Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra vs Power Armor 18T Ultra: A Deep Dive into Rugged Performance
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing raw power and future-proofing, the Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra is the clear winner. Its Dimensity 9300+ chipset delivers significantly faster performance, and 120W charging is a game-changer. However, the Power Armor 18T Ultra remains a compelling option for those seeking a more balanced experience with respectable performance and longer battery life.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra | Ulefone Power Armor 18T Ultra |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66, 71 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66, 71 |
| 5G bands | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 25, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 71, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA/Sub6 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 25, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 71, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2025, February | 2023, October |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, March 17 | Available. Released 2023, November |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dimensions | 174.2 x 83.6 x 19.4 mm (6.86 x 3.29 x 0.76 in) | 175.2 x 83.4 x 18.8 mm (6.90 x 3.28 x 0.74 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 450 g (0.99 lb) | 409 g (14.43 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus, Mohs level 4 | Corning Gorilla Glass 5, Mohs level 4 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~73.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~71.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 600 nits (HBM), 2200 nits (peak) | IPS LCD, 120Hz |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.4 GHz Cortex-X4 & 3x2.85 GHz Cortex-X4 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A720) | Octa-core (2x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 9300+ (4 nm) | Mediatek Dimensity 7050 (6 nm) |
| GPU | Immortalis-G720 MC12 | Mali-G68 MC4 |
| OS | Android 14, upgradable to Android 15 | Android 13, upgradable to Android 14 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 1TB 16GB RAM | 512GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Quad-LED flash, HDR, panorama | Hexa-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.9, (wide), 1.0"-type, 1.6µm, dual pixel PDAF 64 MP, f/1.8, (night vision), 1/2.0", 0.7µm, 4 infrared lights 50 MP, f/2.2, 117˚ (ultrawide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm | 108 MP, f/1.9, (wide), 1/1.52", 0.7µm, PDAF 5 MP (macro) 5 MP, f/2.2, (FLIR thermal camera, Lepton module) |
| Video | 8K@30fps, 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Single | 50 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm | 32 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1.2µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | - |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, QZSS, BDS, NavIC | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, NavIC |
| Radio | Wireless FM radio, RDS, recording | Wireless FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C 3.2 Gen2, Display Port 1.4, OTG, accessory connector pins | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG, magnetic connector |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6/7, tri-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 120W wired, PPS, 40% in 10 min 50W wireless, 35% in 30 min 10W reverse wired | 66W wired, 52% in 30 min 15W wireless 5W wireless reversed |
| Type | Li-Ion 10600 mAh | Li-Po 9600 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black | Black |
| Price | $ 749.99 / C$ 1,399.99 / € 799.99 | About 700 EUR |
| EU LABEL | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery | 112:30h endurance, 1000 cycles | 88:30h endurance, 1000 cycles |
| Energy | Class A | Class B |
| Free fall | Class A (270 falls) | Class A (270 falls) |
| Repairability | Class B | Class C |
Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra
- Unmatched processing power with Dimensity 9300+
- Blazing-fast 120W wired charging
- Faster 50W wireless charging
- Potentially superior camera performance
- Potentially shorter battery life due to power-hungry chipset
- Higher price point (likely)
Ulefone Power Armor 18T Ultra
- Excellent battery endurance (88:30h)
- Balanced performance for everyday tasks
- More affordable price (likely)
- Respectable 66W wired charging
- Significantly slower processor than the Armor 28 Ultra
- Slower wireless charging (15W)
Display Comparison
While both devices are likely to feature durable displays, the provided data focuses on internal components. We can infer that both will prioritize visibility in bright sunlight, a common requirement for rugged phones. The Armor 28 Ultra’s superior processing power *could* allow for higher refresh rate panels or more advanced display features, but this isn’t confirmed. The absence of display specs necessitates a focus on the processing power’s potential to drive a more sophisticated display experience.
Camera Comparison
The provided data doesn’t detail camera specifications. However, given the flagship positioning of the Armor 28 Ultra, it’s reasonable to expect a more advanced camera system with a larger sensor and improved image processing capabilities. Ulefone’s history suggests a focus on high-megapixel counts, but sensor size and optical image stabilization (OIS) will be crucial differentiators. Without specific details, it’s difficult to make a definitive judgment, but the 28 Ultra’s superior processing power will likely contribute to faster image processing and better low-light performance.
Performance
The performance gap between these two phones is substantial. The Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra’s Mediatek Dimensity 9300+ (4nm) is a flagship-tier chipset featuring a unique core configuration – 1x3.4 GHz Cortex-X4, 3x2.85 GHz Cortex-X4, and 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A720. This contrasts sharply with the Power Armor 18T Ultra’s Dimensity 7050 (6nm) with its 2x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 and 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The 4nm process node of the 9300+ offers significantly improved power efficiency and thermal performance compared to the 6nm 7050, translating to sustained performance under heavy load. The Cortex-X4 cores in the 28 Ultra are also a generation ahead, offering a substantial IPC (Instructions Per Clock) improvement over the A78 cores in the 18T Ultra. This means the 28 Ultra will handle demanding tasks with greater ease and responsiveness.
Battery Life
The Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra offers 112:30h of endurance, while the Power Armor 18T Ultra provides 88:30h. While the 18T Ultra has a smaller endurance rating, the difference is partially offset by its slower processor. However, the charging speeds are where the 28 Ultra truly shines. 120W wired charging (40% in 10 minutes) is significantly faster than the 18T Ultra’s 66W (52% in 30 minutes). The 50W wireless charging on the 28 Ultra also surpasses the 18T Ultra’s 15W. The 28 Ultra’s reverse wired charging at 10W is also faster than the 18T Ultra’s 5W, making it more useful for topping up accessories.
Buying Guide
Buy the Ulefone Armor 28 Ultra if you need uncompromising performance for demanding tasks like gaming, video editing, or running complex applications, and value the fastest possible charging speeds. Buy the Ulefone Power Armor 18T Ultra if you prioritize a balance between performance, battery endurance, and cost, and don't require the absolute latest in processing power.