Compare HTC One Dual Sim vs Xolo Q3000

Feature Comparison

  • Xolo Q3000 has 17.0% more Screen Size
  • HTC One Dual Sim's 32GB Internal Storage is more than Xolo Q3000's 16GB Internal Storage
  • Both HTC One Dual Sim and Xolo Q3000 have same RAM
 
HTC One Dual Sim
Xolo Q3000
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #1Rank #2  
Spec Score 
100 / 100
50 / 100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
63Value For Money
57Value For Money
  
Display     
Screen Size
4.7 inch 5.7 inch   
Screen Resolution
1920 x 1080 pixels 1920 x 1080 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD LCD   
Pixel Density
468.7 PPI 386.5 PPI   
Screen Protection
Corning Gorilla Glass 2 -   
Bezel Less
No No   
Screen Features
- -   
Chipset     
Brand
Qualcomm MediaTek   
Processor Speed
1.7GHz 1.5GHz   
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 -   
Processor Type
Quad-Core Quad-Core   
RAM
2GB 2GB   
Graphics
Adreno 320 PowerVR SGX544   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
4MP 13MP   
Dual Rear Camera
No No   
Front Camera Resolution
2.1MP 5MP   
Dual Selfie Camera
No No   
Camera Details
Continuos Shooting, 1/3'' Sensor Size, 2µm Pixel Size, Image Recording, Simultaneous HD video and image recording, Digital Zoom, Optical Image stabilization, HDR, Face detection, Burst mode, Smile detection BSI 2 Sensor, Burst Mode, Scene Detection and Tuning, High Dynamic Range (HDR), Low Light Enhancement, Panorama Capture, Geo-tagging   
Video Recording Resolution
Full HD Video Recording (1080p) Full HD Video Recording (1080p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash Autofocus, LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
Android 4.1 Jelly Bean -   
OS Detail
- Android (4.2)   
OS Upgradable To
Android 5.0 -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
Front Facing Stereo Speakers, GPS, FM Radio FM Radio   
Sensors
Accelerometer, Proximity Sensor, Magnetometer, Gyroscope, IR Blaster Accelerometer, Proximity Sensor, Magnetometer, Gyroscope   
IP Rating
- -   
Dimensions (mm)
137.8 x 69.3 x 10.4 81.6 x 164.8 x 8.9   
Weight
156 grams -   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth   
Headphone Jack Type
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
Silver, Black Black, White   
Build Material
Metal Unibody -   
Device Warranty
1 Year 1 Year   
Warranty Details
1 Year on mobile and 6 month on accessories -   
Body SAR
- 0.53W/kg   
Head SAR
- 0.37W/kg   
In The Box
Device, Charger & Cable Separate, Earphone, User Manual, Warranty Card Device, Charger, User Manual   
Audio Features
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
32GB 16GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
- -   
Card Slot
Yes Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
64GB 32GB   
OTG Support
Yes -   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Dual Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Micro SIM Mini (Normal) SIM   
SIM 1 Details
3G, 2G, Mini SIM 3G, 2G, Mini SIM   
SIM 2 Details
2G, Micro SIM 3G, 2G, Mini SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
No No   
2G Bands
GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 MHz GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900   
3G Bands
HSDPA 850 / 1900 / 2100 MHz HSDPA 900 / 1900 / 2100   
4G Bands
- -   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
2300mAh 4000mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
No Yes   
Wireless Charging
No No   
Fast Charging
No No   

HTC One Dual Sim vs Xolo Q3000 Specs

Specs
HTC One Dual SimXolo Q3000  
Screen Size 4.7 inch5.7 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 4MP13MP  
RAM 2GB2GB  
Battery Capacity 2300mAh4000mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 2.1MP5MP  

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare HTC One Dual Sim with Xolo Q3000. When you see HTC One Dual Sim Vs Xolo Q3000 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 Dual Sim stands against Xolo Q3000 and which one you should buy. The best price of HTC One Dual Sim is currently Rs. 35,499. The prices for both these products were updated February 22, 2018.
Report an error on this page