Nokia Lumia 925 now available on AT&T for $99

The Nokia Lumia 925 for AT&T is now on sale; the Lumia 925 was announced on May 14th and has slowly made its way to the U.S. market. First available on T-Mobile in mid-July, the device has finally gone on sale for AT&T customers.

AT&T started pre-orders on August 28th, offering the device in a somewhat exclusive black. The Lumia 925, at 8.5mm and 139g, remains the thinnest and lightest Lumia to date. It offers an 8.7 MP Pureview camera with Optical Image Stabilization and an additional sixth lens for extra sharpness. The device has a 4.5" PureMotion HD+ Display, 1 GB of RAM, and a dual-core Snapdragon 1.5 GHz processor. If you want wireless charging, you'll need to add an optional cover. You can also check out our full review, if you're considering this as your next phone.

Available for $99 with a 2-year contract or $429 without a contract, the device is sure to attract those looking for a less expensive Lumia. The device is only available in black and offers 16 GB of onboard storage, which cannot be expanded. If you need more storage, you may want to look at the Lumia 920, although the device is significantly heavier and thicker, it is available for $49 with a 2-year contract.

You can order the Lumia 925 online (ships in 5-7 business days) or purchase one at your local AT&T store.

Source: AT&TImage via AT&T

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Report: Xbox One graphics drivers lag behind those of PS4

Next Story

Huawei says it is still in the Windows Phone business

41 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

volodoscope said,
Wish it had 32GB instead of 16GB.

They have it but it's only available on Vodafone (in UK). I don't understand why on earth don't they offer 16, 32 and 64 variants everywhere. This is the biggest problem I have with it. High end phone with such limited storage. If it were 725 or 825 then ok but this should've definitely had at lest 32GB variant...

Obry said,

They have it but it's only available on Vodafone (in UK). I don't understand why on earth don't they offer 16, 32 and 64 variants everywhere. This is the biggest problem I have with it. High end phone with such limited storage. If it were 725 or 825 then ok but this should've definitely had at lest 32GB variant...

Well Nokia seems to have wised up and is putting a microSD slot on the 1520. So stupid that they didn't put it on the 920, 925, 928, and 1020. Plenty of room to fit one in.

Nice phone, but I think they're starting it off too high. $0.99 for the 920, $49 for the 925 makes more sense to me at this point, sadly. Nokia has announcements at the end of the mont which I'd hope will have a 32g 925 (which I think is better suited for $99), and the 1520 (how much are its android counterparts selling for? That'll set the max for the 1520 IMO).

Just my thought. It seems like a great phone, but tech ages poorly, especially this time of year. Plus, with the 1020, it seems AT&T is trying to charge as much as they can for Nokia devices so they don't have to subsidize as much, easing their profits. I can understand that, but at the same time, they're also hindering the platform, limiting their options should Apple or Samsung/Android get to be an issue for them.

Chikairo said,
Nice phone, but I think they're starting it off too high. $0.99 for the 920, $49 for the 925 makes more sense to me at this point, sadly. Nokia has announcements at the end of the mont which I'd hope will have a 32g 925 (which I think is better suited for $99), and the 1520 (how much are its android counterparts selling for? That'll set the max for the 1520 IMO).

Just my thought. It seems like a great phone, but tech ages poorly, especially this time of year. Plus, with the 1020, it seems AT&T is trying to charge as much as they can for Nokia devices so they don't have to subsidize as much, easing their profits. I can understand that, but at the same time, they're also hindering the platform, limiting their options should Apple or Samsung/Android get to be an issue for them.

Why should the 925 cost more than the 920? It's just a variant of the 920. It has less storage and doesn't have built in wireless charging in exchange for being thinner.

mrp04 said,

Why should the 925 cost more than the 920? It's just a variant of the 920. It has less storage and doesn't have built in wireless charging in exchange for being thinner.

Because marketing has nothing to do with reality?

Seriously though: it is a newer model, and if Wikipedia is correct? Longer battery life, lighter, and I think the screen is better too. Also, the aluminum body.

Very seriously: if you think these are stupid reasons for a phone to cost more? You're probably right. But, can you think of other things where stupid reasons seemed to be enough for an item to be a best seller or even dominate the market? Most of the market isn't tech savvy!

These are just random numbers, no one can compare two phones just by these. It's like comparing electric and gasoline car by stating the size of a fuel tank.

volodoscope said,
These are just random numbers, no one can compare two phones just by these. It's like comparing electric and gasoline car by stating the size of a fuel tank.

Sure. But what we can see is a Lumia that isn't even top of it's own range and has been out for 3 months still bests the latest iPhone. At a lower cost too.

Who doesn't love a game of top trumps.

How many non-deletable applications, i.e., "crapware" come pre-installed? Pity, the low-end LG A340 from AT&T comes loaded up with so much non-deletable "stuff." Otherwise, it would have been a viable contender for Pantech Breeze III (the other low-end phone AT&T offers).

TsarNikky said,
How many non-deletable applications, i.e., "crapware" come pre-installed? Pity, the low-end LG A340 from AT&T comes loaded up with so much non-deletable "stuff." Otherwise, it would have been a viable contender for Pantech Breeze III (the other low-end phone AT&T offers).
0

TsarNikky said,
How many non-deletable applications, i.e., "crapware" come pre-installed? Pity, the low-end LG A340 from AT&T comes loaded up with so much non-deletable "stuff." Otherwise, it would have been a viable contender for Pantech Breeze III (the other low-end phone AT&T offers).

If its like my Lumia 900 or old Samsung Focus? Everything that isn't part of the OS can be easily uninstalled. Go to the app list, press and hold, press "uninstall" from the contextual menu. Poof! Gone!

Installing and uninstalling WP (and native W8/RT apps) is trivially easy, and as far as I know they don't leave trash behind. I don't know how it is on Android or iOS, so I can't compare...

Maybe, AT&T learned from their bad decision with the LG A340. One can only hope. it may be worth a special trip to the AT&T store to confirm that the crapware can actually be deleted--if any crapware is pre-installed.

I loved my Lumia 920. But this phone is essentially the same thing. But Nokia still gets high marks for making a beautiful phone.

With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

LOL.

64 bit android phones from the future? with I hope at least 6 GB of ram to take advantage of 64 bit architecture which is more expensive and power hungry than efficient 32bit cpus that so far, don't need 6GB of ram...

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

LOL WUT?

Android isn't 64-bit yet and Windows Phone will have zero problems transitioning to 64-bit. It uses the NT kernel. You know, the one millions of consumers have been using on 64-bit CPUs since 2006?

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

I think you got swayed by Apple's announcement of 64-bit architecture. If Apple only put 2 GB of RAM in their new phone, it will be just hype. If they put at least 4, then I would say they're really looking at this long term.

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

Can't tell if troll or serious

neonspark said,
64 bit android phones from the future? with I hope at least 6 GB of ram to take advantage of 64 bit architecture which is more expensive and power hungry than efficient 32bit cpus that so far, don't need 6GB of ram...

must....do.....research.....before.....posting.

64bit isn't just about memory.....

stevan said,

must....do.....research.....before.....posting.

64bit isn't just about memory.....

Crunches... bigger... numbers...

Also, ARM-64 has twice as many general purpose registers and a SIMD unit that has twice as many registers as that of ARM-32.

Both those facts = performance improvement over anything Nokia has on the market now.

-LarvaInject

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

You should be under NDA!!!! Google has told us NOT to post about 64bit processing.

LarvaInject said,
Also, ARM-64 has twice as many general purpose registers and a SIMD unit that has twice as many registers as that of ARM-32.

Both those facts = performance improvement over anything Nokia has on the market now.

-LarvaInject

It might be true that advertising the iPhone as 64-bit can put added pressure to Microsoft / Nokia because consumers are very much unaware of how 64-bit architecture works (all about the numbers now), however, for applications to utilize the processing power of 64-bit, the apps themselves must be running 64-bit. Any app running at 32-bit may or may not see any performance increase.

LarvaInject said,
Also, ARM-64 has twice as many general purpose registers and a SIMD unit that has twice as many registers as that of ARM-32.

Both those facts = performance improvement over anything Nokia has on the market now.

-LarvaInject

Do you have the slightest clue what you're even talking about? 64 bit OS on mobile phones if anything only slows most things down (since most apps are 32 bit so they need to run in emulation layer which brings extra overhead). Furthermore, to actually take advantage of 64 bit instruction sets you need to have 4+ GB of RAM and have apps that actually take advantage of such amounts of RAM. Currently all Android and iOS phones have at most 1GB RAM for the most part and 99% of the apps are 32 bit apps running in emulation layer. Last but not least, Windows Phone is optimized to run using low amounts of RAM so you simply don't need such high specs to achieve the same or better performance as competing Android and iOS device.

It is amazing what misleading advertising can do to people (case in point).

Lolz... does the phone have more than 4GB of memory. Also does the OS support 64bits, and also does it have all the drivers in 64 bit? .... Then do all Apps run at 64 bit as well? ...

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject

and just remember don't update your iPhone 4s or 5 to ios7 for at least a couple of weeks because most apps currently available on the appstore are either broken or very buggy on ios7.

LarvaInject said,
With 64-bit Android and iOS phones now hitting the market, it puts Nokia in a tough position, because they have a 32-bit only lineup right now.

-LarvaInject


I can't stop laughing at this...