Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro vs Asus ROG Phone 5 Pro
Compare Phones: Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro vs Asus ROG Phone 5 Pro
Summary |
|
For:
Lower price (539 USD vs 1698.21 USD)
Better camera (997 points vs 928 points)
Better design (559 points vs 483 points)
Against:
Worse battery (890 points vs 928 points)
Worse performance (698 points vs 997 points)
Worse connectivity (391 points vs 971 points)
Worse display (876 points vs 928 points)
Camera |
|
For:
Better aperture (f/1.6 vs f/1.7)
Better main camera resolution (108.58 Megapixels vs 64.22 Megapixels)
Better front camera resolution (31.96 Megapixels vs 23.79 Megapixels)
Against:
Worse video resolution (0.81 Megapixels vs 2.37 Megapixels)
Battery |
|
Against:
Worse battery capacity (5260mAh vs 6000mAh)
Performance |
|
Against:
Lower cpu frequency (2200 megahertz vs 2840 megahertz)
Less ram (6144 mega bytes vs 16384 mega bytes)
Less rom (65536 mega bytes vs 524288 mega bytes)
Connectivity |
|
Display |
|
For:
Higher pixel density (398 pixels per inch vs 380 pixels per inch)
Against:
Smaller display (6.47 inch vs 6.78 inch)
Design |
|
For:
Bigger display area (88.05 percents vs 84.98 percents)
Summary |
|
For:
Better battery (928 points vs 890 points)
Better performance (997 points vs 698 points)
Better connectivity (971 points vs 391 points)
Better display (928 points vs 876 points)
Against:
Higher price (1698.21 USD vs 539 USD)
Worse camera (928 points vs 997 points)
Worse design (483 points vs 559 points)
Camera |
|
For:
Better video resolution (2.37 Megapixels vs 0.81 Megapixels)
Against:
Worse aperture (f/1.7 vs f/1.6)
Worse main camera resolution (64.22 Megapixels vs 108.58 Megapixels)
Worse front camera resolution (23.79 Megapixels vs 31.96 Megapixels)
Battery |
|
For:
Better battery capacity (6000mAh vs 5260mAh)
Performance |
|
For:
Higher cpu frequency (2840 megahertz vs 2200 megahertz)
More ram (16384 mega bytes vs 6144 mega bytes)
More rom (524288 mega bytes vs 65536 mega bytes)
Connectivity |
|
Display |
|
For:
Bigger display (6.78 inch vs 6.47 inches)
Against:
Lower pixel density (380 pixels per inch vs 398 pixels per inch)
Design |
|
Against:
Smaller display area (84.98 percents vs 88.05 percents)