CAT S61
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix
Pricecompare
Average of 13 scores (from 28 reviews)
Reviews for the CAT S61
The robust CAT S61 puts all those who say that there are no innovations in the smartphone market to shame. However, with the built-in thermal-imaging camera, a laser distance measure, and the automatic measure of the indoor air quality, its most important features might be more useful for professional users.
Source: Ausdroid Archive.org version
There’s a pretty tight target market for the CAT S61 and it’s users who live and work in harsh environments that need a phone capable of surviving the day with them. If you’re not in a trade or industry that fits that bill then you’re not a target user.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 04/21/2019
Source: Htxt Africa Archive.org version
There's really not much to see with the S61 aside from the laser measuring and FLIR camera. Both work decently but not nearly as well as bespoke gadgets for those purposes. What really kills this handset is its middling features and premium price. We know its a rugged phone so there are trade-offs but we feel this handset doesn't compel us to cough up the price of admission.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/09/2018
Rating: Total score: 50%
Source: Trusted Reviews Archive.org version
The CAT S61 is the ultimate, money is no object, rugged phone. But it still isn’t perfect. Clearly aware it’s onto a winning format, Bullit has chosen not to rock the boat on the S60, refining rather than rethinking the design of the S61. Highlights include a more powerful thermal imaging sensor, laser measuring tool and ambient air sensor that will act as canary in a coal mine.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 08/08/2018
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Tech Smart Archive.org version
There’s not much else to crit on the Cat S61. It’s a workhorse built for those for whom ‘light’ should not refer to neither their beer or smartphone. The Cat S61 is the best one in the range by far, pushing it from a mid-range muddler to a strong performer where you don’t need to sacrifice processing power nor screen quality.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 08/03/2018
Source: Zdnet.com Archive.org version
The Cat S61 smartphone is not designed to compete with the Apple iPhone, OnePlus 6, Galaxy Note 8, or any other typical high end or mid-range smartphone. You should only consider buying the S61 if your company has a need for thermal imaging technology. If you just want a rugged smartphone with no need for thermal imaging, then take a look at the Cat S41 for $450.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/30/2018
Source: Android Authority Archive.org version
Overall, it’s great to see a phone fill a niche that isn’t being filled by many other manufacturers. For people that work in extreme conditions, this is a good option (or even if you’re just tough on your devices). It isn’t pretty and it will cost a whopping 899 Euros ($999 USD) when it launches in Q2, but this might be in the running for one of the best rugged phones out there.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 03/01/2018
Foreign Reviews
Source: Android User DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/25/2020
Source: A1 Blog DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/05/2018
Source: Tech Stage DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 08/09/2018
Source: Chip.de DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 08/02/2018
Rating: Total score: 78% performance: 73% features: 73% display: 94% mobility: 94%
Source: Computerbase DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/27/2018
Source: Android Pit DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/23/2018
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: A1 Blog DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/20/2018
Source: Android Pit DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 02/22/2018
Source: Golem DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 02/22/2018
Source: PC Guia PT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 01/23/2019
Rating: Total score: 75%
Source: Nieuwe Mobiel.nl NL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/22/2019
Rating: Total score: 75%
Source: Computer Totaal NL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/13/2018
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: 01Net FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 08/01/2018
Rating: Total score: 84% performance: 80% mobility: 100%
Source: Portables4Gamers FR→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice design; solid workmanship; excellent cameras.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 04/02/2019
Source: Komputerswiat PL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Elegant design; great built quality; nice cameras; good hardware; high performance.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 06/29/2018
Source: HWSW HU→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Powerful hardware; high performance; very tough; decent cameras. Negative: High price.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 08/03/2018
Source: Zing VN→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Solid workmanship; powerful hardware; high performance; metal case; support waterproof and dust avoiding. Negative: High price.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 02/23/2018
Source: Alt om Data DA→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/23/2018
Rating: Total score: 82% price: 60% performance: 70% display: 70% mobility: 100% workmanship: 90%
Source: Lyd og Billede DA→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 07/03/2018
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Mobil.se SV→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/23/2018
Rating: Total score: 74%
Source: Ljud och Bild SV→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 07/02/2018
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Playtech.ro →EN Archive.org version
Positive: Long battery life; support waterproof; powerful hardware; high performance; excellent cameras.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/07/2018
Comment
Model: The CAT S61 is a smartphone that features an advanced thermal imaging camera, a laser distance tool, and an air quality monitor. It is a great rugged phone that’s ideal for a variety of different professions. It is capable of serving engineers, plumbers, builders, farmers, the military, and other groups seeking a particular set of skills from their phones. The only downsides are performance issues and a fairly ridiculous price which will compromise its appeal to hobbyists. The Cat S61 has IP68 and IP69 dust and water resistance so it can handle most environments. It is also rated to handle environments from -25 to 55 degrees Celsius. This is a chunky tank of a phone, capable of surviving falls, bumps, and dunks without a case. On the casing, it has a thick, matte aluminium frame with a glossy edge contrasting with the black plastic, and a distinctive, angled protrusion at the top bears the Cat logo. The 5.2-inch display has three physical buttons below it for access to the back, home, and recent apps, enabling a user to navigate the Android interface even if their hands are wet or dirty. There’s a polycarbonate lip around the screen to prevent it from touching down if a user drops their Cat S61; it also comes with a screen protector already applied over the Gorilla Glass 5 display.
Screen quality is always one of the first areas to be sacrificed on rugged phones. This remains the case with the S61. The 5.2-inch screen offers a significant upgrade on the S60’s panel, but it still doesn’t match equivalently priced non-rugged phones. It’s close to half an inch (1.27 cm) larger than the S60’s 4.7-inch screen, plus the jump from 720p to FHD makes it significantly sharper. Holding the S61 next to the S60, the text is sharper and the screen is generally more pleasant to use. The screen temperature has also been improved. The screen has lost the cool, dull look that plagued the S61. Brightness levels are also better, although nowhere near mobile HDR levels. The hardware specifications feature the slower and older Snapdragon 660 instead, and 4 GB of RAM and 64 GB onboard storage, which places it just below flagship devices. Just to note that the S61 was never meant to compete against the latest smartphones with top specifications. The rest of the specification is fairly standard: 802.11ac Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 5.0, NFC, a 16-megapixel rear camera, 8-megapixel front camera, fast charging capabilities (via Qualcomm’s Quick Charge 3.0 technology) and a tiny 18 W power supply. The CAT S61 currently runs on Android Oreo. The company has also confirmed it will be upgraded to the newer version, Android Pie when it arrives later this year. Security updates have also been guaranteed for at least the next three years.
Hands-on article by Jagadisa Rajarathnam
Qualcomm Adreno 508: Integrated graphics card in the Snapdragon 630 SoC based on the Adreno 500 architecture. According to Qualcomm "up to 30% faster graphics rendering than previous designs".
Only some 3D games with very low demands are playable with these cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
SD 630: Mid-range octa-core SoC with eight ARM Cortex-A53 cpu cores at up to 2.2 GHz, an Adreno 508 GPU, a LPDDR4-2666 memory controller and a X12 LTE (Cat 13/12, 300 / 150 MBit) modem. Manufactured in the modern 14nm process. » Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
5.20":
It is a very small display format for smartphones. You should by no means be mis-sighted and you will generally see very little on the screen and only have a small resolution available. In return, the device should be very small and handy.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.CAT:
CAT, which can be easier found under CAT Phones in the web, gets seldom reviewed, does hardly have any market shares and achieves average ratings (as of 2016).
74.71%: This rating is poor. More than three quarters of the models are rated better. That is rather not a purchase recommendation. Even if verbal ratings in this area do not sound that bad ("sufficient" or "satisfactory"), they are usually euphemisms that disguise a classification as a below-average laptop.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.