The hype was palpable. Nothing promised its first true "flagship killer" with the Phone (3), aiming to disrupt the premium market with signature transparent design and aggressive innovation. After weeks of testing, however, it’s clear the device fails to justify its £799/$899 starting price. Instead of a triumph, consumers get an overpriced mid-ranger masquerading as elite competition.
Design: Style Over Substance
Yes, the Phone (3) looks distinctive. The Glyph Interface returns with more LEDs and customizable patterns – a genuine conversation starter. But the glossy back attracts fingerprints like a magnet, and the aluminum frame feels less premium than competitors’ titanium or matte finishes. While visually striking, these aesthetics don’t translate to durability; early drop tests reveal worrying fragility.
Performance: Flagship Price, Mid-Tier Power
Powered by a Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 chip (not the top-tier 8 Gen 4), the Phone (3) stutters under heavy loads. Multi-tasking between apps like Instagram and Google Maps induced noticeable lag in our tests, and gaming performance trailed rivals like the OnePlus 12R (which costs £300 less). Benchmark results place it closer to £500 phones – a jarring disconnect for a "flagship."
{{< embed "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLUYE_EsWuM" >}}
Tech analyst Marques Brownlee’s review highlights these performance gaps starkly.
Software: Promising, But Unpolished
Nothing OS 3.0 offers clean bloatware-free Android 15, but suffers from inconsistent animations and delayed notifications. Quirks like disappearing widgets and erratic battery optimization require frustrating workarounds. While updates are promised, the out-of-box experience feels unfinished – unacceptable at this price.
Camera: The Biggest Letdown
The 50MP main sensor struggles in low light, producing muddy details and oversaturated colors. Portrait mode edge detection falters with complex backgrounds, and the ultrawide lens exhibits pronounced distortion. Compared to the Pixel 8a’s computational photography mastery (at £499), the Phone (3)’s cameras feel years behind.
{{< embed "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O97JLUOogig" >}}
Popular reviewer Dave2D’s camera comparison underscores these weaknesses against rivals.
Battery & Price: The Fatal Flaws
A 4,600mAh battery delivers just 5 hours of screen-on time – dismal for a 2025 flagship. Combined with 45W charging (half the speed of Chinese rivals), it’s a regression. Yet Nothing’s gravest sin is pricing. At £799, it competes with Samsung’s Galaxy S24 and Apple’s iPhone 15 – both offering superior performance, cameras, and ecosystem integration.
The Verdict: Look Elsewhere
Nothing positioned the Phone (3) as a revolution. Instead, it’s a cautionary tale of ambition outpacing execution. For those seduced by the design, wait for steep discounts. But value seekers should consider proven alternatives:
- The Google Pixel 8a (£499) dominates camera quality and software support.
- {{< link "https://amzn.to/4lFSPKI" >}}
- OnePlus 12R (£599) offers smoother performance and 100W charging.
- {{< link "https://amzn.to/44K8p21" >}}
Nothing’s vision remains exciting, but the Phone (3) proves style and hype can’t compensate for middling hardware at premium prices. Until real substance matches the flash, it’s hard to justify this "flagship."
Post a Comment