Compare Tools :
Date
June 2024
May 2024
Official announcement date only, not the date for product release.
GTIN / MPN
Unknown
V2361GA
Product identifier details, such as a unique serial number, build number, or model ID.
OS
Android 14
Android 14
Operating system type (OS) and version number.
Firmware
Android Stock UI
OriginOS 4.0
Specific firmware name used on the device.
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
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.
WLAN
Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6e, Tri Band
Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, Dual Band
Available enabled features on wireless internet network connection hardware.
Bluetooth
5.3, 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
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.
Dimension
167.1 x 74.9 x 9 mm
163.7 x 75.9 x 8 mm
Dimensions of the device in millimeters (Height x Width x Length).
Weight
198.7 g
194.6 g
Weight of the device in grams.
Material
Aluminum, IP67 Rated
Plastic, IP64 Rated
Type of main body materials and any extra features if available.
Color Options
Blue, White
Black, Blue
Official available body color options.
Score
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.
CPU
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3
Chipset (CPU) hardware name and series.
GPU
Adreno 720
Adreno 720
Graphic (GPU) hardware name and series.
Score
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.
RAM
12GB
8GB / 12GB
Amount of random access memory (RAM) in size capacity.
Internal
256GB / 521GB
128GB / 256GB / 512GB
Total amount of internal memory storage capacity.
External
-
-
Type of third party memory expansion feature, if available.
Score
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.
Size
6.8"
6.78"
Screen size in inches.
Panel
OLED
AMOLED
Type of display panel hardware.
Resolution
1080 x 2436 pixels
1260 x 2800 pixels
Screen resolution in pixels.
Other
~392 ppi density, 120Hz
~453 ppi density, 144Hz
Any extra display and screen features if available.
Score
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.
Type
Li-Po
Li-Po
Type of battery model.
Capacity
4600 mAh
6000 mAh
Battery capacity in milliampere hours (mAh).
Feature
Fast charging 60W, Wireless fast charging 15W
Fast charging 80W
Any extra features related to the power sector, if available.
Charger Model
USB Type-C & Wireless charging
USB Type-C
Charging method and type of charger port model.
Score
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.
Rear
Triple Setup
Dual Setup
Total number of rear cameras.
+
(Main) 50 MP, f/1.9, OIS, PDAF
(Main) 50 MP, f/1.8, 1/1.95", 0.8µm, PDAF
Details of the main camera unit.
+
(Tele) 50 MP, f/2.0, PDAF, 2x optical zoom
(Depth) 2 MP, f/2.4
Details of the secondary camera unit, if available.
+
(Ultrawide) 8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚, 1.12µm
-
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.
+
50 MP, f/2.5, AF
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 4K@30fps / 1080p@30fps
Video Recording 1080p@30fps
Available video recording support and features.
Score
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.
Type
Loudspeaker
Loudspeaker
Primary sound system type.
Extras
3.5mm jack
Stereo Speaker
Extra sound system features.
Score
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.
Biometric
Fingerprint (under display)
Fingerprint (under display)
Biometric security hardware model, if available.
GPS
Yes, A-GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO
Yes, A-GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS
Global Positioning System (GPS) hardware support and features.
NFC
Yes
Yes
Near Field Communication (NFC) function support.
Other
Accelerometer, Gyro, Proximity, Compass
Accelerometer, Gyro, Proximity, Compass
Available sensor hardware type and function.
Score
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.
USD
~ $570
~ $240
Price in US dollars (USD).
EUR
~ €560
~ €230
Price in Euros (EUR).
HTC U24 Pro exhibits superior build quality compared to the Vivo Y200 GT, primarily due to the difference in their construction materials. The HTC U24 Pro boasts an aluminum structure body, which generally enhances its overall sturdiness and premium feel. In contrast, the Vivo Y200 GT is constructed with plastic, a material that, while lightweight, tends to be less robust than aluminum. This distinction in materials contributes to the perception that the HTC U24 Pro offers a more durable and higher quality build from a general perspective. The use of aluminum not only imparts a sense of solidity to the device but also suggests a greater resistance to wear and tear compared to the plastic construction of the Vivo Y200 GT.
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 HTC U24 Pro and Vivo Y200 GT.
In terms of visual quality performance, the HTC U24 Pro with its ~392 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 HTC U24 Pro.
In a general perspective, the HTC U24 Pro equipped with an OLED display panel, and the Vivo Y200 GT also featuring an AMOLED display, both leverage advanced screen technologies known for their superior visual characteristics. The displays are share similarities, such as individual pixel illumination, resulting in deeper blacks and vibrant colors. Choosing between them often depends on individual preferences. Ultimately, determining which is better may vary based on specific user priorities, such as display preferences, device usage, and overall visual experience requirements.
When considering the refresh rate feature, the HTC U24 Pro 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.
If we compare the HTC U24 Pro 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 HTC U24 Pro 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.
Assessing Wi-Fi technology reveals significant differences between the HTC U24 Pro and Vivo Y200 GT. First, the HTC U24 Pro features Wi-Fi 6e, while Vivo Y200 GT utilizes by Wi-Fi 6 technology. From a technical standpoint, HTC U24 Pro holds superiority given that Wi-Fi 6e offers heightened speeds, increased capacity, and superior performance compared to Wi-Fi 6. Consequently, the HTC U24 Pro ensures a more seamless and efficient connectivity experience than Vivo Y200 GT.
Next, in the Bluetooth technology sector, the HTC U24 Pro equipped with Bluetooth 5.3, 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 HTC U24 Pro.
Now, HTC U24 Pro and Vivo Y200 GT stand on equal ground as both incorporate NFC technology, this results in a draw between the two. NFC (Near Field Communication) is a wireless communication technology that enables the seamless exchange of data between devices in close proximity, typically within a few centimeters. It finds application in various scenarios, from mobile payments to instant data transfer, making it a valuable feature for modern smartphones.
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 HTC U24 Pro is equipped with 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.
Referring to the specification data, HTC U24 Pro emerges as the superior choice over Vivo Y200 GT, evident in its internal memory configuration of 256GB / 521GB, surpassing the 128GB / 256GB / 512GB 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. HTC U24 Pro 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.
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, HTC U24 Pro stands out with its impressive hardware, featuring the robust Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 paired with the Adreno 720. This dynamic combination ensures a superior gaming experience, highlighting the device capability to handle high performance tasks with ease. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 provides substantial processing power, while the Adreno 720 contributes to seamless graphics rendering. Gamers can enjoy a lag free and enhanced gaming experience on the HTC U24 Pro, 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 HTC U24 Pro 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 HTC U24 Pro and Vivo Y200 GT is likely to be comparable.
When it comes to optimizing the gaming experience on mobile phones, screen size plays a crucial role in determining visual clarity and immersion. In the context of the HTC U24 Pro and Vivo Y200 GT, the HTC U24 Pro boasts a slightly larger 6.8" screen compared to the Vivo Y200 GT is 6.78" display. This slight difference in size can contribute to a more immersive gaming experience for users. A larger screen provides a more expansive field of view, allowing gamers to perceive in game details with greater clarity and precision. This enhanced visibility becomes particularly important in fast paced games where quick reactions are essential. Additionally, a larger screen can make gaming sessions more enjoyable by offering a more engaging and immersive visual experience.
Discussing screen refresh time, which can be crucial for gaming, the HTC U24 Pro 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.
The main camera setup of the HTC U24 Pro surpasses that Vivo Y200 GT, offering a more comprehensive photography experience. The HTC U24 Pro boasts Triple Setup configuration, providing users with a versatile range of shooting options, enabling users to capture diverse scenes with precision and creativity. In contrast, the Vivo Y200 GT falls behind with its Dual Setup features, limiting the variety of photographic capabilities available to users. The additional lens on the HTC U24 Pro enhances its imaging capabilities, making it a more enticing choice for those seeking a more sophisticated and dynamic camera system.
Examining the main camera resolution features, it appears that the HTC U24 Pro 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 HTC U24 Pro and Vivo Y200 GT on an even playing field, leaving users to consider additional features and capabilities when making a choice between the two.
Delving more into the camera comparison segment, a notable distinction between the HTC U24 Pro and the Vivo Y200 GT surfaces with the inclusion of dedicated Telephoto camera features in the former. The HTC U24 Pro stands out by incorporating specialized Telephoto lenses that enable optical zooming, a feature absent in the Vivo Y200 GT. Optical zoom provides a significant advantage over digital zoom as it involves physical movement of the lens elements, allowing users to magnify subjects without compromising image quality.
This results in sharper, more detailed images, particularly in scenarios where capturing distant subjects is crucial. The absence of dedicated Telephoto capabilities in the Vivo Y200 GT means it relies on digital zoom, which often results in a loss of image quality. Thus, the HTC U24 Pro's inclusion of optical zoom through its Telephoto lenses contributes to an enhanced and versatile photography experience.
When discussing front camera features, the HTC U24 Pro 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 HTC U24 Pro 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.
A cursory examination of front camera specifications reveals that the HTC U24 Pro outshines the Vivo Y200 GT, boasting a significantly higher 50 MP front camera compared to the 16 MP front camera on the Vivo Y200 GT. In general, a higher megapixel count in a front camera tends to contribute to better image resolution and clarity in selfies. A larger megapixel count allows for more details to be captured, resulting in sharper and more vivid images. This can be particularly beneficial for selfie purposes, as users often seek clear and detailed self portraits. The higher resolution provided by a larger megapixel count allows for better cropping and zooming without compromising image quality, contributing to an overall improved selfie experience.
Next, when comparing video recording capabilities, the HTC U24 Pro stands out as more powerful than the Vivo Y200 GT, primarily due to the inclusion of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) in the HTC U24 Pro, a feature absent in the Vivo Y200 GT. OIS is a technology that mitigates the impact of hand movements or vibrations while recording videos, ensuring smoother and more stable footage. The absence of OIS in the Vivo Y200 GT may result in less steady videos, especially in situations where there is hand movement or external vibrations. The HTC U24 Pro integration of OIS contributes to a superior video recording experience, allowing users to capture clear and stable footage even in challenging conditions, making it a preferred choice for those who prioritize high quality and professional looking videos.
Examining the specifications in battery power, it becomes evident that the HTC U24 Pro falls short in comparison to the Vivo Y200 GT. The HTC U24 Pro is equipped with a 4600 mAh battery, whereas the Vivo Y200 GT boasts a more substantial 6000 mAh capacity. This slight but significant difference in battery capacity positions the Vivo Y200 GT as the preferable choice for those prioritizing extended usage. The higher milliampere-hour rating of the Vivo Y200 GT translates to a potentially longer lasting power performance, highlighting the importance of even small disparities in battery capacities when evaluating the overall endurance of devices.
In a positive development, both the HTC U24 Pro 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 HTC U24 Pro 60W 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.
Luckly, users can find satisfaction in both the HTC U24 Pro 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.
Pros list
No notable advantages found on this device
No notable advantages found on this device
Cons list
No significant disadvantage features found on this device
No significant disadvantage features found on this device
Point Result
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 :
After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that HTC U24 Pro has better overall performance than Vivo Y200 GT, based on the final score data.
After comparing the specifications data above, we can conclude that HTC U24 Pro has a very similar overall performance to Vivo Y200 GT, based on the final score data.
After comparing the specifications data above, we can confidently say that Vivo Y200 GT has better overall performance than HTC U24 Pro, 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.