Made to survive anything, the Galaxy Watch Ultra becomes top choice for outdoor fans with this deal
A third-party seller on Amazon is offering it at a serious $251 discount, allowing you to get your hands on one for just under $400. That's a phenomenal deal, which we advise you to take advantage of as soon as possible. The discount was $260 a few weeks ago, and no one knows when it could shrink again. And don't worry—the offer may not come directly from Amazon, but you still get a 30-day return window, so you can ask for a refund if needed.
$251 off (39%)
Snag the Galaxy Watch Ultra at a $251 discount on Amazon! This tough-as-nails smartwatch is ready for anything and comes loaded with standout features like FDA-authorized sleep apnea detection and Samsung's advanced body composition tracking. Act fast and save while the offer lasts! Buy at Amazon But look at it! Why would someone want to return this beautiful piece of machinery? Designed with a titanium case and sapphire crystal glass display, it's tough as nails. Plus, it boasts IP68 and 10ATM ratings, meaning it can handle dust, survive for half an hour in five feet of water, and even withstand brief dives down to 328 feet. Battery life is also superb—for a Galaxy Watch—delivering up to two days per charge, assuming heart rate tracking is on and the always-on display is off. And when it comes to health features, this fella boasts every health-tracking functionality you expect to find on such a high-end timepiece. You also get FDA-approved sleep apnea detection and Samsung's body composition analysis.Overall, the Galaxy Watch Ultra delivers on all fronts—durable design, a plethora of features, good battery life, and premium quality. And with the current deal on Amazon, it's a no-brainer for Galaxy users with an active lifestyle. Don't miss out—save while you can!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GSM Arena
2 minutes ago
- GSM Arena
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE, Tab S11, Tab S11 Ultra and Tab S10 Lite energy labels reveal battery info
The EPREL database has been a great source of information not just for current devices, but also for ones that haven't been officially announced yet. Here's a look at a few upcoming Galaxy devices. The Samsung Galaxy S25 FE (SM-S731B/DS) has a battery that lasts 42:37h on a single charge and is rated for 2,000 charge cycles. Compared to the S24 FE, that's only 37m longer. As a reminder, we now list EPREL info in our specs when they become available. EPREL labels: Samsung Galaxy S25 FE • Galaxy S24 FE The S25 FE received the top A score for drop resistance and an average C score for repairability. These are the same numbers as its 2024 predecessor. Interestingly, info for the new FE isn't officially available on the EPREL database yet. You can scan the QR code, which leads to this link. Samsung Galaxy S25 FE (leaked images) Moving on, the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 and Tab S11 Ultra have already been listed. Their batteries were rated at 81:01h and 94:51h, respectively. For comparison, the Tab S10+ got 73h 44m and the Tab S10 Ultra is rated for 85:18h. Note: the Tab S11 will be an 11" slate. This year Samsung will be skipping the 12.4" Tab S+ model (at least it hasn't leaked). Anyway, we can expect better battery life from the new models. EPREL labels: Galaxy Tab S11 • Galaxy Tab S10+ Strangely, their batteries are rated only for 1,200 charge cycles – the Tab S10 generation were rated for 2,000 cycles. Repairability is average at C and drop resistance is the lowest at E, but that's what the old slates had too. The new models will be rated IP68 as expected. EPREL labels: Galaxy Tab S11 Ultra • Galaxy Tab S10 Ultra Note that the charger rating listed on the EPREL site is the required charger power, not the maximum supported – it's 15W for the Tab S10+ and Tab S11 and 20W for the Tab S10 Ultra and Tab S11 Ultra. Of course, the old tablets both support 45W and we expect the new ones to do at least that much too – a leaked certification for the Tab S11 Ultra claimed 11,600mAh battery capacity and 45W charging. There's one more, the Samsung Galaxy Tab S10 Lite. This one will last 87:42h on a single charge and its battery is rated for 2,000 charge cycles, unlike its pricier siblings. This slate is getting only a basic IP42 rating for ingress protection. EPREL label: Galaxy Tab S10 Lite Drop resistance is bad (E) and repairability is average (C). Note that the most recent Tab S Lite model is the third re-release of the Tab S6 Lite, so there's no direct predecessor to compare that Tab S10 Lite to. For more details on the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11, Tab S11 Ultra and Tab S10 Lite, check out this mega leak with specs and pricing. Samsung is expected to unveil the Galaxy S25 FE on September 19. So far, Samsung has only officially confirmed that the S25 FE will launch earlier than expected. For a look at its (rumored) specs, go here. Via Samsung Galaxy S24 FE
GSM Arena
an hour ago
- GSM Arena
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 FE vs. Galaxy Z Flip7
Samsung is diversifying things in its foldable lineup this year and is now offering two clamshells in addition to the book-style Z Fold7. There's the Galaxy Z Flip7 which brings new displays and a bit of a reimagining of the form factor, and then there's the Galaxy Z Flip7 FE that's more or less the Z Flip6 with a new label on the tin. But with both rocking the same cameras, just how many reasons can one come up with to spend the premium for the Z Flip7 over the FE? Let's explore. Table of Contents: Design Display Battery Life Charging Speaker Test Performance Cameras Verdict For starters, you can compare the complete specs sheets or directly continue with our editor's assessment in the following video or in the text below. Size comparison Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 FE Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 The two phones weigh about the same and at just under 190g the burden on your pocket will be similar to that of a regular-size non-bendy phone. But while weight is the same, proportions are different, and meaningfully so. The FE is a bit chonkier when folded, and marginally thicker when unfolded, while the 'premium' Flip is slimmer in both states, and thus posher and more… advanced? The flip side is that the Z Flip7 is indeed wider, and in open-state operation feels like a more unwieldy handset, while the FE's 3.3mm narrower body is easier to reach across. It's not a huge deal, but if you're concerned with compactness, it's probably worth picking up both phones in the store to see if one's a more comfortable fit than the other. When it comes to build, both phones have Gorilla Glass Victus 2 panels on the outside and Armor Aluminum frames. The Z Flip7's hinge may be more advanced if you trust the marketing, but both handsets are rated for the same 210 falls by the EU's standards (whatever the implications of that are for real-world use). Both phones are also IP48-rated, so they should be able to keep solid particles larger than 1mm at bay (duh) and they should be able to survive being submerged down to 1.5m underwater for as long as 30 minutes. Display comparison Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 Possibly the greatest differentiator between these two Flips are the displays. The Z Flip7 FE stays true to tradition (or is stuck in the past, depending on how you look at it) and features a small-ish 3.4-inch notched cover display and a tall 22:9 6.7-inch foldable panel. In contrast, the Z Flip7 embraces modernity and opts for an edge-to-edge 4.1-inch cover panel, and an even roomier 6.9-inch bendy display on the inside. We'll have to admit that the Z Flip7 FE feels a little cramped on the cover, with the camera viewfinder image looking almost tiny, when you go into the native 4:3 photo aspect. You can live with it, of course, and works just fine for its intended purpose, but the larger screen estate on the Z Flip7's cover is a lot more welcoming. On the inside, the Z Flip7 does have a small advantage too - with displays more is simply always more. Both phones put out roughly the same brightness on the inside, whether in manual operation or with the adaptive brightness boost. The FE is some 200nits behind its stablemate on the cover, but even its 1150nits are a good enough result, we reckon. The internal displays are both capable of 120Hz refresh rate with Samsung's usual adaptive behavior. The FE maxes out at 60Hz on the cover, while the Z Flip7 proper is smoother there, at up to 120Hz - we wouldn't say it's a gamechanger of a difference, but it's nice to have. Battery life The Z Flip7 FE uses the same 4,000mAh capacity battery as the Z Flip6, while the Z Flip7 is treated to an extra 300mAh. Between the higher capacity, newer chipset, and larger display(s), the Z Flip7 manages to outlast the Z Flip7 FE in two key metrics - video playback and web browsing are meaningfully better on the more upmarket model. You could probably find the Z Flip7's call time an advantage too, while gaming longevity is about the same on both in our testing. Overall, this is looking like more of a decisive win for the Z Flip7 than we'd have expected. Charging speed Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 FE 4000 mAh Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 4300 mAh There's no winner in the charging speed section with both Flips being typical Galaxies and charging pretty slowly, especially beyond the 90-ish percent mark. In a way, if both are slow, neither has an advantage, but we can't be sending you from a Galaxy comparison straight to a Motorola store. Both phones support wireless charging too, with the same specs from Samsung that should mean up to 15W with proprietary pads and who knows how much with third-party units (WPC listings say 5W). Both models also feature the same battery health options with charging limits and smart adaptation to your habits. Speaker test There's not a whole lot to set the two Flips apart in the speaker department. In typical Galaxy fashion both have stereo speakers - a bottom-firing one and a front-facing one above the display that doubles as earpiece. In our testing, both earned 'Good' ratings for loudness. That said, the Z Flip7 does have a bit of an advantage to our ears, thanks to a fuller, more open presentation. The FE is plenty good enough though. Performance Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 FE Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 Z Flip7 and Z Flip7 FE are the first Galaxy foldables to use in-house chipsets - all other Zs had Snapdragons, even when the Galaxy S-series models from the same time had a Snapdragon/Exynos divide. The Z Flip7 is based on the Exynos 2500 platform (a first), while the Z Flip7 FE's E2400 was already found on the S24 generation in certain regions. The Exynos 2400 is made on a 4nm process and features a 10-core CPU in a 1+2+3+4 configuration with 6 big and 4 small cores (unlike the 3nm E2500 which has a 1+2+5+2 setup with 8 big and 2 small ones). The Xclipse 940 GPU is 10 fewer than the Xclipse 950 in the Z Flip7's Exynos. The Z Flip7 FE comes with 8GB of RAM, while the Z Flip7 has 12GB. The FE can be had with either 128GB or 256GB of storage, and the Z Flip7's two options are more generous - with either 256GB or 512GB. Benchmark performance The FE is predictably a notch below the regular model, scoring lower across the board. Both phones throttle hard and fast though, so 'peak' results are nowhere near sustainable. In practice, you should be fine with either phone - operation is nice and smooth on both. Both phones launch on Android 16 with One UI 8 on top - that's as cutting edge as you can get on a Galaxy, and essentially on any Android too. Samsung's 7-year update policy (for both major OS releases and ongoing fixes) applies to both, though we kind of feel that the FE might be a little slower to get the big updates. Camera comparison You'd think there would be some difference between the camera systems of the two tiers of Flips, but Samsung chose not to bring any upgrades to the Z Flip7, and the Z Flip7 FE is also inheriting the Z Flip6's camera hardware, unchanged. Whichever Z Flip7 you choose, you'd be getting the same 50MP main camera on the cover, alongside a 12MP ultrawide unit that's missing autofocus, as usual. On the inside, there's a 10MP selfie camera - also with fixed focus. Image quality The two phones' identical camera hardware leads to more or less identical photos - whatever minute differences you might be able to spot should be mostly due to shot-to-shot variation or similarly insignificant differences between the ISPs of the two Exynos chipsets. Overall, you can count on very good photos from the main cameras, with well-presented detail, pleasing colors and wide dynamic range. Daylight photo samples, 1x: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 2x zoom shots won't be giving you reasons to pick one over the other either. Daylight photo samples, 2x: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 There's a bit more of a noticeable split in the ultrawide photos, where the Z Flip7 is consistently sharper than the Z Flip7 FE. The Z Flip7 FE isn't looking so bad as to make us suspicious we've gotten a lemon, but we're not entirely sure it makes sense for its photos to be softer than the Z Flip7's. Make of that what you will. Daylight photo samples, 0.6x: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 Selfies have subtle differences between the two phones from scene to scene, but there's no real pattern and both models deliver generally solid internal camera results. Selfie samples: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 In the dark, the two main cameras produce similar results too, with each phone getting grainy shots in Photo mode and cleaner images in Night mode. Dynamic range and colors are pretty great, and not at all different between the two. Low-light photo samples, 1x: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 Low-light photo samples, 1x, Night mode: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 The parity remains the same at 2x, as well. Low-light photo samples, 2x: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 Low-light photo samples, 2x, Night mode: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 Comparing the ultrawides in Photo mode, the Z Flip7 FE is again softer, but both phones' shots are so noisy that you'd probably want to use Night mode, where the differences are insignificant. Low-light photo samples, 0.6x: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 Low-light photo samples, 0.6x, Night mode: Galaxy Z Flip7 FE • Galaxy Z Flip7 Video quality The video recording capabilities are identical in theory, though the end results are somehow slightly different. By this point we're not surprised that the Z Flip7's ultrawide clips are sharper, but for one reason or another, the FE has a slight edge at 1x zoom. In the dark it's more of a coint toss between the two. Below we have a few framegrabs from the videos taken by the two phones at each focal length so it's easier to compare to one another. Daylight video samples, Galaxy Z Flip7 FE: 0.6x • 1x • 2x Daylight video samples, Galaxy Z Flip7: 0.6x • 1x • 2x Low-light video samples, Galaxy Z Flip7 FE: 0.6x • 1x • 2x Low-light video samples, Galaxy Z Flip7: 0.6x • 1x • 2x Verdict Samsung's two-Flip approach for 2025 came as a bit of surprise but it's seemingly not without merit. The existence of a 'high-end' Flip and a 'mass-market' Flip means more people can have Flips, which seems like a winning strategy. And, with the FE, those being on some sort of a budget won't have to feel too bad about getting last year's model (which, the Z Flip6, at the time of the FE's launch, is still the more sensible option in terms of value). Choosing between the two Flip7s shouldn't be too difficult. The Z Flip7 proper is the best flip-phone Samsung has to offer, standing out from previous iterations thanks to its slimline design and larger cover display (with the larger internal display being more of a by-product of the push for slimness and resulting reshuffling of components). It's also got improved endurance, which is an unexpected but always welcome development. The Galaxy Z Flip7 FE, meanwhile, will get you most of the way there. It's not quite as premium-looking, the cover display is smaller, battery life isn't as good. But it's still a foldable, cover-screen selfies are very much feasible, endurance is… alright, and the camera experience is nearly the same as on the non-FE. But then the FE is easier on your wallet. The narrower body. The lower price for almost the same experience. The larger cover display. The larger internal display, maybe? The overall more premium looks. The longer battery life.
Phone Arena
2 hours ago
- Phone Arena
iPhone 17 Pro now rumored to have a cleaner design with improved connectivity
Receive the latest iOS news Subscribe By subscribing you agree to our terms and conditions and privacy policy iPhone 17 Apple will apparently take advantage of the larger iPhone 17 Pro camera island to improve connectivity and the overall Bu, who has been the source of many iPhone leaks, claims that the iPhone 17 Pro will borrow a structural design cue from the Apple Watch Ultra . On the wearable, antennas are integrated strategically to optimize reception and signal the moment, the iPhone's antennas are placed on the frames. These antenna lines are quite visible and, quite frankly, not a great even if you don't mind the placement of the antennas, they can interfere with 5G and Wi-Fi 7 signals, as their position makes them susceptible to getting covered by a user's hands. Additionally, most users slap cases on their devices, which can again lead to signal issues. Internal metal components can also interfere with the radiation patternThat's perhaps why Apple has decided to relocate the antennas around the camera module, which is going to be bigger than the one on the iPhone 16 Pro , and will thus have more space for repositioning should lead to better signal reception, particularly in dense areas. We can also look forward to lower latency, which should speed up streaming and data will also make for a clear side frame design with fewer breaks. The freed-up space might be utilized for other components, such as the thermal Majin Bu has a respectable track record, they don't always get things right, so this rumor is best taken with a pinch of is shaping up to be a pretty decent upgrade. In addition to a new rear design, the new device is also likely to feature an improved camera system and a faster changes will come at a cost , though, with multiple rumors indicating that the new handsets will be pricier than the current generation.
