Vivo Y200t

Vivo Y200t

Dual Setup

199 gram

6000 mAh

Android 14

6.72" (Inch)

8GB / 12GB RAM

Vivo Y200 GT

Vivo Y200 GT

Dual Setup

194.6 gram

6000 mAh

Android 14

6.78" (Inch)

8GB / 12GB RAM

Announced

Date

May 2024

May 2024

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

Model Detail

GTIN / MPN

V2353DA

V2361GA

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

Platform

OS

Android 14

Android 14

Operating system type (OS) and version number.

Firmware

OriginOS 4.0

OriginOS 4.0

Specific firmware name used on the device.

Network

Bands

2G / 3G / 4G / 5G

2G / 3G / 4G / 5G

Available mobile network support options.

SIM

Single / Dual Nano SIM

Single / Dual Nano SIM

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

Score

100
100

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/ac/6, Dual Band

Available enabled features on wireless internet network connection hardware.

Bluetooth

5.1, A2DP, LE

5.4, A2DP, LE

Version and features of Bluetooth hardware.

USB

USB Type-C

USB Type-C

Type of connectivity port hardware.

Score

90
100

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

165.7 x 76 x 8 mm

163.7 x 75.9 x 8 mm

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

Weight

199 g

194.6 g

Weight of the device in grams.

Material

Plastic

Plastic, IP64 Rated

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

Color Options

Blue, Green

Black, Blue

Official available body color options.

Score

75
100

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

Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1

Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3

Chipset (CPU) hardware name and series.

GPU

Adreno 710

Adreno 720

Graphic (GPU) hardware name and series.

Score

100
100

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

8GB / 12GB

8GB / 12GB

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

Internal

128GB / 256GB / 512GB

128GB / 256GB / 512GB

Total amount of internal memory storage capacity.

External

-

-

Type of third party memory expansion feature, if available.

Score

100
100

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

6.72"

6.78"

Screen size in inches.

Panel

IPS LCD

AMOLED

Type of display panel hardware.

Resolution

1080 x 2408 pixels

1260 x 2800 pixels

Screen resolution in pixels.

Other

~393 ppi density, 120Hz

~453 ppi density, 144Hz

Any extra display and screen features if available.

Score

90
100

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

6000 mAh

6000 mAh

Battery capacity in milliampere hours (mAh).

Feature

Fast charging 44W

Fast charging 80W

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

Charger Model

USB Type-C

USB Type-C

Charging method and type of charger port model.

Score

100
100

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

Dual Setup

Total number of rear cameras.

+

(Main) 50 MP, f/1.8, PDAF

(Main) 50 MP, f/1.8, 1/1.95", 0.8µm, PDAF

Details of the main camera unit.

+

(Depth) 2 MP, f/2.4

(Depth) 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.

+

8 MP, f/2.1

16 MP, f/2.5

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
85

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

Stereo Speaker

Stereo Speaker

Extra sound system features.

Score

100
100

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 (under display)

Biometric security hardware model, if available.

GPS

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

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

Global Positioning System (GPS) hardware support and features.

NFC

-

Yes

Near Field Communication (NFC) function support.

Other

Accelerometer, Gyro, Proximity, Compass

Accelerometer, Gyro, Proximity, Compass

Available sensor hardware type and function.

Score

90
100

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

~ $150

~ $240

Price in US dollars (USD).

EUR

~ €140

~ €230

Price in Euros (EUR).

Comparison Breakdown

Durability

Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT 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 Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT 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 Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT.

Visual Quality

In terms of visual quality performance, the Vivo Y200t with its ~393 pixels per inch (ppi), is in direct competition with the Vivo Y200 GT, which boasts an even higher ppi of ~453. The Vivo Y200 GT gains an advantage in this comparison, as the higher ppi number signifies a more densely packed arrangement of pixels within a one inch square on its display.

This increased pixel density results in a sharper, more detailed visual experience. Pixels per inch (ppi) is a metric that quantifies the pixel density on a screen, and a higher ppi generally translates to a clearer display. In the case of the Vivo Y200 GT, its elevated ppi of ~453 indicates a superior capacity to render images, text, and videos with increased clarity, making it more adept at providing users with a visually striking and clear display compared to the Vivo Y200t.

In the realm of display hardware, the Vivo Y200t is exclusively equipped with an IPS LCD screen. While on the other hand, the Vivo Y200 GT boasts a brilliant AMOLED display. The advantages of AMOLED technology become evident as it offers a superior visual experience compared to IPS LCD. The Vivo Y200 GT displays deliver deeper blacks, higher contrast ratios, and more vibrant colors. This technology enables precise control and the ability to turn off pixels entirely, achieving true black and contributing to a visually stunning and immersive display with enhanced color accuracy.

When considering the refresh rate feature, the Vivo Y200t boasts a 120Hz refresh rate, while the Vivo Y200 GT takes the experience to the next level with an impressive 144Hz refresh rate. Measured in hertz (Hz), the refresh rate indicates how many times a display refreshes per second. A higher refresh rate enhances visual experiences by contributing to smoother on screen motion, particularly beneficial for gaming and dynamic content. This elevated refresh rate not only minimizes motion blur but also grants a significant competitive advantage in gaming, where swift and precise visual feedback is crucial for an immersive and responsive user experience.

Connectivity Features

If we compare the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT, both are supported by 5G networks, their performance in this aspect will be a tie. The absence of a distinction in their network support positions the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT on equal footing, making the performance in this regard identical. Users seeking advanced 5G connectivity features can find both devices to be equally capable, offering a comparable experience in terms of network performance.

Regarding the Wi-Fi technology evaluation of the Vivo Y200t that equipped with Wi-Fi 5, a noteworthy comparison arises with the Vivo Y200 GT which utilizes the latest Wi-Fi 6 technology. This distinction positions the Vivo Y200 GT at the technological forefront, as Wi-Fi 6 provides superior data transfer speeds, reduced latency, and enhanced efficiency, surpassing the capabilities of Wi-Fi 5. So, the Vivo Y200 GT with Wi-Fi 6 features, becomes a more advanced choice if compared to the Vivo Y200t, ensuring an even more seamless and robust wireless connectivity experience for users.

Next, in the Bluetooth technology sector, the Vivo Y200t equipped with Bluetooth 5.1, while the Vivo Y200 GT comes with more latest Bluetooth 5.4 technology. In this scenario, Vivo Y200 GT holds a technological advantage by adopting the more recent Bluetooth technology. Bluetooth 5.4 brings improvements in terms of enhanced services, better connection performance, and increased accuracy in device positioning. Therefore, the integration of Bluetooth 5.4 in the Vivo Y200 GT positions it as the superior choice in Bluetooth technology, offering users a more advanced experience when compared with the Vivo Y200t.

From the NFC technology perspective, Vivo Y200t lacks the NFC feature, while the Vivo Y200 GT comes equipped with it, making the Vivo Y200 GT notably superior. The NFC (Near Field Communication) is a wireless technology facilitating smooth data transfer between devices in close proximity. The absence of NFC in the Vivo Y200t restricts its capabilities for convenient applications like quick file sharing, contactless payments, and seamless connectivity with other NFC enabled devices. Conversely, the inclusion of NFC in the Vivo Y200 GT enhances its versatility, providing users with an extended range of applications.

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, the Vivo Y200t is equipped with 8GB / 12GB of RAM, while the Vivo Y200 GT offers a range of 8GB / 12GB. Ultimately, both devices share an equivalent RAM configuration, resulting in a tie between them. A substantial RAM amount is advantageous for device performance, enabling smoother multitasking and efficient handling of memory intensive tasks. With ample RAM, applications can run concurrently without experiencing slowdowns or performance bottlenecks. This becomes particularly beneficial for users who engage in activities such as gaming, video editing, or running multiple applications simultaneously.

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.

Turning attention to the internal memory specifications, Vivo Y200t presents a range of 128GB / 256GB / 512GB of internal memory storage, while Vivo Y200 GT offers a 128GB / 256GB / 512GB internal memory storage. In this context, both devices share an identical internal memory capacity, resulting in a tie between them. The parity in internal memory amounts suggests that users can expect a similar level of storage capabilities from both Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT. This tie indicates that, in terms of internal memory storage alone, neither device holds a distinct advantage over the other, providing users with a comparable storage experience regardless of their choice between the two.

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, Vivo Y200t stands out with its impressive hardware, featuring the robust Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 paired with the Adreno 710. This dynamic combination ensures a superior gaming experience, highlighting the device capability to handle high performance tasks with ease. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 provides substantial processing power, while the Adreno 710 contributes to seamless graphics rendering. Gamers can enjoy a lag free and enhanced gaming experience on the Vivo Y200t, even when using high presets. The device overall performance shines, offering users confidence in its ability to deliver smooth and uninterrupted gaming sessions without compromising on quality or experiencing degraded performance.

Next, Vivo Y200 GT stands out as a gaming powerhouse, equipped with the formidable Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 processor and the Adreno 720. This powerful combination ensures a top notch gaming experience for users, showcasing the device ability to handle even the most demanding titles with ease. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 provides robust processing capabilities, while the Adreno 720 contributes to seamless graphics rendering. The Vivo Y200 GT excels in delivering an outstanding overall performance, allowing users to indulge in high preset graphics for games without any concerns about lag or degraded gaming quality. With this impressive hardware specification, the Vivo Y200 GT emerges as a compelling choice for gamers who prioritize a premium gaming experience on their mobile devices.

Reflecting the hardware performance specifications, both the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT may showcase real life performance results that are either side by side or nearly identical. While not perfectly identical, the subtle differences between the two devices may not significantly impact the overall gaming experience. The closely matched specifications suggest that users can expect a similar level of performance from both devices in terms of gaming. Whether navigating through graphics intensive games or engaging in casual gaming experiences, the overall gaming performance of the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT is likely to be comparable.

To attain an optimal gaming experience, the Vivo Y200t is equipped with a 6.72" screen, slightly smaller than the Vivo Y200 GT, which boasts a 6.78" 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 Vivo Y200 GT 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.

Discussing screen refresh time, which can be crucial for gaming, the Vivo Y200t boasts a 120Hz refresh rate, while the Vivo Y200 GT takes it up a notch with an impressive 144Hz capability. This distinction places the Vivo Y200 GT in a more advantageous position, promising enhanced gaming performance for users. The elevated refresh rate ensures smoother transitions between frames, reducing motion blur and delivering a visually immersive gaming experience. Consequently, it is particularly beneficial for fast paced gaming styles.

Camera Features

When it comes to the main camera features, both the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT share a common ground, utilizing a Dual Setup. The similarity in their camera configurations suggests that the two devices offer a comparable photography experience. So, in this case, the outcome is a tie, as both the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT provide similar main camera capabilities, making it a matter of user preference and other device features when choosing between the two.

Examining the main camera resolution features, it appears that the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT are on an equivalent level, both equipped with a 50 MP camera. This parallel specification results in a tie between the two devices in terms of megapixel count. A 50 MP camera provides a substantial resolution, allowing for detailed and clear images. While other factors contribute to overall camera performance, the identical main camera resolution positions the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT on an even playing field, leaving users to consider additional features and capabilities when making a choice between the two.

When discussing front camera features, the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT 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 Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT. 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 Vivo Y200 GT holds a distinct advantage over the Vivo Y200t. The Vivo Y200 GT boasts a larger 16 MP front camera, while the Vivo Y200t features a 8 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 Vivo Y200 GT 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 Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT 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 Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT 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

After evaluating the battery power of the Vivo Y200t and the Vivo Y200 GT, it becomes evident that both devices operate on an equal footing, each equipped with a 6000 mAh battery. This parity in battery capacity implies that, in terms of power endurance, the Vivo Y200t and the Vivo Y200 GT yield comparable results. Users can expect similar levels of battery life from both devices, making it a draw in this aspect of comparison. The matching 6000 mAh batteries ensure that users can rely on consistent and reasonably lasting performance from either the Vivo Y200t or the Vivo Y200 GT without a significant advantage for either device in the realm of battery power.

In a positive development, both the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT incorporate the advantageous Fast Charging feature. However, when delving into the specifics, the Vivo Y200 GT emerges as the more advanced choice. The Vivo Y200 GT boasts a Fast Charging capability of 80W, surpassing the Vivo Y200t 44W Fast Charging. This notable difference in charging speeds positions the Vivo Y200 GT as the superior option in terms of battery replenishment time. With its faster charging performance, the Vivo Y200 GT ensures a swifter and more efficient charging experience, making it a preferred choice for users who prioritize rapid battery charging without compromising on overall device performance.

Security Features

Luckly, users can find satisfaction in both the Vivo Y200t and Vivo Y200 GT, 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
  • Large RAM capacity
  • Large internal memory
  • Fast charging feature
  • Dedicated biometric sensor
  • Stereo speaker function

No notable advantages found on this device

  • Full 5G network support
  • High quality build materials
  • Multiple rear camera options
  • NFC capability
  • Brilliant display panel
  • Fast WLAN connection
  • Latest Bluetooth technology
  • Large RAM capacity
  • Large internal memory
  • Fast charging feature
  • Dedicated biometric sensor
  • Stereo speaker function

Disadvantages

Cons list

No significant disadvantage features found on this device

  • Lacks NFC feature
  • Low quality body material used
  • Average WLAN connection speed
  • Uses old Bluetooth version

No significant disadvantage features found on this device

Benchmark

Point Result

Vivo Y200t

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

Vivo Y200 GT

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

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 Y200t

Vivo Y200t

After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Vivo Y200t has better overall performance than Vivo Y200 GT, based on the final score data.

The Winner is :

Both are Winner!

After comparing the specifications data above, we can conclude that Vivo Y200t has a very similar overall performance to Vivo Y200 GT, based on the final score data.

The Winner is :

Vivo Y200 GT

Vivo Y200 GT

After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Vivo Y200 GT has better overall performance than Vivo Y200t, 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 Y200t

Vivo Y200t

Amazon
Vivo Y200 GT

Vivo Y200 GT

Amazon