Compare HTC One M9+ vs Lenovo Phab 2 Pro

Feature Comparison

  • Lenovo Phab 2 Pro has 6.4 inch Screen Size and HTC One M9+ has 5.2 inch Screen Size
  • Lenovo Phab 2 Pro has 64GB Internal Storage, whereas HTC One M9+ has 32GB Internal Storage
  • The Lenovo Phab 2 Pro's got 4GB RAM, while HTC One M9+'s RAM is 3GB
 
HTC One M9+
Lenovo Phab 2 Pro
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
99 /100
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
79 Value For Money Score
83 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
5.2 inch 6.4 inch   
Screen Resolution
2560 x 1440 pixels 2560 x 1440 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD LCD   
Pixel Density
564.8 PPI 459 PPI   
Screen Protection
- -   
Chipset     
Brand
MediaTek Qualcomm   
Processor Speed
2.2GHz 1.8GHz   
Processor
MediaTek MT6795 Helio X10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 652   
Processor Type
Octa-Core Octa-Core   
RAM
3GB 4GB   
Graphics
PowerVR G6200 Adreno 510   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
20MP 16MP   
Front Camera Resolution
4MP 8MP   
Camera Details
Dual-LED Flash, Automatic Simultaneous Video And Image Recording, Geo-tagging, Face/Smile Detection, HDR, Panorama Geo-tagging, touch focus, face detection, HDR, panorama   
Video Recording Resolution
4K Video Recording (2160p) Full HD Video Recording (1080p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, Dual LED Flash Autofocus, LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
Android 5.0 Lollipop Android 6.0 Marshmallow   
OS Detail
- -   
OS Upgradable To
Android 6.0 -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
Fingerprint Scanner, Front Facing Stereo Speakers, GPS, FM Radio Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
150.99 x 71.99 x 9.61 179.8 x 88.6 x 10.7   
Weight
168 grams 259 grams   
Connectivity
4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, VoLTE (Works with Jio)   
Audio Jack
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
Silver, Gold Champagne Gold   
Build Material
Metal Unibody Metal Unibody   
Device Warranty
- 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
32GB 64GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
21GB -   
Card Slot
Yes Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
2TB 128GB   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Nano SIM Nano SIM   
SIM 1 Details
- -   
SIM 2 Details
- -   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No Yes   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
2840mAh 4050mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po) Lithium-ion (Li-ion)   
Removable Battery
No No   
Wireless Charging
- -   
Fast Charging
- Yes, 2.4 x Turbo Charging   

HTC One M9+ vs Lenovo Phab 2 Pro Specs

Specs
HTC One M9+Lenovo Phab 2 Pro  
Screen Size 5.2 inch6.4 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 20MP16MP  
RAM 3GB4GB  
Battery Capacity 2840mAh4050mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 4MP8MP  

Lenovo Phab 2 Pro Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Day-to-day operations are lag free
  • Display and camera are decent
The Bad
  • Poor screen visibility under direct sunlight
  • No 4K video recording is a bummer
  • Project Tango is far from perfect

HTC One M9+ Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Mindboggling display quality at 565PPI
  • HTC BoomSound Stereo speakers
  • Metal unibody construction makes it feel premium
  • Quick unlock with fingerprint sensor
  • Decent performance and battery life
The Bad
  • Runs outdated Android 5.0 Lollipop
  • Lacks fast charging support

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare HTC One M9+ with Lenovo Phab 2 Pro. When you see HTC One M9+ Vs Lenovo Phab 2 Pro 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 HTC One M9+ stands against Lenovo Phab 2 Pro and which one you should buy. The best price of HTC One M9+ is currently Rs. 22,990. The lowest price for Lenovo Phab 2 Pro is Rs. 25,990. The prices for both these products were updated August 20, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page