Compare Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot Magic
Name | Cubot Note 8 | Cubot Magic |
---|---|---|
![]() |
![]() |
|
Antutu benchmark | 49833 | 32116 |
CPU | MediaTek MT6739 | MediaTek MT6737 |
Diagonal size | 5.5 " | 5 " |
Resolution | 960x442 | 1280x720 |
Multi-touch (number of touches) | 5 | 5 |
RAM | 2 Gb | 3 Gb |
Bezel-less | No | No |
ROM | 16 GB | 16 GB |
External memory | MicroSD (TF), supports cards up to 128Gb | MicroSD (TF), supports cards up to 128Gb |
Rear camera | 13 Mp | 13 Mp |
Camera | Dual Camera | Single camera |
Sensor model | ||
dxomark mobile ranking | ||
dxomark (photo) | ||
dxomark (video) | ||
Front (selfie) camera | 5 Mp | 5 Mp |
Battery | 3100 mAh | 2600 mAh |
Wireless charging | No | |
Network | 4 G | 4 G |
WiFi | Yes | Yes |
Bluetooth | Yes | Yes |
NFC | No | No |
Navigation (Positioning) | GPS, A-GPS, GLONAS | GPS, A-GPS |
Notifications Led | No | Yes |
Fingerprint's scanner | No | No |
Operating system (OS) | Android 11 | Android 7.0 |
Material | Plastic | Metal frame and plastic case |
Weight | g | 150 g |
Dimensions | mm | 145 x 71 x 9,3 mm |
Price | 54.26€ ($62.89) See Details |
Discontinued.
View all Cubot models here
Alternatives to the Cubot Magic: Cubot King Kong 5 Pro - Compare Cubot Max 3 - Compare Cubot S200 - Compare |
Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot Magic: Camera comparison.
In this table, you can compare the Cubot Note 8’s camera vs Cubot Magic’s camera, see the difference between the 13Mp sensor and the 13Mp sensor, and understand which camera has the maximum benefits compared to the competitor.
Name | Cubot Note 8 | Cubot Magic |
---|---|---|
Rear camera | 13 Mp | 13 Mp |
Sensor model | ||
Flash | Dual LED flash | Dual LED flash |
Front (selfie) camera | 5 Mp | 5 Mp |
Flash | No | LED flash |
Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot Magic: battery life comparison.
Below, you can find the last battery life test between the Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot Magic, compare the difference between their batteries when in performance or normal mode, and see what chargers they support.
Name | Cubot Note 8 | Cubot Magic |
---|---|---|
Battery | 3100 mAh | 2600 mAh |
Type | Removable | Removable |
Stand-by time | 5-6 days | 5-6 days |
Battery Life | 2-3 days | 1,5-2 days |
Working hours in hard mode | 6-7 hours | 5-6 hours |
Talk time | 30 hours | 25 hours |
Fast charging | No | No |
Wireless charging | No |
Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot Magic: Antutu benchmark comparison.
Cubot Note 8 in the AnTuTu benchmark test got 49833 score points which is 55.17% faster than the Cubot Magic, which got 32116. You can compare its ranking and performance with other models results based on the Antutu test below.
Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot Magic: Geekbench benchmark comparison.
Cubot Note 8 in the Geekbench benchmark tests got a 125 points score in "Single-core" of against the Cubot Magic which got 109, it is 14.68% faster. In "Multi-core" score 359 vs 360 (-0.28% faster). You can compare its ranking and performance with other models results based on the Geekbench test below.
What is the difference between Cubot Note 8 and Cubot Magic? (compare specs) (which is better)
The main differences, why it is better to choose the Cubot Note 8 (advantages)
- Good performance: Is 55.17% faster in the Antutu test (17717 score difference).
- More battery capacity: 3100mAh vs 2600mAh (a difference of 500mAh).
Why it is better not to take Cubot Note 8 (disadvantages)
The main differences, why it is better to choose the Cubot Magic (advantages)
- Has a higher screen resolution: 1280x720 vs 960x442.
Why it is better not to take Cubot Magic (disadvantages)
The advantages of both models
- Have headphone Jack. 3.5mm supports.
Cubot Note 8 related comparisons
- Compare Cubot P40 vs Cubot Note 8
- Compare Cubot Max 3 vs Cubot Note 8
- Compare Cubot King Kong Mini 2 vs Cubot Note 8
- Compare Cubot Note 20 vs Cubot Note 8
- Compare Cubot Note 8 vs Cubot S200
Cubot Magic related comparisons
- Compare Xiaomi Redmi 4X Pro vs Cubot Magic
- Compare Xiaomi Redmi 4X vs Cubot Magic
- Compare Xiaomi Redmi Note 4X vs Cubot Magic
- Compare HomTom HT37 Pro vs Cubot Magic
- Compare Meizu M5C vs Cubot Magic