Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 71.5 | 81.3 |
| Basic Information | |
| LG | |
| Android 13 | -- |
| 0000-00-00 | 2018-06-08 |
| 6.63 x 3.02 x 0.33 inches | 5.97 x 2.97 x 0.29 inches |
| 6.99 ounces | 5.57 ounces |
| Cerulean Blue, Cloudwing Grey and Flowing Purple | Black and Gray |
| -- | Aluminum and Glass (Corning Gorilla Glass 5) |
| -- | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| -- | $ 261.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.8 inches | 6 inches |
| 2460 x 1080 pixels | 2880 x 1440 pixels |
| IPS LCD | P-OLED |
| 395 pixels per inch | 537 pixels per inch |
| 5000 cd/m2 brightness | -- |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 10.6 | 8.8 |
| Performance | |
| MediaTek Helio G99 MT6789 (6 nm) chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SDM845 chipset |
| Octa-Core 2200 MHz processor | Kryo 385, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2800 MHz) processor |
| 8 GB RAM | 6 GB RAM |
| Mali-G57 MC2 GPU | Adreno 630 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.63 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 1 TB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 1,95 TB) external memory slot |
| 15.42 | 14.66 |
| Camera | |
| 64.00 MP + 13.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| -- | f/1.60 aperture |
| -- | 30.00mm focal length |
| -- | 0.32 inches (1/3.09") sensor |
| -- | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (240 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.69 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G) and HSDPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.6 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Battery | 3300mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| -- | Wireless Charging |
| 6.8 | 5.28 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | FM Radio |
Comparison review
LG V35 ThinQ has an overall score of 81.3, which is much better than the OSCAL Tiger 12's 71.5 general score. LG V35 ThinQ's construction is incredibly lighter and somewhat thinner than the OSCAL Tiger 12. LG V35 ThinQ counts with a bit better CPU than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has 2 GB lesser RAM memory, they both have 8 processing cores.
OSCAL Tiger 12 has a way better looking display than LG V35 ThinQ, because although it has a way worse resolution of 1080 x 2460 and a lot lower quantity of pixels in each inch of display, it also counts with a little larger screen. The OSCAL Tiger 12 features slightly more storage to install applications and games than LG V35 ThinQ, because although it has a slot for external memory cards that holds 976 GB smaller, it also counts with 128 GB internal storage.
The OSCAL Tiger 12 counts with a way better battery duration than LG V35 ThinQ, because it has 5000mAh of battery capacity against 3300mAh. The LG V35 ThinQ takes better pictures and videos than OSCAL Tiger 12, although it has a much worse resolution back camera.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.