Today Samsung announced the Galaxy S5 mini, which continues the Galaxy S mini line the same way that the One mini 2 continued the One mini line. Interestingly enough for the international variant the Galaxy S5 mini uses a Samsung Exynos 3470 SoC for the LTE variant, along with an Intel XMM7160 modem. There are a few areas where the GS5 mini bests other similar mini branded devices, such as the 1.5GB of RAM instead of the 1GB found on the One Mini 2. As with the One mini 2, there’s no 802.11ac support. Fortunately, Samsung has improved the display panel to a 720p SAMOLED with 4.5” diagonal compared to the qHD panel of the GS4 mini. I’ve included a table of the specs released below.

  Samsung Galaxy S5 mini
SoC Exynos 3470 4x1.4 GHz Cortex A7
Display 4.5” 720p IPS LCD
Network 2G / 3G / 4G LTE (Category 4 LTE)
Dimensions 131.1 x 64.8 x 9.1mm, 120 grams
Camera 8MP rear camera, 1080p30 max. 2.1MP F/2.0 FFC
Battery 2100 mAh (7.98 Whr)
OS Android 4.4 with TouchWiz UX
Connectivity 802.11a/b/g/n + BT 4.0, USB2.0, GPS/GNSS, MHL, DLNA, NFC
SIM Size MicroSIM

For those unfamiliar with the Exynos 3470, this is a quad core Cortex A7 solution running at 1.4 GHz, along with a Mali 450 GPU. Based upon the amount of Broadcom design wins in Samsung devices it’d be reasonable to infer that the WiFi/BT combo chip is a Broadcom design win as well. The Intel modem is something that we’ve seen before on the Galaxy K, so it’s no surprise to see the same on the Galaxy S5 mini. The phone is also IP67 resistant like its larger cousin, although the USB flap is no longer needed for this variant. Overall, this phone seems to be intent on keeping the mini moniker to its roots. It’s definitely designed to target a more midrange audience, although it'll take a review to see whether it does this effectively.

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • mczak - Tuesday, July 1, 2014 - link

    I wouldn't quite say the Krait 300 cores at 1.7 Ghz would be way better in general, but yes on the cpu side it's a side-grade at best (quite a bit faster multi-thread performance, but definitely behind by 30% or so singlethreaded). The gpu I'd consider even to be a downgrade (from adreno 305 to mali 400mp4 - though the clock is quite high for the latter so it might be about the same performance, but you'd wish if they'd gone mali which I could understand since if the rumors are correct you can pretty much get it for free they'd use something better than the quite crappy 400 which is only gles 2.0 capable).
    Other than that, there's nothing in the specs which would make this an upgrade to the s4 mini neither, except the higher resolution and slightly larger screen (and the latter is probably not what everybody wants, as it is probably the reason why the device is both bulkier (in all 3 dimensions even!) plus adding 13% of weight. Ok the battery has somewhat higher capacity too which is always nice but all in all specs wise this looks like fail to me.
  • Mumrik - Tuesday, July 1, 2014 - link

    "Mini" - 4.5" screen.


    Remember when 3.5-3.8" was regular size? It's because that's a size most people very comfortably can single-hand.

    Having a "mini" version of a phone be larger than that is just stupid. My hands are larger than those of the average guy, yet reaching the far-side upper corner (with a single hand) on my 4.5" Moto G is not comfortable. 4.5" is not "mini", it's just not quite as large as the large phones.
  • jmunjr - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    Hmm I don't think you have large hands. I can one hand up to 4.7" phones, though I do better when they are thicker. One reason I like replaceable batteries aside from longer life - the phone is easier to hold and use.
  • Mumrik - Sunday, July 6, 2014 - link

    Comfortably reaching the corners. And yes, I have big Scandinavian bear hands.
  • AnnonymousCoward - Wednesday, July 2, 2014 - link

    2.5 years ago Samsung announced the Galaxy S2 Skyrocket. 4.5", LTE, 1.5GHz dual, 1GB RAM, 8MP camera. And now we have this S5 Mini with nearly the same specs. WTF? Was Samsung just trying to save a few bucks on component cost? If the phone costs 400 damn dollars, it should have better components to begin with. And if not, pass that cost onto me: I'll pay $415 for the right components. Not $400 for crap.
  • Malih - Wednesday, July 2, 2014 - link

    Sadly phones that have better specs with similar price, usually have to compromise somewhere else, like OS version, features, and/or support.
  • Malih - Wednesday, July 2, 2014 - link

    I remember reading in another site that despite downgrade in specs, they keep the added features/gimmicks, like water resistance and more.
  • Malih - Wednesday, July 2, 2014 - link

    by more, I mean the sensors of the S5
  • jmunjr - Thursday, July 3, 2014 - link

    If it has a user-replaceable battery then this may be a good choice for me and my brother. Can anyone think of as good a phone at this size with a battery that can be replaced?
  • krumme - Friday, July 4, 2014 - link

    The text says "Samsung has improved the display panel to a 720p SAMOLED" but in the specs sheet it says IPS LCD. There seems to be an error in the specs, its probably an oled screen.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now