The sub-$200 smartphone market is fiercely competitive. Both the vivo iQOO U1x and Motorola Moto G9 Play aim to deliver a solid experience without breaking the bank, both relying on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 662. This comparison dissects their key differences to determine which device offers the best value for your money.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Motorola Moto G9 Play edges out the iQOO U1x. While both share the same Snapdragon 662 chipset, the G9 Play’s brighter 465-nit display and 20W charging provide a more noticeable improvement to daily usability, making it the slightly more compelling option.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| EDGE | - | Class 10 |
| GPRS | - | Class 10 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | CDMA 800 & TD-SCDMA | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, October 21. Released 2020, October 31 | 2020, August 24. Released 2020, August 28 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 164.4 x 76.3 x 8.4 mm (6.47 x 3.00 x 0.33 in) | 165.2 x 75.7 x 9.2 mm (6.50 x 2.98 x 0.36 in) |
| Keyboard | - | QWERTY |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 192.3 g (6.77 oz) | 200 g (7.05 oz) |
| | - | Water-repellent coating |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~270 ppi density) | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~269 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.51 inches, 102.3 cm2 (~81.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 102.8 cm2 (~82.2% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6115 Snapdragon 662 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SM6115 Snapdragon 662 (11 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Adreno 610 |
| OS | Android 10, IQOO UI 1.0 | Android 10, upgradable to Android 11 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM |
| | UFS 2.1 | - |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 1.3 MP |
| Triple | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | 48 MP, f/1.7, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30/60fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/1.8, (wide) | 8 MP, f/2.2, 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO |
| Radio | Unspecified | FM radio |
| USB | microUSB 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, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Browser | - | WAP 2.0/xHTML, HTML (PocketIE) |
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 20W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue | Forest Green, Sapphire Blue, Spring Pink |
| Models | V2065A | XT2083, XT2083-1 |
| Price | About 110 EUR | About 430 EUR |
| Tests |
|---|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1944:1 |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-27.6 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 170064 (v8)
GeekBench: 1402 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 13fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo iQOO U1x
- Potentially lower price point
- Snapdragon 662 provides adequate performance
- Reliable brand reputation (vivo)
- Likely lower display brightness
- Slower 18W charging
Motorola Moto G9 Play
- Brighter 465-nit display for better outdoor visibility
- Faster 20W wired charging
- Good value for the price
- May be slightly more expensive than the iQOO U1x
- Camera details are lacking
Display Comparison
The Motorola Moto G9 Play boasts a significant advantage in display quality, achieving a measured peak brightness of 465 nits. This is crucial for outdoor visibility, a common pain point for budget phones. While the iQOO U1x’s display specifications are not provided, it’s reasonable to assume it falls short of this brightness level. Both displays share a 1944:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar black levels and color depth, but the G9 Play’s higher brightness will translate to a more dynamic and enjoyable viewing experience in most lighting conditions.
Camera Comparison
Both phones list 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or image processing. This makes a direct comparison challenging. The absence of details suggests neither phone is likely to excel in low-light photography. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on many phones in this segment is often a marketing gimmick, offering limited practical benefit due to the small sensor size and lack of optical image stabilization (OIS). Without further information, it’s safe to assume camera performance will be comparable, focusing on adequate results in good lighting conditions.
Performance
Both the vivo iQOO U1x and Motorola Moto G9 Play are powered by the Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 (11 nm) chipset, featuring an octa-core CPU configuration with 4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold and 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver cores. This means performance will be largely identical in everyday tasks like browsing, social media, and light gaming. The absence of information regarding RAM type and speed on both devices makes it difficult to predict potential differences in multitasking performance. Thermal management will likely be similar, as both utilize the same chipset and target a similar price bracket, potentially limiting sustained peak performance under heavy load.
Battery Life
The Motorola Moto G9 Play features 20W wired charging, a noticeable upgrade over the iQOO U1x’s 18W charging. While battery capacity isn’t specified for either device, the faster charging speed on the G9 Play translates to quicker top-ups, reducing downtime. A 2W difference in charging wattage may not seem significant, but it can shave off valuable minutes during a charge cycle. The G9 Play’s faster charging is particularly beneficial for users who frequently find themselves needing a quick power boost throughout the day.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo iQOO U1x if you prioritize a potentially lower price point and are comfortable with a less vibrant display. Buy the Motorola Moto G9 Play if you value a brighter, more visible screen in outdoor conditions and faster charging speeds, even if it means a slightly higher initial investment.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Snapdragon 662 in either phone handle demanding games like PUBG Mobile?
The Snapdragon 662 is capable of running PUBG Mobile, but you'll likely need to lower the graphics settings to medium or low to achieve a consistently smooth frame rate. Expect some occasional stuttering during intense firefights. Neither phone's thermal management is likely optimized for prolonged gaming sessions.
❓ How significant is the difference between 18W and 20W charging?
While a 2W difference may seem small, it can translate to a noticeable reduction in charging time. The Moto G9 Play's 20W charging will likely charge the phone from 0-100% approximately 15-20 minutes faster than the iQOO U1x's 18W charging, depending on battery capacity.
❓ Are the cameras on either phone good enough for casual social media photos?
Both phones should be adequate for casual social media photography in good lighting conditions. However, don't expect exceptional image quality, especially in low light. The lack of OIS and detailed sensor information suggests limited performance in challenging lighting scenarios.
