The vivo V17 Neo and Nokia 7.2 represent compelling options in the crowded mid-range smartphone market. While both aim to deliver a balanced experience, they take different approaches to achieving it. The V17 Neo prioritizes faster charging and a newer chipset, while the Nokia 7.2 focuses on display quality and a clean Android experience. This comparison dives deep into the specifics to determine which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing responsiveness and quicker top-ups, the vivo V17 Neo is the better choice. Its Mediatek Helio P65 chipset offers a slight performance advantage, and the 18W charging significantly outperforms the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging, despite both phones sharing a 69-hour endurance rating.
| 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, 7, 8, 20, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - ROW |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat6 300/150 Mbps | 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, August. Released 2019, August | 2019, September 05. Released 2019, September 23 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), glass back (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 159.5 x 75.2 x 8.1 mm (6.28 x 2.96 x 0.32 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 | 179 g (6.31 oz) | 180 g (6.35 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~404 ppi density) | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.38 inches, 99.9 cm2 (~83.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 99.1 cm2 (~82.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED | IPS LCD, HDR10 |
| | Always-on display | - |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.7 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (4x2.2 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6768 Helio P65 (12 nm) | Qualcomm SDM660 Snapdragon 660 (14 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G52 MC2 | Adreno 512 |
| OS | Android 9.0 (Pie), Funtouch 9 | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 11, Android One |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | eMMC 5.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Zeiss optics, LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Triple | 16 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.8", 1.12µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
Auxiliary lens | 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 | 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps (gyro-EIS) |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | Zeiss optics, HDR |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | 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 | 5.0, A2DP, EDR, LE, aptX |
| NFC | Yes | 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 (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 10W wired |
| Type | 4500 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black brilliant, Blue Pearl | Cyan Green, Charcoal, Ice |
| Models | - | TA-1193, TA-1178, TA-1196, TA-1181 |
| Price | About 280 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 V17 Neo
- Faster 18W charging for quicker top-ups
- More modern Helio P65 chipset offers slight performance gains
- Potentially better thermal management due to 12nm process
- Display brightness likely lower than Nokia 7.2
- Camera specs are not detailed, potentially indicating average performance
Nokia 7.2
- Brighter display (585 nits) for better outdoor visibility
- Clean Android experience with fewer pre-installed apps
- Good contrast ratio (1342:1) for vibrant colors
- Slower 10W charging
- Older Snapdragon 660 chipset may struggle with demanding tasks
Display Comparison
The Nokia 7.2 boasts a notably brighter display, reaching a measured 585 nits, compared to an unstated value for the V17 Neo. Both share a 1342:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar black levels and color depth. However, the Nokia 7.2’s higher peak brightness translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. While panel technology isn’t specified for either, the Nokia 7.2’s display is likely to offer a more pleasant viewing experience in bright conditions.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack detailed sensor information. Without specifics on sensor size or aperture, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the market segment suggests both will rely on software processing to enhance image quality. The absence of details implies neither phone will be a standout performer in low-light conditions. Focusing on the main sensor is crucial, as the inclusion of a 2MP macro lens on either device is unlikely to provide significant photographic value.
Performance
The vivo V17 Neo’s Mediatek Helio P65, built on a 12nm process, offers a slight architectural advantage over the Nokia 7.2’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 (14nm). The P65 utilizes a combination of Cortex-A75 and A55 cores, providing a boost in single-core performance, while the Snapdragon 660 employs Kryo 260 cores. The Snapdragon 660’s 2.2 GHz clock speed on its performance cores is higher than the P65’s 2.0 GHz, but the newer architecture of the P65 generally translates to better efficiency. This means the V17 Neo may sustain performance for longer periods without significant throttling, though both phones are unlikely to excel at demanding tasks.
Battery Life
Both the vivo V17 Neo and Nokia 7.2 achieve an endurance rating of 69 hours, indicating similar overall battery life under typical usage. However, the charging speeds differ significantly. The V17 Neo supports 18W wired charging, allowing for a much faster 0-100% charge compared to the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. This difference is crucial for users who frequently need to quickly replenish their battery, offsetting any potential minor differences in battery capacity.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo V17 Neo if you need a phone that can keep up with moderate multitasking and benefits from faster charging speeds, making it ideal for users on the go. Buy the Nokia 7.2 if you prefer a phone with a well-calibrated display and a clean, bloatware-free Android experience, and aren't concerned about the slower charging or slightly older processor.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Mediatek Helio P65 in the vivo V17 Neo struggle with graphically intensive games like PUBG?
While the Helio P65 isn't a gaming powerhouse, it can handle PUBG at medium settings. Expect some frame drops during intense firefights. The Snapdragon 660 in the Nokia 7.2 will offer a similar experience, but the P65’s architecture may provide slightly more sustained performance over longer gaming sessions.
❓ How significant is the difference in charging speed between 18W and 10W on these phones?
The difference is substantial. 18W charging on the V17 Neo will significantly reduce the time it takes to fully charge the battery compared to the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. Expect roughly a 30-60 minute difference in a full charge, making the V17 Neo much more convenient for users who need a quick power boost.
❓ Is the Nokia 7.2 likely to receive more software updates than the vivo V17 Neo?
Historically, Nokia has been committed to providing timely Android updates and security patches, even for its mid-range devices. vivo’s update schedule is less predictable. Therefore, the Nokia 7.2 is likely to receive more consistent and longer-term software support.
