The vivo Y50 (2020) and Nokia 7.2 represent a shrinking breed: affordable smartphones focused on delivering a solid experience without breaking the bank. Both leverage Qualcomm's Snapdragon 6-series, but with different iterations and manufacturing processes. This comparison dives deep into the nuances to determine which phone offers the best value in today's market.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing display quality and a slightly more refined software experience, the Nokia 7.2 is the better choice. While the vivo Y50 offers a newer chipset, the Nokia 7.2’s brighter display and comparable battery life make it a more compelling overall package.
| 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, 38, 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 / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 40, 41 - IN |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, April 06. Released 2020, April 12 | 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 x 76.5 x 9.1 mm (6.38 x 3.01 x 0.36 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 | 197 g (6.95 oz) | 180 g (6.35 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~403 ppi density) | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~400 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.53 inches, 102.9 cm2 (~83.1% 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 (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 SM6125 Snapdragon 665 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SDM660 Snapdragon 660 (14 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Adreno 512 |
| OS | Android 10, Funtouch 10.0 | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 11, Android One |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | - | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Zeiss optics, LED flash, panorama, HDR |
| Quad | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 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 | - | Zeiss optics, HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3", 0.9µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, EDR, LE, aptX |
| NFC | No | Yes (excl. India) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO | 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, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 15W wired | 10W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Starry Black, Iris Blue, Iris Blue, Pearl White | Cyan Green, Charcoal, Ice |
| Models | 1935, V1965A | TA-1193, TA-1178, TA-1196, TA-1181 |
| Price | About 70 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 Y50 (2020)
- Faster 15W charging
- More efficient 11nm chipset
- Potentially longer software support (vivo's update policy)
- Less refined Funtouch OS
- Display brightness likely lower than Nokia 7.2
- Chipset clock speed is lower
Nokia 7.2
- Brighter display (585 nits)
- Cleaner Android One software
- Higher CPU clock speed (Snapdragon 660)
- Slower 10W charging
- Older 14nm chipset
- Potentially shorter software support (Nokia's update history)
Display Comparison
The Nokia 7.2 boasts a significantly more impressive display, achieving a measured peak brightness of 585 nits compared to an unlisted value for the vivo Y50. Both share a 1342:1 contrast ratio, suggesting similar color depth and black levels. However, the higher brightness of the Nokia 7.2 translates to better visibility outdoors and a more engaging viewing experience. While both likely utilize IPS LCD panels, the Nokia 7.2’s superior brightness is a clear advantage for users who consume a lot of video or work outdoors.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, offering little specific detail. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is difficult. However, given the market positioning, it’s safe to assume both rely on relatively basic camera setups. The presence of a 2MP macro lens on either device is largely a marketing gimmick and unlikely to deliver significant image quality improvements. The Nokia 7.2’s image processing, coupled with its potentially better dynamic range due to the brighter display, may yield slightly more pleasing results in challenging lighting conditions.
Performance
Both phones utilize Qualcomm’s Kryo 260 cores, but the Nokia 7.2’s Snapdragon 660 operates at a higher clock speed (2.2 GHz vs 2.0 GHz on the Y50’s Snapdragon 665). Crucially, the Snapdragon 660 is built on a 14nm process, while the 665 uses a more efficient 11nm process. This means the 665 *should* offer better power efficiency, but the higher clock speeds of the 660 may offset this in real-world usage. The 11nm node of the Snapdragon 665 in the Y50 should theoretically lead to less heat generation under sustained load, potentially mitigating throttling during extended gaming sessions, but the difference is likely marginal.
Battery Life
Both the vivo Y50 and Nokia 7.2 achieve an endurance rating of 69 hours, indicating comparable battery life. However, the vivo Y50’s 15W charging is a step up from the Nokia 7.2’s 10W charging. This translates to a faster 0-100% charge time for the Y50, though the difference won’t be dramatic. The comparable endurance ratings suggest that despite the different chipsets, both phones manage power consumption effectively, likely due to their similar screen resolutions and battery capacities (unspecified in the provided data).
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y50 (2020) if you prioritize a slightly newer processor and are comfortable with vivo’s Funtouch OS. This phone is ideal for users who frequently update their software and want the latest features, even if they come with a slightly less polished interface. Buy the Nokia 7.2 if you prefer a cleaner Android One experience, a brighter and more vibrant display, and a phone that feels more premium in hand. This is the better option for media consumption and users who value software simplicity.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 660 in the Nokia 7.2 overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
While the Snapdragon 660 is built on a 14nm process, it's unlikely to experience significant overheating during typical gaming. The Nokia 7.2’s thermal design is adequate for the chipset’s power consumption. However, demanding titles at maximum settings may lead to some throttling to maintain stable performance.
❓ Is the Android One software on the Nokia 7.2 guaranteed to receive long-term updates?
Nokia promised a good update schedule with Android One, but their track record has been inconsistent. While the Nokia 7.2 launched with Android 9, it received updates to Android 10 and 11. However, future updates are uncertain. The Y50 may receive longer support from Vivo, but with their Funtouch OS skin.
❓ How much faster is the 15W charging on the vivo Y50 compared to the 10W charging on the Nokia 7.2?
The 15W charging on the Y50 will reduce the total charge time, but the difference isn't massive. Expect roughly a 30-60 minute reduction in full charge time compared to the Nokia 7.2, depending on battery capacity (which is not specified).
