Rumored Nokia 'Catwalk' specs show a serious fat trimming

Earlier this year we first heard that Nokia is preparing a new Lumia device with an aluminium shell, codenamed "Catwalk", that's said to be a successor to the current Lumia 920. Today we're seeing some leaked specs for this device courtesy of Flavio, an Italian blogger who has previously revealed details for smartphones ahead of their launches.

Flavio's source indicates that the Nokia Catwalk is a Lumia 920 with some minor modifications; the specs for the Catwalk are similar to the Lumia 920, including a 1.5 GHz dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 chipset, 1 GB of RAM, an 8.7-megapixel camera with optical image stabilization, a 4.5-inch octaOLED 1280 x 768 display (octa referring to On Cell Touch display technology), 16 GB of on-board storage and a 2000 mAh (7.6 Wh) battery.

The major change comes in the form of size and weight reductions, reportedly slimming down the Catwalk to just 8.4mm thick and 132 grams, compared to 10.7mm and 185 grams with the Lumia 920. This reduction is said to be facilitated by the heavily-rumored aluminium design, and a switch from an IPS LCD display to an OLED-family panel should also help to reduce the footprint of this Lumia device.

Apparently the Catwalk will be unveiled on May 15 for a release on carriers in late June, with T-Mobile being a rumored carrier in the United States for this particular device. Nokia also allegedly has two other devices in the pipeline: the Lumia 928 (or "Laser"), which is reportedly a Lumia 920 revamp for Verizon and could well be based on this Catwalk model; and the flagship "EOS", which is said to bring a high-megapixel PureView camera to Windows Phone for the first time.

It's likely that Nokia will reveal both the "Catwalk" and "EOS" devices at the same time, with the Catwalk slotting into the range below the EOS in both price and specs. Of course theses specs remain a rumor right now, but it shouldn't be too long until we hear something official straight from Nokia.

Source: Flavio via: WPCentral

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Intel reportedly shipping Haswell chip to PC OEMs

Next Story

Verizon's Lumia 928 leaks, not made of aluminum, packs PureView

29 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

32gb would be cool but sounds pretty nice anyway. This shouldn't be the most expensive model so they make sense. Altho I'll be grateful if anyone can tell me what the hell is octaoled Googling for it just brought back results with these specs.

If one can't hear the very distinguishable difference between CD and DVD/A quality sound then that person is most likely deaf. The difference between bitrates on the low scale and on the high can be discerned by even the most junior of music listeners. The separation of instruments in the sound and the clarity is noticeable.

In regards to screen resolution as long as the text is sharp most consumers don't care what the resolution is. If two phones are not side by side people can't tell the difference between a sharp font and a sharper font. Anything above the 320ppi is more than enough for most consumers. WP doesn't need to be a 1080p phone due to its UI nature. It uses tiles and larger icons so incredibly sharp details above 320ppi can be lost to most consumers. Text is super sharp already at the Lumia 920's current resolution. How much more do you want them to squeeze in and waste. In the end consumers don't count ppi's or even give a crap about it.

ok one aluminum is not as tough as poly...so this phone is probably weak. second only 16gb of memory? it seems like the version 928 is better than the 920...updated camera and xenon flash, why not updated the original 920 with these fixes?

Trolls is what they are...I just want the specs so people will stop crying about it....I would rather have a 41mp camera and 64 gb of storage.....

Low resolution display; mid-speed dual-core CPU; just 1GB RAM; only a 2000mAh non-removable battery. They're incredibly underwhelming specs for a flagship phone, especially when it represents the best that Windows Phone has to offer.

It's like Nokia is completely oblivious to the phones recently released by HTC and Samsung.

theyarecomingforyou said,
Low resolution display; mid-speed dual-core CPU; just 1GB RAM; only a 2000mAh non-removable battery. They're incredibly underwhelming specs for a flagship phone, especially when it represents the best that Windows Phone has to offer.

It's like Nokia is completely oblivious to the phones recently released by HTC and Samsung.

Agree. There is nothing high end about this spec. It's just a problem for developers, since iOS and Android phones have much better spec, but they need to trim down their apps/games to work on Windows Phones, if possible at all.

theyarecomingforyou said,
Low resolution display; mid-speed dual-core CPU; just 1GB RAM; only a 2000mAh non-removable battery. They're incredibly underwhelming specs for a flagship phone, especially when it represents the best that Windows Phone has to offer.

It's like Nokia is completely oblivious to the phones recently released by HTC and Samsung.

Maybe because theres more to phones than just specs?

theyarecomingforyou said,
Low resolution display; mid-speed dual-core CPU; just 1GB RAM; only a 2000mAh non-removable battery. They're incredibly underwhelming specs for a flagship phone, especially when it represents the best that Windows Phone has to offer.

It's like Nokia is completely oblivious to the phones recently released by HTC and Samsung.


If this is nothing more then a 922 they're not going to change the specs. The third rumored EOS should be more but these are just redesigned 920s.

If we were talking about a possible 930 or 950 then I'd agree.

Yep ... people are so eagar to bash MS, and they don't even know what this phone is for. Nokia 920 is exclusive to AT&T. Catwalk is Nokia 920 refresh for T-mobile, and they have another Nokia 920 refresh for Verizon. This isn't meant to be the next flagship phone.

Scorpus said,
The "Catwalk" is not meant to be the next flagship, just a Lumia 920 refresh. The next flagship will be the "EOS"

I really don't see a need for too much higher res a screen or doubling the ram. I'd much rather get that wasted hardware cost put into storage space. I really can't see why 1080p is such a big deal. I've seen HTCs 1080p phone and it didn't seem to make that much of a difference in usability. Winphone doesn't even support 1080p yet so I saw these specs and it's exactly what I expected.

It's the looks that sell a lot of phones nowadays anyways. Everything I've heard is that this will be the most attractive phone on sale with the best camera hands down. Yeah there will be better android handsets as far as specs go but this one will be very desirable.

blackjezuz said,
I really don't see a need for too much higher res a screen or doubling the ram. I'd much rather get that wasted hardware cost put into storage space. I really can't see why 1080p is such a big deal. I've seen HTCs 1080p phone and it didn't seem to make that much of a difference in usability. Winphone doesn't even support 1080p yet so I saw these specs and it's exactly what I expected.

The standard answer: 'don't see need for better spec'.

Yeah, let's stop developing better hardware. No one has a need for it anyway.

Do you not understand the concept of the high ppi displays? Beyond a certain point the pixels are too small to be seen, 1080p displays on phone are complete joke.

notchinese said,
Do you not understand the concept of the high ppi displays? Beyond a certain point the pixels are too small to be seen, 1080p displays on phone are complete joke.

And people argued that it wasn't possible to tell the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps MP3s or between DVD and Blu-ray, yet that's nonsense. While an argument can be made for there being diminishing gains for continued PPI increases the reality is that 1080p screens are an improvement. When you take the low screen resolution with the rest of the specs it's clear we're looking at a mid-range product and it only highlights how quickly the Lumia 920 has become dated.

But where to you cross the line between "noticeably better" and "Uselessly better" Because at some point, the resolution change can no longer be noticed, and it can even have a detrimental effect on other things, such as battery life, draw speed (CPU/GPU power needed to render the same thing at a higher res) and cost.

I mean a 4k screen on a 5 inch device would be a higher resolution, but would it be better?

theyarecomingforyou said,

And people argued that it wasn't possible to tell the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps MP3s or between DVD and Blu-ray, yet that's nonsense. While an argument can be made for there being diminishing gains for continued PPI increases the reality is that 1080p screens are an improvement. When you take the low screen resolution with the rest of the specs it's clear we're looking at a mid-range product and it only highlights how quickly the Lumia 920 has become dated.

If the prices tmo and Verizon charge for their respective 920 respins reflects the mid-range nature of the specs then there is nothing to really complain about. Until they release a 930+ Lumia the specs won't change.

Just look at what they did with the 810, 820 and 822. Same specs but tweaked body designs for some carriers.

1280x768 isn't low res just because there are phones who offer more, far from it. Also resolution isn't the only thing you should consider when it comes to displays and the rest of the specs are fine, WP is very efficient so you'll get more out of CPU/RAM than with Android.

Anyway, I'm impressed by how they managed to slim the device down, didn't like the 920 due to it's size and weight, other Nokias are a bit bulky too. Looking forward to it.

theyarecomingforyou said,

And people argued that it wasn't possible to tell the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps MP3s

Even professionals often enough aren't able to tell the difference...

theyarecomingforyou said,

And people argued that it wasn't possible to tell the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps MP3s or between DVD and Blu-ray, yet that's nonsense. While an argument can be made for there being diminishing gains for continued PPI increases the reality is that 1080p screens are an improvement. When you take the low screen resolution with the rest of the specs it's clear we're looking at a mid-range product and it only highlights how quickly the Lumia 920 has become dated.

When the retina display was introduced on the iPhone, it was an advancement that the Apple fanboys used to laugh at the competition. And it was much better than on other phones. But then Windows Phones and Android devices did better, releasing phones with even higher DPI than the iPhone, and suddenly anything higher than the DPI used on the iPhone 5 (326 DPI) was meaningless because Jobs told them that retina was the best that the human eye could see (proven incorrect, btw). Yes, the resolution and DPI is important, until the competition exceeds Apple's specs, then it is too much.

Mackster said,

Agree. There is nothing high end about this spec. It's just a problem for developers, since iOS and Android phones have much better spec, but they need to trim down their apps/games to work on Windows Phones, if possible at all.


What are you mumbling about, have you even held a WP8 device before?
I got a 920, and I don't think I've ever maxed out the CPU or RAM.
Well I think Castlemine maxed out my CPU but that's due to horrible coding/no optimization.

MFH said,

Even professionals often enough aren't able to tell the difference...

Haha, most sounds above the 128kbps range are not hearable to the human ear, especially not when you get older.
Funny how people keep claiming such nonsense. If I recall correctly there was a big research on this in the late 90s where the bitrate of a song has very little to do with quality once you get above a specific bitrate. I think it was 96 or 128 not to sure.

DVD and Bluray is entirely different. The sound quality is quite similar but the picture is obviously better on a Betamax.

SoylentG said,

When the retina display was introduced on the iPhone, it was an advancement that the Apple fanboys used to laugh at the competition. And it was much better than on other phones. But then Windows Phones and Android devices did better, releasing phones with even higher DPI than the iPhone, and suddenly anything higher than the DPI used on the iPhone 5 (326 DPI) was meaningless because Jobs told them that retina was the best that the human eye could see (proven incorrect, btw). Yes, the resolution and DPI is important, until the competition exceeds Apple's specs, then it is too much.

You might want to check yourself on that claim (It's technically correct if you have vision BETTER than 20/20, which most of us don't, if you hold your phone about a foot away from your face)

http://prometheus.med.utah.edu...10/06/apple-retina-display/

Osiris said,

Maybe because theres more to phones than just specs?


But this is a smartphone not a phone.... Besides 16GB instead of 32GB and no SD card is a big difference.

MDboyz said,
Yep ... people are so eagar to bash MS, and they don't even know what this phone is for. Nokia 920 is exclusive to AT&T. Catwalk is Nokia 920 refresh for T-mobile, and they have another Nokia 920 refresh for Verizon. This isn't meant to be the next flagship phone.


And what MS has to do with this? Nokia is the OEM; besides this Catwalk is supposed to be a global device to be sold Worldwide not just TMobile.

Sraf said,
You might want to check yourself on that claim (It's technically correct if you have vision BETTER than 20/20, which most of us don't, if you hold your phone about a foot away from your face)

http://prometheus.med.utah.edu...10/06/apple-retina-display/

There are other factors to consider. For instance, if you have a 1080p source and display it at a non-native resolution (say 720p) then there is quality loss involved, as well as a performance hit for the conversion. That's why there has been a push for 1080p displays. It should also be noted that there are advantages to moving beyond 1080p for a sub-5" device, as it means non-native resolutions can be used without the same visual artifacts that occur currently on desktop monitors.

What you also find is that as manufacturing technologies improve it becomes no more expensive - and in some cases cheaper - to provide higher resolution screens, even if the gains diminish considerably.