Lumia 830 -v- iPhone 6 (mini comparison)

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
Okay, I understand what has been said however I am not seeing a huge difference in my use between the 2 processors. I will consider changing my mini comparison a little to reflect that on paper at least the iPhone has a top of the line processor.

I do not doubt that under heavy usage you would see a difference but I don't use my phones like that. I have a SP3 for heavy tasks.

The reason I evened out the score in that category is because while the iPhone has the faster processor the 830 has an SD card slot, a removable battery, glance, and double tap. I think these make up the points that the 830 looses in the processor area.
 

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
And OP calling iPhone 6 a mid level phone!!! It's not a valid end-to-end comparison TBH

I didn't say the iPhone 6 was a mid level phone, I said it has mid level specs..

1GB of RAM and a 750p screen is considered mid level specs, no? Because I believe they are and that's what the iPhone 6 has...
 
Last edited:

kristalsoldier

New member
Oct 23, 2013
593
0
0
Visit site
Most of this is a solid review, but the "specs" section is a travesty, IMO. I get that folks like the ability to add storage and swap batteries, but there was clearly nothing on a technical level applied to that part of the review. The Lumia 830 carries a low-end (well, a step above low-end, but not even mid-range) SoC, which has an overall set of parts behind that of the 2012 Snapdragon S4 in the 920. The iPhone 6, on the other hand, carries a top-notch SoC, and a 64-bit one, at that (offering better performance and hardware expansion long-term). Simply put, as much as Apple leans on its brand and overprices its products, the iPhone 6 legitimately carries high-end guts, even if the RAM quantity isn't the best. The SoC differences you don't discuss are likely why things seem snappier on iOS. Maybe part of it is slow animations from Windows Phone's tiles, but an inferior processor WILL cause apps to open more slowly, so it's certainly something to factor in.

Don't get me wrong, I'd never touch an iOS (or other Apple) device from a personal purchase standpoint, but these phones are not in the same class, in terms of their internals. The iPhone 6 carries high-end parts inside, while the Lumia 830 is a budget phone with a good camera.

If all budget phones were like the 830, the category of "budget phones" would have to be redefined! I think the 830 is a very good mid-level phone and is decently spec'd. Of course, it is not top of the line, but its functional capabilities as a "smart" phone are very good. The biggest problem, from my point of view, for the 830 is not even its SoC (MS had only two options here - either the S200 (which would have really made it into a budget phone) or the S800 (which would have clashed with the 930), but the Windows Phone app eco-system. As it currently stands, the 830 is more than capable of executing its tasks - within reason - well enough.

This leads me to observe one point that to me seems strange. If MS had kitted the 830 with a S800 SoC, leaving everything (yes, including the screen) as the way the 830 currently stands, do you think we would still be having this conversation? So, imagine the 830 with the S800 SoC and priced maybe US$50-75 more. Would that be a device that could viably compete against the iPhone 6?
 

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
Based on my usage of the 2 phones, the 830 is pretty darn even with the iPhone 6 in my actual day to day use.

As I stated I don't game but if someone wants to offer up a game that's on both platforms I will gladly download and compare them.

I generally change things up every few weeks. I have an iPhone 6 and a MacBook Pro. I also always have a Windows phone and my SP3. When using the iPhone I will exclusively use the MacBook and when using Windows phone I will exclusively use the SP3. Yes I am weird..

I'm not a big spec or benchmark person. I am sure we have all seen devices with high end specs and benchmarks but are horrible in real world use.. I base a phone off of my usage and how it performs under my usage. Many will consider my smartphone usage to be light.

If I were a heavy gamer or if I was processing large amounts of photos and videos then maybe I would notice the processor difference but I don't use my phones in this manor.

Anywho, if someone wants me to compare an app or a game that's available on both then let me know and I will give it a go..

I also updated the original post re: The processor
 
Last edited:

dharmababa

Member
Sep 22, 2012
83
0
6
Visit site
I bet a lot of people use phones more like you than push them really hard. Phones are starting to get fast enough for most users (as PCs did a while back) where we don't need big jumps anymore.

Which is what makes the 830 interesting. For it to compete in real world usage (thx for not bowing to spec wars in your comparison) and come in at $280 cheaper is pretty good. Unfortunately most people have the $280 hidden by contract subsidies and just want the safety of being in the iPhone club.

It will be interesting to see how long Apple can continue to ask for those prices (with no real lower end options) as more people move to unsubsidized plans.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
If all budget phones were like the 830, the category of "budget phones" would have to be redefined! I think the 830 is a very good mid-level phone and is decently spec'd. Of course, it is not top of the line, but its functional capabilities as a "smart" phone are very good. The biggest problem, from my point of view, for the 830 is not even its SoC (MS had only two options here - either the S200 (which would have really made it into a budget phone) or the S800 (which would have clashed with the 930), but the Windows Phone app eco-system. As it currently stands, the 830 is more than capable of executing its tasks - within reason - well enough.

This leads me to observe one point that to me seems strange. If MS had kitted the 830 with a S800 SoC, leaving everything (yes, including the screen) as the way the 830 currently stands, do you think we would still be having this conversation? So, imagine the 830 with the S800 SoC and priced maybe US$50-75 more. Would that be a device that could viably compete against the iPhone 6?

I guess it's true that if budget phones were built like the 830, they would redefine budget devices, but as the 830 is not priced as a budget device, it does not apply to that category. I'll agree, the 830 carries extras (camera, display) worthy of an "affordable flagship" moniker (not the true 20-MP camera and 1080p display of the high-end 930/1520), but its SoC is so poor (it loses out to the 2012 S4 inside the 820/920) that the "flagship" part of the title is killed. The pricing of it is so high that the "affordable" side is killed as well, leaving us with an awkward device that has the guts of a budget device, the extras of a near-flagship device, and the price of a true flagship. As for the app ecosystem, it doesn't cause me any meaningful fits, but I acknowledge that it still needs to get several popular apps published and running on the majority of devices.

Now, that points about the Snapdragon 800, it's one I definitely need to address. If the 830 carried the same SoC as the 930, it would earn the "affordable flagship" title. You mention a potential clash with the 930, but I disagree for two reasons:

1. The 930 is not available on the majority of U.S. carries, so that segment of the user base (myself included) wouldn't even have something to clash against. To us AT&T users, the 830 would legitimately look like a smaller version of the 1520, same as the 930 does internationally.
2. The 820 carried the 920's SoC without clashing with it. In fact, if you look at the differences between the 830 and the 930, EXCEPT THE SoC, they are almost identical to the things which separated the 820 and 920 when the launched. The 920 had a higher-resolution display and more initial storage. It had a unibody chassis with wireless charging built in. However, the 820 had microSD support, a removable battery and cover, which could allow for wireless charging. Does that sound familiar? It should, because those are the point-for-point differences between the 830 and 930. The one exception is on the camera, but the 8xx has a compromise from the 9xx class in each case, they're just different (the 820 had the same camera resolution as the 920, but not OIS; the 830's camera has the 930's OIS, but at a lower resolution).

If the 830 had the Snapdragon 800, the discussion of how Microsoft skimped on the SoC would obviously not exist, because the point wouldn't exist. If the 830 had a Snapdragon 800 (well, preferably an 801 or 805), I would have praised Microsoft for a serious "affordable flagship" to succeed the underrated 820, and I would probably be a proud 830 owner right now. However, I cannot convince myself to buy the 830 for the same price as the 920, when the 830 has as lower-resolution display and (the important part) a weaker SoC than the 2012 device I have now.

Here's the problem: As Microsoft has taken on the Lumia production, everything has screamed "budget." What has Microsoft announced since taking over Nokia's hardware division?

1. A Snapdragon 400-packing Lumia 830.
2. A Snapdragon 400-packing Lumia 730/735.
3. A Snapdragon 200-packing Lumia 535.

Before that, the last new device announced was ANOTHER Snapdragon 400 device, the Lumia 630/635 (The Lumia 930 was announced at the same time, but it was just an international Icon, which was announced 2 months before). It's been 9 months since we saw an announced flagship Windows Phone device, 7 months if you want to consider the re-announcement of the Icon as the international 930. While that time frame itself isn't bad, it looks horrid when you consider the announcement of 4 budget-class SoC devices since, and the lack of a single high-end device on AT&T, T-Mobile, or Sprint in over a year, with the niche Lumia 1520 (October 2013, AT&T exclusive) as the only announced high-end device. Before that, you would have to back it up all the way to the Lumia 1020 from July 2013 (which carried an SoC from early-2012) to find a high-end U.S. release.

On its face, the fact that we don't have a 930 successor is not worthy of a complaint, because it's not even a year old. Where it becomes moronic is AT&T (allegedly the lead WP carrier) never got the 930, and the only American 930 carrier (Verizon's Icon) has already EoLed its device. There are just too many Windows Phone budget devices being thrown out there, while the high-end Windows Phone devices are getting slaughtered by constant announcements from HTC, Samsung, LG, Apple, and even Google itself.

Basically, the loss of McLaren had killed the 2014 hopes of Windows Phone, and this insane waiting period to Windows 10 is looking like it will kill 2015 for the platform as well. I mean, it's to the point that a replacement for my 920 is so far off that I almost wish I had gotten the 1520 (which I didn't really want) on AT&T Next because I'd be due for another upgrade from that by the time we see a 940 or 1030 on AT&T.

I bet a lot of people use phones more like you than push them really hard. Phones are starting to get fast enough for most users (as PCs did a while back) where we don't need big jumps anymore.

Which is what makes the 830 interesting. For it to compete in real world usage (thx for not bowing to spec wars in your comparison) and come in at $280 cheaper is pretty good. Unfortunately most people have the $280 hidden by contract subsidies and just want the safety of being in the iPhone club.

It will be interesting to see how long Apple can continue to ask for those prices (with no real lower end options) as more people move to unsubsidized plans.

This seems like a rather wayward comparison. The off-contract difference between the 820 and iPhone 6 is $200, while the on-contract difference is $100. I agree that most can live on the Lumia 830's SoC just fine, but when you see that it's a downgrade from the 820's 2-year-old SoC, it becomes hard to accept it. Apple hits its lower-end segment by continuing to push its past 2 models (5C and 5S) at lower prices than before, and those devices actually carrier stronger internals than the 830 as well. So, when you stick the 830 against the same-priced 5S, the 5S has stronger internals. When you meet a comparable device, you're staring at the iPhone 5C, which is cheaper on-contract than the 830.

What's funny is that you mention the subsidies, but the iPhone is actually subsidized more than the Lumia. The same-priced 5C (both are $450 off-contract) is $100 less than the 830, while the $100 on-contract iPhone (the 5S) has a higher, $550 off-contract price. That's been a complaint from carriers for a while now, that they have to eat more money on Apple devices than the competition. Of course the majority of consumers will take the more-powerful device for the same price, especially when it is tagged with the holy Apple logo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
This seems like a rather wayward comparison. The off-contract difference between the 820 and iPhone 6 is $200.

You get a $100 Fitbit with the Lumia 830.. if you don't want the Fitbit then sell it. I got $80 for mine. The price difference is $200 on paper but you could easily sell that Fitbit for a minimum of $50 and maybe even get close to the full $100.

Since all other specs between the phones are equal then I guess that A8 chip is worth an extra $250-$300 to some [[shaking my head in disbelief]]

People buy iPhones because that is what they are pushed to as soon as they get one foot in the carrier door. If the reps took the time to show and explain Windows phones then more people would buy them..

What I find interesting is that all the negative comments about the 830 come from people who don't even own one.

If you are going to buy a phone based on specs then avoid the iPhone. It has 1GB of RAM and a 750p screen. These are mid range spaces in my book...
 
Last edited:

mddeckie

New member
Oct 14, 2014
18
0
0
Visit site
I just got my 830 today and switched from an iPhone 5. This Is my first windows phone and I've only owned iPhones. My first impressions are this is a great phone. I'm still getting used to the UI but I'm getting along! I was impressed with the transfer my data app it worked very well getting my contacts to my nee phone!
The screen on this phone is great and the 5" size is ideal! I've had no issues so far and will post more after I play with it some more
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
You get a $100 Fitbit with the Lumia 830.. if you don't want the Fitbit then sell it. I got $80 for mine. The price difference is $200 on paper but you could easily sell that Fitbit for a minimum of $50 and maybe even get close to the full $100.

Since all other specs between the phones are equal then I guess that A8 chip is worth an extra $250-$300 to some [[shaking my head in disbelief]]

People buy iPhones because that is what they are pushed to as soon as they get one foot in the carrier door. If the reps took the time to show and explain Windows phones then more people would buy them..

What I find interesting is that all the negative comments about the 830 come from people who don't even own one.

If you are going to buy a phone based on specs then avoid the iPhone. It has 1GB of RAM and a 750p screen. These are mid range spaces in my book...

To counter every point made:

1. The FitBit might net you some profit, but the iPhone will have a higher resale/trade value when you next upgrade. My mom got $250 for her iPhone 5S when she upgraded, while I might not be able to get that much for a Lumia 930, despite the fact that it's 6 months newer.

2. You're still throwing an asinine price that isn't in-line with the actual values. The Lumia is $100, minus $50 for the FitBit sale, so $50. The iPhone is $200. So, you're talking $150, not $250-$300. It's also not JUST the SoC, it's also getting a more mature OS with better application options (things which do not apply to me, but definitely will apply to others).

3. I find it incredibly dumb when people use the "you don't have one" argument to act like someone cannot know anything about the product. I don't need to own a Lumia 830 to see a benchmark comparison of the Snapdragon 400 and the Snapdragon S4. I don't need to own it to know that it will not meet my needs (an upgrade from my 920). Ownership does not beget knowledge. My family is full of iPhone users, yet I know more about the iPhone than pretty much all of them. I don't own a baseball team, but I can analyze a player's performance.

4. RAM isn't the end-all, be-all of hardware. If your applications don't need the extra RAM, then having it is irrelevant (where as you can ALWAYS benefit from a faster CPU, for the most part). I have 32 GB of RAM in my desktop, but I really don't ever go above 4 GB used. Sure, having 32 GB is great if I do something crazily RAM-dependent, but you can easily run a high-end PC with half the memory, and maybe even a quarter. The screen resolution, I'm torn on. Sure, it's not as great of a spec "check box," claiming a non-1080p display. However, with the level of pixel density on the device, you likely wouldn't notice much (if any) difference, if the device went up to 1080p. It's the same reason that I don't hold the 720p display of the Lumia 830 against it, when my Lumia 920 is a 768p (or something like that) resolution. However, the Lumia 830 skimps on the very core of the phone, which is why I hate it. It has a bunch of nice features, but when you announce it as a "flagship," then immediately announce that it's too weak to use a new feature (Hey, Cortana), then you're basically calling yourselves liars with the "flagship" tag, which is what Microsoft did.
 

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
To counter every point made:

1. The FitBit might net you some profit, but the iPhone will have a higher resale/trade value when you next upgrade. My mom got $250 for her iPhone 5S when she upgraded, while I might not be able to get that much for a Lumia 930, despite the fact that it's 6 months newer.

2. You're still throwing an asinine price that isn't in-line with the actual values. The Lumia is $100, minus $50 for the FitBit sale, so $50. The iPhone is $200. So, you're talking $150, not $250-$300. It's also not JUST the SoC, it's also getting a more mature OS with better application options (things which do not apply to me, but definitely will apply to others).

3. I find it incredibly dumb when people use the "you don't have one" argument to act like someone cannot know anything about the product. I don't need to own a Lumia 830 to see a benchmark comparison of the Snapdragon 400 and the Snapdragon S4. I don't need to own it to know that it will not meet my needs (an upgrade from my 920). Ownership does not beget knowledge. My family is full of iPhone users, yet I know more about the iPhone than pretty much all of them. I don't own a baseball team, but I can analyze a player's performance.

4. RAM isn't the end-all, be-all of hardware. If your applications don't need the extra RAM, then having it is irrelevant (where as you can ALWAYS benefit from a faster CPU, for the most part). I have 32 GB of RAM in my desktop, but I really don't ever go above 4 GB used. Sure, having 32 GB is great if I do something crazily RAM-dependent, but you can easily run a high-end PC with half the memory, and maybe even a quarter. The screen resolution, I'm torn on. Sure, it's not as great of a spec "check box," claiming a non-1080p display. However, with the level of pixel density on the device, you likely wouldn't notice much (if any) difference, if the device went up to 1080p. It's the same reason that I don't hold the 720p display of the Lumia 830 against it, when my Lumia 920 is a 768p (or something like that) resolution. However, the Lumia 830 skimps on the very core of the phone, which is why I hate it. It has a bunch of nice features, but when you announce it as a "flagship," then immediately announce that it's too weak to use a new feature (Hey, Cortana), then you're basically calling yourselves liars with the "flagship" tag, which is what Microsoft did.
Yawn..

1. Why are you trying to skew numbers? I got $80 for my Fitbit.

2. The 830 is an AT&T device and they push everyone to the Next Plan. Sure some are still under the old on contract option but not many I'd assume. I paid full price for my 830 as I did with the iPhone, it's how I roll as I don't want a contract and I don't want payments on their Next plan. My price difference between the 2 devices ended up at $280 after selling the Fitbit. Is it really that hard for you to understand the math?

3. Specs don't always relate to real world usage. Again, is this concept really that hard to comprehend? I actually have both phones and you don't have either so you are here in this thread for what purpose? The 830 does just fine and I am not noticing any difference in my day to day use. Can you understand that?

4. You said "RAM is irrelevant and I will always benefit from a faster CPU" LOL. Come on, now you are making yourself look bad.

See the screenshots below of my iPhone 6 RAM immediately after boot. As you can see there is not much available. Now what do you think happens when I start opening apps or want to multi task?

Anyway, for some very odd reason you've chosen this thread to play games. You don't have either device so your spec talk is meaningless since I am seeing no real world difference between the 2 devices.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0002.jpg
    IMG_0002.jpg
    71.1 KB · Views: 11
  • IMG_0001.jpg
    IMG_0001.jpg
    55.4 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:

apinkel

New member
Dec 13, 2012
26
0
0
Visit site
I took my 820 (the processor is roughly the same speed as the one in the 830) and opened a couple web pages on an iPhone 6 and my phone.

The load times were virtually identical.

The point I'm making (and the one that has been made throughout this thread) is that in real world usage the 830 does give the iPhone 6 a run for it's money despite the huge disparity in benchmark results and price.

That said, I would never call the iPhone 6 anything less than top of the line in performance, design, platform features, stability, etc.. The fact that a midrange phone can compete with a top of the line phone so well in day to day use is incredibly impressive to me.
 

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
I took my 820 (the processor is roughly the same speed as the one in the 830) and opened a couple web pages on an iPhone 6 and my phone.

The load times were virtually identical.

The point I'm making (and the one that has been made throughout this thread) is that in real world usage the 830 does give the iPhone 6 a run for it's money despite the huge disparity in benchmark results and price.

That said, I would never call the iPhone 6 anything less than top of the line in performance, design, platform features, stability, etc.. The fact that a midrange phone can compete with a top of the line phone so well in day to day use is incredibly impressive to me.

I get where some can't fathom a Lumia 830 competing with the iPhone 6. On a paper spec sheet maybe it can't which is the opinion of some and it's based solely on the processor.

However, in real world and in day to day actual usage the Lumia 830 does impressively well against the iPhone 6.. Of course if someone is simply looking at a spec sheet they will never understand this..
 
Last edited:

dharmababa

Member
Sep 22, 2012
83
0
6
Visit site
I think we can all agree that the 830 is a horrible deal under contract. If you are going the contract route, the only thing that makes sense is to get the most expensive device possible.

But my experience has been the same as raqball's: AT&T pushed me towards a mobile share value plan which was surprising because it lowered my bill by just under $100 on 4 lines. That works out to a $600 subsidy per line over 2 years which obviously doesn't make send if the device isn't even worth $600 :)

In my case, I got a new 830 off eBay with no Fitbit for $360 no tax. An iPhone 6 is $710 after tax new. Not a completely fair comparison (I didn't look for new iPhone 6's on eBay) but in my case I saved ~$350 over 2 years, minus some time value of money if I would have used the Next plan.
 

BCH

New member
Oct 18, 2010
58
0
0
Visit site
To counter every point made:

3. I find it incredibly dumb when people use the "you don't have one" argument to act like someone cannot know anything about the product. I don't need to own a Lumia 830 to see a benchmark comparison of the Snapdragon 400 and the Snapdragon S4. I don't need to own it to know that it will not meet my needs (an upgrade from my 920). Ownership does not beget knowledge. My family is full of iPhone users, yet I know more about the iPhone than pretty much all of them. I don't own a baseball team, but I can analyze a player's performance.

I owned a Lumia 920 for two years before upgrading to the at&t variant 830. The 830 is a much quicker phone in use. Period. It suffers none of the lag that my 920 experienced using Xbox Music (which feels like a legitimate 5-star app on the 830 with XBM Pass), and it does not have trouble populating live tiles on the start screen when switching out of apps, like the 920 experienced when running 4 or more apps. The 830 does this while having better battery life and no overheating issues. A computer's performance is dictated by the sum of the parts, and you can't tell how fast a computer will be merely by comparing processor specs. I don't know WHY the 830 is a far superior phone, but the proof is in the use.
 

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
I did take a few photos but they came out horrible. The only other device I had to use I had to dig out of a closet and it's a Galaxy S2 Skyrocket (or something like that).

If anyone wants, I will post them, but they are kind of, well.. BAD!

I'm still rockin the 830 and its still just as impressive as my original thoughts on it..
 

theefman

Active member
Nov 14, 2008
3,979
5
38
Visit site
Amazing how people just cant let this phone have ANY credit at all and are so fixated on the CPU spec.....

OP, for your bad pictures, what condition were the pictures taken in? Wouldn't expect anything less than 920 level quality at least.
 

raqball

New member
Aug 27, 2014
209
0
0
Visit site
Amazing how people just cant let this phone have ANY credit at all and are so fixated on the CPU spec.....

OP, for your bad pictures, what condition were the pictures taken in? Wouldn't expect anything less than 920 level quality at least.

To my eye they are pretty bad.. The S2 is dead so I will charge it and access the photos. The S2 has a cracked screen and a hairline crack on the camera lens (it's my sons old phone)

Yeah, I don't get it either but then again none of them have an 830 and decide which phone to buy off a spec sheet I guess...
 
Last edited:

nessinhaw

New member
Mar 16, 2013
367
0
0
Visit site
well, to me pics look great '-' specially low light performance!

i would attach some pics directly, since i'm posting from the Phone but idk if the original quality wont be lowered down
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
322,901
Messages
2,242,866
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb