Compare Apple iPhone 4 16GB vs Coolpad Mega 2.5D

Feature Comparison

  • Coolpad Mega 2.5D has 36.0% more Screen Size
  • Internal Storage of Apple iPhone 4 16GB is the same as Coolpad Mega 2.5D
  • The Coolpad Mega 2.5D has 3GB RAM, which is 83.0% more
 
Apple iPhone 4 16GB
Coolpad Mega 2.5D
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
62 /100
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
67 Value For Money Score
75 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
3.5 inch 5.5 inch   
Screen Resolution
960 x 640 pixels 1280 x 720 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD LCD   
Pixel Density
329.7 PPI 267 PPI   
Screen Protection
- -   
Chipset     
Brand
Apple A series MediaTek   
Processor Speed
1GHz 1GHz   
Processor
Apple A4 MediaTek MT6735   
Processor Type
Single-Core Quad-Core   
RAM
512MB 3GB   
Graphics
PowerVR SGX535 Mali-T720   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
5MP 8MP   
Front Camera Resolution
1MP 8MP   
Camera Details
Geo-Tagging, Touch Focus, HDR Geotagging   
Video Recording Resolution
HD Video Recording (720p) Full HD Video Recording (1080p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash Autofocus, LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
iOS Android   
OS Version
- Android 6.0 Marshmallow   
OS Detail
iOS 4 Cool UI 8.0   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Apple 30-pin Connector Micro USB   
Features
GPS GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
115.2 x 58.6 x 9.3 143.9 x 71.5 x 8.0   
Weight
137 grams 141 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, VoLTE (Works with Jio)   
Audio Jack
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
White, Black Champagne Gold, Royal Gold, Space Gray   
Build Material
Glass, Metal Plastic   
Device Warranty
1 Year 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
16GB 16GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
12.7GB 9.73GB   
Card Slot
- Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
- 32GB   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Micro SIM Nano SIM   
SIM 1 Details
3G, 2G, Micro SIM 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
SIM 2 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No Yes   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
1420mAh 2500mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po) Lithium-ion (Li-ion)   
Removable Battery
No -   
Wireless Charging
- -   
Fast Charging
- -   

Apple iPhone 4 16GB vs Coolpad Mega 2.5D Specs

Specs
Apple iPhone 4 16GBCoolpad Mega 2.5D  
Screen Size 3.5 inch5.5 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 5MP8MP  
RAM 512MB3GB  
Battery Capacity 1420mAh2500mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 1MP8MP  

Coolpad Mega 2.5D Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Solid build quality and premium looks
  • Runs on the latest Android Marshmallow out of the box
  • 4G LTE enabled with VoLTE support
The Bad
  • Hybrid second slot
  • Battery life does not hold up well
  • Average cameras
  • Not that great performance

Apple iPhone 4 16GB Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Fresh and gorgeous new design
  • Extremely premium build quality
  • Retina display is probably the best display we have seen at the time of the launch of this phone
  • iOS 4 is fresh and brings tons of improvements
  • Apple's ecosystem has tons of apps and games
The Bad
  • No expandable storage
  • The glass on the back of the phone is prone to shattering
  • Uses a 30 pin Apple proprietary cable for charging and syncing
  • Questions being raised about the reception on the device
  • The speaker is not the loudest

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare Apple iPhone 4 16GB with Coolpad Mega 2.5D. When you see Apple iPhone 4 16GB Vs Coolpad Mega 2.5D comparison on Pricebaba, watch-out for the specifications of these phones and also the VFM score. With Pricebaba’s Value For Money Score, you can know how Apple iPhone 4 16GB stands against Coolpad Mega 2.5D and which one you should buy. The lowest price for Coolpad Mega 2.5D is Rs. 7,199. The prices for both these products were updated July 21, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page