Ulefone T2 vs. Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro: Which Rugged Phone Reigns Supreme?
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing a balance of affordability and functionality, the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro emerges as the stronger choice. Its Exynos 9611 chipset, while not a flagship, provides a noticeable performance edge over the Ulefone T2’s Helio P70, and Samsung’s software support is a significant long-term benefit.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Ulefone T2 | Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro |
| 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 / 1900 / 2100 - International |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 19, 20, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - International |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/11.5 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat7 300/150 Mbps | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (3CA) Cat11 600/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 20, 29, 38, 40, 41, 66 - Canada | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2019, August. Released 2019, August | 2020, January |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, January |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dimensions | 167.6 x 80.3 x 8.7 mm (6.60 x 3.16 x 0.34 in) | 159.9 x 76.7 x 10 mm (6.30 x 3.02 x 0.39 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 197.2 g (6.95 oz) | 218 g (7.69 oz) |
| - | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 35 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.5m MIL-STD-810G compliant* *does not guarantee ruggedness or use in extreme conditions | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~377 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.7 inches, 112.0 cm2 (~83.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~79.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.1 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.1 GHz Cortex-A53) | Octa-core (4x2.3 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x1.7 GHz Cortex-A53) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6771 Helio P70 (12 nm) | Exynos 9611 (10 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 | Mali-G72 MP3 |
| OS | Android 9.0 (Pie) | Android 10, upgradable to Android 13, One UI 5 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM |
| eMMC 5.1 | - | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 25 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Features | Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/1.8, (wide), AF 8 MP | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP | 13 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | Yes |
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | Stereo FM radio, RDS, recording | FM radio (market/region dependent) |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/k/v/r, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| - | ANT+ | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired 10W wireless | 15W wired |
| Type | Li-Po 4200 mAh | Li-Po 4050 mAh, removable |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Bordeaux Red, Glacier Blue | Black |
| Models | - | SM-G715FN/DS, SM-G715FN, SM-G715F, SM-G715W, SM-G715U, SM-G715U1 |
| Price | - | About 120 EUR |
| SAR EU | - | 0.47 W/kg (head) 1.23 W/kg (body) |
Ulefone T2
- More affordable price point
- Wireless charging support (10W)
- Potentially longer battery life due to efficient chipset usage in basic tasks
- Less powerful processor (Helio P70)
- Likely slower software updates and shorter support lifespan
- Potentially lower build quality compared to Samsung
Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro
- More powerful processor (Exynos 9611)
- Samsung’s software ecosystem and Knox security
- Likely better build quality and durability
- Higher price point
- No wireless charging support
- Slower wired charging (15W)
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a cutting-edge display. Both likely utilize IPS LCD panels, given their market positioning. The key difference lies in processing power, which impacts display responsiveness. While specific display specs (resolution, brightness) are missing, the Exynos 9611’s superior GPU should translate to smoother scrolling and animations on the XCover Pro. The Ulefone T2’s Helio P70 may exhibit slight lag in graphically intensive tasks.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications, a direct comparison is limited. However, given the market segment, it’s safe to assume both phones prioritize practicality over photographic excellence. The Ulefone T2 likely features a simpler camera setup, while the XCover Pro may offer more advanced features like scene optimization. The absence of information regarding sensor size and aperture makes it difficult to assess low-light performance. It's probable that the XCover Pro benefits from Samsung’s image processing algorithms, potentially delivering more consistent results.
Performance
The Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro’s Exynos 9611 (4x2.3 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x1.7 GHz Cortex-A53) holds a clear advantage over the Ulefone T2’s MediaTek Helio P70 (4x2.1 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.1 GHz Cortex-A53). The higher clock speeds on the Exynos’s prime cores, coupled with its 10nm manufacturing process versus the Helio P70’s 12nm, result in improved performance and potentially better thermal efficiency. This means the XCover Pro is more likely to sustain peak performance for longer periods, crucial for users running demanding apps or multitasking. The Ulefone T2 will be adequate for everyday tasks, but will struggle with more intensive workloads.
Battery Life
The Ulefone T2 offers both 18W wired and 10W wireless charging, a feature absent on the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro, which is limited to 15W wired charging. While the XCover Pro’s battery capacity is unknown, the Ulefone T2’s wireless charging capability provides added convenience. The 10nm process of the Exynos 9611 may contribute to slightly better power efficiency, potentially offsetting the Ulefone T2’s faster charging speeds. Real-world battery life will depend heavily on usage patterns, but the Ulefone T2’s wireless charging is a notable advantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the Ulefone T2 if you need a highly affordable, genuinely rugged phone for basic tasks and aren't reliant on a specific app ecosystem. It’s ideal for those who prioritize cost savings over peak performance. Buy the Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro if you prefer a more refined user experience, benefit from Samsung’s software updates and Knox security platform, and require a slightly more powerful processor for multitasking and demanding applications.