Oscal Flat 2 vs. Blackview BV8800: A Deep Dive into Rugged Smartphone Choices
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing exceptional battery life and long-term reliability, the Oscal Flat 2 is the clear winner. Its astounding 51:52h endurance and 1100 charge cycles significantly outperform the Blackview BV8800's 199h rating. However, the BV8800 offers a more powerful processor and faster charging for those who demand more performance.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Oscal Flat 2 | Blackview BV8800 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 7, 8, 19, 20, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 30, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE |
| - | CDMA2000 1x | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2025, January | 2021, December 24 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, January | Available. Released 2022, January 10 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dimensions | 163.2 x 75.2 x 8.8 mm (6.43 x 2.96 x 0.35 in) | 176.2 x 83.5 x 17.7 mm (6.94 x 3.29 x 0.70 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 192 g (6.77 oz) | 367 g (12.95 oz) |
| - | IP68/IP69K dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.5m MIL-STD-810H compliant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Mohs level 5 | - |
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.56 inches, 103.4 cm2 (~84.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~70.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 450 nits | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 480 nits |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T606 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6781 Helio G96 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MP1 | Mali-G57 MC2 |
| OS | Android 14, DokeOS 4.0 | Android 11, Doke-OS 3.0 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | No |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 256GB 4GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 117˚ (ultrawide) 20 MP, f/1.8, (IR camera), 2 IR emitters Auxiliary lens |
| Single | 13 MP, (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12 μm | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1440p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | - |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide), 1/5.0" | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 33W wired, 31% in 30 min, 100% in 90 min Reverse wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | 8380 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Phantom Black, Ripple Blue, Sky Purple | Black, Orange, Green |
| Price | - | About 350 EUR |
| SAR | 0.70 W/kg (head) 1.40 W/kg (body) | - |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 199h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: 1348:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -29.3 LUFS (Average) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 254849 (v8), 288964 (v9) GeekBench: 1752 (v5.1) GFXBench: 10fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
| EU LABEL | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery | 51:52h endurance, 1100 cycles | - |
| Energy | Class B | - |
| Free fall | Class A (270 falls) | - |
| Repairability | Class B | - |
Oscal Flat 2
- Exceptional battery life (51:52h endurance)
- Impressive 1100 charge cycles for long-term battery health
- Potentially lower cost due to less emphasis on high-end components
- Slow 10W charging
- Less powerful processor for demanding tasks
- Display specifications are unknown
Blackview BV8800
- More powerful MediaTek Helio G96 processor
- Faster 33W wired charging with reverse wired charging
- Decent display brightness (501 nits) and contrast (1348:1)
- Significantly lower battery endurance (199h)
- Potentially shorter battery lifespan due to fewer charge cycles
- Camera specifications are vague
Display Comparison
The Blackview BV8800 boasts a measured peak brightness of 501 nits and a 1348:1 contrast ratio, providing a reasonably vibrant viewing experience. While the Oscal Flat 2’s display specifications are not provided, the BV8800’s contrast ratio suggests a standard IPS panel. The BV8800’s brightness is adequate for outdoor visibility, but users seeking a truly exceptional display will find it lacking compared to higher-end panels. The lack of information on the Oscal Flat 2’s display makes a direct comparison difficult, but it’s likely to be a similar IPS-level experience.
Camera Comparison
Both devices list 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or image processing. This suggests a focus on basic functionality rather than photographic excellence. Without further information, it’s difficult to assess the camera performance of either device. The absence of details implies both likely utilize standard camera setups, and users shouldn't expect flagship-level image quality. The 2MP macro cameras often found in this segment are unlikely to provide significant value.
Performance
The Blackview BV8800’s MediaTek Helio G96 chipset, featuring a 2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 configuration, represents a significant performance advantage over the Oscal Flat 2’s Unisoc T606. The G96’s Cortex-A76 cores offer a noticeable uplift in single-core performance, crucial for app responsiveness, while the higher clock speeds across the board translate to smoother multitasking and gaming. The Unisoc T606 (2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55) is a capable chip for everyday tasks, but will struggle with graphically intensive games or demanding applications. The G96’s Mali-G57 MC2 GPU further solidifies the BV8800’s gaming prowess.
Battery Life
The Oscal Flat 2’s battery endurance of 51:52h is a standout feature, dwarfing the Blackview BV8800’s 199h rating. This translates to potentially days of use on a single charge for the Oscal. While the BV8800 compensates with 33W wired charging (reaching 31% in 30 minutes and 100% in 90 minutes), the Oscal Flat 2’s 1100 charge cycles suggest superior long-term battery health. The BV8800’s faster charging is convenient, but the Oscal’s longevity and sheer endurance are more compelling for many users. The Oscal Flat 2’s 10W charging is slow, but the massive endurance mitigates this drawback.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oscal Flat 2 if you need a phone that can genuinely last for days on a single charge, and you value longevity over raw processing speed. This is ideal for outdoor workers, travelers, or anyone who frequently finds themselves away from power outlets. Buy the Blackview BV8800 if you prefer a more responsive experience for gaming or demanding applications, and you appreciate the convenience of 33W fast charging, even if it comes at the cost of battery endurance.