Compare Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb vs ECOO E04 Lite

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb vs ECOO E04 Lite Comparison - Compare Size, Cameras, Specs, Features, Price of Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb with ECOO E04 Lite.
Name	Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb	ECOO E04 Lite

Antutu benchmark	38695
CPU	MediaTek MT6753	MediaTek MT6753
Diagonal size	5 "	5.5 "
Resolution	1280x720	1920x1080
Multi-touch (number of touches)	5	5
RAM	3 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	8 Mp	16 Mp
Camera	Single camera	Single camera
Sensor model
dxomark mobile ranking
dxomark (photo)
dxomark (video)
Front (selfie) camera	2 Mp	8 Mp
Battery	5020 mAh	2500 mAh
Wireless charging
Network	4 G	4 G
Sim cards
WiFi	Yes	Yes
Bluetooth	Yes	Yes
NFC	No
Navigation (Positioning)	GPS, A-GPS, GLONAS	GPS, A-GPS
Notifications Led	Yes
Fingerprint's scanner	Yes
Operating system (OS)	Android 7.0	Android 5.1
Material	Metal
Weight	149 g	g
Dimensions	144 x 70,1 x 8,6 mm	mm
Price	Discontinued. View all Vernee models here Alternatives to the Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb:	Notify me when it goes on sale. View all ECOO models here Alternatives to the ECOO E04 Lite:

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb vs ECOO E04 Lite: Camera comparison.

In this table, you can compare the Vernee Thor E’s camera vs ECOO E04 Lite’s camera, see the difference between the 8Mp sensor and the 16Mp sensor, and understand which camera has the maximum benefits compared to the competitor.

Name	Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb	ECOO E04 Lite
Rear camera	8 Mp	16 Mp
Sensor model
Flash	LED flash
Front (selfie) camera	2 Mp	8 Mp
Flash	No

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb vs ECOO E04 Lite: battery life comparison.

Below, you can find the last battery life test between the Vernee Thor E vs ECOO E04 Lite, compare the difference between their batteries when in performance or normal mode, and see what chargers they support.

Name	Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb	ECOO E04 Lite
Battery	5020 mAh	2500 mAh
Type	Non-removable	Removable
Stand-by time	6-7 days
Battery Life	3-4 days
Working hours in hard mode	10-12 hours
Talk time	30 hours
Fast charging	Yes
Wireless charging

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb vs ECOO E04 Lite: Antutu benchmark comparison.

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb in the AnTuTu benchmark test got 38695 score points which is 100.00% faster than the ECOO E04 Lite, which got 0. You can compare its ranking and performance with other models results based on the Antutu test below.

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb

5 inches (1280x720) Curved Glass / MT6753 / 3Gb / 16GB / 8Mp / 5020mAh

0.00€

$0.00

38695

ECOO E04 Lite

5.5" (1920x1080) / MT6753 / 3Gb / 16GB / 16Mp / 2500mAh

On Sale Soon

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb vs ECOO E04 Lite: Geekbench benchmark comparison.

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb in the Geekbench benchmark tests got a 116 points score in "Single-core" of against the ECOO E04 Lite which got 115, it is 0.87% faster. In "Multi-core" score 603 vs 610 (-1.15% faster). You can compare its ranking and performance with other models results based on the Geekbench test below.

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb

5 inches (1280x720) Curved Glass / MT6753 / 3Gb / 16GB / 8Mp / 5020mAh

0.00€

$0.00

116 / 603

ECOO E04 Lite

5.5" (1920x1080) / MT6753 / 3Gb / 16GB / 16Mp / 2500mAh

On Sale Soon

115 / 610

What is the difference between Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb and ECOO E04 Lite? (compare specs) (which is better)

The main differences, why it is better to choose the Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb (advantages)

More battery capacity: 5020mAh vs 2500mAh (a difference of 2520mAh).
Have fast charging supports.

Why it is better not to take Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb (disadvantages)

The main differences, why it is better to choose the ECOO E04 Lite (advantages)

Has a higher resolution newer rear camera: 16Mp compared to 8Mp
Has a higher resolution front (selfie) camera: 8Mp vs 2Mp .
Has a higher screen resolution: 1920x1080 vs 1280x720.

Why it is better not to take ECOO E04 Lite (disadvantages)

Does not have fast charging support

The advantages of both models

Have headphone Jack. 3.5mm supports.

Vernee Thor E 3/16Gb related comparisons

ECOO E04 Lite related comparisons

Rate this page: 1-5

4.63/5 of 296

Frequent comparisons