Nokia 3 review: Un-Finnished Business

Un-Finnished Business

GSMArena Team, 30 June 2017.

2.7

Performance

We didn't really go into the performance section expecting to be blown away in any way by the Nokia 3. Frankly, it wouldn't be fair or realistic to ask anything other than basic functionality out of a Mediatek MT6737, with only four 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores at its disposal and a single Mali-T720MP1 GPU core.

That being said, we expected to see a level of performance similar to that on the Xiaomi Redmi 4a or the Sony Xperia L1. Both also have four Cortex-A53 cores, running at around 1.4 GHz, 2GB of RAM and 720p displays. There are some notable differences in GPUs, but nothing that should have any effect on the overall usability of a phone, outside gaming and other graphics intensive tasks. Unfortunately, where Sony and Xiaomi came through with software optimization for a reasonably smooth experience across the UI and light everyday tasks, the Nokia 3 really struggles to cope.

Hopefully, it's an optimization issue that can be resolved in future software updates. After all, HMD did make a huge point out of its dedication to timely updates and a high level of security on the new wave of Nokia devices. However, in its current state, the Nokia 3 unit we got for review, running its latest available Android 7.0 ROM really struggles even with mundane tasks.

The UI is far from smooth, with animations often slowing down. We even got occasional freezes, with the CPU obviously trying hard to keep up with loading and scrolling heavier webpages and even searching and browsing the Play Store. Want to leave some app updates in the background while you go about other tasks? Not, really a viable option, to be frank...

To kick things off, we have GeekBench 4 - a pure CPU benchmark. Things are looking rather bleak for the Nokia 3. In terms of competition, we pit it up against a few other recent quad-core, Cortex-A53 devices, we had in the database, like the Sony Xperia L1, Xiaomi Redmi 4a and Meizu M5c. Most other devices we threw into the mix are there based on their price similarity to the Nokia 3. Meizu M5 and M5s, Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 - most of these have four more cores to work with, which makes for pretty big variances in performance.

GeekBench 4 (multi-core)

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
4456
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
3016
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
3011
Lenovo Moto M
2921
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
2719
Meizu M5 Note
2690
Meizu M5s
2480
Meizu M5
2428
Huawei Honor 5X
2035
Sony Xperia L1
1775
Lenovo K6 Power
1698
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
1670
Nokia 3
1487
Meizu M5c
1213

GeekBench 4 (single-core)

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
1546
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
832
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
819
Lenovo Moto M
771
Meizu M5 Note
683
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
658
Sony Xperia L1
655
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
638
Huawei Honor 5X
616
Meizu M5s
610
Lenovo K6 Power
610
Meizu M5
592
Meizu M5c
565
Nokia 3
557

AnTuTu is a more compound benchmark, taking into account things like RAM capacity and speed, as well as storage speed. Sadly, GPU plays a part in the score as well and we suspect that's what really dragged the Nokia 3 down overall, since it only has one graphics core to work with.

AnTuTu 6

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
85162
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
62316
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
61616
Lenovo Moto M
51831
Huawei Honor 5c
51220
Meizu M5 Note
47806
Nokia 6
46413
Lenovo K6 Power
44115
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
44062
Moto G5
43755
Meizu M5
40831
Meizu M5s
39166
Sony Xperia L1
37813
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
36110
Huawei Honor 5X
35469
Meizu M5c
29001
Nokia 3
28441
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)
24884

To further prove this point, here is how the entry-level Nokia handled GFXBench. Even the basic OpenGL ES 3.0 test was enough to bring the Nokia 3 to its knees. Just to put things into perspective, the Meizu M5c is also stuck with a lonely single Mali-T720MP1 GPU core. The Meizu M5 Note, Xiaomi Redmi 4a and Huawei Honor 5x, on the other hand, run much more capable, multi-core GPU's - Mali-T860MP2, Adreno 308 and Adreno 405, respectively. These are barely powerhouses as well, but even they put the Nokia 3 to shame.

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (1080p offscreen)

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
15
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
9.9
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
9.8
Huawei Honor 5c
7.8
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
7.2
Lenovo Moto M
7.1
Moto G5
7.1
Lenovo K6 Power
7.1
Huawei Honor 5X
5.6
Meizu M5 Note
5.5
Meizu M5
5.2
Meizu M5s
4.5
Sony Xperia L1
4.1
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
2.8
Nokia 3
2.2
Meizu M5c
2.2

GFX 3.0 Manhattan (onscreen)

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
15
Meizu M5
10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
9.7
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
9.6
Meizu M5s
9.2
Sony Xperia L1
8.8
Huawei Honor 5c
8.3
Lenovo Moto M
7.6
Moto G5
7.1
Lenovo K6 Power
7.1
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
7
Huawei Honor 5X
6.1
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
5.7
Meizu M5 Note
5.5
Nokia 3
4.5
Meizu M5c
4.4

There are a couple of other interesting observations to be made here. The Sony Xperia L1 might appear to use the exact same GPU as the Nokia 3, but it has the advantage of two GPU cores. The test results speak for themselves.

The other thing worth mentioning is that despite its poor graphics performance the Mali-T720 still supports OpenGL ES 3.1 - a requirement for running Android Nougat. This is kind of obvious, given that the phone ships with Android 7 to begin with, but It's still good no note, as one less criteria to worry about, when it comes to potentially running future Android versions.

Basemark X tells a pretty similar story. It has the Nokia 3 trading blows with the Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) and its Mali-400 GPU at the very bottom of the chart.

Basemark X

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
13666
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
10446
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
10424
Huawei Honor 5c
7735
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
7522
Moto G5
7475
Lenovo K6 Power
7475
Lenovo Moto M
6732
Meizu M5 Note
5276
Huawei Honor 5X
5009
Meizu M5
4767
Meizu M5s
4646
Sony Xperia L1
4045
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
3335
Meizu M5c
2292
Nokia 3
2210
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)
1424

Basemark X (medium)

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
23300
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
21078
Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
20921
Huawei Honor 5c
16171
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
15303
Moto G5
15292
Lenovo K6 Power
15286
Meizu M5 Note
11983
Meizu M5
11303
Huawei Honor 5X
10107
Meizu M5s
8915
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
6251
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)
4605
Nokia 3
4511

Last, but not least, there is Basemark OS II and its second version. They seem to be a bit kinder to the Nokia 3, evaluating its overall performance a bit higher. Still, the numbers hardly impress.

Basemark OS II

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi 4 Prime
1296
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
1290
Lenovo Moto M
1127
Nokia 6 (Chinese version)
1041
Nokia 6
1004
Meizu M5 Note
944
Huawei Honor 5X
906
Meizu M5
846
Meizu M5s
842
Sony Xperia L1
802
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
801
Nokia 3
620
Meizu M5c
522
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)
399

Basemark OS 2.0

Higher is better

Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (Helio X20)
1728
Huawei Honor 5c
1221
Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 (S625)
1050
Huawei Honor 5X
874
Moto G5
795
Meizu M5s
781
Sony Xperia L1
767
Xiaomi Redmi 4a
707
Nokia 3
568
Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)
326
Lenovo K6 Power
281
Meizu M5c
182

Circling back to our original point on performance, we really didn't expect or ask much of the Nokia 3. All it had to do is deliver a usable experience, while performing day to day Android tasks. Nothing fancy or advanced, just things your grandma will expect.

In all fairness, we can't say that it totally failed to deliver. However, the experience is far from smooth, even with the low bar we set. Frankly, we point the finger squarely at the manufacturer HMD and its software department. We've already seen the likes of the Redmi 4a and the Sony Xperia L1 perform a lot better on basically the same low-end hardware. The Nokia 3 should theoretically have an additional edge with its near-stock Android experience.

In reality, all synthetic tests aside, however, both Sony and Xiaomi managed to deliver a much more pleasant, albeit far from stellar, experience, with a lot more added value functionality baked into the OS.

Audio output is mediocre

The Nokia 3 did well with an active external amplifier, delivering above average loudness and nicely clean output.

Plugging in a pair of headphones did a lot of damage though, affecting the degrading the readings across the board. Volume plummeted too so it's really not a performance worth writing home about.

Test	Frequency response	Noise level	Dynamic range	THD	IMD + Noise	Stereo crosstalk
Nokia 3	+0.02, -0.11	-91.9	91.8	0.012	0.017	-91.8
Nokia 3 (headphones)	+0.88, -0.06	-78.7	77.6	0.039	0.348	-52.5
Sony Xperia L1	+0.10, -0.11	-93.6	92.9	0.0090	0.013	-93.8
Sony Xperia L1 (headphones)	+0.79, -0.10	-92.9	91.9	0.010	0.420	-53.1
Xiaomi Redmi 3s	+0.02, -0.07	-94.3	90.6	0.0024	0.0087	-91.8
Xiaomi Redmi 3s (headphones)	+0.02, -0.10	-93.7	90.3	0.028	0.061	-72.2
Oppo F1s	+0.37, -0.00	-71.2	75.3	0.936	1.190	-41.2
Oppo F1s (headphones)	+0.80, -0.05	-67.8	74.6	0.336	0.579	-42.3
Huawei Honor 7 Lite (5c)	+0.03, -0.44	-90.4	90.9	0.0019	0.011	-87.9
Huawei Honor 7 Lite (5c) (headphones)	+0.04, -0.47	-90.3	90.7	0.0067	0.072	-73.1
Motorola Moto G4	+0.02, -0.07	-92.4	92.5	0.0028	0.0084	-92.1
Motorola Moto G4 (headphones)	+0.04, -0.08	-92.0	92.0	0.0073	0.070	-63.8

Nokia 3 frequency response

You can learn more about the tested parameters and the whole testing process here.

Reader comments

IsHacker
22 Aug 2024
vIb

It's August 2024 and this phone is already 7 years old, but I'm still using it. It still works fine, except for the power button. It wears out quickly and I have already repaired the power button 6-7 times. Also these days, the battery life...

Babbu Shah
06 Apr 2022
fJC

Its been five years Since I bought this mobile. It is still doing great i bought it in July 2017 and still using it here in april 2022

Anonymous
12 Jun 2021
nS$

I agree about the camera, below standards even after considering the price range. On the other hand, really sturdy phone, It even survived falling twice in the toilet.