The vivo U3 and Nokia 7.2 represent compelling options in the budget-to-midrange smartphone space, but cater to slightly different priorities. The U3 leverages the newer Snapdragon 675, while the Nokia 7.2 relies on the established Snapdragon 660. This comparison dissects the key differences to determine which device delivers the best overall experience.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the vivo U3 emerges as the stronger choice. Its Snapdragon 675 chipset offers a noticeable performance uplift over the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660, translating to smoother multitasking and gaming. While both phones boast similar battery endurance, the U3’s faster 18W charging provides a convenience advantage.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 - ROW |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 34, 38, 39, 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 / CDMA / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | CDMA 800 & TD-SCDMA | 1, 3, 5, 8, 40, 41 - IN |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2019, October. Released 2019, October | 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 9.0 | 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 | 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, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired
5W reverse wired | 10W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue, Green | Cyan Green, Charcoal, Ice |
| Models | V1941A, V1941T | 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: 139495 (v7), 164484 (v8)
GeekBench: 5440 (v4.4), 1398 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 8.1fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo U3
- Faster Snapdragon 675 processor for smoother performance
- 18W fast charging for quicker battery refills
- More efficient 11nm process node
- Display specifications are unknown
- Camera details are limited
Nokia 7.2
- Brighter display (585 nits)
- Proven software support from Nokia
- Good battery endurance (69h)
- Older Snapdragon 660 processor
- Slower 10W charging
Display Comparison
The Nokia 7.2 boasts a measured peak brightness of 585 nits and a 1342:1 contrast ratio, providing a visually pleasing experience, particularly outdoors. While the vivo U3’s display specifications aren’t provided, it’s likely to be comparable in terms of contrast. However, the Nokia 7.2’s higher brightness gives it an edge in direct sunlight readability. Both displays share the same contrast ratio, suggesting similar panel technology, but the Nokia 7.2’s measured output provides a concrete advantage.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having Photo/Video capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are lacking. Without sensor size, aperture, or image processing details, a direct comparison is difficult. However, given the U3’s more modern chipset, it’s reasonable to assume it benefits from more advanced image signal processing (ISP) capabilities, potentially leading to better dynamic range and low-light performance. The absence of information regarding OIS or dedicated camera features makes it impossible to definitively declare a winner.
Performance
The vivo U3’s Snapdragon 675 (11nm) represents a significant architectural leap over the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660 (14nm). The 675 utilizes Kryo 460 cores – a mix of 2x2.0 GHz Gold and 6x1.7 GHz Silver – while the 660 employs Kryo 260 cores (4x2.2 GHz Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Silver). The smaller 11nm process node of the 675 translates to improved power efficiency and reduced thermal throttling, allowing for sustained performance during intensive tasks. While the 660’s higher clock speeds on its Gold cores might offer a slight advantage in single-core tasks, the 675’s superior architecture and efficiency provide a more substantial benefit in multi-core workloads and gaming.
Battery Life
Both the vivo U3 and Nokia 7.2 achieve an endurance rating of 69 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. However, the vivo U3’s 18W wired charging significantly outperforms the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. This means the U3 can replenish its battery much faster, reducing downtime and offering greater convenience. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging speed gives the U3 a practical advantage for users who frequently need to top up their battery.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo U3 if you prioritize performance for gaming and demanding applications, and value faster charging speeds. It’s ideal for users who frequently switch between apps or enjoy mobile games. Buy the Nokia 7.2 if you prefer a phone with a proven track record of software support and a slightly brighter display, and are less concerned with raw processing power. It’s a solid choice for everyday tasks and media consumption.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Snapdragon 675 in the vivo U3 handle demanding games like PUBG Mobile smoothly?
Yes, the Snapdragon 675 is capable of running PUBG Mobile at medium to high settings with stable frame rates. Its Adreno 618 GPU provides a noticeable performance boost over the Snapdragon 660’s Adreno 512, resulting in a smoother gaming experience, especially during intense firefights.
❓ How long will it take to fully charge the vivo U3 with the 18W charger compared to the Nokia 7.2?
The vivo U3’s 18W charging will significantly reduce charging times. While exact figures depend on battery capacity (which isn't specified), expect a full charge in approximately 1.5 to 2 hours. The Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging will likely take over 3 hours to reach 100%.
❓ Does the Nokia 7.2 benefit from Nokia’s Android One program, and what does that mean for software updates?
Yes, the Nokia 7.2 was part of the Android One program, guaranteeing at least two years of Android version updates and three years of security patches. This provides a more secure and up-to-date software experience compared to many other phones in this price range, though update support may be nearing its end of life.
