To say that the Lumia brand is diluted with low cost smartphones would be a bit of an understatement. However, Microsoft has found a way to lower the barrier to entry even further with the launch of the Dual-SIM Lumia 430 model today.

It is all fairly pedestrian in the specifications department, as we will see below, but the real story is just how inexpensive this device is. Pricing will vary by market, but Microsoft is estimating the Lumia 430 Dual-SIM smartphone to be priced around $70 USD before any subsidies are applied.

To hit these kinds of price points, some sacrifices have to be made of course, but all in all it is still a typical low end Lumia. Before Microsoft bought the Lumia line from Nokia, we had similar low end phones launched that would be missing key features. The Lumia 635 is a great example of this. Although it was a decent device, the lack of a proximity sensor and ambient light sensor made it difficult to use in real life, and the limited 512 MB of RAM meant it could not access the entire Windows Phone catalog of apps.

Microsoft has taken a different approach, and all of the low end devices that they have launched with the Microsoft logo have included the standard features needed to enjoy a smartphone experience, and the $70 Lumia 430 is no exception. It comes with the Qualcomm Snapdragon 200 SoC, with dual 1.2 GHz Cortex A7 cores, so it will not be the speediest device ever launched, but Windows Phone has always been good on low end devices and avoids the stutter and chop which has plagued Android. RAM is a healthy 1 GB, which means that the Lumia 430 does have access to the entire Windows Phone store. Other key features such as the ambient light and proximity sensor are included, even for this budget price, so obvious features such as automatic brightness will work.

Speaking of brightness, the LCD will also likely be a very low end model, but it is a 4” 800x480 LCD, although it is not listed whether this is an IPS display (hopefully it is) but the display enhancement technologies such as ClearBlack are not available. I have also found with the low end Lumia phones that the display coating is also either very thin or not available, and this could continue that trend due to the price.

Storage is also something that Microsoft has bumped up, with Nokia opting for 4 GB on the very low end models, but Microsoft has equipped even this low end device with 8 GB of internal NAND. MicroSD support will give an additional 128 GB more space, and Windows Phone supports MicroSD very well so this will not be an issue.

The battery is just a 1500 mAh, with the older 3.7 V chemistry, which works out to just 5.55 Wh of capacity.

  Nokia Lumia 430
SoC MSM8212 dual-core 1.2 GHz Snapdragon 200
RAM/NAND 1 GB RAM, 8 GB NAND + microSD
Display 4.0” 800x480 LCD
Network GSM/GPRS/EDGE/UMTS/HSPA+ up to 42.2 Mbps
Dimensions 120.5 x 63.2 x 10.6 (mm)
Weight 127.9 grams
Camera 2MP rear camera Fixed Focus 1/5" Sensor No Flash, VGA FFC
Battery 1500 mAh (5.55 Whr)
OS Windows Phone 8.1 with Denim Firmware
Connectivity 802.11 b/g/n + BT 4.0, USB2.0, MPT, DLNA, FM Radio
Location Technologies Cellular and Wi-Fi network positioning, A-GPS, A-GLONASS
SIM Size Smart Dual MicroSIM

The camera is the main area where costs were saved. The Lumia 430 comes with just a 2 MP fixed focus camera on the rear, however the front camera is the same resolution as the $1299 Apple MacBook, with a 0.3 MP VGA sensor which is clearly for cost savings, and will not be very good for anything other than the occasional video chat.

Microsoft’s strategy seems to be to release a new low end smartphone every couple of weeks, and even as someone who follows the space it is getting awfully confusing. However most of these are aimed at specific markets, and the Lumia 430 is no exception. The Lumia 430 will be available in April in the Asia-Pacific, India, the Middle East, Africa, Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Belarus.

Source: Lumia Conversations

POST A COMMENT

60 Comments

View All Comments

  • kspirit - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    That Apple jab gave me life :')

    Brett <3
    Reply
  • Refuge - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    I had to read the entire thing twice to be sure I was looking at the right "Jab" before I commented...

    Is that even really a jab? I mean jeese, all he did was make a comparison on cameras.

    Have you ever read any of their case/keyboard/laptop reviews? They (sometimes) can be brutal.

    Go find a corner and pout quietly I suppose...
    Reply
  • clewis97 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    A jab? That was an apples to apples comparison with no opinion inserted. For my money, I have never preferred Apple products aside of the iPod and iPhone prior to 2012 when android began to work effectively and Windows phone 8 became available. Apple computers seem to me counter-intuitive, low end hardware, not upgrade-able, with a glitched OS. I prefer Microsoft services (one-drive, MSN services, Office etc...) and modular hardware any day of the week. Except for Garageband!!! I love Garageband. I have owned a Mac, IPad, IPhone, and simply do not prefer them. I never got it. My gadgets are not fashion accessories. Windows and Windows phone are intimately suited to the way I do business, and the way I live.; Windows phone is the simplest, most intuitive, best working phone OS I have ever used and I have used several iterations of each. Apps you say? I have never not been able to find a useful app in the store for the purposes that I need them. This applies only to me as personal choice is always recommended, but pushing apple products and services on people as the best option is simply ridiculous. It's not... It is an option (1 of 3 or 4 perfectly viable ones). I admire Apple as a tech innovator but any of their past or present eco-systems and hardware specs simply do not live up to the hype or my expectations. Still, it is better than Chrome\Android, but not on par with Windows and Intel in terms of software\hardware combo. Not even close to me. Just a thought. Reply
  • althaz - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    THIS is the new 520. Looks pretty amazingly great for the price. Reply
  • Michael Bay - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    Yes it is, especially considering how out of place 530 was with all Nokia cut without changing the price much.
    I bought 435 for my mother, she`s happy with it.
    Reply
  • Stanand - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    I mostly agree, but the Lumia 430's 2MP fixed focus camera makes me curse. Even without flash, I find the Lumia 520's 5MP auto focus camera (with Lumia Camera software) to be surprisingly useful. Reply
  • blanarahul - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    Things that are not necessary:
    a) Ambient Light Sensor: Never works properly on low end devices.
    b) 0.3 MP camera: Why is it even there?
    c) Back camera: IMHO Microsoft should innovate and put the 2 MP FF Camera on the front.
    Reply
  • blanarahul - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    d) They should make a camera-less quad A7 option/IPS display option. Reply
  • hojnikb - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    at this pricepoint you're better off buying a second hand smartphone. Reply
  • Calista - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    I tend to agree, but this phone will be sold in developing countries. You just won't be able to find the same surplus of old more expensive phones as in richer countries and thus new but inexpensive phones are needed over there. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now