x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Black Samsung Galaxy F captured in the wild

Posted: , by Chris P.

Tags :

Black Samsung Galaxy F captured in the wild
The Samsung Galaxy F leaks are becoming relentless, especially if you consider this last week, and usually that's the case the closer a phone gets to its actual release date. It would appear that we are no more than a few short months away from witnessing Samsung's supposedly more luxurious take on the flagship model, with a device that, all agree, will sport a metal frame in order to at least partially disperse certain consumers' dissatisfaction with what they perceive as a relatively cheaper build. 

But the metal in the chassis is hardly all that's exciting about the Galaxy F -- its hardware specs sheet leaves practically nothing to desire at this point. We're talking an allegedly larger, 5.24-inch Quad HD (1440 x 2560 pixels) resolution display, a mighty Snapdragon 805 chip capable of providing LTE-A speeds of up to 225 Mbps, 3 GB of RAM, and the same excellent, 16-megapixel ISOCELL camera found in the current Samsung Galaxy S5. Not too bad, especially if Samsung strikes sooner rather than later, and releases the Galaxy F at the beginning of the fall. That will, most likely, position the Android giant very well compared with its rivals' offerings.

source: evleaks

  • Options

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:42 4

1. Zack20 (Posts: 41; Member since: 10 Dec 2013)

3 GB of RAM?
Can't they upgrade it to like 4 GB?
Or it requires a 64-bit architecture?

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:46 1

2. ArtSim98 (Posts: 3535; Member since: 21 Dec 2012)

I believe 4 is maximum on 32 bit? At least on Windows. I dunno.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 04:55

17. TechFreak123 (Posts: 85; Member since: 25 Feb 2014)

Android L supports 64 bit so they can use 64-bit chip...

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 06:51 4

19. CoastCity (Posts: 257; Member since: 07 Mar 2014)

Photos show two different designs, one with curved down side and one with strait (asymmetric). That button in the photo of the symmetric one, spoils the phone's curvage. Looks better on that rendering. I don't like the brushed gold though, I'd like it satin gold.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 07:13

21. CoastCity (Posts: 257; Member since: 07 Mar 2014)


posted on 07 Jul 2014, 07:34

22. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)

Maximum addressable memory while running in 32 bit is about 3.5 GB. They could put 4 GB in the Galaxy F without a 64 bit chip and Android L, but about 512 MB of it would be unavailable for use.

They could put in a 64 bit chip and 4 GB of RAM, and then once the Android L update comes out consumers could finally use that extra 512 MB. It's the ultimate marketing plot, "This update will give your Galaxy F more RAM!"

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 08:08

23. Aploine (Posts: 437; Member since: 24 Oct 2013)

Thanx for that. 512mb look so small to market it. Imho the ultimate plot is that they charge more than $50 for the extra 16gb (from 16 to 32 I mean).

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 14:37

25. Cicero (Posts: 923; Member since: 22 Jan 2014)

Apple charge $100. Better?

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:46

3. Bioload25 (Posts: 213; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)

Can somebody tell me why the pixel arrangement of the display is so visible on photos 5 and 6? I can almost count the pixels themselves zooming in...

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:48 5

5. ArtSim98 (Posts: 3535; Member since: 21 Dec 2012)

Because it's a lazily made render.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 02:10 1

10. Chris.P (Posts: 567; Member since: 27 Jun 2013)

Believe it's a sought-after effect. Who knows.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 07:12 3

20. CoastCity (Posts: 257; Member since: 07 Mar 2014)

It's a raster kind of graphic effect. You almost can't see pixels in real life displays like this one with 1440 x 2560 resolution. How could you on an image 700 x 500px?

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 11:50

24. bparkerson (unregistered)

That would depend on the display you are actually viewing from not from the display in the picture. Besides, I think what we are looking at is a photoshopped picture and not the actual display...that's what it looks like to me.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:47 6

4. tech2 (Posts: 3487; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)

Gotta say this beast looks pretty sexy...

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:51

6. zuckerboy (banned) (Posts: 898; Member since: 22 Dec 2011)

whut ? it is like s5 no difference

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:54 2

8. Bjray (Posts: 187; Member since: 29 May 2014)

Oh really... i.imgur.com/XnJple8.jpg (9th image)

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 02:07 4

9. tech2 (Posts: 3487; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)

Look at the pics closely. The devil is in the detail. I personally see a lot of difference.

Also, if you're expecting a complete overhaul then that's not going to happen. You just don't outright change the design of a multi-million flagship product which people have grown use to.

None of the OEMs ever radically change their design language may it be Z2 from Z1, M8 from M7, iPhone 6 from iPhone 5s, etc.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 02:12

11. nctx77 (Posts: 2374; Member since: 03 Sep 2013)

Meh! It pretty much looks like an S5. The only difference is a metal ring lol! Your basically getting exited about a metal ring. The specs are hardly better than a note 3.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 02:44 3

14. tech2 (Posts: 3487; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)

Not 'your' its You're.

Lets look at the phone's design a bit more sensibly:

1. No perforated back. This back looks really nice. Not very glossy but not exactly matt either.

2. The metal ring is less accentuated. Also, it is much more darker and smoother unlike the patterned ring on GS5.

3. The phone's speaker is placed down below near the charging port unlike on the back on GS5 which is a big welcome change.

4. The bezels are incredibly small.

On the hardware front,

1. Mostly likely at least SD 805 or a better Exynos

2. QHD, QHD and QHD

3. 3GB Ram.

So yeah, its way better then Note 3. Not to mention the Note series and Galaxy S series are both targeted at different audience. So comparing them is really stupid.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 01:54 1

7. Anshulonweb (Posts: 434; Member since: 07 Feb 2014)

meh....waiting for note 4....

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 02:14 1

12. wando77 (Posts: 1076; Member since: 23 Aug 2012)

I wish they would do away with the samsung branding on the front and the cheap looking silver earpiece. The front should be all black like a nexus device with the branding on the back. Or at least move the samsung branding up a few mm so it is central and just have small black holes hidden in the branding for the earpiece.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 02:16

13. 0xFFFF (Posts: 3806; Member since: 16 Apr 2014)

An S5 LTE-A edition with 3GB and the 805, with a unlocked bootloader/optional KNOX would be great. Add the S5 Active's camera button for some extra goodness. I certainly don't need the extra cost and added radiation of a metal back cover and metal bumper.

As much as I sometimes think the bezelboys are out of control, nothing compares to the metalfetishboys. They love their metal and rage hard for it.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 03:06

15. Zomer (Posts: 307; Member since: 31 May 2013)

It's fake.

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 03:20

16. phljcnth (Posts: 496; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)

Isn't it an S4?

posted on 07 Jul 2014, 04:55

18. swayze91 (Posts: 50; Member since: 19 Jun 2014)

Looks good. If rumors are true on the specs then it will definitely be a decent contender.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories