Nokia 3 1 Vs Galaxy J3 2017 Was Upgrading Really Worth It

For budget-conscious smartphone users in the late 2010s, the Nokia 3.1 and Samsung Galaxy J3 (2017) represented two solid entry-level options. Many consumers found themselves at a crossroads—whether to stick with their aging Galaxy J3 or upgrade to the newer Nokia offering. But was that upgrade truly worthwhile? To answer this, we need to go beyond specs and evaluate real-world performance, long-term usability, software support, and value retention.

The Galaxy J3 2017 was a reliable workhorse for basic tasks—calls, messaging, light browsing—but by 2018, its limitations were becoming apparent. Enter the Nokia 3.1, launched with Android One, promising cleaner software, faster updates, and better optimization. On paper, it looked like an obvious step up. But how did it perform in daily use?

Design and Build Quality

One of the first noticeable differences between the two devices is the build quality. The Galaxy J3 2017 features a plastic body with a removable back cover, giving it a utilitarian feel. While functional, it lacks durability and premium appeal. Its 5-inch display feels compact by modern standards but still manageable for one-handed use.

In contrast, the Nokia 3.1 introduced an aluminum frame and a more refined design language. Though the back is still plastic, the structural rigidity improved significantly. It also offered a slightly larger 5.2-inch HD display with better brightness and viewing angles. The placement of buttons and speaker grille felt more deliberate, reflecting HMD Global’s emphasis on thoughtful ergonomics.

Tip: When upgrading from older Samsung devices, check if your accessories (cases, chargers) are compatible—the Nokia 3.1 uses a different port layout.

Performance and Software Experience

The Galaxy J3 2017 runs on Samsung’s Exynos 7870 chipset with 2GB of RAM and 16GB of storage. At launch, it handled basic apps adequately, but over time, multitasking became sluggish. Samsung’s TouchWiz interface added bloatware and slowed down responsiveness, especially after OS updates.

The Nokia 3.1, powered by the MediaTek MT6750N and also equipped with 2GB of RAM, wasn’t a massive leap in raw power. However, its advantage lies in software. As part of the Android One program, it shipped with near-stock Android (initially Android 8.0 Oreo), resulting in smoother animations, fewer background processes, and quicker app launches.

Android One also meant timely security patches and guaranteed OS upgrades. While the J3 2017 received only one major Android update (to Nougat), the Nokia 3.1 eventually upgraded to Android 10—a rare feat in the budget segment.

“Software optimization can outweigh hardware superiority in entry-level phones. A clean OS often delivers a more satisfying user experience than raw specs.” — Linus Park, Mobile Analyst at TechEdge Weekly

Camera Comparison: Realistic Expectations

Both phones feature modest cameras, so expectations should remain grounded. The Galaxy J3 2017 has an 8MP rear sensor and a 5MP front camera. In good lighting, photos are acceptable for social media, but low-light performance is poor—images become grainy and lack detail.

The Nokia 3.1 steps up slightly with an 8MP rear shooter that includes phase detection autofocus and an f/2.0 aperture. Image processing is more consistent thanks to Google’s computational photography influence via Android One. While not revolutionary, point-and-shoot reliability improved, especially in daylight conditions.

Video recording remains limited to 1080p on both devices, but the Nokia handles stabilization slightly better. Neither phone excels here, but for casual snapping, the Nokia offers a more predictable outcome.

Detailed Feature Comparison

Feature	Nokia 3.1	Galaxy J3 2017
Release Year	2018	2017
OS at Launch	Android 8.0 (Oreo)	Android 7.0 (Nougat)
Final OS	Android 10	Android 8.0 (limited)
Chipset	MediaTek MT6750N	Exynos 7870
RAM / Storage	2GB / 16GB (expandable)	2GB / 16GB (expandable)
Rear Camera	8MP, PDAF, f/2.0	8MP, f/1.9
Battery	2990 mAh	2600 mAh
Display	5.2\" HD IPS LCD	5.0\" HD Super AMOLED
Software Updates	Regular via Android One	Inconsistent, delayed

Note: While the J3 2017 has a Super AMOLED screen—an advantage in contrast and color vibrancy—the Nokia’s LCD panel benefits from better sunlight readability and less blue light emission.

Real-World Upgrade Experience: A Mini Case Study

Consider Maria, a schoolteacher who used her Galaxy J3 2017 from 2017 to mid-2019. By 2018, she noticed increasing lag when switching between WhatsApp, Gmail, and YouTube Kids for classroom videos. App crashes became frequent, and the device would overheat during video playback.

In 2019, she upgraded to the Nokia 3.1. Despite similar hardware, her experience improved dramatically. Apps launched faster, multitasking was smoother, and the phone stayed cooler. She appreciated the stock Android interface, which made navigation intuitive for her non-tech-savvy parents, who occasionally borrowed the phone.

Most importantly, she received regular security updates until 2021 and the Android 10 upgrade in 2020—something her J3 never got. For Maria, the upgrade wasn’t about flashy features, but about longevity and peace of mind.

Step-by-Step: Is Upgrading Worth It?

If you're still using a Galaxy J3 2017 and considering a move to the Nokia 3.1 (or a similar-tier device), follow this decision timeline:

1. Evaluate current pain points: Is your J3 freezing, failing to install app updates, or running out of storage?
2. Check software status: If your device hasn’t received updates since 2018, security risks increase.
3. Assess usage needs: Do you rely on mobile banking, messaging, or video calls? These demand stable performance.
4. Compare alternatives: Even if the Nokia 3.1 isn’t available new, consider refurbished units or newer budget models with Android Go.
5. Test before committing: If possible, try the Nokia 3.1 in-store or borrow one to assess speed and interface comfort.

Tip: Always back up your J3 data before switching. Use Google Drive or Samsung Smart Switch to transfer contacts and messages seamlessly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Was the Nokia 3.1 faster than the Galaxy J3 2017?

Not significantly in benchmark tests, but due to its clean Android One software, the Nokia 3.1 felt snappier in everyday use, with fewer lags and quicker app response times.

Can both phones run modern apps in 2024?

Limitedly. Both struggle with heavy apps like TikTok or Instagram Reels. Light versions (e.g., Facebook Lite) or web-based alternatives are recommended for smoother performance.

Did the Nokia 3.1 have better battery life?

Yes. With a larger 2990 mAh battery and more efficient software, the Nokia 3.1 typically lasted a full day with moderate use, whereas the J3 2017 often required charging by late afternoon.

Conclusion: Was the Upgrade Worth It?

For most users, yes—the upgrade from the Galaxy J3 2017 to the Nokia 3.1 was genuinely worthwhile, not because of dramatic hardware improvements, but because of better software, longer support, and improved long-term reliability.

The shift from bloated manufacturer skins to clean Android One marked a turning point in budget smartphones. The Nokia 3.1 exemplified how thoughtful software integration could elevate a modest device into a dependable daily driver. Meanwhile, the J3 2017, despite its early popularity, quickly became outdated due to inconsistent updates and heavier system overhead.

If you were holding onto the J3 past 2018, moving to the Nokia 3.1 likely extended your smartphone lifespan by two or more years—saving money and reducing e-waste. That alone makes the upgrade a smart, practical choice.

💬 Have you made this upgrade? Share your experience below—did the Nokia 3.1 meet your expectations, or did you face unexpected issues?