Compare LG Optimus L9 P765 vs Coolpad Note 3

Feature Comparison

  • Coolpad Note 3's 5.5 inch Screen Size is more than LG Optimus L9 P765's 4.7 inch Screen Size
  • Internal Storage of Coolpad Note 3's is 75.0% more than LG Optimus L9 P765
  • The Coolpad Note 3's got 3GB RAM, while LG Optimus L9 P765's RAM is 1GB
 
LG Optimus L9 P765
Coolpad Note 3
Highlight:
All Features
Only Differences
Rank Rank #2Rank #1  
Spec Score 
44 /100
100 /100
  
This score is assigned based on the product's specifications without taking price into consideration.
 
59 Value For Money Score
68 Value For Money Score
  
Display     
Screen Size
4.7 inch 5.5 inch   
Screen Resolution
960 x 540 pixels 1280 x 720 pixels   
Screen Type
LCD LCD   
Pixel Density
234.4 PPI 267 PPI   
Screen Protection
- -   
Bezel Less
- No   
Screen Features
- -   
Chipset     
Brand
- MediaTek   
Processor Speed
1GHz 1.3GHz   
Processor
TI OMAP 4430 MediaTek MT6753   
Processor Type
- Octa-Core   
RAM
1GB 3GB   
Graphics
PowerVR SGX540 Mali-T720 MP3   
Camera     
Rear Camera Resolution
5MP 13MP   
Dual Rear Camera
- No   
Front Camera Resolution
0.3MP 5MP   
Dual Selfie Camera
- No   
Camera Details
Geo-Tagging, Touch Focus, Face Detection Digital image stabilization, Digital Zoom, Auto Flash, Touch to focus, Face detection   
Video Recording Resolution
Full HD Video Recording (1080p) Full HD Video Recording (1080p)   
Camera Features
Autofocus, LED Flash LED Flash   
General Specifications     
Operating System
Android Android   
OS Version
- Android 5.1 Lollipop   
OS Detail
Android (4.0) -   
OS Upgradable To
- -   
Device Type
Touchscreen Touchscreen   
USB Connector Type
Micro USB Micro USB   
Features
FM Radio Fingerprint Scanner, GPS, FM Radio   
Sensors
- Accelerometer, Proximity Sensor, Magnetometer, Ambient Light, Gyroscope   
IP Rating
- -   
Dimensions (mm)
131.9 x 68.2 x 9.1 151.00 x 77.00 x 9.30   
Weight
125 grams 155 grams   
Connectivity
3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth 4G LTE (India Compatible), 3G, 2G, WiFi, Bluetooth   
Headphone Jack Type
3.5mm 3.5mm   
Color
White, Black White, Black   
Build Material
- Plastic   
Device Warranty
- 1 Year   
Warranty Details
- 1 Year on mobile and 6 month on accessories   
Body SAR
- -   
Head SAR
- -   
In The Box
- Device, Charger & Cable Separate, Earphone, User Manual, Warranty Card   
Audio Features
- -   
Storage     
Internal Storage
4GB 16GB   
Approx. User Available Storage
- 10.81MB   
Card Slot
Yes Yes   
Maximum Card Slot Capacity
32GB 64GB   
OTG Support
- Yes   
Communication     
SIM Card Slots
Single Dual   
Network Type
GSM GSM   
SIM Card Type
Mini (Normal) SIM Micro SIM   
SIM 1 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Micro SIM   
SIM 2 Details
- 4G, 3G, 2G, Micro SIM   
Hybrid SIM (microSD + SIM)
- No   
2G Bands
- GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 MHz   
3G Bands
- UMTS 900 / 1900 / 2100 MHz   
4G Bands
- FD-LTE 1800 / 2300   
Battery     
Battery Capacity
2150mAh 3000mAh   
Battery Type
Lithium-ion (Li-ion) Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po)   
Removable Battery
Yes No   
Wireless Charging
- No   
Fast Charging
- No   

LG Optimus L9 P765 vs Coolpad Note 3 Specs

Specs
LG Optimus L9 P765Coolpad Note 3  
Screen Size 4.7 inch5.5 inch  
Rear Camera Resolution 5MP13MP  
RAM 1GB3GB  
Battery Capacity 2150mAh3000mAh  
Front Camera Resolution 0.3MP5MP  

Coolpad Note 3 Pros & Cons

The Good
  • Fingerprint sensor with Individual app lock support
  • Ample 3GB of RAM for good multitasking experience
  • Dual SIM 4G support
  • Decent battery life
The Bad
  • Heats up while performing graphic intensive tasks
  • Some bloatwares pre-installed
  • Average display sharpness at just 267PPI

Talk about this comparison, ask your questions!

This page helps you compare LG Optimus L9 P765 with Coolpad Note 3. When you see LG Optimus L9 P765 Vs Coolpad Note 3 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 LG Optimus L9 P765 stands against Coolpad Note 3 and which one you should buy. The prices for both these products were updated December 14, 2017.
Report an error on this page