Lava Bold N1 alternatives
Tap above to see alternatives.
Vivo X200 Pro alternatives
Tap above to see alternatives.
Lava Bold N1

Lava Bold N1
-
Unisoc SC9863A
28 nm
-
5000 mAh
10W
-
6.75"
720 x 1600 pixels
-
13 MP
1080p@30fps
-
Specs
Vivo X200 Pro

Vivo X200 Pro
-
Dimensity 9400
3 nm
-
6000 mAh
90W
-
6.78"
1260 x 2800 pixels
-
50 MP
8K@30fps
-
Specs
4x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55
4x1.2 GHz Cortex-A55
1x3.63 GHz Cortex-X925
3x3.3 GHz Cortex-X4
4x2.4 GHz Cortex-A720
f/2.0, (wide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm, PDAF
f/1.6, 23mm (wide), 1/1.28", 1.22µm, PDAF, OIS
200 MP
f/2.7, 85mm (periscope telephoto), 1/1.4", 0.56µm, multi-directional PDAF, OIS, 3.7x optical zoom, macro 2.7:1
50 MP
f/2.0, 15mm, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm, AF
4K@30/60/120fps
1080p
f/2.0, 20mm (ultrawide)
1080p@30/60fps
SIM1: Nano, SIM2: Nano
SIM1: Nano, SIM2: Nano
FDD: N1, N2, N3, N5, N7, N8, N12, N20, N25, N26, N28
TDD: N38, N40, N41, N66, N77, N78
FDD: N1, N2, N3, N5, N7, N8, N12, N20, N25, N26, N28
TDD: N38, N40, N41, N66, N77, N78
In this performance comparison, the Vivo X200 Pro with its Mediatek Dimensity 9400 (3nm) performs better than the Lava Bold N1 with the Unisoc Unisoc SC9863A (28nm), thanks to superior chipset efficiency.
Vivo X200 Pro features a superior AMOLED display, while Lava Bold N1 comes with an LCD panel. In terms of smoothness, Vivo X200 Pro offers a higher 120 Hz refresh rate, ensuring fluid scrolling and animations. Both devices deliver the same brightness level at nits. Notably, Vivo X200 Pro offers a higher screen resolution, resulting in sharper visuals and more detailed content.
Vivo X200 Pro features a larger 6000 mAh battery, potentially delivering better battery life. Vivo X200 Pro also supports faster wired charging at 90W, compared to 10W on Lava Bold N1. Vivo X200 Pro supports wireless charging at 30W, while Lava Bold N1 lacks this feature.
Vivo X200 Pro offers better protection against water and dust with an IP69 rating.
- Lava Bold N1 – Check price here
- Vivo X200 Pro – Check price here
¹ Scores can vary even with the same chipset due to RAM, thermals, and software optimization.