Search


Compare phones

Samsung Chrono

SCH-R260, SCH-R261, SCH-R261A
Global Score
32.936.1
Basic Information
PhilipsSamsung
--0000-00-00
4.09 x 1.88 x 0.58 inches3.70 x 1.83 x 0.67 inches
3.59 ounces3.14 ounces
--Scratch-Resistant Glass
$ 125.00$ 80.00
Display / Screen
2.4 inches2 inches
240 x 320 pixels (QVGA)240 x 320 pixels (QVGA)
TFTTFT
167 pixels per inch200 pixels per inch
ResistiveNo touch screen
66.3
processor processor
GPUARM Mali-400 MP1 (320 MHz) GPU
5.765.94
Storage
11,26 MB internal memory--
microSD external memory slotNo SD card slot
0.20
Camera
1.30 MP0.30 MP
4.513.63
GPRS and GSMCDMA
SIM--
0.20.1
Battery Life
900mAh Li-Ion Battery800mAh Li-Ion Battery
Removable BatteryRemovable Battery
360 hours standby time
3.5 hours talk time
526 hours standby time
5 hours talk time
2.42.24
Other Features
Bluetooth 1.2Bluetooth 2.1, EDR
--GPS

Comparison review

The Samsung Chrono is slightly better than the Philips 692, having a 36.1 score against 32.9. The Samsung Chrono is a somewhat lighter but somewhat thicker cellphone than the Philips 692. The Samsung Chrono has a little better performance than Philips 692, and although they both have the same number of cores, the Samsung Chrono also has an additional graphics processing unit.

Samsung Chrono has a bit sharper screen than Philips 692, because although it has a quite smaller display, and they both have the same exact 320 x 240 resolution, the Samsung Chrono also counts with a just a bit greater pixel density. Philips 692 takes greater videos and photos than Samsung Chrono, because it has a back camera with a lot better 1.3 mega-pixels resolution.

Philips 692 counts with a superior storage for games and applications than Samsung Chrono. Philips 692 features just a bit better battery duration than Samsung Chrono, because it has a 13% bigger battery size.

The Samsung Chrono is not only the best devices in this comparison, but it's also a lot cheaper.




Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.