Compare BlackBerry Curve 9360 vs Oppo Neo 5 (2015)

Feature Comparison

  • The Oppo Neo 5 (2015)'s got 4.5 inch Screen Size, while BlackBerry Curve 9360's Screen Size is 2.4 inch
  • The Internal Storage on Oppo Neo 5 (2015) is 96.0% more
  • Oppo Neo 5 (2015) has 50.0% more RAM
 
BlackBerry Curve 9360
Oppo Neo 5 (2015)
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
47 Value For Money Score
66 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
2.4 inch 4.5 inch   
Screen Resolution
480 x 360 pixels 854 x 480 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD LCD   
Pixel Density
250 PPI 217.7 PPI   
Screen Protection
- -   
Bezel Less
- No   
Screen Features
- -   
Chipset     
Brand
- MediaTek   
Processor Speed
800MHz 1.3GHz   
Processor
- MediaTek MT6582   
Processor Type
- Quad-Core   
RAM
512MB 1GB   
Graphics
- Mali-400 MP2   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
5MP 8MP   
Dual Rear Camera
- No   
Front Camera Resolution
- 2MP   
Dual Selfie Camera
- No   
Camera Details
Geo-Tagging, Face Detection, Image Stabilization Continuous shooting, Sony IMX 179 Sensor, HDR, Scene mode, Digital zoom, Touch focus, self timer, Digital image stabilization, Face detection, Exposure compensation, Geotagging, White balance settings, ISO settings, Panorama   
Video Recording Resolution
- HD Video Recording (720p)   
Camera Features
LED Flash Autofocus, LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
BlackBerry Android   
OS Version
- Android 4.4 KitKat   
OS Detail
BlackBerry OS v7 -   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Non-Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
GPS GPS, FM Radio   
Sensors
- Accelerometer, Proximity Sensor, Magnetometer, Ambient Light   
IP Rating
- -   
Dimensions (mm)
109 x 60 x 11 131.9 x 65.5 x 8.0   
Weight
99 grams 135 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth   
Headphone Jack Type
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
Black, White White, Black   
Build Material
- Glass, Metal   
Device Warranty
1 Year 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- -   
Body SAR
- -   
Head SAR
- -   
In The Box
Device, Charger, Earphone, User Manual Device, Charger, Earphone, Cover   
Audio Features
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
512MB 16GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
- -   
Card Slot
Yes Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
32GB 32GB   
OTG Support
- -   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Mini (Normal) SIM Micro SIM, Nano SIM   
SIM 1 Details
3G, 2G, Mini SIM -   
SIM 2 Details
- -   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
Yes No   
2G Bands
GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 GSM 1800 / 1900 / 850 / 900 MHz   
3G Bands
HSDPA 850 / 1900 / 2100, HSDPA 900 / 1700 / 2100 UMTS 2100 MHz   
4G Bands
- -   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
1000mAh 2000mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-ion (Li-ion) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
Yes No   
Wireless Charging
- No   
Fast Charging
- No   

BlackBerry Curve 9360 vs Oppo Neo 5 (2015) Specs

Specs
BlackBerry Curve 9360Oppo Neo 5 (2015)  
Screen Size 2.4 inch4.5 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 5MP8MP  
RAM 512MB1GB  
Battery Capacity 1000mAh2000mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 2MP  

Oppo Neo 5 (2015) Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Full HD video recording capability
  • Dual SIM support
The Bad
  • Lacks 4G LTE support
  • Average performing processor
  • Poor battery capacity
  • Below average display resolution

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare BlackBerry Curve 9360 with Oppo Neo 5 (2015). When you see BlackBerry Curve 9360 Vs Oppo Neo 5 (2015) 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 BlackBerry Curve 9360 stands against Oppo Neo 5 (2015) and which one you should buy. The best price of BlackBerry Curve 9360 is currently Rs. 4,008. The lowest price for Oppo Neo 5 (2015) is Rs. 8,000. The prices for both these products were updated December 17, 2017.
Report an error on this page