Cat S62 vs Ulefone Armor 9E: A Deep Dive into Rugged Smartphone Performance
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing long-term software support and convenient wireless charging, the Cat S62 is the better choice. While the Ulefone Armor 9E boasts a newer chipset, the Snapdragon 660’s optimization and Cat’s established brand reputation for ruggedness provide a more reliable overall experience.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Cat S62 | Ulefone Armor 9E |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 20, 25, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66, 71 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat12 600/150 Mbps | HSPA 42.2/11.5 Mbps, LTE Cat12 600/150 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE |
| CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, June 18 | 2020, September 08. Released 2020, September 08 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, June 18 | Discontinued |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 6), plastic back, aluminum frame | Front glass, aluminum back with rubber, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 157.5 x 76.2 x 12.7 mm (6.20 x 3.00 x 0.5 in) | 168.2 x 82 x 15 mm (6.62 x 3.23 x 0.59 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 260 g (9.17 oz) | 324 g (11.43 oz) |
| IP68/IP69 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 35 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.8m MIL-STD-810H compliant | IP68/IP69K dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.2m MIL-STD-810G compliant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 | Scratch-resistant glass, oleophobic coating |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2160 pixels, 18:9 ratio (~424 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) |
| Size | 5.7 inches, 83.8 cm2 (~69.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~70.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.2 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM660 Snapdragon 660 (14 nm) | Mediatek MT6779 Helio P90 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 512 | PowerVR GM9446 |
| OS | Android 10, upgradable to Android 11 | Android 10 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 48 MP, (wide), PDAF 2 MP | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Quad-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 64 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.72", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.4, 100˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP | 8 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG, accessory connector |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, coulombmeter |
| - | Endoscope mount (camera sold separately) | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | Wireless QC4 | 18W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 4000 mAh | Li-Po 6600 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black | Black |
| Price | About 440 EUR | About 290 EUR |
Cat S62
- Wireless charging for added convenience.
- QC4 fast charging for quicker top-ups.
- Established brand reputation for ruggedness and reliability.
- Older Snapdragon 660 chipset may show its age in demanding tasks.
- Potentially higher price point compared to the Ulefone.
Ulefone Armor 9E
- More modern Mediatek Helio P90 chipset for potentially faster performance.
- Likely more affordable price point.
- Potentially better raw processing power for specific tasks.
- Wired charging only – lacks the convenience of wireless.
- Less established brand reputation in the rugged phone market.
- Software support may be less consistent than Cat.
Display Comparison
Neither device’s display specifications are provided, so a direct comparison is limited. However, given the Cat S62’s positioning, it likely features a more color-accurate panel geared towards outdoor visibility. The Ulefone Armor 9E, focusing on value, may prioritize cost savings over display quality. Rugged phones generally prioritize durability over display tech, so expect standard LCD panels rather than OLED.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specs, a definitive comparison is difficult. However, the rugged phone market rarely prioritizes camera quality. Both devices likely feature serviceable cameras for basic documentation. The Ulefone Armor 9E’s newer chipset *could* offer slightly improved image processing capabilities, but this is heavily dependent on software implementation. Expect both to struggle in low-light conditions. The inclusion of a 2MP macro lens on either device is largely a marketing gimmick and unlikely to deliver significant image quality improvements.
Performance
The Ulefone Armor 9E’s Mediatek Helio P90 (12nm) appears to have a theoretical advantage over the Cat S62’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (14nm) due to the smaller fabrication process. The P90’s Cortex-A75 cores offer higher peak performance than the S660’s Kryo 260 Gold cores. However, the Snapdragon 660 benefits from Qualcomm’s mature software optimization and a more efficient architecture, potentially leading to more consistent performance under sustained loads. The S660’s octa-core configuration (4x2.2 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz) is well-balanced, while the P90’s (2x2.2 GHz & 6x2.0 GHz) leans towards burst performance. This means the Ulefone may excel in short tasks, but the Cat could maintain smoother operation during extended use.
Battery Life
Battery capacity isn’t specified for either device. However, the Cat S62’s inclusion of wireless charging, alongside QC4 fast charging, provides a significant convenience advantage. The Ulefone Armor 9E relies solely on 18W wired charging. While 18W is adequate, it’s slower than QC4, and the lack of wireless charging limits usability for users accustomed to this feature. A larger battery capacity on the Ulefone could offset the slower charging, but without that information, the Cat S62’s charging versatility is a key differentiator.
Buying Guide
Buy the Cat S62 if you need a phone with proven durability, wireless charging, and a brand known for consistent software updates within the rugged space. It’s ideal for professionals in demanding fields like construction or field service. Buy the Ulefone Armor 9E if you prioritize raw processing power for tasks like video editing or gaming on a tighter budget, and are comfortable with a potentially less refined software experience and wired-only charging.