The Honor Play9C (China) and vivo X50e represent compelling options in the increasingly crowded mid-range 5G smartphone market. While both aim to deliver 5G connectivity at a reasonable price, they take distinctly different approaches to achieving this, primarily through their chipset choices and charging capabilities. This comparison dissects those differences to determine which phone best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing fast charging and slightly better overall performance, the vivo X50e is the stronger choice. Its Snapdragon 765G and 33W charging offer a smoother experience and quicker top-ups. However, the Honor Play9C presents a viable alternative for those on a tighter budget.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | LTE | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 |
| 5G bands | SA/NSA | 1, 28, 78 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE (4CA), 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2024, September 26 | 2020, September 30. Released 2020, October 01 |
| Status | Available. Released 2024, September 26 | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Dimensions | 163.6 x 75.3 x 8.4 mm (6.44 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) | 162.1 x 75 x 8.9 mm (6.38 x 2.95 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 200.4 g (7.05 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.56 inches, 103.4 cm2 (~83.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.44 inches, 100.1 cm2 (~82.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | TFT LCD, 90Hz, 780 nits (peak) | AMOLED |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.4 GHz Kryo 475 Prime & 1x2.2 GHz Kryo 475 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 475 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 6100+ (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM7250 Snapdragon 765G 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Adreno 620 |
| OS | Android 14, Magic OS 8 | Android 10, Funtouch 10 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
13 MP, f/2.5, 50mm (telephoto), 1/2.8", 0.8µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom
8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 16mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro) |
| Single | 13 MP, f/1.8, (wide) | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 5 MP, f/2.2, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| | - | 32-bit/384kHz audio |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.3, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 10W wired
2.5W reverse wired | 33W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 5200 mAh | 4350 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue | Black, Blue |
| Models | JDY-AN00 | V1930 |
| Price | About 100 EUR | About 410 EUR |
Honor Play9C (China)
- Potentially better thermal efficiency due to 6nm process
- Reverse wired charging capability
- Likely more affordable price point
- Significantly slower 10W charging
- Less powerful chipset for gaming and multitasking
- Inferior camera performance expected
vivo X50e
- Faster Snapdragon 765G processor
- 33W fast charging for quick top-ups
- Potentially better camera system
- Older 7nm process node
- Likely higher price compared to the Play9C
- May experience more thermal throttling under sustained load
Display Comparison
Neither device's display specifications are provided, so a direct comparison is limited. However, given the market positioning, we can infer both likely utilize LCD panels. The vivo X50e, being a slightly more premium offering, may have a marginally higher peak brightness and potentially better color calibration. The absence of high refresh rate information suggests both are likely capped at 60Hz.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications, a precise comparison is difficult. However, the vivo X50e, historically, places a greater emphasis on camera quality within its X-series. It’s reasonable to assume the X50e has a more sophisticated image processing pipeline and potentially a larger primary sensor. The Honor Play9C likely focuses on providing adequate camera performance for casual use, but won't compete with the X50e in image quality or low-light capabilities. The absence of OIS information suggests neither phone features optical image stabilization.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The vivo X50e’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (7nm) boasts a Kryo 475 Prime core clocked at 2.4GHz, offering a performance edge over the Honor Play9C’s Mediatek Dimensity 6100+ (6nm). While the Dimensity 6100+ benefits from a newer 6nm process, the Snapdragon 765G’s CPU architecture – with its dedicated Prime core – provides superior single-core performance, crucial for responsive app launches and smoother UI navigation. The Snapdragon 765G also features a more capable Adreno 620 GPU, translating to better gaming performance. The 7nm process of the Snapdragon 765G, while older, is well-optimized, and the architectural advantages outweigh the process node difference in real-world usage.
Battery Life
The Honor Play9C’s 10W charging is a significant drawback compared to the vivo X50e’s 33W charging. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging of the X50e dramatically reduces downtime. A full charge on the Play9C will take considerably longer, potentially exceeding two hours, while the X50e can likely reach 100% in under an hour. The 2.5W reverse wired charging on the Play9C is a niche feature, useful for topping up accessories, but doesn’t offset the charging speed disparity.
Buying Guide
Buy the Honor Play9C (China) if you need a functional 5G phone with a focus on basic tasks and extended battery life, and are comfortable with slower charging speeds. Buy the vivo X50e if you prioritize faster performance for gaming and multitasking, and value the convenience of significantly quicker 33W wired charging. The X50e is the better option for users who frequently use demanding apps.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Dimensity 6100+ in the Honor Play9C struggle with graphically demanding games like PUBG Mobile?
The Dimensity 6100+ is a capable chipset, but the Snapdragon 765G in the vivo X50e has a more powerful GPU. While the Play9C can likely run PUBG Mobile, you may need to lower graphics settings for a smooth experience. The X50e will provide a more consistent and higher-fidelity gaming experience.
❓ How long will it realistically take to fully charge the Honor Play9C with its 10W charger?
With a 10W charger, a full charge from 0% on the Honor Play9C will likely take over two hours, potentially closer to 2.5-3 hours depending on battery capacity. This is a significant drawback compared to the vivo X50e's 33W charging.
❓ Does the Snapdragon 765G in the vivo X50e get hot during extended gaming sessions?
The Snapdragon 765G can experience some thermal throttling during prolonged, intensive gaming. However, Qualcomm's thermal management is generally effective, and the X50e should maintain acceptable performance levels. The 6nm process of the Dimensity 6100+ *may* offer slightly better sustained performance, but the Snapdragon's architectural advantages are more impactful overall.
