vivo T4 Ultra vs Motorola Edge 40 Neo: A Deep Dive into Performance and Value
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing raw performance and rapid charging, the vivo T4 Ultra is the clear winner. However, the Motorola Edge 40 Neo offers a more well-rounded experience with excellent battery endurance and a brighter display, making it ideal for everyday users who don't demand the absolute fastest processing speeds.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo T4 Ultra | Motorola Edge 40 Neo |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 48, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 38, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 48, 66 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 18, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2025, June 11 | 2023, September 14 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, June 18 | Available. Released 2023, September 14 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 160.6 x 75 x 7.5 mm (6.32 x 2.95 x 0.30 in) | 159.6 x 72 x 7.9 mm (6.28 x 2.83 x 0.31 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 192 g (6.84 oz) | 170 g or 172 g (6.00 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1260 x 2800 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~460 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~402 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~89.2% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.55 inches, 103.6 cm2 (~90.1% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 2160Hz PWM, 1600 nits (HBM), 5000 nits (peak) | P-OLED, 1B colors, 144Hz, HDR10+, 1300 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.4 GHz Cortex-X4 & 3x2.85 GHz Cortex-X4 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A720) | Octa-core (2x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 9300+ (4 nm) | MediaTek Dimensity 7030 (6 nm) |
| GPU | Immortalis-G720 MC12 | Mali-G610 MC3 |
| OS | Android 15, Funtouch 15 | Android 13, up to 2 major Android upgrades |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.55", 1.0µm, multi-directional PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.0", 1.12µm, PDAF |
| Features | Ring-LED flash, panorama, HDR | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Triple | 50 MP, f/1.9, 23mm (wide), 1/1.56", PDAF, OIS 50 MP, f/2.6, 85mm (periscope telephoto), 1/1.95", 0.8µm, PDAF (15cm - ∞), OIS, 3x optical zoom 8 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide) | - |
| Video | 4K, 1080p, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.5, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/3.0", 0.7µm |
| Video | Yes | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE | 5.4, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, NavIC | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 90W wired, PD, 100% in 48 min Reverse wired | 68W wired, 50% in 15 min |
| Type | Si/C Li-Ion 5500 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Phoenix Gold, Meteor Grey | Black, Soothing Sea, Caneel Bay, Peach Fuzz |
| Models | - | XT2307-1 |
| Price | ₹ 36,999 | $ 299.00 / € 168.73 / ₹ 19,900 |
| SAR | 0.99 W/kg (head) 1.00 W/kg (body) | - |
vivo T4 Ultra
- Exceptional performance with Dimensity 9300+
- Ultra-fast 90W wired charging
- Potentially better thermal management due to 4nm process
- Battery life likely shorter than Edge 40 Neo
- Display brightness potentially lower than Edge 40 Neo
Motorola Edge 40 Neo
- Excellent battery life (10:28h active use)
- Bright and vibrant display (1073 nits)
- Balanced and refined user experience
- Significantly less powerful chipset (Dimensity 7030)
- Slower charging speed (68W)
Display Comparison
The Motorola Edge 40 Neo boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1073 nits, making it more usable outdoors in direct sunlight. While the vivo T4 Ultra’s display specs are not provided, the Edge 40 Neo’s brightness advantage is substantial. The Edge 40 Neo’s panel likely benefits from its focus on visual experience, whereas the T4 Ultra appears to prioritize internal components. We expect the Edge 40 Neo to offer better visibility and color vibrancy in bright conditions.
Camera Comparison
Detailed camera specs for both devices are limited. However, the focus should be on the main sensor capabilities. Without knowing the sensor sizes, we can assume the T4 Ultra, positioned as a performance-focused device, may prioritize a larger sensor for improved low-light performance. The Edge 40 Neo’s camera is described as capable of both photo and video, suggesting a balanced approach. The absence of details regarding OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on either device makes it difficult to assess video stabilization capabilities. We advise users to disregard any mention of 2MP macro cameras, as their image quality is typically negligible.
Performance
The vivo T4 Ultra’s Mediatek Dimensity 9300+ (4nm) represents a substantial leap in performance over the Motorola Edge 40 Neo’s Dimensity 7030 (6nm). The 9300+ features a unique CPU configuration with Cortex-X4 cores clocked up to 3.4GHz, designed for peak performance, while the 7030 relies on older Cortex-A78 cores at 2.5GHz. This translates to significantly faster app loading, smoother multitasking, and superior gaming performance on the T4 Ultra. The 4nm process node of the 9300+ also contributes to better thermal efficiency, potentially mitigating throttling during sustained workloads. The Edge 40 Neo’s 6nm chip is still capable, but will struggle to match the T4 Ultra in demanding scenarios.
Battery Life
The Motorola Edge 40 Neo shines in battery endurance, achieving an active use score of 10:28h and an endurance rating of 80 hours. While the vivo T4 Ultra’s battery capacity is unknown, its 90W wired charging significantly outperforms the Edge 40 Neo’s 68W charging, promising a full charge in just 48 minutes. The Edge 40 Neo reaches 50% charge in 15 minutes, but the T4 Ultra’s faster charging is a significant convenience factor. The Edge 40 Neo’s longer battery life is ideal for users who prioritize minimizing charging frequency, while the T4 Ultra’s rapid charging compensates for potentially higher power consumption due to its more powerful chipset.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo T4 Ultra if you are a power user, mobile gamer, or frequently engage in demanding tasks like video editing and need the fastest possible processing speeds and 90W charging. Buy the Motorola Edge 40 Neo if you prioritize all-day battery life, a vibrant display for media consumption, and a more balanced, refined smartphone experience without sacrificing essential performance.