The sub-$200 smartphone market is fiercely competitive. The vivo Y31 (2021) and Tecno Camon 17 Pro both aim to deliver a solid experience without breaking the bank, but they take different approaches. The Y31 relies on Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 662, while the Camon 17 Pro opts for MediaTek’s Helio G95. This comparison dives deep into the specifics to determine which phone offers the best value.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing a balance of performance and fast charging, the Tecno Camon 17 Pro is the better choice. Its Helio G95 chipset offers a noticeable performance uplift, and the 25W/33W charging significantly reduces downtime compared to the Y31’s 18W charging, despite both phones having a similar endurance rating.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 | LTE |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, January 20 | 2021, May 08 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, January 20 | Available. Released 2021, June 03 |
| Body |
|---|
| Dimensions | 163.9 x 75.3 x 8.4 mm (6.45 x 2.96 x 0.33 in) | 168.9 x 77 x 9 mm (6.65 x 3.03 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 188 g (6.63 oz) | 201 g (7.09 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) | 1080 x 2460 pixels (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~84.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.8 inches, 109.8 cm2 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 500 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6115 Snapdragon 662 (11 nm) | Mediatek MT6785V/CD Helio G95 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Mali-G76 MC4 |
| OS | Android 11, Funtouch 11 | Android 11, HIOS 7.6 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Quad-LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.72", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.3, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP, f/2.4, (monochrome)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 48 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | Dual-LED flash |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm | 48 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with dual speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio, recording |
| 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 (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired, 70% in 67 min | 25W / 33W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Racing Black, Ocean Blue | California Silver, Malibu Blue |
| Models | V2036, V2036_21 | CG8, CG8h |
| Price | About 190 EUR | About 280 EUR |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 140h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 781:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-24.4 LUFS (Very good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 309107 (v8)
GeekBench: 1668 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 17fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo Y31 (2021)
- Reliable Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 chipset
- Generally smooth performance for everyday tasks
- Established brand reputation
- Slower 18W charging
- Less powerful processor compared to the Camon 17 Pro
- Limited camera details
Tecno Camon 17 Pro
- More powerful MediaTek Helio G95 chipset
- Faster 25W/33W charging
- Higher peak display brightness
- MediaTek chipset may not have the same software support as Qualcomm
- Less established brand recognition
- Potential for more aggressive power consumption
Display Comparison
Both the vivo Y31 and Tecno Camon 17 Pro share a similar contrast ratio of 781:1, suggesting comparable image depth. However, the Tecno Camon 17 Pro boasts a measured peak brightness of 538 nits, which is crucial for outdoor visibility. While neither phone is likely to feature high-refresh-rate panels, the higher brightness of the Camon 17 Pro gives it an edge in real-world usability, especially under direct sunlight. The lack of detailed panel specifications (like LCD vs IPS) makes a deeper analysis difficult, but the brightness difference is a tangible benefit.
Camera Comparison
Both phones are advertised with 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is challenging. However, the market positioning of Tecno often emphasizes camera features, suggesting a potentially more refined image processing pipeline. The presence of a dedicated camera section in the specs implies a focus on this area for the Camon 17 Pro. The Y31, being a more budget-focused device, likely prioritizes cost savings over advanced camera technology. It's safe to assume the Camon 17 Pro will offer more versatile camera features, even if the megapixel count is similar.
Performance
The Tecno Camon 17 Pro’s MediaTek Helio G95 (12nm) represents a clear step up in processing power compared to the vivo Y31’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 (11nm). The G95 features a more modern CPU architecture – Cortex-A76 cores versus the Kryo 260 Gold in the Snapdragon 662 – resulting in better single-core performance. While both are octa-core CPUs, the G95’s architecture translates to smoother multitasking and a more responsive experience in demanding applications. The 12nm process node on the G95, while slightly larger than the 11nm on the Snapdragon, is offset by architectural improvements. This means the Camon 17 Pro will likely handle gaming and resource-intensive tasks more effectively.
Battery Life
Both the vivo Y31 and Tecno Camon 17 Pro achieve an endurance rating of 140 hours, indicating similar overall battery life under typical usage. However, the charging speeds are drastically different. The Y31 is limited to 18W wired charging, taking approximately 67 minutes to reach 70% charge. The Camon 17 Pro, on the other hand, supports 25W/33W charging, allowing for significantly faster top-ups. This difference in charging speed is a major advantage for the Camon 17 Pro, as it minimizes downtime and provides greater convenience for users who frequently need to recharge their devices.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y31 (2021) if you prioritize a known, reliable chipset (Snapdragon) and a generally smooth, if not blazing-fast, experience for everyday tasks. Buy the Tecno Camon 17 Pro if you prefer a more powerful processor for gaming and demanding apps, and value the convenience of significantly faster charging speeds, even if it means opting for a MediaTek solution.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the MediaTek Helio G95 in the Camon 17 Pro get noticeably warmer during extended gaming sessions?
The Helio G95 is known to run warmer than some other mid-range chips. While the Camon 17 Pro's thermal management isn't specifically detailed, the 12nm process node and higher performance suggest it *could* get warm during prolonged gaming. However, this is often managed through software throttling, which may slightly reduce performance to maintain safe temperatures.
❓ Is the 18W charging on the vivo Y31 sufficient for overnight charging, or will I need to plug it in for extended periods?
18W charging is adequate for overnight charging, but it's significantly slower than the Camon 17 Pro's 25W/33W. Expect a full charge to take considerably longer – likely over 3 hours. If you frequently need to top up your battery during the day, the Y31's slower charging will be a noticeable inconvenience.
❓ Given the similar endurance ratings, does the faster charging of the Camon 17 Pro actually translate to a better user experience?
Absolutely. While both phones last roughly the same amount of time on a single charge, the Camon 17 Pro's faster charging dramatically reduces the time you spend tethered to a wall. A quick 30-minute charge can provide a substantial boost in battery life, making it ideal for users on the go.
