LG G6 leaks from multiple angles

LG G6 leaks from multiple angles
The LG G6 has been the subject of various leaks, including one yesterday that showed off a glossy back cover for the device. Today, a number of pictures surfaced that allegedly show off the phone from several angles. Unlike the glossy back that appeared Thursday, today's leak shows a brushed metal design. The back also shows a dual camera setup, and a fingerprint scanner that is located directly under the two snappers.

The LG G6 is expected to be unveiled later this month at MWC in Barcelona. It features a 5.7-inch screen with a resolution of 1440 x 2880, and an aspect ratio of 18:9.  The Snapdragon 821 chipset will be powering the device, equipped with a quad-core CPU and the Adreno 530 GPU. We could see an IP certification rating in 2017, and the end of a modular build after one quick year. A Type-C USB port is included.

Since the images in the slideshow have not been verified, we suggest taking this story with the proverbial grain of salt.


source: UnderKG.co.kr (translated) via AndroidPure

Related phones

G6
  • Display 5.7" 1440 x 2880 pixels
  • Camera 13 MP / 5 MP front
  • Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 821, Quad-core, 2350 MHz
  • Storage 32 GB + microSDXC
  • Battery 3300 mAh(20.5h talk time)

FEATURED VIDEO

86 Comments

1. dubaiboy78

Posts: 442; Member since: Sep 19, 2014

Wooow! If it only have sd835 it would be great!

8. sgodsell

Posts: 7207; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

The SD 821 only started to arrive inside devices in November 2016. Plus it's GPU can sustain high end graphics, which is needed for VR. So the SD 821 is a good thing. Sure, it would have been better to have a SD 835, but the 821 will hold its own, especially since the Pixels have proven that. Also from the renders it looks like it's still packing an ID blaster. Good job LG.

10. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

The 821's CPU is trash and the power consumption sucks compared to other 2016 chips. It makes even less sense in a 2017 phone. I would probably be okay with compromises if this phone costed 300$. But for a phone that will cost over 700$, it's an absolute no.

18. Stranger

Posts: 73; Member since: Jan 19, 2017

So is snapdragon 835 .lol

24. strawhat67

Posts: 66; Member since: Jul 16, 2015

A10 is the best processor so far

77. sissy246

Posts: 7070; Member since: Mar 04, 2015

This os not even about apple idiot

23. LebronJamesFanboy

Posts: 671; Member since: Mar 23, 2013

Tyrion - You are DEAD WRONG. My Xiaomi Mi Note 2 with an 821 chip has the BEST real world performance I've seen out of a phone. Phone is fast as hell with this chip and the 6gb of RAM, and I get 7 hours + SOT, equating to 2.5 days of usage for me. Just because new chips come out doesn't mean the predecessor is trash. The new LG phone will be just fine with an 821. Stop spreading BS bro.

30. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

What he said isn't BS. The Snapdragon 821 isn't much more powerful or efficient than the 820 before it. What you're seeing with your Mi Note is Xiaomi's excellent software minimalism, battery optimization, etc. If you look at another phone, such as the LeEco LE Pro 3, you can see that the chip itself isn't exactly too powerful. At least, not compared to the Exynos, Kirin, or A series chips currently in circulation.

46. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

In other words, you can't just slap that SoC into a phone and expect miracles. I'm OK with that...

40. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Thank you. I respect Lannister, but he tends to speak hyperbolically and it gets tiring. The 821 is not trash and many OEMs have gotten great battery and excellent day to day performance out of it. Just because there's something better on the horizon doesn't mean it's trash--even if it doesn't have the best efficiency or performance. If we follow his line of thinking, every SoC other than the most efficient (625) or the most powerful (A10) is garbage, which isn't true at all.

60. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

That's not true. And if you want to criticize someone, have the balls to say it on his face. The kirin, exynos as well as Apple A are all better than SD821. And that was not even fine for 2016. 2017 makes it all the more worse. You are getting a mediocre chip and that too from last year. All these chips are significantly more powerful as well as more efficient. I don't hate the 820 or 821. In fact , I own a oneplus 3. This chip was passable for last year since Qualcomm was going through a tough time after 810's disaster. Also the phone costs 400$. That was also the reason why I didn't go for a flagship for the first time in my life. 625 isn't the most efficient chip BTW.

63. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

I'm pretty certain these comments are public and everyone can view them, including you. As far as SoCs are concerned, there are many decent, amazing, and even poor ones out there. I would in no way call the 821 a poor chip, even if I was being critical. These phones are more than the sum of their parts, and this is what kills me about some people. Stop looking at phones for individual aspects and judging the whole for the shortcoming of one of its parts. We would do very well if we had this same perspective when it comes to our fellow person, too. As for the most efficient chip, what would you say it is? The only thing I think could compete with it are the recent Kirin chips...

69. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

I never said 820 was a poor chip. The 810 was a poor chip. The 820 was just mediocre. The problem is that a mediocre chip might have worked in 2016, but in 2017, a mediocre chip becomes poor chip since we get a new kirin, a new exynos and will get a new A chip in a few months. The phone is more than the sum of it's parts, yes. But an SoC is the most important of those parts. Using a mediocre SoC like 821 automatically means that your phone is going to perform poorer than others and will have less battery life. Not to mention support for hardware acceleration of video codecs which 835 supports. No amount of greatness LG puts is going to change the above facts. I'm sorry, but I personally don't think I would pay more than 300$ for an 820/821 phone in 2017, no matter how good the phone screen is or how good the camera is. Phones in this day and age are judged by their shortcomings, not their good features since all phones do reasonably well nowadays. The most efficient chip is the exynos 7870. It's a bit more frugal than the 625 and offers about the same performance.

74. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Not sure about your notion that the 7870 is more efficient than the 625. The Galaxy J7 compared to the Galaxy C7 is a good example. Both run 5.5" AMOLED displays and have 3300mAh batteries. Both run TouchWiz on Android 6.0.1. Battery life ratings from GSMArena were 101 and 100 hours, respectively. J7 :http://m.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_j7_2016-review-1453p3.php C7:http://m.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_c7-review-1482p3.php#bl Individual times, rounded to the nearest 1/4 hour between J7 and C7: Talk (24.5h vs 25.5h), Web (12.25h vs 14.5h), and Video (18.25h vs 15.25h). Very close, but I think the C7 has it where it counts, though. As for benchmark performance... C7:http://m.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_c7-review-1482p5.php J7: http://m.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_j7_2016-review-1453p5.php C7 is the clear winner in performance, and comparable in battery...ALL while running a 1080p screen vs the J7's 720p! As I said, I favor the 625 as the most efficient ;-)

66. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Alright, I told a fib. The only case where I'd judge a phone based on a single component is when the chipset has the word 'mediatek' in it! They're practically always very inefficient and/or have atrocious performance.

70. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

Same can be said about Qualcomm since they consume a lot of power and deliver less performance than all the other flagship chips.

73. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

...Except for mediatek :-)

79. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

Mediatek doesn't make flagship CPUs.

47. Lamzaza unregistered

If it's have 6gb of RAM OK but with 4gb and LG UX mmmm. V20 is use UFS 2.1 don't it wil go backwards to emmc 5.1?

57. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

Here comes the defender. I also have an 820 phone and battery life is good. But a 3000 mah phone should give at least 8-9 hour SoT. And I'm getting 6. You don't realize how bad the SoC is since you don't know how efficient good ones are. Take snapdragon s7 vs exynos. The snapdragon had pretty good battery but the exynos blows it out of water.

25. Mrmark

Posts: 383; Member since: Jan 26, 2013

Never satisfied.... 835 isn't out until may or June . So 821 is the current best Snapdragon

58. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

Then I would rather wait till then rather than regretting.

41. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

When you consider the $850 price tag that's gonna come on the S8, I wouldn't be complaining about $700. Especially since this is LG...Just wait 3-4 months and it'll be down to $550

59. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

For LG UI and an outdated CPU, I wouldn't pay more than 300$. Oneplus 4 will have 835 and will cost 400$.

65. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Not sure about that. I see a trend in the Android space, one where high end phones this year are all gonna increase in asking price. Including OnePlus. Every phone they create at the same level has increased over the years, and I expect the same from the next one. I expect a minimum of $450 for the 64GB version of the OnePlus 4. When you consider this, then yes, the LG is overpriced. But to consider any of the big names to them leads to the same conclusion to be honest.

71. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

These are just my opinion. I need a flagship chip in a phone in order to pay for it. And the best chip in a phone in order to pay more than 500$. You might not feel like it and it's fine by me. Just don't go around spreading false facts like the 821 is one of the best chips. It's the worst flagship chip right now since all 3 competitor chips are better.

75. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

I don't spend more than $500 on a phone, myself. I'm rocking a 3T as well. Really like it. May trade it for something like the OnePlus 4, Mate 9 Pro, G6 (depending on what they do with or if they come out with a supped up version), or possibly a Nokia. If you take into account all the mobile chips that are around, it does rank among the best. I would say it's the worst of the best, which still makes it good in my opinion. Also, you should practice what you preach. Don't go around saying it's CPU is "trash" and that it's power draw "sucks," when a number of OEMs are doing very well with it. Just because the big few are failing to optimize their software doesn't mean that you can't get good results from it.

80. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

Being the worst of the best makes it the worst. It's the worst flagship chip, that's it. There is no optimization to be done here. Samsung, Oneplus as well as a few others are struggling with battery life. The ones that do well( Xiaomi) use aggressive background killing as well as not allowing CPU to run on full speed. And even Xiaomi isn't getting very good results from it. It has a lot bigger battery than S7 edge and lower screen resolution, and it still has a lot lower battery life. You can't get good results from it since the CPU sucks a lot of power when under full load.

81. SYSTEM_LORD

Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Again, you're being a tad dramatic. Just look at the Mi5. Great life in a 5.2" with a 3K battery. I feel like a clock drop to about 1.8GHz to 2.0GHz on the big and 1.2GHz to 1.4GHz on the LITTLE could solve things while still maintaining fluidity could work. I will admit, I feel like the life could've been a bit better than they are under load, but everyone is chasing benchmark performance. So there's that. There are inherent advantages to Qualcomm chips that you're overlooking. Cellular modems perform the best. I would hate being on the clinical site and putting my phone away at 80% and taking back out mid shift and seeing 70% after doing mostly nothing. That eliminates any advantage you gain with a more efficient CPU/GPU. Then again, we really could blame Google for that. Even though I'm not a big installer of custom ROMs, for all those with mid range devices or those who get a buggy "update" dumped on them by their OEM/carrier, they have the option to install something else. This CANNOT be said said for Exynos or Kirin.

85. Tyrion_Lannister unregistered

mi5 doesn't have the regular 820. Underclocked and undervolted chips will obviously have great battery life. Same goes with pixel. Even at 90% load, an SoC will consume around only 60-70% of the peak power. That's why underclocking is so much better for battery life( power is proportional to v^2f. If you halve the voltage and frequency, the power consumption will drop 8 times with half the speed). I underclocked my oneplus 3 to 1.6 GHz and the battery life almost doubled. That doesn't count though. Yes, Qualcomm chips have advantages, but current intel modems are more efficient. Also regarding custom ROMs, no phone gets stable custom ROM nowadays since there are so many. The top phones for custom ROMs are still the Oneplus one and galaxy S3. I guess that says a lot about the state of custom ROMs. Not to mention Cyanogen shut down pretty hard.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.