|
54%
Celkon Win 400
₹1,999
(Discontinued)
|
52%
iBall Andi 4L Pulse
₹3,499
(Discontinued)
|
Add to Compare
|
Copy link to bookmark or share with others
Celkon Win 400 vs iBall Andi 4L Pulse
Comparing the Celkon Win 400 vs iBall Andi 4L Pulse across performance, display, camera, battery, storage and user rating to help determine the better smartphone.
Here is the summary of the results:
Performance: Celkon Win 400 runs at a higher processing speed of 1.3 GHz, while iBall Andi 4L Pulse runs at 1.2 GHz, making Celkon Win 400 the better performer.
Display: Both Celkon Win 400 and iBall Andi 4L Pulse offer the same screen size of 4 inches, but iBall Andi 4L Pulse features a LCD display compared to Celkon Win 400's TFT, making iBall Andi 4L Pulse the better display of the two.
Rear Camera: Both Celkon Win 400 and iBall Andi 4L Pulse feature a 5 MP primary rear camera.
Front Camera: Celkon Win 400 offers a higher front camera resolution with 1.3 MP, while iBall Andi 4L Pulse offers 0.3 MP, making Celkon Win 400 better for front camera photography.
Battery: Both Celkon Win 400 and iBall Andi 4L Pulse offer the same 1500 mAh battery capacity.
Storage: Both Celkon Win 400 and iBall Andi 4L Pulse offer the same internal storage of 4 GB.
User Rating: Celkon Win 400 receives a higher user rating of 4, while iBall Andi 4L Pulse has a rating of 3.8.
|
✕
Celkon Win 400
₹1,999
(Discontinued)
|
✕
iBall Andi 4L Pulse
₹3,499
(Discontinued)
|
Add to Compare
|
Summary
Spec Score
|
54%
|
52%
|
Release Date
|
27 Nov, 2014
|
05 Jan, 2015
|
Performance
|
|
|
|
Snapdragon 200
|
Snapdragon 200
|
|
(upto 1.3 GHz)
|
(upto 1.2 GHz)
|
|
512 MB RAM
|
512 MB RAM
|
Display
|
|
|
|
4.0 inches (10.16 cm)
|
4.0 inches (10.16 cm)
|
|
TFT
|
LCD
|
|
480x800 px
|
480x800 px
|
Rear Camera
|
|
|
|
5 MP
Primary Camera
|
5 MP
Primary Camera
|
Front Camera
|
|
N/A
|
|
1.3 MP
|
0.3 MP
|
Battery
|
|
|
|
1500 mAh
|
1500 mAh
|
Storage
|
4 GB
|
4 GB
|
User Ratings
|
4/5
(28 ratings)
|
3.8/5
(114 ratings)
|
User Feedback
General
Operating System
|
Windows Phone v8.1
|
Windows Phone v8.1
|
Performance
Performance Rating
|
Poor
|
Poor
|
Chipset
|
Qualcomm Snapdragon 200 MSM8212
|
Qualcomm Snapdragon 200
|
Processor
|
Quad core, 1.3 GHz, Cortex A7
|
Quad core, 1.2 GHz
|
Graphics (GPU)
|
Adreno 302
|
N/A
|
RAM
|
512 MB
|
512 MB
|
Display
Display Rating
|
Very Good
|
Very Good
|
Display Type
|
TFT
|
LCD
|
Screen Size
|
4.0 inches (10.16 cm)
|
4.0 inches (10.16 cm)
|
Resolution
|
480x800 px
|
480x800 px
|
Pixel Density
|
233 ppi
|
233 ppi
|
Screen to Body Ratio (calculated)
|
55.82 %
|
N/A
|
Design
Height
|
125.4 mm
|
N/A
|
Width
|
65 mm
|
N/A
|
Thickness
|
10.3 mm
|
N/A
|
Weight
|
121 grams
|
N/A
|
Rear Camera
Rear Camera Rating
|
Avg
|
Below Avg
|
Resolution
|
5 MP
Primary Camera |
5 MP
Primary CameraBack-illuminated sensor BSI |
Flash
|
Yes LED Flash
|
Yes LED Flash
|
Image Resolution
|
2592 x 1944 Pixels
|
2592 x 1944 Pixels
|
Camera Features
|
Digital Zoom
|
Digital Zoom
|
Video Recording
|
1280x720 fps
|
N/A
|
Front Camera
Front Camera Rating
|
Poor
|
N/A
|
Resolution
|
1.3 MP
Primary Camera |
0.3 MP
Primary Camera |
Battery
Battery Rating
|
Very Good
|
Very Good
|
Capacity
|
1500 mAh
|
1500 mAh
|
Battery Type
|
Li-ion
|
Li-Polymer
|
TalkTime
|
Up to 5 Hours(2G)
|
N/A
|
Storage
Internal Storage
|
4 GB
|
4 GB
|
Expandable Storage
|
Yes Up to 32 GB
|
Yes Up to 32 GB
|
Network & Connectivity
SIM Slot(s)
|
Dual SIM
|
Dual SIM
|
Network Support
|
5G Not Supported
|
5G Not Supported
|
Wi-Fi
|
Yes Wi-Fi 4 (802.11 b/g/n)
|
Yes Wi-Fi 4 (802.11 b/g/n)
|
Bluetooth
|
Yes v4.0
|
Yes v3.0
|
GPS
|
Yes with A-GPS
|
Yes
|
Multimedia
Audio Jack
|
3.5 mm
|
3.5 mm
|
Sensors
Other Sensors
|
Light sensor Proximity sensor Accelerometer
|
Light sensor Proximity sensor Accelerometer
|