The vivo V17 (Russia) and Nokia 7.2 represent compelling options in the crowded mid-range smartphone market. While both devices aim for affordability, they take slightly different approaches to achieving it. The V17 prioritizes a newer chipset, while the Nokia 7.2 focuses on display quality and a clean software experience. This comparison dissects their key differences to determine which phone delivers the best overall package.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the vivo V17 (Russia) offers a slight edge due to its more modern Snapdragon 665 chipset. This translates to a modest performance boost in everyday tasks and gaming. However, the Nokia 7.2’s superior display brightness and contrast make it a strong contender for media consumption.
| 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, 28, 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, November. Released 2019, December | 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 | 159.3 x 75.2 x 8.7 mm (6.27 x 2.96 x 0.34 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 | 186.7 g (6.60 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 (~83.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 99.1 cm2 (~82.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED | IPS LCD, HDR10 |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.2 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SDM665 Snapdragon 665 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SDM660 Snapdragon 660 (14 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | 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 | 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 |
| Quad | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Triple | - | 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 | USB Type-C 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 | Cloud Blue, Blue Fog | Cyan Green, Charcoal, Ice |
| Models | V1945A, V1945T | TA-1193, TA-1178, TA-1196, TA-1181 |
| Price | About 330 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 (Russia)
- More modern Snapdragon 665 chipset
- Faster 18W wired charging
- Potentially better power efficiency
- Display brightness specifications are unknown
- Camera details are limited
Nokia 7.2
- Brighter display (585 nits)
- High contrast ratio (1342:1)
- Clean Android experience
- Older Snapdragon 660 chipset
- Slower 10W wired charging
- Less efficient 14nm process
Display Comparison
The Nokia 7.2 boasts a noticeably brighter display, reaching a measured 585 nits, compared to the vivo V17’s unspecified brightness. Both share a 1342:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar color depth and black levels. This higher brightness on the Nokia 7.2 is particularly beneficial for outdoor visibility, while the V17’s display specifications remain less defined, potentially impacting its usability in direct sunlight. The Nokia 7.2’s display is a clear advantage for users who consume a lot of video content or frequently use their phones outdoors.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but detailed camera specifications are lacking. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the market positioning suggests the Nokia 7.2, with its emphasis on overall user experience, might offer more refined image processing. The absence of specific details on either device necessitates relying on user reviews and sample images to assess real-world camera performance. The lack of information on features like OIS or Night Mode makes it hard to determine a clear winner.
Performance
The vivo V17’s Snapdragon 665, built on an 11nm process, offers a slight architectural advantage over the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660 (14nm). While both utilize the same Kryo 260 core configuration (4x2.0 GHz Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Silver), the 665’s smaller node generally leads to improved power efficiency and potentially slightly higher sustained performance. The 660 in the Nokia 7.2 has a marginally higher peak clock speed (2.2 GHz vs 2.0 GHz), but the process node difference is more impactful for overall efficiency. Users seeking smoother multitasking and gaming will likely see a subtle benefit with the vivo V17.
Battery Life
Both the vivo V17 and Nokia 7.2 share an Endurance rating of 69 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. However, the vivo V17’s 18W wired charging is significantly faster than the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. This means the V17 can replenish its battery much quicker, reducing downtime. While both phones offer similar longevity, the V17’s faster charging is a practical advantage for users who need to quickly top up their battery throughout the day.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo V17 (Russia) if you prioritize responsiveness and occasional gaming, benefiting from the newer Snapdragon 665. It’s ideal for users who frequently multitask or run demanding applications. Buy the Nokia 7.2 if you value a vibrant, easily visible display and a clean Android experience, making it perfect for media enthusiasts and those who prefer a streamlined user interface.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 665 in the vivo V17 offer a noticeable gaming improvement over the Snapdragon 660 in the Nokia 7.2?
While not a massive leap, the Snapdragon 665 generally provides a smoother gaming experience, particularly in more demanding titles. The 11nm process allows for better thermal management, reducing the likelihood of performance throttling during extended gaming sessions. Expect slightly higher frame rates and more consistent performance on the vivo V17.
❓ Is the 10W charging on the Nokia 7.2 a significant drawback compared to the vivo V17's 18W charging?
Yes, the difference in charging speed is substantial. 10W charging will take considerably longer to fully charge the Nokia 7.2, potentially requiring several hours. The vivo V17’s 18W charging significantly reduces downtime, allowing you to quickly top up your battery when needed.
❓ Given the similar battery endurance ratings, does that mean both phones will last the same amount of time on a single charge?
The 69-hour Endurance rating suggests similar battery life *under standardized testing conditions*. However, real-world usage varies greatly. The Snapdragon 665 in the vivo V17 is more power-efficient, potentially leading to slightly longer battery life with similar usage patterns. The Nokia 7.2’s brighter display could consume more power, offsetting some of the battery capacity.
