dayss a go and there's no BBM preinstaled
3. peace247 (Posts: 100; Member since: 26 Apr 2014)
Ambient light sensor for call...?
I think it is the proximity sensor...
5. andro. (Posts: 1971; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
Ive seen this phone on sale with some mobile networks for 130 euros on prepay,its a decent offering for that. Think the review slightly forgets its a budget level smartphone
8. boosook (Posts: 1091; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)
The problem is that it's not so budget level... Nokia set a price which is too high for a phone with so many limitations (512MB of ram, no flash, no front camera, no ambient light sensor and all the other things listed in the CONS section of the review).
It has almost the same price of the Moto G, yet the Moto G is in another league... it has an HD screen, more ram, it's faster (look at the tests) and it's a full-featured smartphone.
The 630 sits between the Moto E and the Moto G, but its price is close to the latter.
10. lalalaman (Posts: 388; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)
moto g is much more expensive in my country....around $55 higher than 630
13. muhsen (Posts: 268; Member since: 07 Jun 2012)
in the Uk, it costs the same as Moto E which is alot worse( S400 vs S200).
While reviewing, they should have considered all countries, not just theirs.
17. eldyagustius (Posts: 147; Member since: 30 Oct 2013)
512MB for windows phone is enough if you compared it with android smartphones..
18. dr.c33 (Posts: 19; Member since: 31 May 2014)
Ok, I bet you want the Lumia 930 to come with 512 MB of RAM too right? Yes I admit Windows Phone is fluid even with 512 MB of RAM, and Android isn't (but it is far more capable). The point is, you are paying a lot for 512MB of RAM. That's like saying just because WP always runs smooth, L930 should come with the least capable hardware possible and demand a high price.
WP should use its fluidity as an advantage and not as an excuse. Yes, implement 512 MB of RAM is fluid, but cut the price down by at least $50 USD while you are at it.
23. eldyagustius (Posts: 147; Member since: 30 Oct 2013)
I think the lumia 630 is fairly cheap like 520 in my country though it has only 512MB RAM.
24. dr.c33 (Posts: 19; Member since: 31 May 2014)
No it isn't. It's bordering $200. You know what I can get with $200? On the android side, Moto G and Xiaomi 2S and Hongmi Note. On the WP side, I can get the HTC 8X with a 720P screen and slimmer profile. If I just add 50 bucks I can get a L920.
Stop making excuses for this thing they call a "budget" phone.
6. ihavenoname (Posts: 1522; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)
I'd say that good device for price. However, eventhough Moto G is slightly more expensive in some regions, I'd still have it all day. It has much better screen, build quality is very good and solid, it has customizable back plates, better OS, as PA said, slightly better camera with flash. But you can't go seriously wrong with either.
9. lalalaman (Posts: 388; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)
well dual sim version is $170 in my country whereas Moto G is around $220....that makes both of them great devices for their price range....i wonder why it is expensive in US
Plus nokia should have named that phone Lumia 530,it is nowhere near 6xx series specs....
12. muhsen (Posts: 268; Member since: 07 Jun 2012)
that's weird, Gsmarena has named the 630 as one of the best 5mpx shooters and PA says it's middling ????!! PA camera reviews have always been questionable (iphones taking the lead sometimes against the likes of Sony Xperia flagships). so I would go for Gsmarena words.http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_
Also, most competitors phones mentioned r totally wrong to be placed here or priced wrong. The moto G for example costs 150 pounds in the UK while the 630 price is 90-110 pounds, that's a big difference specially when u know that moto G doesn't have an Sd slot while the 630 does. The Galaxy Grand is of a totally different category and costs double the price of the 630, I don't understand how it's mentioned here. The moto E ,which is worse than the 630, costs the same, and PA forgets to mention that 630 has a S400 processor while the moto E has S200 processor which is alot worse.
All in all, PA fails miserably in reviews, better stick to news. For readers, Gsmarena review for this phone is thorough, fair and not out of reality as this one is, so consider it more than this review when buying ( this goes for all Gsmarena reviews actually).http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_
20. sbw44 (Posts: 412; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)
Exactly! most reviews of the 630 mentions it has a great camera, one saying its camera is so good that you would think its from a phone that's twice as much. trustedreviews says "But image quality is a fair bit better than, say the Motorola Moto G and Moto E. You can create some nice-looking photos, if not ones you can successfully crop into."
So when it comes to camera's never and I mean NEVER thrust PA! They have no idea to use cameras!
21. sgodsell (Posts: 1437; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)
Then there are others that can take the moto g camera and make it come out looking so much better then the 630. Also the moto g has a fast focus camera. The 630 does not. In fact the moto g camera can be used to take slow motion videos. Oh and it has a camera flash. All of which the 630 does not have.
In truth the 630 and the moto g should not be compared. The moto g is superior to any lumia 5xx, 6xx, 7xxx devices. The moto e is comparable to the lumia 630.
26. Leandrop (Posts: 10; Member since: 25 Nov 2012)
Are you kidding me? I have a Lumia 720 wich sports PureView lens and it is by far better than Moto G on the camera level. Besides Moto G is really hard to use outside, unusable under direct sunlight. You can use Lumia 630 outside with no problems at all and even though it lacks a flash it manages to take pretty good images. I am not saying 630 is superior but here in Argentina Moto G is not as cheap as everyone thinks ( 2600 argentinian pesos in a two year contract or almost usd $305) while Lumia 630 will cost much less (aproximately 1600 argentinian pesos - usd $188 in a two year contract as well).
So, yes. Lumia 630 is not at the same price point as Moto G. Actually, Moto G is quite expensive costing as much as Nexus 4 in Argentina.
22. Mohammad_Abu-Shukur (Posts: 25; Member since: 08 Nov 2013)
1 thing to say
going to get it
25. MikiSam (Posts: 1; Member since: 17 Jun 2014)
Price varies per market and in Thailand, I bought this phone for US$150, no contract. Regardless of the price tho, I feel this phone is a major surprise. It is fast, offers tons of great features and actually beats all smartphones in some areas (it set a World Guinness Record for fastest keyboard). But over all, the combination of its features is excellent. The PROs:
- wonderful keyboard with unique MS swipe technology
- Gorilla 3 screen wrapped in pleasant plastic
- fast performance, good battery life
- expandable memory up to 128GB
- replaceable battery
- lifetime offline HERE maps - better then Google, Apple or Blackberry maps
- good camera with realistic colored and good exposed shots
- two SIMs
- all that for US$150 (!)
- lack of flash (is a minor inconvenience)
- no headphones in the box
- disabled time feature on locked screen that most Lumias have
I am very happy with this phone.
28. nuna12 (Posts: 12; Member since: 16 Aug 2014)
This is even more important now that Microsoft plans to drop Nokia’s feature phones and focus solely on Windows Phone.
29. nuna12 (Posts: 12; Member since: 16 Aug 2014)
During our testing, we were lucky to get through a full 24 hours without getting nagged about "critically low" battery levels.
|Display||4.5 inches, 480 x 854 pixels (218 ppi) IPS LCD|
Qualcomm Snapdragon 400, Quad core, 1200 MHz, ARM Cortex-A7 processor
512 MB RAM
|Size||5.10 x 2.63 x 0.36 inches|
(129.5 x 66.7 x 9.2 mm)
4.73 oz (134 g)
|Battery||1830 mAh, 16.4 hours talk time|