Umidigi Bison vs. Ulefone Armor 9E: A Deep Dive into Rugged Smartphone Performance
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing responsiveness and smoother multitasking, the Ulefone Armor 9E emerges as the better choice. Its Helio P90 chipset, featuring Cortex-A75 cores, delivers a noticeable performance uplift over the Bison’s Helio P60, making it more suitable for gaming and demanding applications. However, the Bison remains a viable option for basic usage at a potentially lower price point.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Umidigi Bison | Ulefone Armor 9E |
| 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, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/11.5 Mbps, LTE Cat12 600/150 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE |
| - | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020. Released 2020 | 2020, September 08. Released 2020, September 08 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Front glass, aluminum back with rubber, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 162.5 x 79.9 x 12.8 mm (6.40 x 3.15 x 0.50 in) | 168.2 x 82 x 15 mm (6.62 x 3.23 x 0.59 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 250 g (8.82 oz) | 324 g (11.43 oz) |
| - | IP68/IP69K 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 | Corning Gorilla Glass | Scratch-resistant glass, oleophobic coating |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~75.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~70.6% 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 (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Helio P60 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6779 Helio P90 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 | PowerVR GM9446 |
| OS | Android 10 | Android 10 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama | Quad-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", AF 16 MP, 120˚ (ultrawide) 5 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | 64 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.72", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.4, 100˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 24 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.2 |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | FM radio, RDS, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG, accessory connector |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass, barometer | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, coulombmeter |
| - | Endoscope mount (camera sold separately) | |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 6600 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Cyber Yellow, Lava Orange | Black |
| Price | - | About 290 EUR |
Umidigi Bison
- Potentially lower price point
- Rugged design for durability
- Suitable for basic smartphone tasks
- Less powerful Helio P60 chipset
- May exhibit lag during demanding tasks
- Potentially lower display quality
Ulefone Armor 9E
- More powerful Helio P90 chipset
- Improved multitasking and gaming performance
- Potentially better camera system
- Likely higher price point
- May have slightly shorter battery life under heavy load
- Rugged design may add bulk
Display Comparison
Neither device's display specifications are provided, so a direct comparison is limited. However, given the market segment, both likely utilize IPS LCD panels. The Bison, being potentially the more budget-focused option, may have slightly lower peak brightness and color accuracy. Ulefone, historically, has focused on providing reasonable display quality within the rugged category, so the Armor 9E may offer a marginally better viewing experience. Bezels are likely to be substantial on both devices, prioritizing durability over a sleek aesthetic.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specifications, a precise comparison is difficult. However, it’s reasonable to assume both phones will feature a multi-camera setup geared towards general-purpose photography. The Ulefone Armor 9E, positioned as a slightly higher-tier device, may incorporate a larger primary sensor or more advanced image processing algorithms. The presence of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) would be a significant advantage for the Armor 9E, improving low-light performance and reducing blur. The common inclusion of 2MP macro lenses on both devices offers limited practical benefit due to their small sensor size and low resolution.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Ulefone Armor 9E’s MediaTek Helio P90 (12nm) boasts a significant architectural advantage over the Umidigi Bison’s Helio P60 (12nm). The P90 utilizes 2x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A75 cores alongside 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, while the P60 features 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. The A75 cores in the P90 offer substantially improved single-core performance, translating to snappier app launches and smoother multitasking. While both are 12nm chips, the P90’s more efficient core design likely results in better sustained performance under load. This benefits users who engage in gaming or resource-intensive tasks.
Battery Life
Both devices share the same 18W wired charging capability. Battery capacity isn’t specified, but rugged phones typically prioritize larger batteries. The actual 0-100% charging time will likely be similar, around 2-3 hours, given the 18W charging. The P90 in the Armor 9E, while more powerful, may also consume slightly more power, potentially offsetting any battery capacity advantage. Real-world battery life will depend heavily on usage patterns, but the Armor 9E’s more efficient chipset architecture could contribute to slightly longer endurance during demanding tasks.
Buying Guide
Buy the Umidigi Bison if you need a highly affordable, extremely durable phone primarily for basic communication, light social media, and occasional photography. It’s ideal for users who prioritize longevity and don’t require intensive processing power. Buy the Ulefone Armor 9E if you prefer a more responsive experience, enjoy mobile gaming, or frequently use demanding applications. The P90 chipset provides a significant performance boost, making it a better choice for power users who still need a rugged device.