x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Meet the most compact 5-incher: Sharp Aquos Crystal vs Nexus 5 vs S5 and others size comparison

Meet the most compact 5-incher: Sharp Aquos Crystal vs Nexus 5 vs S5 and others size comparison

Meet the most compact 5-incher: Sharp Aquos Crystal vs Nexus 5 vs S5 and others size comparison
So, thanks to SoftBank's Sprint buyout, we are finally getting some of the almighty Japanese smartphones on this side of the pond, and with a fresh new handset at that, not some existing rehash. Sprint just announced the availability of the bezel-less Sharp AQUOS Crystal, which will sell for $0 if you get it with contract, $150 if you get it on prepaid with Boost or Virgin, and a $240 MSRP if you just buy it SIM-free. 

In the great traditions of Sharp's EDGEST design language, the Aquos Crystal has almost no side and top bezels, which allows it to fit a 5" panel in a size that is more akin to a 4.5" model. Actually, the phone is just 5 inches (131mm) in height and 2.6 inches (67mm) in width. For comparison, that's about as compact as the Moto G, while having a half-inch larger display diagonal. Thus, the Crystal sports one of the best screen-to-body ratios in the industry, with about 78.21% of the front being a pure display surface - better than, say, the LG G2, but still lower than Sharp's EDGEST champion - the AQUOS SH-04F, with its eyepopping 81%, the highest in the industry.

Sharp's phones aside, nobody comes even close to the AQUOS Crystal's ergonomics, certainly nothing that is being sold in the US market, as you can see from our size comparison below. Again, for the SIM-free price of the Moto G LTE, you are getting a better phone with similar dimensions, yet a half-inch larger, 5" display diagonal - what's not to love here. Keep'em coming, SoftBank, Sprint users will certainly appreciate it.

Sharp AQUOS Crystal
5.16 x 2.64 x 0.39 inches
131 x 67 x 10 mm
4.97 oz (141 g)

Sharp AQUOS Crystal

Google Nexus 5
5.43 x 2.72 x 0.34 inches
137.84 x 69.17 x 8.59 mm
4.59 oz (130 g)

Google Nexus 5

Samsung Galaxy S5
5.59 x 2.85 x 0.32 inches
142 x 72.5 x 8.1 mm
5.11 oz (145 g)

Samsung Galaxy S5

Apple iPhone 5s
4.87 x 2.31 x 0.3 inches
123.8 x 58.6 x 7.6 mm
3.95 oz (112 g)

Apple iPhone 5s

Motorola Moto G LTE
5.11 x 2.59 x 0.46 inches
129.9 x 65.9 x 11.6 mm
5.04 oz (143 g)

Motorola Moto G LTE

HTC One mini 2
5.41 x 2.56 x 0.42 inches
137.43 x 65.04 x 10.6 mm
4.83 oz (137 g)

HTC One mini 2

LG G3 s
5.42 x 2.74 x 0.41 inches
137.7 x 69.6 x 10.3 mm
4.83 oz (137 g)

LG G3 s

Sony Xperia Z2
5.78 x 2.89 x 0.32 inches
146.8 x 73.3 x 8.2 mm
5.75 oz (163 g)

Sony Xperia Z2

To see the phones in real size or compare them with other models, visit our Visual Phone Size Comparison page.

19 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 19 Aug 2014, 10:00 3

1. lalalaman (Posts: 393; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)


O_o...unbelievable

A headless phone:-D

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 16:05

9. robcar (Posts: 78; Member since: 18 Jan 2011)


The other phones look so old next to Sharp the beauty.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 10:07

2. chaoscauser (Posts: 32; Member since: 04 Jun 2014)


unbelievable.. What a fragile and non-ergonomic phone!

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 10:17 2

3. vuyonc (Posts: 394; Member since: 24 Feb 2014)


Drop test then we'll talk

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 11:03 1

4. chaoscauser (Posts: 32; Member since: 04 Jun 2014)


Any competitive manufacturer can make the screen to body ratio, 95% but they don't cause durability and ergonomic design are two basic things required for any mobile device.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 16:37 1

10. robcar (Posts: 78; Member since: 18 Jan 2011)


Typical fanboy comment, you can not accept that someone else can do better than your own favorite manufacturers.

Ergonomics is nothing wrong more than it is rougher as many others so it is quite the opposite. In addition, the surface of the ground that you do not have to stretch your thumb so much. No other manufacturer is close to this, then they can not.
All endeavors of utilization dead surface in the most efficient manner and it requires newly developed technology that Sharp has. The technology must also fit under the screen, and it does not for other manufacturers so they must have big lips stuffed with technology.

Well lets see how it does in the drop test ... most people do not care about it at all when they buy a phone. I have had 10-15 smartphone and the screen has never been broken, I have few times dropped mobiles but nothing serious has happened.

If you're looking for durability, it is probably not the model for you anyway. This is more a mobile to show off the technical possibilities and desgin.

posted on 28 Aug 2014, 05:43

18. Alain1990 (Posts: 13; Member since: 10 Jun 2014)


take a look at this one.. vega iron smashing bezel test with s4 and lg g pro.. a 5 inch phone with 67.6 mm.. slim bezel next to aquos crystal.. m.youtube.com/watch?v=St5ckGsBQmc

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 11:48

5. realjjj (Posts: 170; Member since: 28 Jan 2014)


Actually others do come close to it with thinner phones.
If you want to measure how compact a device is, then you to got to factor in volume per screen area not just the front. Ofc you can factor in pixel density and performace since those impact the size of the battery.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 18:18

14. shahrooz (Posts: 217; Member since: 17 Sep 2013)


volume per screen diamater: (lower is better)
Sharp AQUOS Crystal: 1.0625472
LG G3: 1.2177656
Z2 : 1.027950769230769
5S: 0.8437275

looking at the results we can tell the benchmark you just created is nothing good. it only reflecs the thickness of handset plus an error which is caused by screen to surface ratio differences

posted on 10 Oct 2014, 11:03

19. buccob (Posts: 1579; Member since: 19 Jun 2012)


Volume is good to know, but surface area is more important because it can actually mean a phone uncomfortable to hold in relation to the size of its screen...

iPhones are crap regarding this... but they do have the smallest form factor in volume... Though thickness never bothered me, I prefer a bigger battery instead.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 13:54

6. Bondurant (Posts: 163; Member since: 04 Jun 2014)


awesome. Hope its patented before Samsung and iphone copy them.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 14:13 1

7. downphoenix (Posts: 2426; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)


Phone Arena reacts:

Any other carrier launches this phone: Wow, this phone is a great mid ranger, Im gonna pick one up for a backup.

Sprint launches it: It sucks, its not ergonomic, do a drop test.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 17:22

12. medtxa (Posts: 306; Member since: 02 Jun 2014)


test first then judge.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 14:20

8. ThePython (Posts: 401; Member since: 08 May 2013)


So ugly...

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 17:20

11. medtxa (Posts: 306; Member since: 02 Jun 2014)


accidental touch is BS! unintended touch with any finger tips is not accidental touch you just being reckless, there is nothing special with this phone that make it more prone to accidental touch. and case in landscape mode there is some insane people that worry about palm accidentaly press the screen duh you don't operate phone with palm holding the both side that would be impossible, just try it.

and the relation between bezels size and screen crash prone that stupid. so much internet nonsense.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 17:45

13. gigaraga (Posts: 1381; Member since: 29 Mar 2013)


Holy. SHARP. That actually looks so future - like. Perfect.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 21:04

15. anleoflippy (Posts: 320; Member since: 03 Jan 2013)


Well, Xperia ZL is close to it.

posted on 19 Aug 2014, 21:25

16. justttclassified (Posts: 17; Member since: 02 Jul 2014)


Mehh! Am interested, but I ain't buying.

posted on 20 Aug 2014, 11:21

17. Taters (Posts: 3606; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)


Wow! LG and Google did a great job on the Nexus 5. Very compact yet they put everything in there including wireless charging, 1080p, OIS, super light.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories