Galaxy A32 5G watermarked review photos 1 scaled

The rendering of the Galaxy A34 shows that Samsung may be completely simplifying its design language

It looks very Galaxy S23-ish

Samsung is gearing up for 2023. Growing intelligence suggests the Galaxy S23 lineup is on the way for a major design change that would bring the S23 and S23+ in line with the design of the pervasive Ultra dynasty. These may not be the only two phones in the company’s portfolio to make this change: if more leaks are accurate, we might also see a nearly identical design on the upcoming mid-range Galaxy A34.


New CAD renders of the Galaxy A34 have been posted to Giznext, courtesy of OnLeaks, and they show Samsung’s upcoming budget phone from multiple angles. An untrained eye may not be able to tell the difference between an A34 and an S23 unless you know what to look for. At first glance, we notice that this device looks quite similar to the Galaxy S23 smartphones from multiple angles with some minor differences such as the backlight that is a little lower.

That’s not to say both phones are identical — when you scroll to the front, you’ll see a teardrop notch instead of the punch-hole notch we usually see on flagship phones and upper-midrange phones.

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen this design as the Galaxy A13 did first. But it may become common across the A-band. At the bottom, we have the USB-C port, while at the top, we can spy the SIM card slot.

Overall, these renders set up the Galaxy A34 as a solid budget phone, though we’ll have to see its spec stack once it’s released. It should happen in the first half of 2023, most likely after the announcement of the Galaxy S23 series. If you’re looking for a cheap phone, it might be worth waiting for this one — it has the potential to become one of the best cheap phones out there.

UPDATE: 2022/11/27 13:25 EST by AROL WRIGHT


A previous version of this article published wrongly stated that the Galaxy A34 had a headphone jack. OnLeaks made that clear This is not the case, although the original source, Giznext, stated that it had only one source. The article has been updated to remove the misinformation.