Compare phones
Samsung SGH-T509
SGH-T509s| Global Score | |
| 32.2 | 35.2 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Nokia |
| -- | 2007-05-31 |
| 4.60 x 1.80 x 0.40 inches | 4.32 x 1.77 x 0.37 inches |
| 2.70 ounces | 3.31 ounces |
| $ 150.00 | $ 100.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| -- | 2 inches |
| 176 x 220 pixels | 240 x 320 pixels (QVGA) |
| TFT | TFT |
| -- | 200 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 3 | 6.6 |
| processor | processor |
| GPU | GPU |
| 5.76 | 5.76 |
| Storage | |
| 7,17 MB internal memory | 1 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 0.2 | 1.4 |
| Camera | |
| 0.30 MP | 2.00 MP |
| -- | 220 x 176 video resolution |
| 3.63 | 4.73 |
| EDGE and GSM | UMTS, EDGE and GSM |
| SIM | SIM |
| 0.3 | 0.4 |
| Battery Life | |
| 800mAh Li-Ion Battery | 830mAh Li-Ion Battery |
| Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 168 hours standby time 3.5 hours talk time | 216 hours standby time 3.5 hours talk time |
| 2.24 | 2.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 1.2 | Bluetooth 2.0, EDR |
Comparison review
The Nokia 6500 classic has a general score of 35.2, which is a bit better than Samsung SGH-T509's 32.2 global score. Nokia 6500 classic's design is just a little bit thinner but heavier than the Samsung SGH-T509. The Nokia 6500 classic has a much better looking display than Samsung SGH-T509, because it has a higher resolution of 320 x 240 pixels.
Nokia 6500 classic has much more storage capacity to install applications and games or saving photos and videos than Samsung SGH-T509, because it has 1016,83 MB more internal storage capacity. The Nokia 6500 classic features a processing unit that's just as good as the CPU in Samsung SGH-T509, they have a 0-Core CPU.
Nokia 6500 classic counts with a very superior camera than Samsung SGH-T509, because it has a way more mega-pixels back-facing camera. The Nokia 6500 classic counts with a bit superior battery lifetime than Samsung SGH-T509, because it has an 830mAh battery capacity.
Nokia 6500 classic is not only the best devices in this comparison, but it's also by far the cheapest one, making this phone a no doubt choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.