Compare Gionee Elife S5.5 vs Lenovo Phab

Feature Comparison

  • Screen Size of Lenovo Phab's is 28.0% more than Gionee Elife S5.5
  • Both Gionee Elife S5.5 and Lenovo Phab have same Internal Storage
  • Both Gionee Elife S5.5 and Lenovo Phab have same RAM
 
Gionee Elife S5.5
Lenovo Phab
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #1Rank #2  
Spec Score 
100 /100
80 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
80 Value For Money Score
69 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
5 inch 6.98 inch   
Screen Resolution
1920 x 1080 pixels 1280 x 720 pixels   
Screen Type
AMOLED LCD   
Pixel Density
440.6 PPI 210.4 PPI   
Screen Protection
Corning Gorilla Glass 3 -   
Bezel Less
- -   
Chipset     
Brand
MediaTek Qualcomm   
Processor Speed
1.7GHz 1.2GHz   
Processor
MediaTek MT6592 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410   
Processor Type
Octa-Core Quad-Core   
RAM
2GB 2GB   
Graphics
Mali-450 MP4 -   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
13MP 13MP   
Front Camera Resolution
5MP 5MP   
Camera Details
Geo-tagging, touch focus, face/smile detection, panorama, HDR -   
Video Recording Resolution
Full HD Video Recording (1080p) -   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash Autofocus, Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
Android 4.2 Jelly Bean Android 5.1 Lollipop   
OS Detail
- Vibe UI   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
GPS, FM Radio GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
145.1 x 70.2 x 5.6 186 x 97 x 8.9   
Weight
133 grams 250 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth   
Audio Jack
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
White, Black, Blue Tuxedo Black   
Build Material
Glass, Metal Plastic   
Device Warranty
1 Year 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
16GB 16GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
10GB 23.91GB   
Card Slot
No Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
- 64GB   
OTG Support
- -   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Micro SIM Micro SIM   
SIM 1 Details
3G, 2G, Micro SIM 4G, 3G, 2G, Micro SIM   
SIM 2 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Micro SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No No   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
2300mAh 4250mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-ion (Li-ion) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
No No   
Wireless Charging
- -   
Fast Charging
- -   

Gionee Elife S5.5 vs Lenovo Phab Specs

Specs
Gionee Elife S5.5Lenovo Phab  
Screen Size 5 inch6.98 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 13MP13MP  
RAM 2GB2GB  
Battery Capacity 2300mAh4250mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 5MP5MP  

Lenovo Phab Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Huge display gives a great multimedia experience
  • Great battery life with 4250mAh unit
  • 4G LTE enabled
  • Expandable storage up to 64GB
The Bad
  • Below average display quality with just 210PPI
  • Mediocre performance with a chipset for budget devices
  • Not that great camera output
  • Huge size for comfortable usage as a mobile device

Gionee Elife S5.5 Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Gorgeous slim design of the phone
  • Despite glass front and back, the phone feels solid in the hand
  • The display on the phone is fantastic, with good colour reproduction
  • Snappy camera
The Bad
  • Amigo UI is a major memory hog
  • The phone gets hot when subjected to day to day tasks
  • Battery life can be eccentric, primarily due to heating issues
  • Video recording is not the best as the phone drops a lot of frames when recording

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare Gionee Elife S5.5 with Lenovo Phab. When you see Gionee Elife S5.5 Vs Lenovo Phab 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 S5.5 stands against Lenovo Phab and which one you should buy. The best price of Gionee Elife S5.5 is currently Rs. 19,999. The prices for both these products were updated October 24, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page