The ZTE Blade A36 and A76 4G represent ZTE’s continued push into the ultra-budget smartphone market. While both devices aim to deliver essential smartphone functionality at a low price point, they diverge in key areas like processing power and charging capabilities. This comparison dissects these differences to determine which device offers the best value for your money.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the ZTE Blade A76 4G emerges as the slightly better choice. While both phones offer comparable battery endurance (around 54 hours), the A76 4G’s significantly faster 22.5W charging dramatically improves usability, reducing downtime and making it ideal for those on the go.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | LTE |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2025, June 18 | 2025, October |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, June | Available. Released 2025, October |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic frame, plastic back | - |
| Dimensions | 167.6 x 77.4 x 8.3 mm (6.60 x 3.05 x 0.33 in) | - |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | - | - |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | Mohs level 4 | Mohs level 4 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~260 ppi density) | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~262 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.75 inches, 110.0 cm2 (~84.8% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.75 inches, 109.5 cm2 (~89.3% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | IPS LCD, 90Hz |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core 1.8 GHz |
| Chipset | Unisoc T7200 (12 nm) | - |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MP1 | - |
| OS | Android 15 | Android 15 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | No |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | - | 50 MP, (wide), AF
Auxiliary lens |
| Features | LED flash | LED flash, HDR |
| Single | 13 MP, AF
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 5 MP | Yes |
| Video | Yes | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE | Yes |
| NFC | No | Unspecified |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS | GPS |
| Radio | FM radio | Unspecified |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 2.0 |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Accelerometer, proximity, compass | Yes |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 10W wired | 22.5W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Green, Silver | Silver, Gold, Violet |
| Models | Z2472 | Z2474 |
| Price | About 60 EUR | € 93.19 |
| EU LABEL |
|---|
| Battery | 54:13h endurance, 800 cycles | 54:20h endurance, 800 cycles |
| Energy | Class A | Class A |
| Free fall | Class D (80 falls) | Class C (90 falls) |
| Repairability | Class B | Class B |
ZTE Blade A36
- More modern chipset architecture (Unisoc T7200)
- Comparable battery endurance to A76 4G
- Potentially better sustained performance due to Cortex-A75 cores
- Significantly slower 10W charging
- Likely lower single-core performance compared to A76 4G
- Limited information on display quality
ZTE Blade A76 4G
- Faster 22.5W charging for quicker top-ups
- Higher CPU clock speed (1.8 GHz)
- Potentially more responsive user experience
- Older chipset architecture (details unknown)
- Likely lower sustained performance compared to A36
- Limited information on display quality
Display Comparison
Display specifications are not provided, so a direct comparison is impossible. However, given the price bracket, both devices likely utilize LCD panels with 720p+ resolution. Bezels are expected to be noticeable on both. Color accuracy will likely be standard for this segment, prioritizing power efficiency over color fidelity.
Camera Comparison
Camera details are absent beyond the existence of cameras. In this price range, expect basic image sensors focused on functionality rather than quality. The absence of details suggests neither phone will excel in photography, and image processing will likely prioritize speed over detail. Users should temper expectations regarding low-light performance and dynamic range.
Performance
The ZTE Blade A76 4G and A36 differ significantly in their CPU configurations. The A36 features the Unisoc T7200 (12nm) chipset, employing an octa-core setup with 2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This architecture, while efficient, is geared towards balanced performance. The A76 4G utilizes an octa-core CPU clocked at 1.8 GHz, but the specific chipset isn't specified. The higher clock speed suggests a slight edge in single-core performance, potentially leading to snappier app launches. The T7200’s Cortex-A75 cores in the A36 should provide better sustained performance in demanding tasks compared to a purely Cortex-A55 based processor, but the A76’s higher clock speed may compensate. Neither phone is designed for intensive gaming.
Battery Life
Both the ZTE Blade A36 and A76 4G boast impressive battery endurance, both rated at approximately 54 hours. However, the key differentiator lies in charging speed. The A36 is limited to 10W wired charging, while the A76 4G supports a significantly faster 22.5W wired charging. This means the A76 4G can replenish its battery much more quickly, reducing downtime. While both phones offer 800 charge cycles, the faster charging of the A76 4G makes it more convenient for daily use.
Buying Guide
Buy the ZTE Blade A36 if you prioritize a slightly newer chipset architecture and are comfortable with slower charging speeds. This phone is best suited for users who primarily use their phone for basic tasks like calls, texts, and light social media. Buy the ZTE Blade A76 4G if you value faster charging and don't mind a slightly older processor; it’s the better option for users who need to quickly top up their battery throughout the day and appreciate a more responsive experience.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ How much faster is the charging on the ZTE Blade A76 4G compared to the A36?
The ZTE Blade A76 4G’s 22.5W charging is more than double the speed of the A36’s 10W charging. This translates to a significantly reduced time to fully recharge the battery, making it much more convenient for users who frequently need to top up their phone throughout the day.
❓ Will the Unisoc T7200 in the A36 handle basic gaming like Candy Crush or Subway Surfers?
Yes, the Unisoc T7200 in the ZTE Blade A36 should be capable of handling casual games like Candy Crush and Subway Surfers without significant issues. However, it's not designed for graphically demanding games, and you may experience slowdowns or reduced frame rates in those titles.
❓ Is the difference in CPU clock speed (1.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz) noticeable in everyday use?
The 0.2 GHz difference in CPU clock speed is likely to be noticeable in tasks like app launching and web browsing, giving the A76 4G a slight edge in responsiveness. However, the overall user experience will also depend on software optimization and RAM management.
