OnePlus One review

Here's why OnePlus One equals 4.5

OnePlus One review

Why you can trust TechRadar We spend hours testing every product or service we review, so you can be sure you’re buying the best. Find out more about how we test.

Where did this come from? Samsung, HTC, Sony, and even Google will be asking the very same question of the OnePlus One, we suspect.

The way it takes on the very cream of the Android crop whilst charging less than half the price makes it a bargain of near Motorola Moto G proportions.

We liked

The OnePlus One has got one of the best processors in the business, even if it is beginning to show its ages, backed by a hugely generous allotment of RAM, which means that it's a seriously impressive performer.

That performance is helped by the CyanogenMod firmware, which takes the speed and intuitiveness of stock Android and adds a load of customisation options to the settings menu, should you wish to tinker.

Then there's the 5.5-inch 1080p display, which shows everything off as clearly as you could hope for and all for a frankly unbelievable £219, $299 (around AU$320).

We disliked

For all the OnePlus One's high-end specs, it arguably suffers the most from the omission of a simple little microSD slot. Lack of storage is the one bottleneck here, while some will find the lack of a removable battery equally frustrating.

Then there are the little input inconsistencies that we hope can be fixed with a software update or two, such as a flawed voice control system and oversensitive gesture shortcuts.

Verdict

The OnePlus One's performance-to-price ratio is one of the most impressive we've ever seen in a smartphone, offering Samsung Galaxy S5 performance for half the price.

We'd almost call it the Motorola Moto G of the high-end Android world, but for a few small but significant flaws that interfere with everyday usability.

Still, if you're after a truly top end phone that can be customised to the Nth degree, and you don't mind accepting a few rough patches as part of the package, we can't see a better - or cheaper - alternative.

First reviewed: May 2014