Lava Shark 4G alternatives
Tap above to see alternatives.
Vivo X200 alternatives
Tap above to see alternatives.
Lava Shark 4G
Lava Shark 4G
-
Unisoc T606
12 nm
-
5000 mAh
18W
-
6.67"
720 x 1612 pixels
-
50 MP
1080p@30fps
- Specs
2x1.6 GHz Cortex-A75
6x1.6 GHz Cortex-A55
1x3.63 GHz Cortex-X925
3x3.3 GHz Cortex-X4
4x2.4 GHz Cortex-A720
16GB 512GB (UFS 4.0)
(wide), AF
f/1.6, 23mm (wide), 1/1.56", PDAF, OIS
50 MP
f/2.6, 70mm (periscope telephoto), 1/1.95", PDAF, OIS, 3x optical zoom
50 MP
f/2.0, 15mm, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/2.76", 0.64µm, AF
1080p
f/2.0, 20mm (ultrawide)
1080p@30/60fps
SIM1: Nano, SIM2: Nano
SIM1: Nano, SIM2: Nano
8 5G bands
n1, n3, n5, n8, n28, n40, n77, n78
In this performance comparison, the Vivo X200 with its Mediatek Dimensity 9400 (3nm) performs better than the Lava Shark 4G with the Unisoc Unisoc T606 (12nm), thanks to superior chipset efficiency.
Vivo X200 offers 4 years of OS updates, while Lava Shark 4G does not have confirmed OS update information. Vivo X200 receives 5 years of security updates, while Lava Shark 4G does not have confirmed security update information.
Vivo X200 features a superior AMOLED display, while Lava Shark 4G comes with an LCD panel. Both smartphones offer the same 120 Hz refresh rate. Both devices deliver the same brightness level at nits. Notably, Vivo X200 offers a higher screen resolution, resulting in sharper visuals and more detailed content.
Vivo X200 features a larger 5800 mAh battery, potentially delivering better battery life. Vivo X200 also supports faster wired charging at 90W, compared to 18W on Lava Shark 4G.
Vivo X200 offers better protection against water and dust with an IP69 rating.
- Vivo X200 – Check price here
¹ Scores can vary even with the same chipset due to RAM, thermals, and software optimization.