Ulefone Armor 8 vs. Power Armor 13: Which Rugged Phone Reigns Supreme?
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users prioritizing performance and future-proofing, the Ulefone Power Armor 13 is the clear winner. Its Helio G95 chipset and 33W charging significantly outperform the Armor 8’s Helio P60 and 15W charging. However, the Armor 8 remains a viable option for budget-conscious buyers who don't demand intensive processing.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Ulefone Armor 8 | Ulefone Power Armor 13 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 28, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 38, 40, 66 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/11.5 Mbps, LTE Cat7 300/150 Mbps | HSPA 42.2/11.5 Mbps, LTE Cat12 600/150 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, August 17. Released 2020, August 17 | 2021, July 22 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2021, July 26 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Front glass, aluminum back with rubber, aluminum frame | - |
| Dimensions | 166 x 81.8 x 15 mm (6.54 x 3.22 x 0.59 in) | 183.7 x 85.4 x 20.8 mm (7.23 x 3.36 x 0.82 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 282 g (9.95 oz) | 492 g (1.08 lb) |
| IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.2 m MIL-STD-810G compliant | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.2m MIL-STD-810G compliant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Scratch-resistant glass, oleophobic coating | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1560 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~282 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~386 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.1 inches, 91.3 cm2 (~67.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.81 inches, 112.0 cm2 (~71.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53) | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6771 Helio P60 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6785V/CD Helio G95 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 | Mali-G76 MC4 |
| OS | Android 10 | Android 11 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM | 256GB 8GB RAM |
| eMMC 5.1 | - | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, Panorama, HDR | Quad-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Penta | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide) 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/2.2, (wide), PDAF 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.2 | 16 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio, RDS, recording | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | - |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, baroceptor, coulombmeter | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, baroceptor, coulombmeter |
| - | Infrared distance measure (error range: 1~20m, ±10mm; 20~40m, ±25mm) | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 15W wired | 33W wired 15W wireless 5W reverse wireless |
| Type | Li-Po 5580 mAh | Li-Po 13200 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Orange, Red | Black |
| Price | About 200 EUR | About 300 EUR |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 296h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: 1306:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -28.3 LUFS (Average) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 294194 (v8), 351678 (v9) GeekBench: 1610 (v5.1) GFXBench: 18fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Ulefone Armor 8
- More affordable price point
- Rugged design for durability
- Acceptable battery endurance
- Outdated Helio P60 chipset
- Slow 15W wired charging only
- Likely limited camera performance
Ulefone Power Armor 13
- Significantly faster Helio G95 processor
- 33W wired, 15W wireless, and 5W reverse wireless charging
- Brighter display for outdoor visibility
- Higher price compared to the Armor 8
- Rugged design adds bulk
- Camera specs remain unspecified
Display Comparison
Both the Ulefone Armor 8 and Power Armor 13 share a contrast ratio of 1306:1, suggesting similar visual depth and black levels. However, the Power Armor 13 boasts a measured peak brightness of 401 nits, indicating a noticeably brighter display in direct sunlight compared to the Armor 8, which lacks published brightness data. While both likely utilize IPS LCD panels given the price point, the brighter display of the Power Armor 13 offers a superior viewing experience outdoors.
Camera Comparison
Both devices list 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size or megapixel count. Given the market segment, it’s reasonable to assume both feature modest camera setups. Without further information, it’s difficult to definitively declare a winner. However, the Power Armor 13’s more powerful processor could potentially enable better image processing and faster capture speeds. The inclusion of a dedicated camera ISP within the G95 chipset is a potential advantage.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Ulefone Armor 8 utilizes the Mediatek Helio P60, featuring a Cortex-A73/A53 configuration. The Power Armor 13 steps up to the Helio G95, employing more modern Cortex-A76/A55 cores. This architectural shift translates to a substantial performance increase for the Power Armor 13, particularly in CPU-intensive tasks and gaming. The G95’s higher clock speeds (2.05 GHz vs 2.0 GHz) and improved core design provide a smoother, more responsive user experience. While both are built on a 12nm process, the G95’s efficiency gains are significant.
Battery Life
Both phones achieve an endurance rating of 296 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. However, the Power Armor 13’s charging capabilities are dramatically superior. It supports 33W wired charging, significantly faster than the Armor 8’s 15W. Furthermore, the Power Armor 13 adds 15W wireless charging and 5W reverse wireless charging, offering unparalleled convenience. While the Armor 8 relies solely on slower wired charging, the Power Armor 13’s charging versatility is a major advantage for users on the go.
Buying Guide
Buy the Ulefone Armor 8 if you need a highly affordable, basic rugged phone for essential communication and light tasks. It’s ideal for users who prioritize cost savings over raw performance. Buy the Ulefone Power Armor 13 if you prefer a more responsive experience for multitasking, gaming, and demanding applications, coupled with significantly faster charging and the convenience of wireless charging.