Official Lumia 830 specs+info - it's here!

[Jorge Holguin]

Uhh, I understand this. What you obviously didn't read in my post is that I currently own a 920. For someone getting a first phone, or a first Windows Phone, the 830 will be great. It will not, however, be faster or an upgrade from a 920, which I think a lot of people here (who are just now coming off 2 year contracts with AT&T from a 920) were hoping for.

I owned a 920, 925 and 635 trust me the first two of my list I believe are two of the best WP ever released. But I believe the 830 is great is no a high end as someone above mentioned already but is a great mid-end phone. So I was thinking [ the 930, 1520 or buy the unlocked Icon] well I was waiting for the 1520 replacement and I don't think is coming this yr so, the 830 it is. Unless MS surprise me before the holidays

Maybe what DR was referencing was a separate, US-only, AT&T/T-Mobile compatible version of the 830 with a bigger camera and improved processor. . .right? Right? I have a hard time believing that WPC wouldn't tip us off to the fact that the 730 and 830 aren't coming to the US at all.

​/straws

According to MS they are all coming globally a month from now, unless I got that wrong as well

 

[chuck232]

The Lumia 830 is now listed on the Nokia USA site, with a notify-me option.

Nokia Lumia 830 - Slim Stylish Smartphone with Windows - Nokia - USA

The Lumia 735 is also there. I'm feeling reasonably confident they'll both show up here, in time for the holidays.

 

[The Lard]

Where are you all getting that it's Dual Core? The Nokia product page says it's Snapdragon 400 Quad Core 1.2 GHz

Nice name.

I owned a 920, 925 and 635 trust me the first two of my list I believe are two of the best WP ever released.

It's true, the 920 is a fecking superb phone, despite the fact that mine's an early one and the FFC is therefore full of dust. Built like a tank too - I accidentally lobbed it down an isle in the supermarket the other day and there's barely a mark on it.

 

[hasasimo]

Where are you all getting that it's Dual Core? The Nokia product page says it's Snapdragon 400 Quad Core 1.2 GHz

Source: nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia830/specifications/

Yeah I noticed that too. I was getting my info from the actual Qualcomm website which says that the SD400 has a dual-core CPU compared to the 800's quad-core CPU: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/processors/comparison

 

[chuck232]

Yeah I noticed that too. I was getting my info from the actual Qualcomm website which says that the SD400 has a dual-core CPU compared to the 800's quad-core CPU: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/processors/comparison

Ah, yes, they listed the higher performing part from the Snapdragon 400 family, a dual core, Krait 300, 1.7GHz part (8x30AB) as opposed to the part many entry-mid range devices use, which is the 8x26 series, quad core, Cortex-A7s.

 

[Keith Wallace]

Yeah, because it won't top it.

We'll see more ignorant cheering due to it being a quad core and we'll be presented with the usual meaningless Basemark II numbers, but the more technical websites will all show this underperforming, even when compared to its own two year old predecessor (Lumia 820).

You can maybe call this high end if you consider only its features, like OIS, Qi charging, ClearBlack display and such. Maybe that is how MS rationalizes their high end classification, but the SoC definitely isn't.

On the other hand, the 730 looks to be a really sweet deal, as it appears to be very similar in most aspects except the camera.

I'd call all of that a generous assessment. Yeah, it's got Qi, but it'll get stripped out on AT&T. Yeah, it's ClearBlack, but the resolution is inferior. Yeah, it's got OIS, but the camera resolution suffers (10-MP isn't a high-end camera resolution, and 720p certainly isn't a high-end display resolution). The core components of the phone are mediocre at best, equivalent to the low-end Mini devices Samsung and HTC throw out without any major media coverage. The idea of getting a phone running low-end hardware, then being locked into it for 2 years, is just dreadful.

Honestly, if you don't have huge gaming expectations, I don't think there is a rational reason to worry about the CPU in this device. The problem with that statement is that humans aren't rational beings.

When we buy a new device, we want it to be an upgrade over what we already had. Unfortunately, as far as the CPU is concerned, this isn't an upgrade over what you had in your 820. That is the problem. This won't be important to everyone, but for those of us who are interested in computing technology and view the CPU/GPU as the heart of any computing device, that is a bit of a let down.

For me personally this is a pretty good device and I'll likely end up getting it anyway (mainly because I'm not thrilled with the 930 and even less so with the 1520). However, if I was on a budget, then I'd be taking a very close look at the 730 to determine if it doesn't also do the job just as well.

I think it's totally rational to say that spending a bunch of money on a new phone should mean an improvement. Why would I go sign a new 2-year contract to get an inferior device? Like was said, many of us who are upset with this device are folks almost ready to upgrade from the Lumia 920 on AT&T. Why would I jump at the chance to lock myself into a phone with a lower resolution, no wireless charging (because AT&T strips Qi charging out of everything), a SoC that likely won't be a meaningful improvement, and less on-board storage? I'm not crazy about using a camera like a professional, so improved OIS and 1.3 MP of resolution doesn't compare to all of the things I'd lose in an upgrade. I don't think that's an irrational analysis in any way, and I think it's the stance many of us have taken--why sign up for a new contract for less than what we got 2 years ago?

Honestly, I don't know why you'd take the 830 over the 930 though. The price difference will likely be small, and you'd be doubling the resolution of the display, doubling the resolution of the camera, doubling the built-in storage (though losing the microSD support), and you'd get a top-end CPU that will significantly improve performance. For what I expect will be $100 more, I'd definitely go 930 over 830.

It's too bad they announced Hey Cortana! for S800 today. . .it's kind of blunting my excitement on this a little. I'm not spec driven, but announcing a really cool feature at the same time as you announce a phone that is too underpowered to get it is bound to cast a bit of a pall over the whole thing.

Battery life on my 920 is diving off a cliff, so here's the question: wait another 6 months for 20nm, 64-bit, futureproofing? Or bite now on a beautiful, affordable phone that has few quantitative improvements over the one I've got?

I'm in the camp of waiting until we get a 1020 refresh, I think. That might mean a 6-month wait, might mean more. However, if you're not totally against HTC, their One M8 basically carries all of the desired specs for a true 830 successor and/or a non-Verizon Icon.

I owned a 920, 925 and 635 trust me the first two of my list I believe are two of the best WP ever released. But I believe the 830 is great is no a high end as someone above mentioned already but is a great mid-end phone. So I was thinking [ the 930, 1520 or buy the unlocked Icon] well I was waiting for the 1520 replacement and I don't think is coming this yr so, the 830 it is. Unless MS surprise me before the holidays

I don't get the bad sales pitch that the 830 is a mid-range phone. By Lumia standards, the display and camera are mid-range. The SoC is low-end. The Snapdragon 600 would be the mid-range, while this is a class below it. The phone's core components are low-end, while its extra stuff is mid-range, which means I'd call it low-mid, with a noticeable lean towards low.

 

[a5cent]

I'd call all of that a generous assessment. Yeah, it's got Qi, but it'll get stripped out on AT&T. Yeah, it's ClearBlack, but the resolution is inferior. Yeah, it's got OIS, but the camera resolution suffers (10-MP isn't a high-end camera resolution, and 720p certainly isn't a high-end display resolution). The core components of the phone are mediocre at best, equivalent to the low-end Mini devices Samsung and HTC throw out without any major media coverage. The idea of getting a phone running low-end hardware, then being locked into it for 2 years, is just dreadful.

I know. I'm just trying to figure out how Nokia might be viewing this device as opposed to how many of us see it. Looking at one of Rubino's posts from this morning and how he wrote it, it seems Nokia may have focused more on what could be called a feature list, rather than a more technical specs list:

• supports SensorCore for your fitness/motion tracking
• has DolbyDigital sound enhancement
• readability outdoors is better than on almost any other non Nokia phone and it's got a very high quality display with good colour, brightness and contrast characteristics
• it's the only phone in it's class with OIS, and it's the thinnest phone with OIS bare none
• etc.

Those things are important, and as Rubino mentioned, easy to explain to anybody. I think he may be on to something. It's a pretty decent list considering the price.

The only thing directly wrong with the device is the marketing message. Being dubbed an affordable high-end device, it should have had at least one spec that looks like it belongs in that class. Instead they've now got everyone looking for the high-end specs where there are none. It does have some high end features however...

I suspect that a huge part of the disappointment is attributable to the fact that many non-Verizon customers have their Lumia 920 contracts expiring soon. Many of us really wanted this phone to offer a viable upgrade path. Unfortunately it doesn't, and considering the introductory price of $440, it was never meant to. Yes, that sucks, but that doesn't automatically make this a bad phone. It's just not what soon-to-be-upgraders (for whom a 1520 isn't desirable and who can't get a L930 or HTC One) were hoping for.

 

[a5cent]

I think it's totally rational to say that spending a bunch of money on a new phone should mean an improvement.

Nobody is forcing you to spend money on this phone if you already have a Lumia 920. I completely agree that would be a little stupid. The fact that this device isn't positioned to be a viable upgrade to a 920 doesn't make this device any worse however. It may have made your upgrade-situation worse, or more precisely, it failed to improve it, but that doesn't mean that this isn't a decent device for the price.

Honestly, I don't know why you'd take the 830 over the 930 though. The price difference will likely be small, and you'd be doubling the resolution of the display, doubling the resolution of the camera, doubling the built-in storage (though losing the microSD support), and you'd get a top-end CPU that will significantly improve performance. For what I expect will be $100 more, I'd definitely go 930 over 830.

I think I can make a good argument on that, so I do have my reasons, but I'll leave that for another time when I'm less tired :wink:

 

[Keith Wallace]

To take that all in at once, I'd say yes and no to Daniel's points. Just to go through that whole feature set from the perspective of my sister, a common user looking to replace her 822...

SensorCore: Why give up a FitBit for SensorCore? What is the selling point on that feature over the fitness trackers so many average users already have? My sister likes her FitBit One, and I don't see anything thoroughly explain SensorCore in a way that shows it as not only an alternative to a typical fitness tracker, but an improvement on it. On the general level, why SensorCore over S Health, and what about Apple, the king of marketing a gimmick as more than it is? It doesn't seem like Microsoft is meaningfully focused on this feature, given the lack of media coverage.

Dolby Digital: What does this do for the music? All my sister cares about is that the music plays when she wants it. When talking high-end audio branding, Beats is the brand that sells, and Apple has that. On top of that, who in the mainstream will own headphones to pick up the subtleties this might offer, and who in the crowd will honestly care? I mean, I like having the equalizer in my 920, but I could easily live without it.

Sunlight Readability: Good to have, but as soon as you compare it to "non-Lumia" offerings, I both wonder how this feature stacks up against the apps/features missing in the 830, as well as why this feature matters to the 820 upgrade crowd (let alone the 920), since this already exists on the older devices.

OIS: The masses won't know this much. They won't care what it means, and it's why Apple and Samsung are able to easily get away with inferior cameras--the masses (who you're trying to market this for) don't have high standards.

Honestly, my disappointment isn't even in upgrading from the 920. It's that this is named and marketed as an 810/820/822 successor, and it's hard to even argue that point. It's like an 820 with a batter camera and a couple of minor features, and that's not going to be enough to convince users to sign up for 2 years of what will essentially be the same phone from 2012 that they want to replace. On a personal level, my disappointment is in the lack of effort in pushing boundaries with Windows Phone, and the overall lack of quality devices. I wasn't going to go from the 920 to the 830, but I was at least hoping to see Microsoft show us some real commitment to being a hardware manufacturer. Instead, I'm left staring at two phones which are somewhat redundant (730/830) and marketed as more than what they are. That just gives me a bad taste in my mouth looking forward to my upgrade because not only is there a near-future device to wait on, but I'm also unsure that there will be something to move towards in the future because Microsoft looks so uncommitted to giving us high-end hardware.

 

[Squachy]

I know. I'm just trying to figure out how Nokia might be viewing this device as opposed to how many of us see it. Looking at one of Rubino's posts from this morning and how he wrote it, it seems Nokia may have focused more on what could be called a feature list, rather than a more technical specs list:

• supports SensorCore for your fitness/motion tracking
• has DolbyDigital sound enhancement
• readability outdoors is better than on almost any other non Nokia phone and it's got a very high quality display with good colour, brightness and contrast characteristics
• it's the only phone in it's class with OIS, and it's the thinnest phone with OIS bare none
• etc.

Those things are important, and as Rubino mentioned, easy to explain to anybody. I think he may be on to something. It's a pretty decent list considering the price.

The only thing directly wrong with the device is the marketing message. Being dubbed an affordable high-end device, it should have had at least one spec that looks like it belongs in that class. Instead they've now got everyone looking for the high-end specs where there are none. It does have some high end features however...

I suspect that a huge part of the disappointment is attributable to the fact that many non-Verizon customers have their Lumia 920 contracts expiring soon. Many of us really wanted this phone to offer a viable upgrade path. Unfortunately it doesn't, and considering the introductory price of $440, it was never meant to. Yes, that sucks, but that doesn't automatically make this a bad phone. It's just not what soon-to-be-upgraders (for whom a 1520 isn't desirable and who can't get a L930 or HTC One) were hoping for.

To be honest that featurelist doesn't appear to be all that 'oh wow' high end....its pretty much almost standard fare across the board.

in regards to an upgrade path...The upgrade path of a 920 should be the 930 and anything higher. High end for high end.
If you go high end to lower end (say 830 or 730) you either realize your requirements aren't that high to begin with or you are side-grading at best. Its not going to be any better or worse (or it could actually be worse) than what you have now.

 

[a5cent]

To be honest that feature list doesn't appear to be all that 'oh wow' high end....its pretty much almost standard fare across the board.

Daniel's or mine? Either way, I've already said multiple times that I think the device lacks marketability at $400. Agreed. Still, when looking at the things I mentioned, I don't think those are standard fare at $400. Particularly when the device has a first for its class (OIS). Those features may not be worth much to you, fine, but maybe to others? At the very least, I think Daniel was right when he said these are all things that are easy to explain to the average joe, and may be easier to sell than CPU, RAM and display specs. Keith obviously disagrees, and hey, maybe he's right. IDK.

Like I said, I'm trying to figure out what the folks at Nokia were thinking. So far I haven't seen anyone provide a better explanation. Maybe they are all just stupid, right?

in regards to an upgrade path...The upgrade path of a 920 should be the 930 and anything higher. High end for high end.

Of course. But then the 830 should at least have been a viable update for the 820, right? Anyway, that wasn't really the point. My point was about the dashing of upgrade hopes, and that the 830 can still be a good device for the price, even if it wasn't what soon-to-be 920/820 upgraders were looking/hoping for.

 

[chuck232]

Since we're all pretty stubborn in our opinions and grasping at any data to support our arguments, here are mine in as clear of a way I can think of putting them:

• It won't be Euros-converted-to-USD expensive. E.g. It won't be $440. It'll be less.
• As an "upgrade" from the 820, it has a much higher resolution display, much improved camera, enhanced design, SensorCore, you know, the things a regular customer easily grasps, not why a dual core Krait is faster than this quad core Cortex-A7
• While we'd like to think Microsoft/Nokia is out to take care of Windows Phone fans, it's a secondary concern to selling a boatload of devices running Microsoft services. That means the addressable market is in fact not primarily enthusiast WP users, comparing this to their existing 820 or 920, but rather folks holding some random Android phone, hoping not to pay more than $15/mo for a device or otherwise a free (to free-ish) phone on a 2 year contract. They get to look at a Samsung Galaxy S4 mini, the Moto X, an iPhone 4s, and the 830.

 

[realwarder]

To be honest that featurelist doesn't appear to be all that 'oh wow' high end....its pretty much almost standard fare across the board.

in regards to an upgrade path...The upgrade path of a 920 should be the 930 and anything higher. High end for high end.
If you go high end to lower end (say 830 or 730) you either realize your requirements aren't that high to begin with or you are side-grading at best. Its not going to be any better or worse (or it could actually be worse) than what you have now.

920 upgrade should be 930. But then you can't get it on AT&T. It doesn't have glance, and judging by the massive 1520, if AT&T get something they'll remove Qi. You can't even buy the international version and use with AT&T.

Yes, I'm annoyed.

Perhaps the 920 will have to last a little longer.

 

[a5cent]

Since we're all pretty stubborn in our opinions and grasping at any data to support our arguments, here are mine in as clear of a way I can think of putting them:

• It won't be Euros-converted-to-USD expensive. E.g. It won't be $440. It'll be less.
• As an "upgrade" from the 820, it has a much higher resolution display, much improved camera, enhanced design, SensorCore, you know, the things a regular customer easily grasps, not why a dual core Krait is faster than this quad core Cortex-A7
• While we'd like to think Microsoft/Nokia is out to take care of Windows Phone fans, it's a secondary concern to selling a boatload of devices running Microsoft services. That means the addressable market is in fact not primarily enthusiast WP users, comparing this to their existing 820 or 920, but rather folks holding some random Android phone, hoping not to pay more than $15/mo for a device or otherwise a free (to free-ish) phone on a 2 year contract. They get to look at a Samsung Galaxy S4 mini, the Moto X, an iPhone 4s, and the 830.

With the exception of the price, which I don't know anything about, those are exactly my points...

It has a few nice features for the price, and although it doesn't look like a worthy upgrade to the 820 for many here at WPC (primarily due to SoC specs which won't make much difference outside of games), it might look like a worthy upgrade to the average Joe (for the reasons you mentioned).

 

[jgbstetson]

I really don't understand why everyone is so damn upset. They brought OIS to the 800 series, a bigger, higher res screen, an aluminum chassis, a bigger battery. And it's crap because the processor isn't a leap forward? Then you probably need to join the Android camp. Doesn't have hey Cortana? They don't exactly pick and choose which features they want to withhold. It's a delicate balance of design, features, price, positioning, etc. Seriously, we're spoiled.

920 upgrade should be 930. But then you can't get it on AT&T. It doesn't have glance, and judging by the massive 1520, if AT&T get something they'll remove Qi. You can't even buy the international version and use with AT&T.

Yes, I'm annoyed.

Perhaps the 920 will have to last a little longer.

Just to be clear, this is the fault of ATT. US carriers can go to hell, all of them. But, at least you're not on T-Mobile.

 

[EMINENT 1]

Serious fail. I really like the idea of qi, Hey, Cortana and wireless miracasting, but not even having these capabilities completely makes the phone a non-starter.

Guess i'm saving my money a while longer.

 

[Eliminateur]

urgh i'm really on the fence now, was about to pull the trigger on the 1320 but seeing this now makes me waver i mean:
830 has removable batt(quite smaller but removable, easily replaceable)
better cpu
it has that "sensorcore" always-on cortana
WAYYYYY better camera (1080 vid, higher res, optical OIS)
double internal memory
has nfc(don't really care)
double-tap to wake
glance screen(i might be wrong but i think 1320 has it as well?)
add beidou nav and better sensor integration for nav but lacks magnetometer

and will probably cost only a little more than the 1320

 

[chuck232]

urgh i'm really on the fence now, was about to pull the trigger on the 1320 but seeing this now makes me waver i mean:
830 has removable batt(quite smaller but removable, easily replaceable)
better cpu
it has that "sensorcore" always-on cortana
WAYYYYY better camera (1080 vid, higher res, optical OIS)
double internal memory
has nfc(don't really care)
double-tap to wake
glance screen(i might be wrong but i think 1320 has it as well?)
add beidou nav and better sensor integration for nav but lacks magnetometer

and will probably cost only a little more than the 1320

Just to clarify a few items:

• The SoCs are comparable, both from the Snapdragon 400 series. The Lumia 1320's will have better single-threaded performance. They'll roughly be on-par for multi-threaded activities.
• The 830 supports SensorCore, but not the wake-on-voice Cortana feature (requires Snapdragon 80x)
• The 830 also includes a magnetometer. The 1320 lacks a gyroscope.

 

[Eliminateur]

Just to clarify a few items:

• The SoCs are comparable, both from the Snapdragon 400 series. The Lumia 1320's will have better single-threaded performance. They'll roughly be on-par for multi-threaded activities.
• The 830 supports SensorCore, but not the wake-on-voice Cortana feature (requires Snapdragon 80x)
• The 830 also includes a magnetometer. The 1320 lacks a gyroscope.

ah you're right about cortana, i misread and forgot it needs the big 80x... bummer
nokia spec sheet doesn't lists magneto on 830.
BTW why does nokia do that kind of stuff with sensors on every model baffles me, they cut stuff retardedly, like putting high end sensors on low end phones and taking them out of higher end ones. I do wonder how the lack of gyro hurts the 1320 in particular...
Also, do the 830 and 1320 both have noise cancelling front/back mics?

 

[colinkiama]

SD400 is only dual core

Its the quad core sd400. The same one in the moto G. It is quite fast. It's also the one in the 630.

ah you're right about cortana, i misread and forgot it needs the big 80x... bummer
nokia spec sheet doesn't lists magneto on 830.
BTW why does nokia do that kind of stuff with sensors on every model baffles me, they cut stuff retardedly, like putting high end sensors on low end phones and taking them out of higher end ones. I do wonder how the lack of gyro hurts the 1320 in particular...
Also, do the 830 and 1320 both have noise cancelling front/back mics?

What are you talking about. The 1320 does have a gyroscope. Why would temple run be advertised with the phone if it didn't lol