The Lava Shark 4G and TCL 30 SE represent the fiercely competitive sub-$150 smartphone market. Both aim to deliver essential smartphone functionality at an accessible price point, but they take different approaches to achieving this. This comparison dissects their core components – chipset, charging, and overall performance – to determine which device offers the best value for your money.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing responsiveness and slightly better CPU performance, the Lava Shark 4G is the stronger choice. Its Unisoc T606 chipset, featuring Cortex-A75 cores, provides a noticeable advantage over the TCL 30 SE’s Helio G25, despite the TCL’s slightly higher clock speeds on some cores. However, the TCL 30 SE remains a viable option for basic tasks.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 900 / 1800 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 - EMEA/APAC |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - EMEA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/11.5 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 26, 28, 66 - LATAM |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2025, March 25 | 2022, February 27 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, April | Available. Released 2022, April 20 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 165.8 x 77.2 x 8.5 mm (6.53 x 3.04 x 0.33 in) | 165.2 x 75.5 x 8.9 mm (6.50 x 2.97 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 200 g (7.05 oz) | 190 g (6.70 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 103.7 cm2 (~81.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.52 inches, 102.6 cm2 (~82.3% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz | IPS LCD, 450 nits (typ) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x1.5 GHz Cortex-A53) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T606 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6762G Helio G25 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MP1 | PowerVR GE8320 |
| OS | Android 14 | Android 12, TCL UI 4.0 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM |
| | - | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 50 MP, (wide), AF | 8 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/4", 1.12µm |
| Triple | - | 50 MP, f/1.9, 28mm (wide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP | 8 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Video | Yes | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | - |
| NFC | No | Yes (6165H/6165H1 only) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | Unspecified |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 15W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Titanium Gold, Stealth Black | Atlantic Blue, Space Gray, Glacial Blue |
| Models | - | 6165H, 6156H1, 6165A, 6165A1, 6165S |
| Price | About 80 EUR | - |
Lava Shark 4G
- More powerful CPU cores (Cortex-A75)
- Faster 18W charging
- Potentially smoother multitasking
- Brand recognition may be lower than TCL
- Likely similar display quality to TCL 30 SE
TCL 30 SE
- Potentially lower price point
- Established brand (TCL)
- Adequate for basic smartphone tasks
- Less powerful CPU architecture (all Cortex-A53)
- Slower 15W charging
- May struggle with demanding apps
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a standout display. Given the lack of display specifications in the provided data, we can assume both utilize standard LCD panels common in this price bracket. Bezels are likely to be substantial on both, and color accuracy will be adequate but not exceptional. The focus here is clearly on cost reduction, not visual fidelity.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications, a direct comparison is difficult. However, it’s safe to assume both devices feature basic camera setups geared towards casual photography. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is likely more for marketing than practical use. Image processing will likely be heavily reliant on software algorithms to enhance image quality, and low-light performance will be limited on both.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Lava Shark 4G’s Unisoc T606 utilizes a big.LITTLE architecture with 2x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration provides a performance boost for demanding tasks due to the more powerful A75 cores. The TCL 30 SE’s MediaTek Helio G25, with 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, relies solely on the less capable A53 architecture. While the G25 has a higher peak clock speed, the A75 cores in the T606 offer superior single-core performance, translating to snappier app launches and smoother multitasking. The 12nm process node is shared by both, suggesting similar power efficiency.
Battery Life
Both phones feature modest charging speeds. The Lava Shark 4G supports 18W wired charging, while the TCL 30 SE is limited to 15W. While the difference isn’t massive, the 18W charging on the Lava Shark 4G will result in slightly faster top-up times. Battery capacity isn’t specified, but given the price point, we can expect capacities around 5000mAh on both devices, offering all-day battery life with moderate usage. The faster charging of the Lava Shark 4G provides a slight convenience advantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the Lava Shark 4G if you frequently switch between apps, enjoy light multitasking, or occasionally play less demanding mobile games. The Cortex-A75 cores in the Unisoc T606 offer a more fluid experience. Buy the TCL 30 SE if your primary needs are basic communication – calls, texts, and light social media – and you prioritize a potentially lower price point over raw performance. It's a solid choice for first-time smartphone users or those on a very tight budget.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Unisoc T606 in the Lava Shark 4G handle popular games like PUBG Mobile?
While the Unisoc T606 can run PUBG Mobile, expect to play at lower graphics settings and frame rates for a smooth experience. The Helio G25 in the TCL 30 SE will likely struggle even more with consistent performance in demanding titles.
❓ Is the difference in charging speed (18W vs 15W) significant in real-world use?
The 3W difference isn't dramatic, but it will translate to roughly 10-15 minutes faster full charge times for the Lava Shark 4G. This can be noticeable for users who frequently need to quickly top up their battery.
❓ How does the CPU architecture impact everyday tasks like browsing and social media?
The Cortex-A75 cores in the Lava Shark 4G’s Unisoc T606 provide a more responsive experience when switching between apps, scrolling through webpages, and using social media. The TCL 30 SE’s all-A53 configuration may exhibit slight lag in these scenarios.
❓ Are software updates likely to be consistent on either device?
Given the price point and manufacturers, consistent and timely software updates are not guaranteed on either device. Expect limited updates, primarily focused on security patches.
