Vivo Y53t

Vivo Y53t

Dual Setup

186 gram

5000 mAh

Android 13

6.51" (Inch)

4GB / 6GB RAM

Infinix Smart 4

Infinix Smart 4

Single Setup

183 gram

4000 mAh

Android 9.0

6.6" (Inch)

1GB / 2GB RAM

Announced

Date

January 2023

October 2019

Official announcement date only, not the date for product release.

Model Detail

GTIN / MPN

Unknown

X653 / X663

Product identifier details, such as a unique serial number, build number, or model ID.

Platform

OS

Android 13

Android 9.0

Operating system type (OS) and version number.

Firmware

FuntouchOS 13

Android Stock UI

Specific firmware name used on the device.

Network

Bands

2G / 3G / 4G / 5G

2G / 3G / 4G

Available mobile network support options.

SIM

Single / Dual Nano SIM

Dual SIM, Nano SIM

Type and support for Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) feature.

Score

100
90

Mobile network functionality is an important feature that must be available on modern devices. This feature enables users to use a SIM card to access online networks, facilitating connections between individuals. Good mobile networks must have a fast connection, use the latest technology, and adopt extra features to support the needs of users.

In our matrix calculation, we calculate the mobile network score using a technology adoption approach. If a device offers more complete features on the network bands and uses extra features on the SIM card function, it will receive a higher score. A higher score on this segment will provide a faster and more flexible experience when using the mobile network function.

Connectivity

WLAN

Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Dual Band

Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n, Dual Band

Available enabled features on wireless internet network connection hardware.

Bluetooth

5.2, A2DP, LE

5.0, A2DP, LE

Version and features of Bluetooth hardware.

USB

USB Type-C

MicroUSB 2.0

Type of connectivity port hardware.

Score

90
85

Similar to the mobile network function, the connectivity feature is also an important feature for modern devices. With this feature, devices can connect to other supporting gadgets, such as internet routers, computers, speakers, wearable devices, and others.

Good connectivity features on devices must adopt all the latest wireless connection technologies available. This ability allows devices to make more connections to other devices using the latest Bluetooth technology with lower latency and achieve faster internet connection from the WLAN network.

In this situation, we use a calculation methodology with a technology approach. If a device supports more features on the WLAN function, uses the latest Bluetooth version, and has a modern universal connection port, we can assign a high score to the device. This means that a higher score will bring a more flexible user experience in terms of connectivity.

Body & Design

Dimension

164.1 x 75.6 x 8.2 mm

167 x 76 x 8.3 mm

Dimensions of the device in millimeters (Height x Width x Length).

Weight

186 g

183 g

Weight of the device in grams.

Material

Plastic

Plastic

Type of main body materials and any extra features if available.

Color Options

Black, Orange

Black, Blue, Purple

Official available body color options.

Score

75
75

The body material is an important consideration for users who want a premium device or need the device for long term use. Therefore, the device must have a good and strong body material component.

In this segmentation, we measure the body and design score using a quality and variety color approach. If a device uses good materials like aluminum and stainless steel, the score will be higher than a device that adopts plastic as the main body material component. If a device uses a more premium body material component and also provides extra protection from water and dust damage, the score will be even higher.

However, we do not include body dimensions and weight information in our matrix calculation because these factors are subjective and can vary from user to user. Some users may prefer larger and bolder devices, while others may prefer smaller and lighter ones. Therefore, we do not include this information in the score calculation.

Performance

CPU

MediaTek Dimensity 700

Mediatek Helio A22

Chipset (CPU) hardware name and series.

GPU

Mali-G57 MC2

PowerVR GE8320

Graphic (GPU) hardware name and series.

Score

95
80

The chipset performance on a device is a vital aspect that concerns most people. This is reasonable because most users want a device that can process tasks quickly. The CPU and GPU are the main components that affect performance.

The CPU processes tasks, and the GPU renders images. Both are related to providing the best experience for users. The better the CPU, the more efficient the device will be in terms of battery consumption, because the best CPU is smarter and more advanced in handling system logic.

We calculate the matrix for this segmentation using a performance result approach, where the data is obtained from several benchmark tools. This is done to bring more relevance to the actual data from the performance score. Additionally, the latest chipset model is not always better than the older chipset model because we use an overall performance approach that calculates based on real performance and not just based on the chipset model.

The total score is calculated from the combination of the CPU and GPU scores. The higher the score, the faster and smoother the processing will be for the user's needs.

Memory

RAM

4GB / 6GB

1GB / 2GB

Amount of random access memory (RAM) in size capacity.

Internal

128GB

16GB / 32GB

Total amount of internal memory storage capacity.

External

MicroSDXC

MicroSDXC

Type of third party memory expansion feature, if available.

Score

100
95

Besides the chipset, memory is also an important component that users must consider when purchasing a device, as it is closely related to the device's performance.

For instance, multitasking is a simple example that highlights the importance of memory performance. If the RAM storage is insufficient, the user may not be able to run several apps simultaneously, and if the RAM runs out, the apps may crash, which can cause the device to reboot automatically.

Moreover, modern apps require large RAM usage to run smoothly, making the RAM sector a crucial factor in our matrix calculation score. We can say that 65% of the score comes from the RAM performance.

We also consider the internal storage when calculating our score. A larger internal storage size will result in a higher score, as the internal storage is crucial for multimedia purposes, among others. Therefore, we pay more attention to this sector.

However, we do not include external storage in our matrix score calculation because several modern users prefer to use cloud storage services instead of physical expansion memory. Furthermore, cloud storage services offer many benefits such as ease of use, safety, and lower cost, as opposed to buying external memory expansion, which is more expensive and less safe.

Screen & Display

Size

6.51"

6.6"

Screen size in inches.

Panel

IPS LCD

IPS LCD

Type of display panel hardware.

Resolution

720 x 1600 pixels

720 x 1600 pixels

Screen resolution in pixels.

Other

20:9 ratio, (~270 ppi density)

20:9 ratio, (~270 ppi density)

Any extra display and screen features if available.

Score

90
90

To ensure the best user experience while using a device, the display and screen sector must be given special attention by the user. This is because the display and screen sector is the first thing that users see on their device, and high definition images on the display screen will enhance the user experience.

A good display screen hardware and software can greatly enhance activities such as navigating, using apps and games, and enjoying entertainment content on the device. When measuring the quality of a display panel, we look at the technology used, screen resolution, and extra features such as screen refresh rate, PPI, and screen protector. However, screen size is not included in our calculation matrix because it is relative and difficult to quantify.

A higher score on the display and screen segmentation means that the device will have excellent visual quality and provide the user with the best experience for any image or visual activity.

Battery

Type

Li-Po

Li-Po

Type of battery model.

Capacity

5000 mAh

4000 mAh

Battery capacity in milliampere hours (mAh).

Feature

Fast charging 15W

-

Any extra features related to the power sector, if available.

Charger Model

USB Type-C

MicroUSB 2.0

Charging method and type of charger port model.

Score

100
85

A good device is one that can last all day. Modern devices can typically endure for more than 20 hours under normal use, although some may only last for 16 to 18 hours. Therefore, if you want a device with a good battery life, you should pay attention to the battery segmentation on the device.

To help users determine how good the battery sector is on a device, we calculate a score using several metrics. First, we calculate the battery capacity and also consider battery features such as whether it supports fast charging or not.

We also factor in the charger method support to create a score. If the device supports multiple charge methods, such as wireless charging, we give it a higher score in the battery segmentation. However, we do not include battery type information in our matrix calculation because it is unnecessary.

It's important to note that a higher score on the battery segmentation does not necessarily mean that the device will have better battery endurance life than other devices. Although it is usually the case, our score is not based solely on battery life but also on the advanced battery features and support available on the device.

Camera

Rear

Dual Setup

Single Setup

Total number of rear cameras.

+

(Main) 13 MP, AF

8 MP

Details of the main camera unit.

+

(Macro) 2 MP, f/2.4

-

Details of the secondary camera unit, if available.

+

-

-

Details of the third camera unit, if available.

+

-

-

Details of the fourth camera unit, if available.

Front

Single Setup

Single Setup

Total front camera number, if available.

+

5 MP

8 MP

Details of the main front camera unit, if available.

+

-

-

Details of the secondary front camera unit, if available.

Feature

Video Recording 1080p@30fps

Video Recording 1080p@30fps

Available video recording support and features.

Score

85
80

The camera feature is a brilliant thing that modern devices offer. With this feature, we can capture any moment as quickly as possible and share the result directly on social media to show others the interesting moments we capture.

Generally, modern devices come equipped with a single camera, while others have more than one camera setup. This is amazing because with a variety of camera lens styles on a single device, we can take photos in multiple styles, including portrait photos, landscape photos, or take photos of faraway objects using zoom cameras.

A good camera feature should produce high quality, clear images with low noise and offer multiple lens styles. You can determine the quality of the camera feature by looking at the score on the camera segmentation. If the score is high, that means the camera feature on that device is brilliant and very good.

For the matrix calculation, we not only consider individual camera specifications but also combine all information data. We consider how many camera lenses are available on the device, how good the main camera features are for both rear and front cameras, and how good the camera can be used for recording video. All of these factors directly impact the matrix calculation score.

Audio & Sound

Type

Loudspeaker

Loudspeaker

Primary sound system type.

Extras

3.5mm jack

3.5mm jack

Extra sound system features.

Score

95
95

For those who love listening to music, watching movies, and playing competitive online games on their device, it's important to pay attention to the audio and sound quality. Not all modern devices have good audio and sound quality, with many only being average.

To determine the quality of audio and sound, you can check the score we have calculated for this segmentation. Our matrix calculation is based on available features, such as the presence of a 3.5mm jack and stereo speaker support. If a device has these extra features, it will receive a higher score. Additionally, we may give extra points if the device collaborates with popular and trusted sound system makers, as this ensures a higher quality of sound.

Sensor

Biometric

Fingerprint (at the side)

Fingerprint (at the back)

Biometric security hardware model, if available.

GPS

Yes, A-GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS

Yes, A-GPS

Global Positioning System (GPS) hardware support and features.

NFC

-

-

Near Field Communication (NFC) function support.

Other

Accelerometer, Proximity, Compass

Accelerometer, Proximity, Compass

Available sensor hardware type and function.

Score

90
90

Sensors are an essential part of modern devices, providing various functionalities such as security, utility, payment, navigation, and specialized features for specific situations. A good device should have complete sensor features to fully meet the user's needs. While most modern devices have all standard sensor features, some devices have more complete sensor features than others.

To assess the quality of a device's sensor features, we calculate a score that takes into account all sensor information. However, we focus on two key sensor features, that are common security sensor and the NFC sensor. These are industry standards for all modern devices and play a critical role in ensuring security and convenience for the user.

The score resulting from the matrix calculation reflects how good a device is in terms of sensor features. A higher score indicates that the device has more complete sensor features and is more flexible in use. This, in turn, makes the user happier with the device.

Price

USD

~ $140

~ $120

Price in US dollars (USD).

EUR

~ €130

~ €110

Price in Euros (EUR).

Comparison Breakdown

Durability

Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 share a similar build quality as both devices are constructed with plastic materials. In this instance, as both phones employ the same build material, it results in a tie in terms of build quality. The overall durability and resilience of the devices would likely be comparable, and any distinctions would likely arise from additional design features or engineering considerations beyond the basic material used. Therefore, the build quality comparison between the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 becomes a neutral factor due to their shared use of plastic.

Both of devices share a common feature in their covers, making their build quality comparable. The utilization of the same material underscores their uniformity in terms of both aesthetics and durability, leaving consumers to make their choices based on other distinguishing features or preferences in the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4.

Visual Quality

In terms of visual quality performance, the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 deliver similar results, both featuring a typical pixel density of ~270 pixels per inch (ppi). The identical ppi values in both devices imply that they share the same level of pixel concentration within a one inch square on their displays. Consequently, their visual quality remains consistent, resulting in a tie between the two in terms of display clarity and sharpness. The matching ppi values suggest that users can expect a comparable visual experience from both the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4, highlighting their similarity in this particular aspect of performance.

In the realm of display panel technology, the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 share a common ground, both featuring IPS LCD screens. IPS LCD brings forth advantages such as wide viewing angles, accurate color reproduction, and enhanced visibility. The identical utilization of IPS LCD in both devices ensures that users can expect a consistent and reliable visual experience. This similarity becomes particularly notable in scenarios where display technology plays a pivotal role, providing users with a comparable and satisfactory viewing experience on both the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4.

From the screen refresh rate features, the Vivo Y53t and the Infinix Smart 4 align with their 60Hz screen refresh rates. This commonality suggests that both devices deliver a comparable level of smoothness and responsiveness in visual interactions. The refresh rate, measured in hertz (Hz), determines how frequently a display refreshes per second, playing a pivotal role in optimizing the user experience, particularly during activities such as scrolling or gaming. In this comparison, the Vivo Y53t and the Infinix Smart 4 find themselves in a tie, providing users with an equally display performance.

Connectivity Features

Comparing Vivo Y53t equipped with 5G features to Infinix Smart 4 with only 4G capabilities highlights a distinct advantage for Vivo Y53t. The incorporation of 5G technology positions Vivo Y53t as a more future proof device, offering faster data speeds and improved connectivity. In contrast, the limited 4G capabilities of Infinix Smart 4 may result in a comparatively slower and less efficient network experience. Consequently in this context, Vivo Y53t emerges as the superior option, providing a more modern and technologically advanced mobile experience compared to Infinix Smart 4.

Assessing Wi-Fi technology reveals significant differences between the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4. First, the Vivo Y53t features Wi-Fi 5, while Infinix Smart 4 utilizes by Wi-Fi 4 technology. From a technical standpoint, Vivo Y53t holds superiority given that Wi-Fi 5 offers heightened speeds, increased capacity, and superior performance compared to Wi-Fi 4. Consequently, the Vivo Y53t ensures a more seamless and efficient connectivity experience than Infinix Smart 4.

Next, in the Bluetooth technology sector, the Vivo Y53t is equipped with advanced Bluetooth 5.2, surpassing the Infinix Smart 4, which only utilizes Bluetooth 5.0. This condition gives the Vivo Y53t a distinct advantage, as Bluetooth 5.2 brings more enhancements in terms of data transfer speeds, range, and overall efficiency compared to Bluetooth 5.0. Therefore, the Vivo Y53t is better and more technologically advanced in the realm of Bluetooth connectivity when compared to the Infinix Smart 4.

Unfortunately, both the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 lack NFC features, resulting in a tie between them. The absence of NFC constrains these devices in terms of modern connectivity and functionality. NFC serves as a wireless technology that enables seamless data exchange between devices in close proximity, offering diverse applications such as contactless payments, swift file sharing, and simplified pairing with other compatible devices. Consequently, users of Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 may encounter limitations in fully exploiting the potential for hassle free connectivity.

RAM & Storage

In this RAM comparison, our focus is specifically on evaluating the performance of the highest variant RAM option available for both devices. By narrowing the scope to the top tier RAM configurations, we aim to provide a targeted analysis of the devices capabilities in terms of memory capacity and speed. This approach allows for a more direct and relevant assessment, particularly for users who prioritize and invest in the most robust RAM configurations offered by each device.

Considering the specification data, Vivo Y53t boasts 4GB / 6GB of RAM, surpassing Infinix Smart 4 offering 1GB / 2GB RAM. In this scenario, Vivo Y53t holds a distinct advantage due to its larger RAM capacity. A greater RAM amount is beneficial for multitasking and handling resource intensive applications. With more RAM, the device can efficiently manage multiple tasks simultaneously, leading to smoother performance and faster responsiveness. This translates into a superior user experience, especially for those who engage in demanding tasks or run numerous apps concurrently.

Similar to our approach in comparing RAM, we focus exclusively on evaluating the highest variant of internal memory available for both devices. This targeted comparison ensures a comprehensive analysis of the devices storage capabilities by considering their top tier configurations. By concentrating on the highest internal memory variants, we provide users with insights relevant to those seeking maximum storage capacity and performance. This approach acknowledges that consumers who opt for the highest memory configurations prioritize ample storage for various applications, multimedia content, and files.

Referring to the specification data, Vivo Y53t emerges as the superior choice over Infinix Smart 4, evident in its internal memory configuration of 128GB, surpassing the 16GB / 32GB range offered by the latter. The advantage of having a larger internal memory becomes apparent as it allows users to store a greater volume of data, including apps, photos, videos, and files. This expanded storage capacity is particularly advantageous for users with extensive multimedia libraries, those engaged in content creation, or those who require ample space for various applications. Vivo Y53t higher internal memory range positions it as a more suitable option for individuals seeking a device with generous storage capabilities, accommodating diverse needs and ensuring a smoother user experience.

Differing from the Vivo Y53t, the Infinix Smart 4 stands out by offering an extra feature external memory expansion option. This feature, notably absent in the Vivo Y53t, proves to be quite beneficial for users seeking versatility and increased storage flexibility. With this capability, users can enhance the device existing storage by adding a compatible external memory card. It's particularly advantageous for individuals needing extra space to store large files, multimedia content, or additional applications, all without being confined to the limitations of the device internal storage. The external memory expansion feature empowers users to personalize and expand their storage capacity based on their evolving needs, providing a convenient solution for those with dynamic or expanding data requirements.

Gaming Experience

Within the domain of gaming experience comparisons, evaluating performance by individual devices on a global scale becomes a more viable approach, given the inherent challenges associated with directly comparing devices side by side based solely on CPU and GPU specifications. The complexity, nuanced software optimizations, and diverse user preferences make a comprehensive side by side comparison using hardware specifications alone a difficult task. Relying solely on such technical data may lead to ambiguous or misrepresented results. Therefore, focusing on the overall performance of individual devices can provides a more holistic perspective.

First, The Vivo Y53t boasts a formidable combination of the MediaTek Dimensity 700 processor and Mali-G57 MC2, making it a compelling choice for gamers within the mid-tier market segment. While it may not reach the extremes of flagship performance, the MediaTek Dimensity 700 and Mali-G57 MC2 collaboration ensures a commendable gaming experience. This smartphone caters well to the demands of the middle class gaming community, striking a balance between affordability and performance. The CPU and GPU specifications allows the Vivo Y53t to proficiently handle graphic intensive tasks at mid to high presets, providing users with a satisfying and immersive gaming performance without stretching the boundaries of budget constraints.

Next, Infinix Smart 4 is equipped with entry-level hardware, featuring the Mediatek Helio A22 processor and PowerVR GE8320. While not tailored for hardcore gaming enthusiasts, this device still holds its ground for casual gaming experiences. The combination of the Mediatek Helio A22 and PowerVR GE8320 allows the Infinix Smart 4 to handle less graphics intensive games smoothly and efficiently. However, its technical specifications suggest that it might struggle with the demands of high-end, resource intensive gaming. Nevertheless, for users looking for a budget friendly smartphone that can handle everyday tasks and provide a decent gaming experience at lower to mid-level graphic settings, the Infinix Smart 4 remains a viable and cost effective option.

Move to RAM specification hardware, the comparison between Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 suggests that the former may offer a superior performance due to its larger RAM capacity. A larger RAM amount contributes significantly to the overall performance of a mobile device, particularly in the context of gaming. RAM functions as the temporary storage space for active applications, including games. With a greater RAM capacity, a device like Vivo Y53t can efficiently handle and store more game related data, reducing the likelihood of slowdowns, lags, or interruptions during gameplay. This is crucial for demanding games that require quick data access and smooth transitions. In essence, a larger RAM capacity allows for better and smoother gameplay.

To attain an optimal gaming experience, the Vivo Y53t is equipped with a 6.51" screen, slightly smaller than the Infinix Smart 4, which boasts a 6.6" display. The nuanced distinction in screen size has the potential to result in a significant divergence in the gaming experience on both devices. A larger screen provides users with a more expansive and immersive view, playing a crucial role in appreciating intricate in-game details and navigating virtual environments effectively. This distinction becomes particularly evident in gaming scenarios that require precision and quick reactions. The Infinix Smart 4 marginally larger screen size is likely to contribute to an enhanced and more immersive gaming experience, offering users a visually rich and engaging platform that can markedly influence the overall enjoyment of gaming sessions.

Considering the screen refresh rate for gaming experience, both the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 stand on equal footing with identical 60Hz screen refresh time features. This parity in refresh rates implies that both devices offer the same level of performance in this aspect, resulting in a tie between them. The 60Hz refresh rate shared by Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 ensures smoother transitions between frames, reducing motion blur and contributing to an enhanced gaming experience. As neither device holds a distinct advantage in this particular feature, users can expect a comparable and satisfactory gaming performance from both the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4, making the choice between them more dependent on other factors.

Camera Features

The main camera setup of the Vivo Y53t surpasses that Infinix Smart 4, offering a more comprehensive photography experience. The Vivo Y53t boasts Dual Setup configuration, providing users with a versatile range of shooting options, enabling users to capture diverse scenes with precision and creativity. In contrast, the Infinix Smart 4 falls behind with its Single Setup features, limiting the variety of photographic capabilities available to users. The additional lens on the Vivo Y53t enhances its imaging capabilities, making it a more enticing choice for those seeking a more sophisticated and dynamic camera system.

Navigating the landscape of main camera resolution, the Vivo Y53t emerges as a standout against the Infinix Smart 4, showcasing an impressive 13 MP camera, while the Infinix Smart 4 only comes with 8 MP. Higher megapixel counts typically correlate with finer details and heightened clarity in captured images. This increased resolution opens up possibilities for more extensive cropping and zooming without sacrificing image quality, a significant boon for photography enthusiasts keen on capturing intricate details.

Furthermore, elevated megapixel counts contribute to heightened performance in well lit conditions, yielding sharp and vibrant images. While it's crucial to acknowledge that megapixels alone do not determine camera quality, a larger count, exemplified in the Vivo Y53t, often signals a camera potential for delivering visually stunning and meticulously detailed photographs.

When discussing front camera features, the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 appear to be on par, as both devices feature a Single Setup camera configuration. This similarity results in a tie when considering the basic front camera setup. However, it's crucial to note that the differentiation may lie in specific features unique to each devices camera system. Examining additional specifications, such as sensor quality, image processing capabilities, and any specialized features, will likely reveal distinctions that can influence the overall performance and user experience of the front cameras on the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4. While they share a common Single Setup, the truth may be in the details when comparing the specific attributes that contribute to the overall imaging capabilities of these devices.

Inspecting the front camera specifications, it appears that the Infinix Smart 4 holds a distinct advantage over the Vivo Y53t. The Infinix Smart 4 boasts a larger 8 MP front camera, while the Vivo Y53t features a 5 MP front camera. In the realm of photography, a larger megapixel count is generally considered better as it translates to higher image resolution. More megapixels mean the camera can capture finer details and produce sharper images. For front facing cameras, this becomes particularly crucial in the context of selfies, where users often desire clear and detailed self portraits. The larger megapixel count on the Infinix Smart 4 provides a potential for more clarity, allowing users to capture more intricate facial features and nuances in their selfies, thus contributing to an overall enhanced imaging experience.

Sadly, the both of Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 are lack Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) feature in the video recording sector, leaving them with standard video recording capabilities. OIS is crucial for video recording as it helps mitigate the effects of hand movements, shakes, and vibrations, ensuring that the captured footage remains smooth and stable. Without OIS, videos recorded on devices like the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4 may suffer from noticeable jitteriness, particularly in situations where the camera is handheld or subject to external movements. The absence of OIS limits the devices ability to deliver professionally looking and steady video content, which can be a significant consideration for users who prioritize high quality video recording in various environments.

Battery Endurance

Comes to the battery power, it becomes evident that the Vivo Y53t surpasses the Infinix Smart 4. The Vivo Y53t boasts a substantial 5000 mAh battery, while the Infinix Smart 4 falls slightly behind with a 4000 mAh capacity. This discrepancy in battery size positions the Vivo Y53t as the more potent device in terms of power. With a higher milliampere-hour rating, the Vivo Y53t is poised to deliver extended usage and endurance, providing users with a more robust and long lasting battery performance compared to the Infinix Smart 4.

Upon closer examination, the Vivo Y53t stands out with its Fast Charging 15W feature, a capability absent in the Infinix Smart 4. This distinction positions the Vivo Y53t as a more favorable choice for users who prioritize rapid charging times. The 15W fast charging capability enables the Vivo Y53t to charge more quickly than the Infinix Smart 4, providing users with a convenient and efficient charging experience. In scenarios where time is of the essence, the Vivo Y53t fast charging feature becomes a notable advantage, making it a preferable option for those seeking expedited charging without compromising on device performance.

Security Features

Luckly, users can find satisfaction in both the Vivo Y53t and Infinix Smart 4, as both devices are equipped with dedicated biometric sensors. This inclusion enhances the security features of both devices, providing users with a robust means of safeguarding their data and device access. Having a dedicated biometric sensor, offers users a more secure and convenient method of authentication. The uniqueness and precision of biometric data make it challenging for unauthorized users to gain access, contributing to an overall heightened level of security. This not only protects sensitive information but also enhances the user experience by providing a swift and personalized means of unlocking and accessing the device.

Advantages

Pros list

No notable advantages found on this device

  • Full 5G network support
  • Multiple rear camera options
  • Latest Bluetooth technology
  • Large internal memory
  • Expandable storage with external memory card
  • Fast charging feature
  • Dedicated biometric sensor

No notable advantages found on this device

  • Expandable storage with external memory card
  • Dedicated biometric sensor

Disadvantages

Cons list

No significant disadvantage features found on this device

  • Lacks NFC feature
  • Low quality body material used
  • Relatively small RAM capacity
  • Average WLAN connection speed

No significant disadvantage features found on this device

  • Lacks 5G network support
  • Lacks NFC feature
  • Low quality body material used
  • No fast charging feature supported
  • Uses outdated USB port model
  • Relatively small RAM capacity
  • Relatively small internal memory capacity
  • Average WLAN connection speed
  • Uses old Bluetooth version

Benchmark

Point Result

Vivo Y53t

Build Quality : 75
Display : 90
Camera : 85
Performance : 95
Memory : 100
Network : 100
Connectivity : 90
Battery : 100
Sensor : 90
Audio : 95

Infinix Smart 4

Build Quality : 75
Display : 90
Camera : 80
Performance : 80
Memory : 95
Network : 90
Connectivity : 85
Battery : 85
Sensor : 90
Audio : 95

Final Score

/ 1000

/ 1000

The total score is calculated based on all segmentation scores, and the maximum score is 1000. The total score reflects the overall quality of the device. If a device has a higher total score than its competitors, it is considered better overall.

However, a high total score does not necessarily mean that the device is excellent in all segmentation scores. If you are looking for a device with specific features, it is best to look at the score for that particular segmentation to make an informed decision.

Based on our calculation matrix, the best device overall on this comparison page is :

The Winner is :

Vivo Y53t

Vivo Y53t

After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Vivo Y53t has better overall performance than Infinix Smart 4, based on the final score data.

The Winner is :

Both are Winner!

After comparing the specifications data above, we can conclude that Vivo Y53t has a very similar overall performance to Infinix Smart 4, based on the final score data.

The Winner is :

Infinix Smart 4

Infinix Smart 4

After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Infinix Smart 4 has better overall performance than Vivo Y53t, based on the final score data.

[*] This means that there are multiple series numbers (GTIN/MPN) associated with this product.

Prices listed are for reference only and may not reflect the actual market price. Additionally, the price of the product may vary between different countries.

It's important to note that it may not always be 100% correct. Factors such as missing information from the manufacturer or third-party sources, differences in how information is reported, and human error during data collection can impact accuracy.

May Your Lucky Day

Other Popular Comparison From Both Devices :

Vivo Y53t

Vivo Y53t

Amazon
Infinix Smart 4

Infinix Smart 4

Amazon