Sharp Aquos R2 Compact vs Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact: A Battle of Compact Flagships

The compact flagship phone market is a niche, but passionate, segment. Both the Sharp Aquos R2 Compact and the Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact aimed to deliver top-tier performance in a pocketable form factor. Released roughly a year apart, they represent different approaches to achieving this goal, with the R2 Compact leveraging the newer Snapdragon 845 platform against the XZ1 Compact’s Snapdragon 835. This comparison dissects the key differences to determine which device holds up better today.

Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For the average user seeking a balance of performance and longevity, the Sharp Aquos R2 Compact emerges as the better choice. The Snapdragon 845 offers a noticeable performance uplift over the 835, and the inclusion of PD2.0 charging provides more modern power delivery standards. While battery endurance is rated identically, the newer chipset’s efficiency provides a slight edge.

PHONES
Phone Names	Sharp Aquos R2 compact	Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact

Network
2G bands	GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900	GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bands	HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 2100	HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100
4G bands	1, 3, 5, 8, 11, 12, 17, 19, 26, 28, 41, 42	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66
Speed	HSPA, LTE	HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (4CA) Cat15 800/75 Mbps
Technology	GSM / HSPA / LTE	GSM / HSPA / LTE

Launch
Announced	2018, November. Released 2019, January	2017, August. Released 2017, October
Status	Discontinued	Discontinued

Body
Build	Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic back, aluminum frame	Glass front (Gorilla Glass 4), plastic back, plastic frame
Dimensions	131 x 64 x 9.3 mm (5.16 x 2.52 x 0.37 in)	129 x 65 x 9.3 mm (5.08 x 2.56 x 0.37 in)
SIM	Nano-SIM	Nano-SIM
Weight	135 g (4.76 oz)	140 g (4.94 oz)
	IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins)	IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins)

Display
Protection	Corning Gorilla Glass 3	Corning Gorilla Glass 5
Resolution	1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~485 ppi density)	720 x 1280 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~319 ppi density)
Size	5.2 inches, 67.5 cm2 (~80.5% screen-to-body ratio)	4.6 inches, 58.3 cm2 (~69.6% screen-to-body ratio)
Type	IGZO IPS LCD, 120Hz, HDR10	IPS LCD
	-	Triluminos display X-Reality Engine

Platform
CPU	Octa-core (4x2.6 GHz Kryo 385 Gold & 4x1.7 GHz Kryo 385 Silver)	Octa-core (4x2.45 GHz Kryo & 4x1.9 GHz Kryo)
Chipset	Qualcomm SDM845 Snapdragon 845 (10 nm)	Qualcomm MSM8998 Snapdragon 835 (10 nm)
GPU	Adreno 630	Adreno 540
OS	Android 9.0 (Pie)	Android 8.0 (Oreo), upgradable to Android 9.0 (Pie)

Memory
Card slot	microSDXC (dedicated slot)	microSDXC (dedicated slot)
Internal	64GB 4GB RAM	32GB 4GB RAM
	-	UFS 2.0

Main Camera
Features	LED flash, HDR, panorama	Laser AF, color spectrum sensor, LED flash, panorama, HDR
Single	22.6 MP, f/1.9, 22 mm, PDAF, OIS	19 MP, f/2.0, 25mm (wide), 1/2.3", 1.22µm, predictive PDAF
Video	4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps (gyro-EIS)	4K@30fps, 1080p@60fps, 1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS), 720p@960fps

Selfie camera
Single	8 MP, f/2.2, 23 mm	8 MP, f/2.4, 18mm, 1/4.0"
Video	1080p@30fps	1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS)

Sound
3.5mm jack	Yes	Yes
35mm jack	Yes	Yes
Loudspeaker	Yes	Yes, with stereo speakers
	24-bit/192kHz audio	24-bit/192kHz audio

Comms
Bluetooth	5.0, A2DP, LE	5.0, A2DP, aptX HD, LE
NFC	Yes	Yes
Positioning	GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, QZSS	GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO
Radio	No	No
USB	USB Type-C 2.0	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, DLNA

Features
Sensors	Fingerprint (front-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass	Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, barometer, compass

Battery
Charging	18W wired, PD2.0	18W wired, QC3
Type	Li-Ion 2500 mAh, non-removable	Li-Ion 2700 mAh, non-removable

Misc
Colors	Smokey Green, Deep White, Pure Black	Black, White Silver, Horizon Blue, Twilight Pink
Models	SH-M09	G8441, SO-02K
Price	-	About 300 EUR

Tests
Audio quality	-	Noise -93.7dB / Crosstalk -85.5dB
Battery life	-	Endurance rating 108h
Camera	-	Photo / Video
Display	-	Contrast ratio: 1243:1 (nominal), 3.729 (sunlight)
Loudspeaker	-	Voice 65dB / Noise 70dB / Ring 76dB
Performance	-	AnTuTu: 204581 (v7), 255140 (v8) GeekBench: 5596 (v4.4), 1681 (v5.1) GFXBench: 50fps (ES 3.1 onscreen)

Sharp Aquos R2 compact

More powerful Snapdragon 845 processor
Faster and more efficient PD2.0 charging
Potentially better thermal management
Modern chipset architecture

Potentially less readily available depending on region
Camera software may not be as refined as Sony’s

Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact

Sony’s renowned camera image processing
Proven software stability within the Sony ecosystem
Potentially wider availability
Compact and ergonomic design

Older Snapdragon 835 processor
QC3 charging is less efficient than PD2.0
May exhibit more throttling under sustained load

Display Comparison

Both the Aquos R2 Compact and Xperia XZ1 Compact share a similar display contrast ratio of 1243:1 (nominal) and 3.729 (sunlight), suggesting comparable outdoor visibility. However, detailed panel specifications like peak brightness (in nits) and color gamut coverage are missing. Given Sharp’s history with IGZO displays, the R2 Compact *may* benefit from superior color accuracy and power efficiency, but this is speculative without further data. Bezels are likely comparable, reflecting the design trends of the time, focusing on maximizing screen real estate within a compact footprint.

Camera Comparison

Both devices feature capable camera systems, but detailed sensor specifications are lacking. The context data only mentions 'Photo / Video' capabilities. Sony’s Xperia line is known for its image processing prowess, often prioritizing color accuracy and detail. Sharp, while capable, typically focuses on delivering vibrant, eye-catching images. Without knowing sensor sizes, apertures, or the presence of OIS, it’s difficult to definitively declare a winner. However, the newer image signal processor (ISP) within the Snapdragon 845 of the R2 Compact likely offers improved noise reduction and dynamic range. The absence of any mention of dedicated macro lenses suggests neither phone heavily prioritized this feature.

Performance

The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Sharp Aquos R2 Compact boasts the Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (10nm), featuring an octa-core CPU with 4x2.6 GHz Kryo 385 Gold and 4x1.7 GHz Kryo 385 Silver cores. The Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact utilizes the older Snapdragon 835 (10nm) with 4x2.45 GHz Kryo cores and 4x1.9 GHz Kryo cores. The 845 represents a significant architectural improvement, offering approximately 25-30% better CPU and GPU performance. This translates to smoother multitasking, faster app loading times, and a more enjoyable gaming experience on the R2 Compact. While both are 10nm chips, the 845’s refinements lead to improved thermal efficiency, potentially reducing throttling during sustained workloads.

Battery Life

Interestingly, both phones are listed with an identical endurance rating of 108 hours. However, this rating doesn’t tell the whole story. The Aquos R2 Compact supports 18W wired charging with PD2.0, a more modern and efficient standard. The Xperia XZ1 Compact also supports 18W charging, but utilizes Quick Charge 3.0 (QC3). PD2.0 generally offers better negotiation with chargers and can potentially deliver a slightly faster and more consistent charging experience. While the battery capacity isn’t specified, the Snapdragon 845’s improved efficiency in the R2 Compact could translate to slightly longer real-world battery life despite the identical endurance rating.

Buying Guide

Buy the Sharp Aquos R2 Compact if you prioritize raw processing power for demanding applications, benefit from faster charging speeds with PD2.0, and appreciate a more modern chipset architecture. Buy the Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact if you value Sony’s refined camera software and image processing, prefer a potentially more readily available device depending on your region, and prioritize a proven track record of software stability within the Sony ecosystem.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Does the Snapdragon 845 in the Aquos R2 Compact handle demanding games like Genshin Impact well?

Yes, the Snapdragon 845 is significantly more capable than the 835 in the Xperia XZ1 Compact. It can handle Genshin Impact at medium to high settings with playable frame rates, although sustained performance may be limited by the compact form factor's thermal constraints. Expect a smoother experience overall compared to the XZ1 Compact.

❓ Is the lack of detailed camera specs a major concern when choosing between these two phones?

Yes, it is. Without knowing sensor sizes, apertures, and OIS capabilities, it's difficult to assess the true camera performance. However, Sony's image processing is generally highly regarded, while Sharp's camera performance is less consistently praised. If camera quality is a top priority, researching sample photos and videos from both devices is crucial.

❓ How does the PD2.0 charging on the Aquos R2 Compact compare to the QC3.0 on the Xperia XZ1 Compact in real-world usage?

PD2.0 generally offers more efficient power delivery and better communication with chargers, potentially resulting in slightly faster and more consistent charging speeds. While both support 18W, PD2.0 is the newer standard and is less prone to compatibility issues with modern chargers.