Nokia 808 PureView vs Samsung Galaxy S III

The Nokia 808 PureView has the smartphone camera we've all been waiting for, and the Samsung Galaxy S III is probably the most hyped and popular Android phone this year.

If you are considering those two for one reason or another, we are pitting both devices against each other to see what's what and help you choose.

Can the blazing fast Samsung Galaxy S III with its thin, light design and beautiful 4.8” HD display drop out of anyone's wish list for the chubby kid Nokia 808 PureView with a beautiful 41MP soul? Read on our quick comparison to find out...


The Samsung Galaxy S III is undoubtedly a leap forward in chassis design, considering the internals it sports and the huge display it is accommodating. The compact body that is less than 9mm thin makes the Nokia 808 PureView look like, well, we'll say it again, Quasimodo in comparison. Not only does it have a large hump on top of the 14mm thick body, but the bar underneath the screen where the navigational keys are, and the coarse plastic of the body make it look like any of the army of Symbian handsets of years past.

It does feel more solid than the Galaxy S III, though, which is very light, and is easier to operate with one hand thanks to the smaller display. Yet Samsung's phone also has a microSD slot, removable battery and HDMI-out capabilities, so the 808 PureView can't even muster an advantage in expandability, so the design part clearly goes to the Galaxy S III.


The only slight advantage the Nokia 808 PureView 4” AMOLED screen has before the 4.8” Super AMOLED of the Galaxy S III is that it appears brighter thanks to the ClearBlack anireflective layer Nokia has put on top. In everything else, like colors and especially resolution, the 4.8-incher beats the 808 PureView screen by a huge margin.

The 360x640 resolution typical for Nokia Belle handsets makes for a lousy pixel density on this size, whereas the 720x1280 pixels on the Galaxy S III make for crisp and distinct imagery, regardless of the PenTile pixel matrix used compared to the regular RGB on the 808 PureView. Viewing angles are comparable on both handsets, as in very good, but the color gamut appears way more tame on the Galaxy S III, when placed next to the 808 PureView, where the reds can easily turn eye-piercing at full brightness.

Nokia 808 PureView 360-Degrees View:

Samsung Galaxy S III 360-Degrees View:



1. andro.

Posts: 1999; Member since: Sep 16, 2011

Its always going to be the case that the likes of the s3 would massively outcasts the 808 in every aspect except the camera. The 808 isn't being picked up by carriers so for a phone of its type and a price of 400+ bucks it'll sell only to a very small niche group of people,you themselves will be quite happy with the device no doubt. After being talking to a Nokia rep recently who was saying preview was years in development for symbian only and that it will not be compatible with wp for the foreseeable future you wonder is it future money and r&d times ultimately lost again by Nokia as the resultant end sales income will be quite small.

17. Extraneus

Posts: 121; Member since: Jun 02, 2012

"and that it will not be compatible with wp for the foreseeable future" The opposite of what Nokia has officially announced: The Pureview tech will be incorporated into the coming WP8 devices, expected sometime this fall...


Posts: 5; Member since: Jul 03, 2012

This review seems of no help as everybody knows Galaxy S3 is superior to Nokia 808 in every aspect except the camera dept......Just waste of time .....

12. bbblader

Posts: 590; Member since: Oct 24, 2011

well yes but I would still pick the 808 to have than the s3 I need that kind of cameraphone right now but if the s3 had the same camera of course I would choose the s3 but the luckyest people are the ones that want both and have both

81. Jaris

Posts: 3; Member since: Jul 12, 2012

Indeed this is like comparing apples to oranges. Yet, I still bought the Nokia 808 due to its superior camera. Galaxy 3 did not offer anything special over iphone 4S that I had, but Nokia 808 sure did. The camera is awesome, nothing you have ever seen in mobile devices. And the latest Symbian Belle OS is fairly good and in many respect as good as ios or anroid. Ok maybe you cannot load all the hundred thousand apps, but who needs all of them anyway.


Posts: 3131; Member since: Jan 12, 2010

Nokia needs to make a windows mobile phone put of this and maybe then consider. But I'll take the SGS3 over this any day of the week, it's camera is excellent as well.

4. imran_khan0786

Posts: 61; Member since: Jun 21, 2012

My friends using s3 worst camera in s3 than he take 808 superb camera and performance wise also too good. Its just a single core but its perfect working. Don't wast money in Samsung. Better to wait. And take i5.

11. SleepingOz unregistered

Cool story bro!


Posts: 3131; Member since: Jan 12, 2010

Lmao good one troll you must be blind if you think the SGS3 has the worst camera ever and even more blind if you think this Nokia phone has smooth performance. Look at the simply sliding through home screens it lags like crazy. Keep trolling tho Nokia fanboy, the truth hurts I know.

71. OptimusOne

Posts: 694; Member since: May 22, 2012

man iphone camera is worse

86. cootbtyt

Posts: 1; Member since: Jul 29, 2012

Have you tried belle fp1 before? I know sgs3 is much faster, but it doesn't mean that belle fp1 is laggy :/

87. mancom

Posts: 1; Member since: Aug 10, 2012

well maybe nokia 808 has the advantage on the camera but who care's? samsung has the clear advantage on all aspects. right now a lot of user already switch to samsung why? because of it's superb performance compare it to the lousy nokia symbian unit

5. sid07desai

Posts: 290; Member since: May 03, 2012

Galaxy S3: Phone and UI (Android) 9/10; Camera 7.5/10 Pureview 808: Phone experience (Symbian) 5/10; Camera 9.5/10

7. Birds

Posts: 1172; Member since: Nov 21, 2011

I agree. Nokia 808 gets basic phone needs done but the camera is amazing. The GSIII gets basic phone needs done with many luxuries along the way with a pretty decent camera.

16. rnk.khch

Posts: 86; Member since: Jan 30, 2012

Isn't the 808 camera 20/10?!!!

21. SleepingOz unregistered

No, it isn't. Still the best camera featured on a phone but far from being as good as a LEICA.

22. rnk.khch

Posts: 86; Member since: Jan 30, 2012

Well first of all, the point is how smartphone cameras compare with each other!! Second of all, Nokia 808 PureView ties with the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, the knig of DSLR. It' the first example of the new PureView technology, and the future would see dumping of all traditional camera technologies, such as leica, in favor of PureView.

23. SleepingOz unregistered

Still 9.5 is the right score! 10/10 would be perfection but as we all know perfection doesn't exist. Now talking about 20/10, sounds so BIASED!(and that's probably the case) "Nokia 808 PureView ties with the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, the knig of DSLR." Really?????? And FYI, EOS 5D ain't no king of DSLR. It's not even the best of the EOS series. "and the future would see dumping of all traditional camera technologies, such as leica, in favor of PureView." ROFLMAO! You should do some research before stating such crap, bro! no kidding!

24. rnk.khch

Posts: 86; Member since: Jan 30, 2012

I have done my research!! Can you illuminate us as to what the king of DSLR is? Here is the web address of the canon EOS series. (​et/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_12164). Where is the one you think is better than Mark III in the EOS series?!!! Have you even seen the shots taken by Nokia 808 PureView?!! Do you even know what you are talking about?!! The point of 20/10 was to say that no other smartphone camera can even come close to Nokia 808 PureView in terms of picture of video quality. I don't know how you mesured this to be 9.5!!! Maybe you can illuminate the world on that too!!

31. BiN4RY

Posts: 83; Member since: Jun 22, 2012

"Nokia 808 PureView ties with the Canon EOS 5D Mark III" lmao

77. Killer_Instinct

Posts: 22; Member since: Jun 26, 2012


6. steelicon

Posts: 318; Member since: Apr 02, 2011

As far as connectivity goes, the Samsung Galaxy S III calls everything that the Nokia 808 PureView offers but FM transmittance, and raises with 21Mbps 4G and Wi-Fi Direct. It is not pentaband, though, so you have to get the special version for T-Mobile in the US if you subscribe to that carrier, for example. You forgot to mention 3.5mm AV out to SD TV, standard microHDMI instead of MHL, Offline Maps, Offline GPS, Offline Navigation, Offline Voice Command, Offline Voice Dial.

8. B3BLW29

Posts: 238; Member since: Mar 02, 2012

Wait till Pureview comes on WP8. A fair comparison would be WP8(With pureview) against GS 3 or anything new in android.

9. PhoneArenaUser

Posts: 5498; Member since: Aug 05, 2011

"Nokia 808 PureView vs Samsung Galaxy S III" In my opinion Samsung Galaxy S III is the winner.

14. SleepingOz unregistered

No contest!

18. Extraneus

Posts: 121; Member since: Jun 02, 2012

That really depends on your needs...


Posts: 3131; Member since: Jan 12, 2010

If you want the best camera, buy a camera. If you one one of the best cell phones money can buy with a great camera for a phone, get the SGS3. I'm sorry but other than its camera this phone is crap. Needs WM OS at least.

10. ajac09

Posts: 1482; Member since: Sep 30, 2009

next they will do Nokia 808 vs a piece of trash trash still wins

13. bbblader

Posts: 590; Member since: Oct 24, 2011

since when did the iphone 4s win the last time?

15. Dark4o90

Posts: 205; Member since: Feb 20, 2011

just useless comparison i won't give 6 or $700 dollars for a camera S3 is way better if i want a camera i'll bye one for $300 or even less

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

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 or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.