Skip to main content

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4 could fix the biggest problem with Galaxy Z Fold 3

An unofficial render of the Galaxy Z Fold 4 from the back lying down, open with S Pen
(Image credit: Technizo Concept)

The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 4 could sort out the Galaxy Z Fold 3's inconveniently skinny shape, based on new images from leaker Ice Universe (opens in new tab).

Two photos, allegedly of cases for the Z Fold 4 and Z Fold 3, show that Samsung may well be giving the Z Fold 4 a new squarer design, as IU has rumored before. While the cases aren't directly side-by-side, you can still see some changes looking between the two shots.

See more

The big one is that the two folding sides of the cases (and therefore the phone) have become wider. You can also just about see that the height has shrunk, too, making for a squarer shape overall, like the excellent (but hard to buy) Oppo Find N. The displays on the Z Fold 4 are said to be the same size as the Z Fold 3 though despite this change: 6.2 inches on the outside and 7.6 inches on the inside.

We can also see from this case that the rear camera module seems to have lengthened between generations. This could fit in with alleged plans to update the three cameras on the Z Fold 3 to the same cameras found on the Galaxy S22: a 50MP main camera, a 12MP ultrawide camera and a 12MP 3x telephoto camera.

Disappointingly, but in line with the rumors, there's no sign of an S Pen silo built into the Z Fold 4's body from the look of the cases. The Z Fold 3 works with a special version of Samsung's stylus, but you can only store the S Pen separately or in a specific case. With Samsung having reintroduced the integrated S Pen on the Galaxy S22 Ultra, we're still hoping for the same on a Z Fold phone someday.

Internally, we're expecting a Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 chipset (also for the Galaxy Z Flip 4), offering enhanced performance over the original Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 found in the Galaxy S22 series. It should mean an even bigger power boost over the Snapdragon 888 chip in the Z Fold 3, too. A 50MP main camera has also been tipped for the Galaxy Z Fold 4, which could give it a significant photography boost.

Making these rumors sound all the sweeter is another claiming Samsung wants to give the Z Fold 4 a cheaper price than last year. It's unlikely to suddenly be a bargain given the Z Fold 3 started at $1,800, but it's good to see foldables become more affordable over time and become in reach of more buyers.

All these possible changes won't be confirmed for another few months yet though, with August the most likely time Samsung will reveal its new foldables. Keep an eye on our Galaxy Z Fold 4 and Galaxy Z Flip 4 hubs in the meantime for the latest updates around the rumor mill.

Richard Priday
Staff Writer

Richard is a Tom's Guide staff writer based in London, covering news, reviews and how-tos for phones, tablets, gaming, and whatever else people need advice on. Following on from his MA in Magazine Journalism at the University of Sheffield, he's also written for WIRED U.K., The Register and Creative Bloq. When not at work, he's likely thinking about how to brew the perfect cup of specialty coffee.

  • Marko Pollo
    I own a Fold 3, love it... but the camera as we know needs upgrade. I used to get soo many compliments from Apple ppl when I shared my photos from my Samsung 10S+, now 0 compliments. Reason I wanted to post is my Fold 3 after 7 MONTHS normal usage in San Diego is cracking/splitting where the phone folds inside. SMH, and because I have some outer damage on the outside screen it is NOT COVERED under the manufactured warranty. so instead I must pay my $249 deductible to fix their problem which will most likely affect all fold 3 phones at some time. In my opinion Samsung should pay for their FOLD FLAW instead of me. Incidentally I rarely use the front screen because it is too narrow (candy bar size, I call it) to do anything but receive notifications. I do render it useless. But I do love to use the Fold 3 when open with a nice big screen. Can't wait for the Fold 4. :-)
    Reply