Nokia E52 Rivals and Competitors
Phone RivalsClick on a rival to jump to it.
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia C5 5MP
Nokia C5 5MP
- Lacks Wi-Fi
- Too little RAM memory (256 MB RAM)
- Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches vs 4.41 x 1.81 x 0.48 inches inches)
- Slow processor (600 MHz)
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- Low-resolution video capture
in-depth comparison
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia E72
Nokia E52
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- The camera lacks autofocus
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches vs 4.49 x 2.28 x 0.39 inches inches)
- Slow processor (600 MHz)
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (167 ppi)
- Low-resolution video capture
in-depth comparison
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia E55
Nokia E55
- Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment
- No front-facing camera
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches)
- Slow processor (600 MHz)
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (167 ppi)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- Low-resolution video capture
in-depth comparison
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia E6
Nokia E52
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (167 ppi)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
- Low-resolution video capture
Nokia E6
- Extremely high pixel density screen, over 300ppi (325 ppi)
- High-resolution camera (8 megapixels)
- Too little RAM memory (256 MB RAM)
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches vs 4.55 x 2.32 x 0.41 inches inches)
- Slow processor (600 MHz vs 680 MHz)
- The camera lacks autofocus
in-depth comparison
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia E5
Nokia E52
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches)
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Slow processor (600 MHz)
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (167 ppi)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- Low-resolution video capture
in-depth comparison
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia E51
Nokia E51
- Too little RAM memory (96 MB RAM)
- The camera lacks flash
- Lacks a standard (3.5mm) headphones jack
- Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment
- No front-facing camera
- Lacks global positioning system (GPS)
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches vs 4.51 x 1.81 x 0.47 inches inches)
- Slow processor (600 MHz vs 369 MHz)
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels vs 2 megapixels)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- Low-resolution video capture
in-depth comparison
Nokia E52 vs. Nokia Asha 302
Nokia E52
- Small dimensions (4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches inches)
- Slow processor (600 MHz)
- Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
- Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)
Nokia Asha 302
- Fast processor (1000 MHz)
- The camera lacks flash
- Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment
Common for both Pros & Cons
- Low pixel densitiy screen, below 180ppi (167 ppi)
- The camera lacks autofocus
- Low-resolution video capture
in-depth comparison
