Compare Samsung Galaxy Alpha vs HTC U Play

Feature Comparison

  • HTC U Play has 9.0% more Screen Size
  • The Internal Storage on HTC U Play is 50.0% more
  • The 4GB RAM on the HTC U Play is 50.0% more
 
Samsung Galaxy Alpha
HTC U Play
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
85 /100
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
74 Value For Money Score
72 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
4.7 inch 5.2 inch   
Screen Resolution
1280 x 720 pixels 1920 x 1080 pixels   
Screen Type
AMOLED LCD   
Pixel Density
312.5 PPI 428 PPI   
Screen Protection
- Corning Gorilla Glass   
Chipset     
Brand
Samsung Exynos MediaTek   
Processor Speed
1.8GHz 2GHz   
Processor
Exynos 5430 MediaTek MT6755 Helio P10   
Processor Type
Quad-Core Octa-Core   
RAM
2GB 4GB   
Graphics
Mali-T628 MP6 Mali-T860 MP2   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
12MP 16MP   
Front Camera Resolution
2.1MP 16MP   
Camera Details
Dual Camera, Geo-Tagging, Touch Focus, Face & Smile Detection, Panorama, HDR 1.0 µm pixel size, geo-tagging, touch focus, face detection, panorama, Auto-HDR   
Video Recording Resolution
4K Video Recording (2160p) Full HD Video Recording (1080p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash Autofocus, OIS, Phase Detection Autofocus (PDAF), Dual Tone LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
Android 4.4 KitKat Android 6.0 Marshmallow   
OS Detail
TouchWiz UI -   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB USB Type C   
Features
Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio   
Dimensions (mm)
132.4 x 65.5 x 6.7 146 x 72.9 x 8   
Weight
115 grams 145 grams   
Connectivity
4G LTE (India Compatible), 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, Frosted Gold, Sieek Silver Brilliant Black, Cosmetic Pink, Ice White, Sapphire Blue   
Build Material
Metal, Polycarbonate Glass   
Device Warranty
1 Year 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
32GB 64GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
25.58GB -   
Card Slot
No Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
- 256GB   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Nano SIM Nano SIM   
SIM 1 Details
4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
SIM 2 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Nano SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No Yes   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
1860mAh 2500mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-ion (Li-ion) Lithium-ion (Li-ion)   
Removable Battery
Yes No   
Wireless Charging
- -   
Fast Charging
- -   

Samsung Galaxy Alpha vs HTC U Play Specs

Specs
Samsung Galaxy AlphaHTC U Play  
Screen Size 4.7 inch5.2 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 12MP16MP  
RAM 2GB4GB  
Battery Capacity 1860mAh2500mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 2.1MP16MP  

Samsung Galaxy Alpha Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Crisp and vivid AMOLED display with 312PPI
  • Good performance for average usage thanks to the 2GB RAM
  • 12MP rear camera can shoot videos up to 4k
  • 4G LTE support
The Bad
  • Average battery backup
  • No storage expansion option
  • Runs on outdated Android 4.4 KitKat with no hope of update from Samsung

HTC U Play Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Excellent design and display
  • USB Type-C port is noteworthy
  • Good camera performance
The Bad
  • No 3.5 mm audio jack
  • No 4K video recording

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare Samsung Galaxy Alpha with HTC U Play. When you see Samsung Galaxy Alpha Vs HTC U Play 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 Samsung Galaxy Alpha stands against HTC U Play and which one you should buy. The best price of Samsung Galaxy Alpha is currently Rs. 34,999. The lowest price for HTC U Play is Rs. 29,990. The prices for both these products were updated October 19, 2017.
 
Report an error on this page