x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE Review

Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE 8

Posted: , by


Call quality and Battery:

Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE Review
Callers were impressed with the Galaxy Victory, saying we were clear and without any echo, though they complained we sounded a bit nasally. Still, they said its one of the better phones we’ve tested and gave us an 8.5/10. In general callers sounded good to us as well, though the earpiece was almost too loud, causing some distortion even when set to lower volumes. The speakerphone was plenty loud, but suffered from the same distortion to a lesser degree. We didn’t have any problems understanding callers. The hefty 2100mAh battery is rated for just 7 hours of talk time, but should be enough to get most users through a full day of usage.


The Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE does a good job of bringing a lot of the functionality and features of the Galaxy S III while remaining more affordable. With a good camera, a nice display and speedy performance the Galaxy Victory offers a lot of value. It may not be as sexy as its big brother, but for $100 on contract you could do a lot worse.

Android 4.0.4
Build IMM76D.L300VPALH1

Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE Review:


  • Dual-core S4 processor delivers speedy performance
  • The 5 megapixel camera produces better than expected results
  • 4” WVGA display is bright and crisp


  • Hefty, even for a mid-range device
PhoneArena rating:
8 Good
User rating:
5.7 3 Reviews

  • Options

posted on 21 Sep 2012, 10:20 1

1. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4278; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

Brian...is it that my browser is having a problem or you forgot to mention about the video playback and codec supported by the phone?
Looks nice though chubby...and what's different here, a thing that i liked, is the absence of the Samsung signatured rectangular physical home key...was wondering when Samsung would keep that button away.

posted on 21 Sep 2012, 13:22 2

2. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)

HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA...............8? an 8??? and to think i just got done reading Daniels review on the Xperia T and he gave it an 8 as well...........i just wanna say this, these reviews by PA are just as opinionated as our very own reviews......to blatanly give this "low" end phone a 8 (yes low end, 4 inch "W" VGA not even qHD screen, bad design, and 5 mp shooter) REEEALY goes to show you that it does indeed boil down to wether "YOU" like and are satisfied with the phone of your choice....My only problem is when you do this, give opinionated reviews, and then rate it unjustly, it makes people SHY away from the device because they feel its not enough or they can do better........not trying to be rude, but their is no way in hell you are going to give this particular phone an 8, while great phones like the Photon Q, the Xperia T, and even the Galaxy S Relay, An 8 and UNDER! this phone should have gotten what some one here gave the Photon Q.......A 7! or to be honest......A 6.5.......based on bad design, under par screen, and low pixel density alone........good day phone arena

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 00:27 1

3. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3776; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

You're looking at it entirely wrong. You can't compare high-end devices to low-end devices. If that was how it was done, then all low-end devices would receive scores in the 1-3 range compared to the Galaxy S3s of the world. Devices receive scores based only on how other devices in their own range perform. That's the way it's done.

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 00:32 1

4. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3776; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

Now, that being said, the review score for this phone certainly does seem a little high.

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 01:07

5. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)

lol......there are NO catergories as far as i know.....the ratings seem to be an "overall" rating for every phone here....

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 04:37

6. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4278; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

Can i blame it on the Galaxy SIII-esque look of it?? Just a question...

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 05:32 1

7. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3776; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

I only say that because I remember specifically reading it somewhere on this site after thinking the same thing a few times. It makes sense when you think about it. There's just no way to review a phone like this on the same scale as a top of the line, flagship device. I tried to find where I read it, but I couldn't. :-\

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 12:41 1

9. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)

yea i agree it makes sense but just know that if it confused people like you and me, then its doing it to others as well.....

posted on 23 Sep 2012, 14:24 1

10. KFear (Posts: 145; Member since: 06 Feb 2012)

I agree too. They don't rate them on the same scale as the big daddies. For a mid-range device, aside from it's size and weight, it's pretty gosh darn good!

posted on 24 Sep 2012, 10:44 1

11. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3776; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

Found it!


posted on 25 Sep 2012, 05:14

14. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 4278; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

Yay!! :D

posted on 24 Sep 2012, 20:31

12. Doakie (Posts: 2227; Member since: 06 May 2009)


posted on 24 Sep 2012, 20:44 1

13. Doakie (Posts: 2227; Member since: 06 May 2009)

You know I read your comment and tried to view things your way, but I just don't see the logic. You're fully dismissing this phone due to "low screen resolution" and a 5 MP shooter... If you compare this to Sprints closest offering from Apple, last years iPhone 4S the Galaxy Victory isn't really that bad. Let's go down the list, this is a feature/spec comparison. I'm not going to argue which voice assistant or video chat is better, simply if it has certain features.

Price: Victory (Victory $49 at Amazon vs iPhone $99 at Sprint)

Overall size: iPhone

Screen size: Victory

Screen resolution & technology: iPhone

Battery: Victory (User swappable vs fixed)

Processor/RAM: Tie (Both run smooth, neither is overly laggy)

Storage: Victory (User swappable vs fixed)

Camera: iPhone

Camcorder: iPhone

Video chat: Tie (Google Talk vs FaceTime)

Voice Assistant: Tie (S Voice vs Siri)

LTE: Victory

NFC: Victory

The Galaxy Victory isnt a bad device for sub $100. In fact it gives you plenty of new tech features for a price that is cheaper than last year's tech. I agree that the Photon Q should have gotten a higher score, but to dismiss the Victory due to low PPI and a design you deem as bad seems very close minded.

posted on 22 Sep 2012, 10:10

8. satanrules (Posts: 19; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)

Samsung's back cover's never fail to disappoint.

posted on 03 Dec 2012, 14:53 1

15. mzhelaineous (Posts: 1; Member since: 03 Dec 2012)

The problem with these so-called reviews, is that the feedback is more confusing than the review! I just ordered this phone as it was a "free" phone on the Sprint plan for a Christmas
special. I live on a very limited income so I got what I could afford. The reviews aren't sparkling, but as a free phone, I didn't expect it to be a phone equivalent to a high-end phone. However, I started reading the feedback, and to my horror, I now wonder if this phone will even be functional when I get it. I hope people who leave feedback can be more sensitive to other consumers with limited incomes who get these phones because we "have" to rather than want to and perhaps offer some positive feedback occasionally.
Just my humble opinion.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Display4.0 inches, 480 x 800 pixels (233 ppi) LCD
Camera5 megapixels
Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Lite, Dual-core, 1200 MHz
Size4.80 x 2.50 x 0.50 inches
(121.9 x 63.5 x 12.7 mm)
4.9 oz  (139 g)
Battery2100 mAh, 7 hours talk time

Latest stories