LG G Flex 2 delivers octa-core Snapdragon 810 SoC, improve display, better camera and more

[Shawn Knight]

LG’s first G Flex smartphone was more or less a public experiment. Its self-healing capabilities and the fact that it was curved were neat but shortcomings like a low-resolution screen and poor-quality camera meant that enthusiasts never really took it seriously.

The company hasn’t given up on the concept, however, and has returned with the G Flex 2 which improves on the original in virtually every aspect.

The G Flex 2 will ship with a slightly smaller 5.5-inch display with a resolution that’s been bumped up to 1080p spec. Inside is Qualcomm’s new octa-core Snapdragon 810 chip ticking along at 2.0GHz that is mated with 2GB of RAM. Storage options include your choice of 16GB or 32GB of internal flash, plus there is a microSD card slot should your needs increase or you want to quickly transfer data.

Borrowing from the LG G3, the 13-megapixel camera on the G Flex 2 will include laser auto focus and OIS+ as well as a dual-LED flash. A 2.1-mexapixel shooter can be found up front for selfies and video calls.

The self-healing back cover has returned albeit with some improvements. Where it used to take about three minutes to heal on the original, the G Flex 2 can pull off the same feat in around 10 seconds at room temperature. Now if someone could just come up with self-healing glass, we’d be in business.

The LG G Flex 2 will be available starting later this month in South Korea in silver and red followed by a global rollout shortly thereafter. No word yet on how much it’ll cost but we do know that AT&T and Sprint have already committed to carrying the handset in the US.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/59302-lg-g-flex-2-delivers-octa-core-snapdragon.html

 

[Jad Chaar]

Interesting phone. The self healing back cover is revolutionary IMO as long as it actually works.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

Rather Sprint & AT&T to commit to carrying it than me, it's still a gimmick as far as I'm concerned.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Rather Sprint & AT&T to commit to carrying it than me, it's still a gimmick as far as I'm concerned.

Don't knock it till ya try it. Or, in the case of $600 gadgets, read about it from someone who's tried it.

 

[p51d007]

Neat idea, but why would I want to shell out 600-800 bucks for one of these, or get screwed by "only" paying 199-300 dollar on contract, that rips you off to the tune of several thousand dollars over 2 years, when I can have a great user experience with a 300 dollar chinese 6" phone that WORKS GREAT. It just doesn't have android 5, doesn't have a snapdragon 8xx processor and a million pixel screen? The hardware on these things anymore has so outstripped the the software that you are wasting what it is possible to do. I'd rather have a "slow" snapdragon 400, 720p screen and HUGE battery, that lasts for days with heavy use, for 300 bucks, than waste 700 or more on a device that might get 1 day of heavy use, if you are lucky, and bloated down to the point some features are locked/removed.
Until something magical comes along with the apps, what's the use of every 5-6 months buying a faster and faster device?

 

[Ranger1st]

Only phones I've ever had catastrophic failures with are LG; the 930 fried it's self out and it was less then 18 months old. the slide phone I had from them years ago, forget the name, vanity or something stupid, the internal flash memory holding the OS died in under 8 months, non repairable.. F U LG, never again.

 

[Zenodroid]

2gb ram ? bleh, not worth buying then...

 

[Kibaruk]

2gb ram ? bleh, not worth buying then...

Thats more than you'll need in a phone =P

Also I'm a bit curious on the self healing part, what is it exactly that self heals??

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

Don't knock it till ya try it. Or, in the case of $600 gadgets, read about it from someone who's tried it.

Not for me thanks, I fail to see any justification for spending $600 on a phone unless I could resell the thing in a years time for $1200.

 

[Kibaruk]

I fail to see any justification for spending $600 on a phone unless I could resell the thing in a years time for $1200.

Yes because that makes perfect sense!

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Neat idea, but why would I want to shell out 600-800 bucks for one of these, or get screwed by "only" paying 199-300 dollar on contract, that rips you off to the tune of several thousand dollars over 2 years, when I can have a great user experience with a 300 dollar chinese 6" phone that WORKS GREAT. It just doesn't have android 5, doesn't have a snapdragon 8xx processor and a million pixel screen? The hardware on these things anymore has so outstripped the the software that you are wasting what it is possible to do. I'd rather have a "slow" snapdragon 400, 720p screen and HUGE battery, that lasts for days with heavy use, for 300 bucks, than waste 700 or more on a device that might get 1 day of heavy use, if you are lucky, and bloated down to the point some features are locked/removed.
Until something magical comes along with the apps, what's the use of every 5-6 months buying a faster and faster device?

Not every 6 months, but every couple years, yes. If what you're interested in is battery life then the snapdragon 8xx are what you want in your phone. The faster processors provide better battery life. Also, phones start to wear out after a couple years. I have an HTC One and the battery doesn't last as long as it used too, the camera also doesn't work as well as it did a year ago.
So for us owners of 2013 phones like the One/S4/LG G2, we're interested. I doubt anyone who just bought a Note 4 cares at all about this phone.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

Yes because that makes perfect sense!

OK let me rephrase that. 600 yards is far too much cabbage to throw at a device which is essentially obsolete after less than a year unless you can make most of your money back. Buying into tech is a mugs game and it's the consumer that always winds up holding the losing number. Mid range devices will satisfy 99.9% of all the consumers needs but try telling that to the blockheads who can't or don't want to understand it.

 

[Guest]

a device which is essentially obsolete after less than a year unless

There are a lot of people who, just like you, need to learn that "obsolete" means "no longer functions adequately", and NOT "still functions perfectly well and does everything I need it to, but is no longer the flagship".
This obsession with having to have the very latest product, and calling evrything that isn't the very latest product "obsolete", is beyond ridiculous.

 

[Kibaruk]

OK let me rephrase that. 600 yards is far too much cabbage to throw at a device which is essentially obsolete after less than a year unless you can make most of your money back. Buying into tech is a mugs game and it's the consumer that always winds up holding the losing number. Mid range devices will satisfy 99.9% of all the consumers needs but try telling that to the blockheads who can't or don't want to understand it.

I'm fine with my 2 gens behind 1 year old LG G2 and also I recommend to everyone and anyone to get a first generation Moto G. Not because of that I'll come into a tech site to comment a "no thanks".

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

I'm fine with my 2 gens behind 1 year old LG G2 and also I recommend to everyone and anyone to get a first generation Moto G. Not because of that I'll come into a tech site to comment a "no thanks".

Nothing wrong with buying brand new older devices, they usually get marked way down to clear stocks when they are superseded but they are still relevant. I still use a Galaxy S3 which I bought brand new for less than half it's original release retail price, while not the most desirable device with the greatest specs anymore it still gets the job done.
I've never seen the sense in keeping up with the Jones's or buying something just for it's label but I guess that's just my nature.

 

[mailpup]

There are a lot of people who, just like you, need to learn that "obsolete" means "no longer functions adequately", and NOT "still functions perfectly well and does everything I need it to, but is no longer the flagship".

I believe your definition of obsolete is inaccurate. I suggest you double check it.

 

[Guest]

I believe your definition of obsolete is inaccurate. I suggest you double check it.

No, it is not. Here are the two definitions on Merriam-Webster: "no longer in use or no longer useful", and "of a kind or style no longer current".
Neither applies to generation-old smartphones. Take the Galaxy S4, HTC ONe M7, or the iPhone 5, for example. Suggesting either of them is "no longer useful" is just ridiculous. Also, they all use hardware platforms that are 100% compatible with every smartphone software (on their respective OSes, of course), perform perfectly well running them, and still have current OS versions. Even though they are around two years old, they are not in any conceivable way "obsolete", and still won't be for a while.

 

[mailpup]

You missed my point. I never said anything about any phone being "no longer useful" or obsolete. You evidently assumed that I did. All I said was that your definition of obsolete as "no longer functions adequately" is inaccurate.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

No, it is not. Here are the two definitions on Merriam-Webster: "no longer in use or no longer useful", and "of a kind or style no longer current".
Neither applies to generation-old smartphones. Take the Galaxy S4, HTC ONe M7, or the iPhone 5, for example. Suggesting either of them is "no longer useful" is just ridiculous. Also, they all use hardware platforms that are 100% compatible with every smartphone software (on their respective OSes, of course), perform perfectly well running them, and still have current OS versions. Even though they are around two years old, they are not in any conceivable way "obsolete", and still won't be for a while.

It's a term used loosely and overused. Just because the tech world refers to anything as 'obsolete' after it has been superseded doesn't mean to say it's no longer relevant.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

There are a lot of people who, just like you, need to learn that "obsolete" means "no longer functions adequately", and NOT "still functions perfectly well and does everything I need it to, but is no longer the flagship".
This obsession with having to have the very latest product, and calling evrything that isn't the very latest product "obsolete", is beyond ridiculous.

Of course it's ridiculous but that's the way things roll in the tech world, you take the word at face value
While on the subject of loose terms, "futureproof" is another overused and meaningless term and the industry loves to use it.

 

[Kibaruk]

Ok guys, I think you are all missing the point, this is a TECH news site, if you want to laugh at new overpriced TECHNOLOGY you are in the freaking wrong place.

Now STAHP! I don't care what you might think or might not think is a good or bad way to throw money at, THANKS!

 

[Zenodroid]

Thats more than you'll need in a phone =P

Also I'm a bit curious on the self healing part, what is it exactly that self heals??

do u still run ur pc with 32 bit windows and max 4gb ram ? always better to have more than enough, than less than needed and we are now talking 4gb ram in phones, so its kinda sad that lg is also going the apple way, with low specs on high end systems...