Compare Gionee Elife E7 16GB vs Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB)

Feature Comparison

  • Both Gionee Elife E7 16GB and Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB) have same Screen Size
  • Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB)'s Internal Storage is 75.0% more
  • The Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB)'s got 4GB RAM, while Gionee Elife E7 16GB's RAM is 2GB
 
Gionee Elife E7 16GB
We Love
Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB)
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
92 /100
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
79 Value For Money Score
75 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
5.5 inch 5.5 inch   
Screen Resolution
1920 x 1080 pixels 1280 x 720 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD LCD   
Pixel Density
400.5 PPI 293.72 PPI   
Screen Protection
Corning Gorilla Glass 3 Corning Gorilla Glass 4   
Chipset     
Brand
Qualcomm MediaTek   
Processor Speed
2.2GHz 1.5GHz   
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 MediaTek MT6750   
Processor Type
Quad-Core Octa-Core   
RAM
2GB 4GB   
Graphics
Adreno 330 Mali-T860 MP2   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
16MP 13MP   
Front Camera Resolution
8MP 16MP   
Camera Details
1.34 µm Sensor, Sapphire lens Geo-tagging, Touch Focus, Face Detection, Panorama, HDR   
Video Recording Resolution
Full HD Video Recording (1080p) Full HD Video Recording (1080p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash Autofocus, LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
Android 4.2 Jelly Bean Android 5.1 Lollipop   
OS Detail
- -   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
FM Radio Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
150.6 x 75.0 x 9.5 154.5 x 76 x 7.38   
Weight
150 grams 160 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC, VoLTE (Works with Jio)   
Audio Jack
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
Black, White, Blue Rose Gold, Gold, Gray   
Build Material
- Metal   
Device Warranty
- 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
16GB 64GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
- 53.76GB   
Card Slot
- Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
- 128GB   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Mini (Normal) SIM Nano SIM   
SIM 1 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
SIM 2 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No Yes   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
2500mAh 3075mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-ion (Li-ion) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
No No   
Wireless Charging
- -   
Fast Charging
- -   

Gionee Elife E7 16GB vs Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB) Specs

Specs
Gionee Elife E7 16GBOppo F1s (4GB/64GB)  
Screen Size 5.5 inch5.5 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 16MP13MP  
RAM 2GB4GB  
Battery Capacity 2500mAh3075mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 8MP16MP  

Gionee Elife E7 16GB Pros & Cons

The Good
  • The curved back ensures that the phone sits well in your palm
  • Beautiful display with excellent colour reproduction
  • Excellent rear and front facing cameras easily capable of challenging flagship devices
  • Good battery life
  • Speakers on the phone are adequately loud and clear
The Bad
  • Amigo UI is very intensive on the RAM which leads to a lot of stutters with just 2GB of RAM
  • No LTE support
  • No Dual SIM support
  • Lack of expandable storage means that 16GB of internal storage is inadequate
  • Plastic-y back tends to pick up a lot of scratches in day to day usage

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare Gionee Elife E7 16GB with Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB). When you see Gionee Elife E7 16GB Vs Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB) 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 Gionee Elife E7 16GB stands against Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB) and which one you should buy. The best price of Gionee Elife E7 16GB is currently Rs. 16,400. The lowest price for Oppo F1s (4GB/64GB) is Rs. 16,090. The prices for both these products were updated August 19, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page