Umidigi Bison GT2 Pro vs Nokia XR20: A Deep Dive into Rugged Smartphone Performance
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing gaming and demanding tasks, the Umidigi Bison GT2 Pro offers a noticeable performance edge thanks to its Helio G95 chipset. However, the Nokia XR20’s Snapdragon 480 provides 5G connectivity and the benefit of Nokia’s software support, making it the better choice for users valuing future-proofing and reliable updates.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Umidigi Bison GT2 Pro | Nokia XR20 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 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, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 20, 25, 26, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71 |
| 5G bands | - | 2, 5, 25, 38, 41, 48, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE / 5G |
| - | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2022 | 2021, July 27 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022 | Available. Released 2021, August 04 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dimensions | 172.2 x 83.9 x 12.9 mm (6.78 x 3.30 x 0.51 in) | 171.6 x 81.5 x 10.6 mm (6.76 x 3.21 x 0.42 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 280 g (9.88 oz) | 248 g (8.75 oz) |
| - | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 60 min) Drop-to-concrete resistance from up to 1.8m MIL-STD-810H compliant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.5 inches, 102.0 cm2 (~70.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~76.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | IPS LCD, 550 nits |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Kryo 460 & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 460) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Helio G95 (12 nm) | Qualcomm SM4350 Snapdragon 480 5G (8 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G76 MC4 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 12 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 13 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 256GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.25", 0.8µm, PDAF 13 MP, f/2.4, 123˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.0", 1.12µm |
| Features | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama | Zeiss optics, Dual-LED dual-tone flash, second LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 8 MP, f/2.0 (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), AF 8 MP, f/2.2, 117˚ (ultrawide) 5 MP (macro) | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Single | 24 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.0 (wide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX Adaptive |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS, NavIC |
| Radio | Wireless FM radio | Unspecified |
| USB | USB Type-C | USB Type-C 3.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass, barometer, thermometer (skin temperature) | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired 15W wireless |
| Type | 6150 mAh | Li-Po 4630 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Hack Black | Ultra Blue, Granite Gray |
| Models | - | TA-1368, TA-1362 |
| Price | - | About 270 EUR |
| SAR EU | - | 1.13 W/kg (head) 1.43 W/kg (body) |
Umidigi Bison GT2 Pro
- More powerful processor for gaming and demanding apps
- Potentially better image processing capabilities
- Generally lower price point
- Lacks 5G connectivity
- Potentially less efficient power consumption
- Software updates may be less frequent
Nokia XR20
- 5G connectivity for faster data speeds
- Nokia’s commitment to software updates and security
- Wireless charging convenience
- Less powerful processor compared to the Bison GT2 Pro
- Potentially higher price point
- May exhibit more thermal throttling under sustained load
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a cutting-edge display. Details regarding panel type (IPS vs AMOLED) and resolution are missing, but the focus is clearly on durability, not visual fidelity. The lack of high refresh rates is expected in this segment. The key difference lies in the chipsets’ ability to drive the displays efficiently. While both likely offer adequate outdoor visibility, the Bison GT2 Pro’s more powerful GPU may allow for slightly more vibrant colors and smoother animations, assuming similar panel characteristics.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specs beyond the chipsets, a direct comparison is difficult. Both phones likely feature multi-camera setups geared towards versatility rather than flagship-level image quality. The image signal processor (ISP) within the Helio G95 may offer slightly more advanced image processing capabilities, potentially resulting in better dynamic range and detail in favorable lighting conditions. However, Nokia’s image processing algorithms are generally well-regarded for producing natural-looking photos. The absence of information regarding sensor sizes and optical image stabilization (OIS) makes a definitive judgment impossible.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Umidigi Bison GT2 Pro’s MediaTek Helio G95 (12nm) features a more powerful CPU configuration – two Cortex-A76 cores clocked at 2.05 GHz versus the Nokia XR20’s Snapdragon 480 (8nm) with 2x2.0 GHz Kryo 460 cores. This translates to a clear advantage for the Bison GT2 Pro in CPU-intensive tasks and gaming. However, the Snapdragon 480’s 8nm process is more efficient, potentially leading to better thermal management under sustained load. The XR20 also benefits from integrated 5G connectivity, a feature absent in the Bison GT2 Pro. The Snapdragon 480’s Adreno 619 GPU is also a capable performer, but likely trails the Helio G95’s GPU in raw graphical power.
Battery Life
Both devices offer 18W wired charging, suggesting similar charging speeds. The Nokia XR20 adds 15W wireless charging, a convenience feature the Bison GT2 Pro lacks. Battery capacity is not specified, but given the rugged design and target audience, both likely house batteries in the 4000-5000 mAh range. The Snapdragon 480’s superior power efficiency could translate to slightly longer battery life for the Nokia XR20, especially when utilizing 5G connectivity. However, the Bison GT2 Pro’s more powerful processor may drain the battery faster during intensive tasks.
Buying Guide
Buy the Umidigi Bison GT2 Pro if you need a rugged phone primarily for gaming, media consumption, and tasks requiring significant processing power, and are comfortable with a potentially less polished software experience. Buy the Nokia XR20 if you prefer a phone with 5G connectivity, a focus on durability, and the assurance of long-term software support from a reputable brand, even if it means sacrificing some raw performance.