UMiDIGI A9 Pro vs UMiDIGI Bison GT
Compare Phones: UMiDIGI A9 Pro vs UMiDIGI Bison GT
Summary |
|
For:
Lower price (148.19 USD vs 254 USD)
Better design (572 points vs 232 points)
Against:
Worse camera (815 points vs 924 points)
Worse battery (534 points vs 869 points)
Worse performance (505 points vs 663 points)
Worse display (630 points vs 775 points)
Camera |
|
For:
Better aperture (f/1.7 vs f/1.8)
Against:
Worse video resolution (0.2 Megapixels vs 0.81 Megapixels)
Worse main camera resolution (48 Megapixels vs 64.22 Megapixels)
Battery |
|
Against:
Worse battery capacity (4150mAh vs 5150mAh)
Performance |
|
Against:
Lower cpu frequency (2000 megahertz vs 2050 megahertz)
Less gpu cores (3 cores vs 4 cores)
Lower gpu frequency (800 megahertz vs 900 megahertz)
Less ram (4096 mega bytes vs 8192 mega bytes)
Less rom (65536 mega bytes vs 131072 mega bytes)
Connectivity |
|
Display |
|
For:
Higher pixel density (409 pixels per inch vs 395 pixels per inch)
Against:
Smaller display (6.3 inch vs 6.67 inch)
Design |
|
For:
Bigger display area (82.23 percents vs 76.7 percents)
Summary |
|
For:
Better camera (924 points vs 815 points)
Better battery (869 points vs 534 points)
Better performance (663 points vs 505 points)
Better display (775 points vs 630 points)
Against:
Higher price (254 USD vs 148.19 USD)
Worse design (232 points vs 572 points)
Camera |
|
For:
Better video resolution (0.81 Megapixels vs 0.2 Megapixels)
Better main camera resolution (64.22 Megapixels vs 48 Megapixels)
Against:
Worse aperture (f/1.8 vs f/1.7)
Battery |
|
For:
Better battery capacity (5150mAh vs 4150mAh)
Performance |
|
For:
Higher cpu frequency (2050 megahertz vs 2000 megahertz)
More gpu cores (4 cores vs 3 cores)
Higher gpu frequency (900 megahertz vs 800 megahertz)
More ram (8192 mega bytes vs 4096 mega bytes)
More rom (131072 mega bytes vs 65536 mega bytes)
Connectivity |
|
Display |
|
For:
Bigger display (6.67 inch vs 6.3 inches)
Against:
Lower pixel density (395 pixels per inch vs 409 pixels per inch)
Design |
|
Against:
Smaller display area (76.7 percents vs 82.23 percents)