vivo Y200 (Asia) vs Motorola Edge 40 Neo: A Detailed Comparison of Mid-Range Powerhouses

The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the vivo Y200 (Asia) and Motorola Edge 40 Neo represent compelling options. The Y200 focuses on rapid charging and a newer Snapdragon chipset, while the Edge 40 Neo prioritizes all-day battery life and a bright, vibrant display. This comparison dives deep into the specifications to determine which device delivers the best overall experience.
Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For the average user prioritizing longevity, the Motorola Edge 40 Neo is the better choice, offering a substantial 10:28h active use battery life. However, if minimizing charging time is paramount, the vivo Y200’s 80W charging, capable of 80% charge in just 30 minutes, makes it a strong contender.

PHONES
Phone Names vivo Y200 (Asia) Motorola Edge 40 Neo
Network
2G bandsGSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bandsHSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100
4G bands1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41 - Asia1, 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 bands1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA - Asia1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA
SpeedHSPA, LTE, 5GHSPA, LTE, 5G
TechnologyGSM / HSPA / LTE / 5GGSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G
Launch
Announced2024, November2023, September 14
StatusAvailable. Released 2024, November 22Available. Released 2023, September 14
Body
BuildGlass front, plastic back, plastic frameGlass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame, plastic back
Dimensions163.2 x 75.9 x 7.8 mm or 8.0 mm159.6 x 72 x 7.9 mm (6.28 x 2.83 x 0.31 in)
SIMNano-SIM + Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + eSIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM
Weight188 g or 190 g (6.63 oz)170 g or 172 g (6.00 oz)
Display
Protection-Corning Gorilla Glass 3
Resolution1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density)1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~402 ppi density)
Size6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.7% screen-to-body ratio)6.55 inches, 103.6 cm2 (~90.1% screen-to-body ratio)
TypeAMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 1200 nits (HBM), 1800 nits (peak)P-OLED, 1B colors, 144Hz, HDR10+, 1300 nits (peak)
Platform
CPUOcta-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x1.95 GHz Cortex-A55)Octa-core (2x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55)
ChipsetQualcomm SM4450 Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 (4 nm)MediaTek Dimensity 7030 (6 nm)
GPUAdreno 613Mali-G610 MC3
OSAndroid 14, Funtouch 14Android 13, up to 2 major Android upgrades
Memory
Card slotmicroSDXC (uses shared SIM slot)No
Internal256GB 8GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM
Main Camera
Dual50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.95", 0.8µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide)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
FeaturesRing-LED flash, panorama, HDRLED flash, HDR, panorama
Video1080p@30fps4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, gyro-EIS
Selfie camera
Features-HDR
Single32 MP, f/2.5, (wide)32 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/3.0", 0.7µm
Video1080p@30fps4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps
Sound
35mm jackNoNo
Loudspeaker Yes, with stereo speakersYes, with stereo speakers
Comms
Bluetooth5.0, A2DP, LE5.4, A2DP, LE
NFCNoYes
PositioningGPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, QZSS, BDSGPS, GLONASS, GALILEO
RadioNoNo
USBUSB Type-C 2.0, OTGUSB Type-C 2.0, OTG
WLANWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-bandWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, tri-band, Wi-Fi Direct
Features
SensorsFingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compassFingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass
Battery
Charging80W wired, 80% in 30 min Reverse wired68W wired, 50% in 15 min
TypeLi-Ion 5000 mAhLi-Po 5000 mAh
Misc
ColorsDynamic Black (Imperial Black), Titanium Silver, Dreamy VioletBlack, Soothing Sea, Caneel Bay, Peach Fuzz
Models-XT2307-1
PriceAbout 280 EUR$ 299.00 / € 168.73 / ₹ 19,900

vivo Y200 (Asia)

  • 80W Fast Charging: Significantly reduces charging time.
  • Snapdragon 4 Gen 2: Newer chipset with potential thermal advantages.
  • 4nm Process: Potentially improved power efficiency.

  • Battery Life Unknown: Lacks detailed battery performance data.
  • Display Brightness Unspecified: Likely lower brightness than the Edge 40 Neo.

Motorola Edge 40 Neo

  • Excellent Battery Life: 10:28h active use and 80h endurance rating.
  • Bright Display: 1073 nits peak brightness for outdoor visibility.
  • Fast Charging: 68W wired charging provides a quick boost.

  • Dimensity 7030: 6nm process may run hotter under sustained load.
  • Charging Speed: Slower than the vivo Y200's 80W charging.

Display Comparison

The Motorola Edge 40 Neo boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1073 nits. This is crucial for outdoor use, where the Y200’s display brightness is not specified, likely falling short. While panel technology isn’t detailed for either, the Edge 40 Neo’s brightness advantage suggests superior visibility in direct sunlight. Bezels and color accuracy are unknown for both, but the brightness difference is a clear win for Motorola.

Camera Comparison

Camera details are limited. Both phones likely feature multi-camera setups, but the specifics are unknown. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is difficult. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is unlikely to significantly impact image quality, serving primarily as a marketing feature. Image processing styles will likely differ, with vivo often favoring vibrant colors and Motorola aiming for more natural tones.

Performance

The Motorola Edge 40 Neo’s MediaTek Dimensity 7030, with its 2x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 cores, has a slight clock speed advantage over the vivo Y200’s Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A78). Both chips utilize a 6nm vs 4nm process, respectively, meaning the Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 *should* offer better thermal efficiency. However, the Dimensity 7030’s higher clock speeds could translate to faster performance in demanding tasks. The Y200’s 4nm node suggests potentially longer sustained performance under load, mitigating throttling. RAM specifications are missing for both, impacting multitasking capabilities.

Battery Life

The Motorola Edge 40 Neo shines in battery performance, achieving an impressive 10:28h of active use and an endurance rating of 80 hours. The vivo Y200 lacks these detailed metrics, but compensates with significantly faster 80W wired charging, reaching 80% in just 30 minutes. The Edge 40 Neo’s 68W charging takes 15 minutes to reach 50%. While the Y200’s battery capacity is unknown, the Edge 40 Neo’s endurance suggests a larger battery, prioritizing longevity over quick top-ups.

Buying Guide

Buy the vivo Y200 (Asia) if you need the fastest possible charging speeds and prefer a newer Qualcomm chipset, even if it means slightly shorter battery life. Buy the Motorola Edge 40 Neo if you prioritize all-day battery performance, a brighter display for outdoor visibility, and a more balanced overall package.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Does the MediaTek Dimensity 7030 in the Motorola Edge 40 Neo tend to overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
While the Dimensity 7030 is a capable chip, its 6nm process may lead to more heat generation under sustained load compared to the vivo Y200’s 4nm Snapdragon 4 Gen 2. However, Motorola’s thermal management implementation will play a crucial role. Expect some throttling during extended gaming, but it shouldn't be severe enough to render the phone unusable.
❓ How much faster is the 80W charging on the vivo Y200 compared to the 68W charging on the Motorola Edge 40 Neo in real-world use?
The vivo Y200 can reach 80% charge in 30 minutes, while the Edge 40 Neo takes 15 minutes to reach 50%. This means a full charge on the Y200 will take approximately 45-60 minutes, while the Edge 40 Neo will require closer to 75-90 minutes. The Y200 offers a significantly quicker initial charge, ideal for users who need a rapid power boost.
❓ Is the lack of detailed camera specifications on both phones a cause for concern?
Yes, it is. Without knowing sensor sizes, apertures, or OIS capabilities, it's difficult to assess the camera performance accurately. Both phones likely offer acceptable image quality for social media, but don't expect flagship-level results. Relying on online sample photos and reviews is crucial before making a decision.