Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 77.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | |
| Android 13 | -- |
| -- | 2014-09-29 |
| 6.63 x 3.02 x 0.33 inches | 6.04 x 3.09 x 0.33 inches |
| 6.99 ounces | 6.21 ounces |
| Cerulean Blue, Cloudwing Grey and Flowing Purple | Black, Gold, Pink and White |
| -- | Aluminum and Plastic |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 5.7 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| IPS LCD | Super AMOLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 515 pixels per inch |
| 5000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.6 | 8.6 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio G99 MT6789 (6 nm) chipset | Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 5433 chipset |
| Octa-Core 2200 MHz processor | ARM Cortex-A57 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 20 nm (Octa-Core 1900 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 3 GB RAM |
| Mali-G57 MC2 GPU | Mali-T760 MP6 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 32 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 128 GB) external memory slot |
| 15.42 | 8.12 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 3.70 MP |
| -- | f/2.20 aperture |
| -- | 31.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.69 | 9.9 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Micro SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.6 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 3220mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 5.2 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 4.1, EDR |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| -- | Infra-red port |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy Note4 is just a bit better than the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12, with a score of 77.6 against 71.5. The Samsung Galaxy Note4 construction has the same thickness than the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12, but it is lighter. Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 counts with just a bit better processing power than Galaxy Note4, and although they both have a Octa-Core processing unit, the Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 also has a greater amount of RAM.
Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 counts with a much sharper display than Samsung Galaxy Note4, because although it has a little worse 1080 x 2460 resolution and a just a little worse display density, it also counts with a larger screen. Galaxy Note4 counts with a much better camera than Blackview Oscal Tiger 12, although it has a back-facing camera with a much worse 16 megapixels resolution.
Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 counts with a much better storage to install applications and games than Samsung Galaxy Note4, because it has a slot for an external memory card that admits up to 1 TB and more internal storage capacity. Blackview Oscal Tiger 12 features a superior battery lifetime than Galaxy Note4, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.