Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7 FE price leaked, so it's actually happening?
After more rumors than even the most diehard Samsung fans would care to count, it seems like a Fan Edition Galaxy foldable phone is actually happening this year. Likely named the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7 FE, this phone is supposed to be a cheaper entry into the world of foldable smartphones.
One of the biggest disadvantages that foldables face in the industry are their price tags. As such, the foldable industry has been in a downward spiral, with some phone manufacturers pulling out of the segment entirely. Samsung has also revised and toned down the sales expectations for the Galaxy Z Flip 7 and the Galaxy Z Fold 7. According to a report ( translated source ), the Galaxy Z Flip 7 FE will cost around one million won, which is approximately $736 USD. If that's true, then this should in theory incentivize a lot of customers to give foldable phones a try. Other cheap foldables have existed, of course. But many consumers — particularly in the U.S. — don't want to get something that's not a Samsung, Apple, or Google phone.The report also mentions that the Flip 7 FE will be powered by Samsung's own Exynos 2500 processor. This chip was first supposed to debut in the Galaxy S25 series, but Samsung was unable to get it ready in time. The Exynos 2500 is also said to be powering the Galaxy Z Flip 7 . For people averse to Exynos chips, the Galaxy Z Fold 7 will reportedly come with the Snapdragon 8 Elite processor instead.
Samsung Galaxy S25 phones are also powered by the Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset across the board. | Video credit — Samsung A price tag of around $736 for a foldable phone sounds great, but there's a problem: this might not be the same price in the U.S. Samsung has already won this year's foldable contest by deciding not to increase prices. The Flip 7 and Fold 7 are allegedly going to cost the same as their predecessors. However, some regions will see price hikes, and the U.S. is a major contender due to the whole tariff business.
The uncertainty caused by the volatile tariff policies is affecting Samsung's competitors too. Apple is perhaps being affected the most, and has been the target of direct criticism from the president. There are rumors that the company is discussing raising the prices of the upcoming iPhone 17 series to compensate. Regardless of how the situation plays out Stateside, it's about time one of the big players realized that a cheaper foldable is necessary for the market. Now, if only they'd come to the same conclusion for bigger batteries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Phone Arena
an hour ago
- Phone Arena
This budget carrier now supports Android smartwatches, but only if you use this watch
Receive the latest Android news By subscribing you agree to our terms and conditions and privacy policy Comment byu/VisibleCM from discussion inVisible One Reddit user pointed out a possible reason why Pixel Watches were prioritized. Citing a comment from the US Mobile CEO, they noted that "Google actually put in a lot of the legwork themselves to get the Pixel watch working on Verizon MVNOs like US Mobile and Visible." That might explain why Samsung support is still unavailable. It's also worth noting that Google's Pixel devices are often sold unlocked directly from Google, making them more common on MVNOs like Visible. In contrast, Samsung wearables are often sold through the big three carriers. Right now, only Pixel Watch 2 and newer LTE models are supported. It's a limited start, but one that signals Visible is finally expanding its Android offerings beyond phones. For now, Samsung Galaxy Watch users will need to wait, but given the popularity of those devices, it seems likely that broader support is on the way. One Reddit user pointed out a possible reason why Pixel Watches were prioritized. Citing a comment from the US Mobile CEO, they noted that "Google actually put in a lot of the legwork themselves to get the Pixel watch working onMVNOs like US Mobile and Visible." That might explain why Samsung support is still unavailable. It's also worth noting that Google's Pixel devices are often sold unlocked directly from Google, making them more common on MVNOs like Visible. In contrast, Samsung wearables are often sold through the big three now, onlyand newer LTE models are supported. It's a limited start, but one that signals Visible is finally expanding its Android offerings beyond phones. For now, Samsung Galaxy Watch users will need to wait, but given the popularity of those devices, it seems likely that broader support is on the way. Visible, the Verizon -owned budget carrier, has rolled out support for Android smartwatches — but only for a small group of users. If you own a Google Pixel Watch 2 or newer with LTE, you can now connect your wearable to Visible's smartwatch is a welcome update for Android users, who have been waiting for the same level of support Apple Watch users have had on Visible for some time. According to the company, the new feature allows Pixel Watch users to link their devices for an extra $10 per month on the basic Visible and Visible+ plans. If you're on the top-tier Visible+ Pro plan, the smartwatch feature is included at no additional get started, users need to pair their Pixel Watch with their Android phone , then open the Pixel Watch app. From there, go to Watch Settings > Mobile Network. When prompted, sign in to your Visible account and follow the on-screen instructions to complete setup. At this time, Visible is not selling any compatible smartwatches directly, so users must bring their own the update is a step forward, some users were quick to notice what's missing. There's currently no support for Samsung Galaxy smartwatches, which are among the most widely used Wear OS devices. Many in the community hope Galaxy Watch support will be added soon.
Phone Arena
an hour ago
- Phone Arena
Motorola Razr (2025) vs Razr Ultra (2025): one is a pretty cover, the other is the whole package
But here's the real question: if you're looking at Motorola's foldable lineup, is the Ultra worth the Ultra price tagover the standard Razr? Or is the regular Razr good enough? Let's dive in — spec sheets are fine, but how these phones feel, look, and perform in the hand matters more. $200 off (13%) The Motorola Razr Ultra is here, and the official store has a splendid deal to help you celebrate it! For a limited time, you can buy the 1TB variant at the price of the 512GB model, which saves you $200. Select colors are available right now. Buy at Motorola The Motorola Razr+ (2025) has finally been announced. You can buy the high-end flip phone with a Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 chip at the Motorola Store. You can trade in an eligible device to score some savings. Buy at Motorola Don't want to pay top dollar for your next flip phone? Consider the Motorola Razr (2025), now available for purchase. The handset features a MediaTek Dimensity 7400X chip and sports AI features. Buy at Motorola Motorola Razr 2025 vs Razr Ultra 2025 differences explained: Table of Contents: Design and Display Performance and Software Camera Battery Audio Specs Conclusion Both Razrs follow the same DNA and come in as elegant lifestyle accessories first. This is due to Motorola always picking fresh colors in partnership with color expert Pantone. But it's not just the hues — Razr and Edge phones come with different stylish finishes on the back, not just the boring old glass. First, Motorola started dressing its phones in vegan leather. Now, the Ultra models also get wood or velvet covers, which is pretty neat! But even if you go for the base Razr 2025, you will still get a faux leather-covered shell, or stylish latex wrapping. Depending on which color you choose, it'll have different patterns over it. The Razr (2025) comes in: Pantone Gibraltar Sea (dark blue) Pantone Spring Bud (green) Pantone Lightest Sky (cream) Pantone Parfait Pink (pink) The Razr Ultra is available in the following colors: Pantone Scarab (black, with a leather/velvet back) Pantone Rio Red Pantone Mountain Trail (wooden back) Pantone Cabaret Both phones feel pretty nice to handle and open / close. Motorola has been working on that hinge for a while now and it incorporates titanium elements that will hopefully make it last longer. It certainly feels sturdy and both phones open and close with pleasing snaps, and are able to hold the screen open at multiple angles. You'd expect some trade-offs between models, but this these are quite close. The Razr Ultra has a 7.0-inch internal display with 165 Hz refresh rate, while the regular Razr "settles" for a 6.9-inch panel at 120 Hz. OLED panels, of course, with a few different color profiles to pick from — from natural and grounded, to punchy, vibrant and saturated. Brightness? The Ultra edges ahead slightly with 2,400-ish nits at 20% APL vs the Razr's ~2,100. A 20% APL test measures a more "realistic" scenario for smartphone usage and those numbers here mean that these look excellent outdoors. Too bright to be outshone! But, if peak brightness is what interests you — the Razr 2025 specs say 3,000 nits peak, the Razr Ultra 2025 goes up to 4,500! (Peak brightness only measures a small portion of the screen for limited time) A minimum of 2 nits is not an excellent bedside reader, and 2.4 is slightly worse. These won't be poking your eyes out per se, but you will probably avoid using them when the lights are off. Then there's the cover screen. The Ultra's 4-inch external display is a whole productivity panel compared to the 3.6-inch one on the regular Razr. It looks better, too, with the entire upper shell of the Ultra housing a screen, instead of having a thick-ish bezel. Still, both are usable in the typical Motorola style — there are useful widgets to be found here, but you can launch full apps if you so desire. Android will re-scale them to fit (most of the time). The fingerprint scanners on both phones are located in the power button — they work lightning fast on both, even if it's not the most optimal positioning. Here's where things get spicy. The Razr Ultra is powered by the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 Elite, backed by a hefty 16 GB of RAM and 512 GB storage out of the box. The regular Razr? Well, it cuts some corners and ends up with the far less powerful MediaTek Dimensity 7400X, 8 GB RAM, and 256 GB storage. Daily use? Both are OK, though if you engage with the AI more often, the Snapdragon definitely feels faster — of course. Once you start gaming, video editing, or multitasking like a maniac, the Ultra's extra horsepower becomes very real. The Motorola Razr 2025 is only here as your daily communicator, not the pocket computer experience. And yeah, if you ever doubted it, the CPU benchmarks show that the Razr Ultra is up to 3 times faster — barely any surprise there. While the regular Razr's score looks quite bad in comparison, we do emphasize that it runs daily tasks just fine. In the graphics department, the Ultra is three to five times better — depending on whether it's throttling or not. Considering it's a clamshell smartphone, we do find its thermals to be doing a pretty decent job at keeping it productive! Motorola gave both Razrs a 50 MP main camera, but the Ultra doubles down with a 50 MP ultrawide, while the regular Razr gets… a 13 MP secondary sensor. It's also worth noting that these 50 MP main cameras are not the same — the Ultra's sensor is bigger than the one in the vanilla Razr, and you will spot that in the samples below. On the front, the Razr Ultra triples down with yet another 50 MP camera, while the Razr (2025) has the still respectable 32 MP resolution for selfies. All that's left is to see how they do! As can be seen from our camera score, that main camera makes quite the difference. Despite both being 50 MP, the base Razr fell short with more oversharpening and artifacts. Both ultra-wide cameras scored about the same, despite their vast differences in hardware. And both phones don't do well with zooming, though with different issues. Let's look at the samples: Both cameras deal well with wide dynamics, but the Ultra does allow itself to amp up highlights just a bit more. Color reproduction from both is pretty down to earth and pleasant, with just a tinge of saturation to make that photo shareable on social media. However, when it comes to detail, the Ultra definitely takes it — fine details are visible, but soft and natural. Whereas the 50 MP snapper of the Razr (2025) presents a lot of oversharpening, even in the perfect lit conditions. These phones don't have dedicated zoom cameras, so any magnification they give you is a digital crop-in. The Razr Ultra tops out at 30x, but you won't be using it — it's pretty degraded at that point. The Razr (2025) maxes out at 10x, and it's very fuzzy there, too. At 2x (the samples above), they are both quite usable. Though, the base Razr's tendency to oversharpen is amplified, while the Ultra photo still looks good. Here's a comparison at 10x: As mentioned at the start of the camera section, their zooms are bad for different reasons. The base Razr has a lot of noise. The Razr Ultra photo looks "cleaner" at first glance because it applies a ton of noise reduction. As a result, the image becomes washed-out, painting-like. We won't be knocking these a lot — they are not zoom camera phones and not marketed as such. The ultra-wide camera of the Ultra presents a bit more neon-y colors in the skies but definitely has a much better dynamic range and slightly better details. The ultra-wide of the Razr (2025) has more natural colors, but is darker, crushes shadows, and it shows a lot more HDR bloom than the one on the Razr Ultra does. The selfie camera of the Razr (2025) is a bit too warm, a bit too red, and a bit too soft. Not bad in general, but when compared side-by-side, the Razr Ultra selfie looks more realistic and sharper. The video quality of the Razr Ultra is hands-down just better. Colors are more realistic, details are slightly sharper, the stabilization is more... stable, and the microphone does a better job at noise reduction. The Razr (2025) video, in comparison, looks murky, the grass is a bit too saturated, the sky is a weird dark hue, and its microphone is noisier. It's still usable, but loses in this side-by-side. The Motorola Razr Ultra has a slightly bigger body, which allows it to fit a slightly bigger battery — 4,700 mAh. That's not a huge difference from the 4,500 mAh cell of the base Razr (2025), however there's another factor to consider — the processors. The Snapdragon 8 Elite is built on a 3 nm process, which is more energy-efficient than the 4 nm process of the MediaTek Dimensity 7400X. But then again, the Dimensity should require less power, since it's not as big of a monster. So, we went into our tests with curiosity: With a massive 24 hour endurance in our browsing test, the Razr Ultra shows that it can comfortably be a 2-day phone with casual use. Curiously, it fell behind in the video streaming test, where it should've scored another easy win. But then, at the gaming test, it lasted 3 hours longer than the base Razr, showing that even though that Snapdragon is a fire breather, the Ultra still makes good use of the energy it has on hand. The Razr Ultra is also a bit faster to charge — 30 minutes on a 68 W charger got us up to 80%! The Razr (2025) supports 30 W charging and only got up to 60% in the same time frame. Still respectable and can get you out of a pickle if you forgot to charge. The speakers of the Razr (2025) noticeably lack depth and bass, and they have a pronounced mid hump. So, videos with speech will come through, but you won't enjoy the soundtracks. Its vibration is not a click, but a tight buzz — still pretty satisfying, just noticebly different from flagships. The Ultra, on the other hand, has surprisingly boomy speakers which put a smile on our face. Not to the level of an iPhone Pro Max or Galaxy Ultra, but definitely more usable. The haptic motor here is a click — quick, pronounced, and satisfying. But if you want the best flip phone Motorola has ever made — no compromises, no 'if onlys' — the Razr Ultra (2025) is worth the splurge. Bigger, faster, sharper, bolder. You get what you pay for — and in this case, what you pay for a pretty good camera, better speakers, a prettier external display, more premium finishes, and very fast performance.
GSM Arena
an hour ago
- GSM Arena
Poco F7 teaser campaign starts, probably reveals its launch month
Poco introduced the F7 Pro and F7 Ultra back in March, and over the past few weeks rumors about a 'vanilla' F7 joining them have intensified. Today, this is finally confirmed as Flipkart has put up a special microsite for the upcoming device. While it doesn't give us a specific release date, the URL does mention June, so we assume that means the device will be unveiled by the end of this month. The microsite goes through the history of the vanilla F series devices, all the way back to the original Poco F1 from 2018, which is billed as "the flagship killer that started it all" and "democratized performance". According to past rumors, the Poco F7 is likely to be a rebranded Redmi Turbo 4 Pro, in which case it will come with a 6.83-inch 1280x2272 AMOLED screen with 120 Hz refresh rate and 3,200-nit peak brightness, the Snapdragon 8s Gen 4 chipset, 12/16GB of RAM, 256GB/512GB/1TB of storage, a 50 MP main camera, an 8 MP ultrawide, a 20 MP selfie snapper, and a 7,550 mAh battery. Thanks for the tip! Xiaomi Poco F7 Pro Xiaomi Poco F7 Ultra
