Both the Oppo A35 and Honor X8c target the budget-conscious smartphone user, but they approach this segment with vastly different internal hardware. The Oppo A35 relies on the older Mediatek Helio P35, while the Honor X8c boasts the more modern and efficient Qualcomm Snapdragon 685. This comparison dissects these differences to determine which device offers the best value and user experience.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user, the Honor X8c is the superior choice. Its Snapdragon 685 chipset, built on a 6nm process, provides a noticeable performance uplift and improved power efficiency compared to the Oppo A35’s 12nm Helio P35. The 35W charging is a significant advantage, offsetting the potentially smaller battery capacity.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | LTE |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | CDMA2000 1x | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, April 14 | 2025, January 14 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, April 26 | Available. Released 2025, January 20 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back or silicone polymer back (eco leather) |
| Dimensions | 164 x 75.4 x 7.9 mm (6.46 x 2.97 x 0.31 in) | 161.1 x 74.6 x 7.1 mm (6.34 x 2.94 x 0.28 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 177 g (6.24 oz) | 174 g (6.14 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2412 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~394 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.52 inches, 102.6 cm2 (~83.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.7 inches, 108.0 cm2 (~89.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 480 nits (typ) | AMOLED, 120Hz, 1200 nits (HBM), 2800 nits (peak) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.35 GHz Cortex-A53 & 4x1.8 GHz Cortex-A53) | Octa-core (4x2.8 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x1.9 GHz Cortex-A53) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6765 Helio P35 (12 nm) | Qualcomm SM6225 Snapdragon 685 (6 nm) |
| GPU | PowerVR GE8320 | Adreno 610 |
| OS | Android 10, ColorOS 7.2 | Android 15, MagicOS 9 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | No |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 512GB 8GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | - |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | - | 108 MP, f/1.8, 24mm (wide), 1/1.67", PDAF, OIS
5 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide) |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | - |
| Triple | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 50 MP, f/2.1, (wide) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | - |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX | 5.0/5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, proximity (ultrasonic) |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 35W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4230 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, White, Blue | Marrs Green, Midnight Black, Moonlight White, Cloud Purple |
| Models | PEHM00, PEFM00 | ABR-LX1, ABR-LX2, ABR-LX3 |
| Price | - | € 190.78 / $ 213.42 / £ 159.00 |
Oppo A35
- Potentially lower price point.
- Simple and straightforward user experience.
- May be more readily available in certain regions.
- Outdated Helio P35 chipset.
- Slow 10W charging.
- Limited performance for demanding tasks.
Honor X8c
- More powerful and efficient Snapdragon 685 chipset.
- Significantly faster 35W charging.
- Improved overall performance and responsiveness.
- May be slightly more expensive than the Oppo A35.
- Potentially less readily available in some markets.
Display Comparison
Neither device’s display specifications are provided, so a direct comparison is limited. However, given the market positioning, both likely utilize LCD panels. The Honor X8c, being a newer device, may benefit from improved color calibration and potentially higher peak brightness. The absence of high refresh rate technology on either device suggests a focus on maximizing battery life rather than visual fluidity.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications, a precise comparison is difficult. However, the chipset plays a role in image signal processing (ISP) capabilities. The Snapdragon 685’s ISP is more advanced, potentially leading to better image quality, especially in low-light conditions. It’s reasonable to assume the Honor X8c will offer superior image processing and potentially more features, even with similar sensor resolutions. The prevalence of 2MP macro lenses on both devices suggests they are largely marketing features with limited practical utility.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Honor X8c’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 (6nm) is a substantial upgrade over the Oppo A35’s Mediatek Helio P35 (12nm). The 6nm process node inherently offers better power efficiency, translating to longer battery life and reduced thermal throttling. While both are octa-core CPUs, the Snapdragon 685 utilizes 4x2.8 GHz Cortex-A73 cores alongside 4x1.9 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, offering significantly higher peak performance than the A35’s 4x2.35 GHz Cortex-A53 and 4x1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 configuration. This means faster app launches, smoother multitasking, and a more responsive user experience on the Honor X8c.
Battery Life
The Oppo A35 is limited to 10W wired charging, which is slow by modern standards. The Honor X8c’s 35W wired charging is a game-changer, significantly reducing charging times. While battery capacity isn’t specified for either device, the Snapdragon 685’s superior power efficiency means the Honor X8c will likely offer comparable or better battery life despite potentially having a smaller battery capacity. The faster charging speed is a major convenience factor.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A35 if your primary need is a very basic smartphone for essential tasks like calls, texts, and light social media, and you prioritize minimal upfront cost. Buy the Honor X8c if you value smoother multitasking, faster app loading times, more responsive gaming, and significantly quicker charging – all without a substantial price premium. The X8c is the better all-rounder.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Honor X8c handle demanding games like PUBG Mobile smoothly?
The Snapdragon 685 is capable of running PUBG Mobile, but likely at medium settings to maintain a stable frame rate. The Helio P35 in the Oppo A35 will struggle with PUBG, even on the lowest settings, due to its limited processing power and potential for thermal throttling.
❓ How long will it take to fully charge each phone from 0%?
With 10W charging, the Oppo A35 will likely take over 3 hours to fully charge. The Honor X8c’s 35W charging should bring it from 0% to 100% in approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes, offering a substantial time saving.
❓ Is the difference in chipset performance noticeable for everyday tasks?
Yes, the Snapdragon 685 will provide a noticeably smoother experience for everyday tasks like browsing, social media, and app switching. The Helio P35 can feel sluggish, especially when multitasking or opening multiple apps.
❓ Does the Honor X8c support software updates for longer than the Oppo A35?
Generally, Qualcomm-powered devices receive longer software support than those using MediaTek chipsets. Honor is also demonstrating a commitment to software updates, suggesting the X8c will likely receive updates for a longer period than the A35.
