The vivo U20 and Nokia 7.2 represent distinct approaches to the mid-range smartphone market. The U20 prioritizes processing power with a newer Snapdragon chipset, while the Nokia 7.2 focuses on a refined user experience and a respectable camera system. This comparison dissects their key differences to determine which device delivers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing performance and future-proofing, the vivo U20 emerges as the stronger choice. Its Snapdragon 675 offers a noticeable performance uplift over the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660, making it better suited for demanding apps and gaming. However, the Nokia 7.2’s display quality and potentially more streamlined software experience are worth considering.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 - ROW |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - ROW |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat6 300/50 Mbps or LTE Cat4 150/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 40, 41 - IN |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2019, November. Released 2019, November | 2019, September 05. Released 2019, September 23 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), glass back (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 162.2 x 76.5 x 8.9 mm (6.39 x 3.01 x 0.35 in) | 159.9 x 75.2 x 8.3 mm (6.30 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 193 g (6.81 oz) | 180 g (6.35 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.53 inches, 104.7 cm2 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 99.1 cm2 (~82.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD, HDR10 |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Kryo 460 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 460 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.2 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM675 Snapdragon 675 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SDM660 Snapdragon 660 (14 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 612 | Adreno 512 |
| OS | Android 9.0 (Pie), Funtouch 9.2 | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 11, Android One |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Zeiss optics, LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide)
2 MP (macro) | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS) |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | Zeiss optics, HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm | 20 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3", 0.9µm |
| 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 | 5.0, A2DP, EDR, LE, aptX |
| NFC | No | Yes (excl. India) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 10W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Racing Black, Blaze Blue | Cyan Green, Charcoal, Ice |
| Models | - | TA-1193, TA-1178, TA-1196, TA-1181 |
| Price | About 130 EUR | About 240 EUR |
| SAR | - | 1.15 W/kg (head) 0.90 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.99 W/kg (head) 1.44 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Audio quality | - |
Noise -93.0dB / Crosstalk -93.4dB |
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 69h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1342:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-29.6 LUFS (Average)
|
| Performance |
AnTuTu: 215820 (v8)
GeekBench: 5857 (v4.4), 1614 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 7.7fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
AnTuTu: 139495 (v7), 164484 (v8)
GeekBench: 5440 (v4.4), 1398 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 8.1fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo U20
- Faster Snapdragon 675 processor
- 18W fast charging
- Potentially better future-proofing
- Display specifications unknown
- Camera details limited
Nokia 7.2
- High display brightness (585 nits)
- Good contrast ratio (1342:1)
- Clean Android experience (likely)
- Slower Snapdragon 660 processor
- Slow 10W charging
- Older chipset
Display Comparison
The Nokia 7.2 boasts a display with a measured peak brightness of 585 nits and a 1342:1 contrast ratio, indicating a visually pleasing experience with good clarity and vibrant colors. While the vivo U20’s display specifications are not provided, the Nokia 7.2’s higher brightness is advantageous for outdoor visibility. Both share the same contrast ratio, suggesting similar black levels and color depth. The Nokia 7.2’s display is likely the stronger performer in terms of visual fidelity.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature photo and video capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are limited. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the Nokia 7.2’s brand reputation suggests a focus on image processing and color accuracy. The U20’s camera performance is less well-defined. The absence of specific details makes it difficult to assess which device offers superior image quality, but the Nokia 7.2 likely has an edge due to its brand focus on camera technology.
Performance
The vivo U20’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 (11nm) represents a significant architectural leap over the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660 (14nm). The 675 utilizes Kryo 460 cores, offering improved performance and efficiency compared to the Kryo 260 cores in the 660. The 675’s 2x2.0 GHz Gold cores and 6x1.7 GHz Silver cores provide a more balanced approach to performance, while the 660’s 4x2.2 GHz Gold and 4x1.8 GHz Silver configuration may offer slightly higher peak clock speeds but ultimately falls behind in sustained performance due to the larger manufacturing process. This translates to faster app loading times and smoother multitasking on the U20.
Battery Life
Both the vivo U20 and Nokia 7.2 share an endurance rating of 69 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. However, the vivo U20’s 18W wired charging significantly outperforms the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. This faster charging speed allows the U20 to replenish its battery more quickly, reducing downtime and providing a more convenient user experience. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging is a clear advantage for the U20.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo U20 if you need a phone capable of handling multitasking, moderate gaming, and future software updates without significant slowdowns. Its more powerful chipset provides a smoother experience for demanding users. Buy the Nokia 7.2 if you prefer a phone with a focus on display quality, a clean Android experience, and are less concerned with raw processing power. It’s a solid choice for everyday tasks and photography.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Snapdragon 675 in the vivo U20 handle demanding games like PUBG or Call of Duty Mobile smoothly?
The Snapdragon 675 is capable of running PUBG and Call of Duty Mobile at medium to high settings with playable frame rates. While it won't deliver the same experience as flagship chipsets, it provides a significant improvement over the Snapdragon 660, offering a smoother and more consistent gaming experience.
❓ How much faster is the 18W charging on the vivo U20 compared to the 10W charging on the Nokia 7.2?
18W charging is significantly faster than 10W. While exact 0-100% times depend on battery capacity (which isn't specified), you can expect the vivo U20 to charge considerably quicker, potentially reducing charging time by 40-60% compared to the Nokia 7.2. This means less time tethered to a charger.
❓ Does the Nokia 7.2 receive regular software updates and security patches?
Nokia is known for its commitment to providing timely Android updates and security patches, even for its mid-range devices. The Nokia 7.2 is likely to receive consistent software support, ensuring a secure and up-to-date user experience. However, the U20's update schedule is less predictable.
