Compare Gionee Elife E8 vs CREO Mark 1

Feature Comparison

  • Gionee Elife E8 has 8.0% more Screen Size
  • Gionee Elife E8's got 50.0% more Internal Storage
  • RAM of Gionee Elife E8 is the same as CREO Mark 1
 
Gionee Elife E8
CREO Mark 1
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #1Rank #2  
Spec Score 
100 /100
89 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
92 Value For Money Score
81 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
6 inch 5.5 inch   
Screen Resolution
2560 x 1440 pixels 2560 x 1440 pixels   
Screen Type
AMOLED LCD   
Pixel Density
490 PPI 534 PPI   
Screen Protection
Corning Gorilla Glass 3 Corning Gorilla Glass 3   
Chipset     
Brand
MediaTek MediaTek   
Processor Speed
2GHz 1.95GHz   
Processor
MediaTek MT6795 Helio X10 MediaTek MT6795 Helio X10   
Processor Type
Octa-Core Octa-Core   
RAM
3GB 3GB   
Graphics
PowerVR G6200 PowerVR G6200   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
24MP 21MP   
Front Camera Resolution
8MP 8MP   
Camera Details
1/2.3'' Sensor Size, Geo-Tagging, Touch Focus, Face/Smile Detection, Panorama, HDR Sony IMX230 Sensor, f/2.0 Aperture   
Video Recording Resolution
4K Video Recording (2160p) 4K Video Recording (2160p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, OIS, Phase Detection Autofocus (PDAF), LED Flash Autofocus, Dual LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
Android 5.1 Lollipop Android 5.1 Lollipop   
OS Detail
- -   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
164 x 82.3 x 9.6 155.4 x 76.1 x 8.7   
Weight
210 grams 190 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth   
Audio Jack
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
Gold Black   
Build Material
Metal Unibody Glass, Metal   
Device Warranty
1 Year -   
Warranty Details
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
64GB 32GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
53.97GB -   
Card Slot
No Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
- 128GB   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Dual Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Micro SIM Micro SIM   
SIM 1 Details
Micro SIM -   
SIM 2 Details
Micro SIM -   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No Yes   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
3500mAh 3100mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
No No   
Wireless Charging
No -   
Fast Charging
No Yes, High Voltage Fast Charging   

Gionee Elife E8 vs CREO Mark 1 Specs

Specs
Gionee Elife E8CREO Mark 1  
Screen Size 6 inch5.5 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 24MP21MP  
RAM 3GB3GB  
Battery Capacity 3500mAh3100mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 8MP8MP  

Gionee Elife E8 Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Excellent cameras on the either sides of the device
  • Brilliant Quad HD display with great viewing angles
  • Good performance, should handle day-to-day tasks with ease
  • Fingerprint scanner on the back of the phone
The Bad
  • Huge form factor, thanks to the over sized 6 inch display
  • Battery life is average despite being a 3520mAh unit
  • Runs on outdated Android 5.1 Lollipop

CREO Mark 1 Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Good-looking and well-built
  • Promise of monthly software updates
  • It's Android-based Fuel OS has a clean design with useful features
The Bad
  • Sub-par camera performance
  • Buggy software at launch
  • Battery life could've been better
  • Lag observed while using heavy-duty apps like intensive games

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare Gionee Elife E8 with CREO Mark 1. When you see Gionee Elife E8 Vs CREO Mark 1 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 E8 stands against CREO Mark 1 and which one you should buy. The best price of Gionee Elife E8 is currently Rs. 19,900. The lowest price for CREO Mark 1 is Rs. 19,999. The prices for both these products were updated October 20, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page