Acer F900 Rivals and Competitors
Phone RivalsClick on a rival to jump to it.
Acer F900 vs. HTC Touch2
HTC Touch2
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (143 ppi)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- The camera lacks flash
- Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Slow processor (533 MHz vs 528 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM vs 256 MB RAM)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
- No front-facing camera
in-depth comparison
Acer F900 vs. Nokia C6
Acer F900
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
- No front-facing camera
Nokia C6
- It is so thick it needs a personal fitness trainer (0.66 inches inches)
- Low-resolution video capture
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Slow processor (533 MHz vs 434 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
in-depth comparison
Acer F900 vs. Samsung Galaxy S III
Acer F900
- Slow processor (533 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
- No front-facing camera
Samsung Galaxy S III
- Quad core processor
- Very big display (4.8 inches)
- Extremely high pixel density screen, over 300ppi (306 ppi)
- High-resolution display (720 x 1280 pixels)
- High-resolution camera (8 megapixels)
- Very fast processor (1400 MHz)
- Lots of RAM (1024 MB RAM)
- Fast mobile data support (4G)
- NFC
- HDMI connector for TV-out (via microUSB)
Common for both Pros & Cons
nonein-depth comparison
Acer F900 vs. Samsung I9000B
Acer F900
- Slow processor (533 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
- No front-facing camera
Common for both Pros & Cons
nonein-depth comparison
Acer F900 vs. HTC HD7
Acer F900
- Slow processor (533 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
Common for both Pros & Cons
- No front-facing camera
in-depth comparison
Acer F900 vs. Samsung Galaxy Player 4.2
Acer F900
- Slow processor (533 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
- No front-facing camera
Samsung Galaxy Player 4.2
- Fast processor (1000 MHz)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- The camera lacks flash
- Low-resolution video capture
Common for both Pros & Cons
nonein-depth comparison
Acer F900 vs. Sony Xperia go
Acer F900
- Slow processor (533 MHz)
- Resistive touchscreen technology means its display is less sensitive than you would like it to be
- Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks a proximity sensor that turns the display оff during a phone call
Sony Xperia go
- Dual core processor
- Fast processor (1000 MHz)
- Small dimensions (4.37 x 2.37 x 0.39 inches inches)
- Water-resistant phone
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (165 ppi)
Common for both Pros & Cons
- No front-facing camera
in-depth comparison
