x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Nokia Lumia 900 vs HTC Titan II: Specs comparison

0. phoneArena posted on 09 Jan 2012, 20:02

Today was indeed a great day for Windows Phone fans, or at least for those across the U.S. At CES 2012, we were introduced to the Nokia Lumia 900 and the HTC Titan II, both running Windows Phone Mango...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 05:59

26. silent_seeker (Posts: 3; Member since: 10 Jan 2012)

Nokia lumia 900 has 1.4GHz Snapdragon APQ8055 while titan 2 has 1.5GHz Snapdragon MSM8255....does this makes a difference ???

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 07:18 6

27. remixfa (Posts: 14605; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

nokia wins this round

Amoled vs LCD
Amoled is better on battery
bigger battery
better camera optics
and then theres that elephant in the room... ONLY nokia phones come with nokia's superior maps/navigation system (compared to bing maps or paid telenav) and nokia only apps suites. The HTC would have to be hugely superior to the nokia to make up that difference.

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 08:15 4

29. Reverse (Posts: 3; Member since: 10 Jan 2012)

so true.
Nokia hits the home run.

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 07:45

28. agamhonda (Posts: 14; Member since: 11 Oct 2011)

I haven't had a chane to check out a Nokia phone in person. My choice right now would be a the TITAN only because HTC makes it. I think they make the most best quality phones out there right now.

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 08:17 1

30. knights4life03 (Posts: 131; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)

I think nokia just beat htc in design... u should get ur hands on a n9 or a lumia 800 becuz tge design based on these devices

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 10:18 1

32. remixfa (Posts: 14605; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

I havent gotten my paws on the 900, but even the "cheap" nokia 710 is feels well built, which is more than i can say for cheap HTC phones. If the built quality goes up with the 800 and 900, its probably a very nice handset infront.

Is it just me? I'd take the cyan one over the black. it just catches my eye more.

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 10:47 1

33. knights4life03 (Posts: 131; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)

Yes cyan looks so dang good i would take cyan

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 09:43 1

31. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)

I choose Nokia over HTC they have better deisgn

posted on 10 Jan 2012, 14:39

38. SemperFiV12 (Posts: 948; Member since: 09 Nov 2010)

Its a catch 22 (Charlie Sheen style)

W I N - W I N ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

posted on 11 Jan 2012, 00:20

39. Jylppy (Posts: 1; Member since: 10 Jan 2012)

16Mpx camera in mobile phone? What a massive noise generator. Avoid it at all costs. Mpx-race is over. Other parameters affect more to the image quality and imaging experience.

Pro-level DSLRs have far larger sensors, but still even there Canon and Nikon have scaled down Mpx (Canon: 22 -> 18Mpx, Nikon: 24 -> 16Mpx). Why? To get faster serial shooting speeds, better low-light performance, better high-ISO performance, less noise - i.e. better image quality. And please remember that mobile phone camera sensor is far smaller than pro-DSLR sensor:


It is not the number of pixels, but number of QUALITY pixels that count.

Lumia is true beauty, HTC looks so average. Not a difficult choice for me.

posted on 26 Mar 2012, 09:42

42. remixfa (Posts: 14605; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

tough choice, but between the 2 I'd still take the nokia

-nokia turn by turn navigation, HTC doesnt have it.
-amoled looks better
-amoled is better on battery
-the smaller screen (between 2 giants, lol) is going to be way more battery efficient
-nokia has the bigger battery
-nokia's high end camera hardware should make up for HTC's higher pixel count, especially since they are both just 720p cameras
- cheaper

And I'd bet dollars to donuts, that if one of those 2 devices were going to lose support first, it would be the HTC since Nokia is so cozy with MS.

posted on 26 Mar 2012, 11:21

43. Lonnie (Posts: 1; Member since: 21 Mar 2012)

Like present HTC Titan better becuase of the messaging and phone key pads. This will continue to be a plus and the new HTC has a faster processor.

posted on 26 Mar 2012, 12:32

44. remixfa (Posts: 14605; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

they have the same processor. the only difference between the chips that i saw was one has the radios built in, and the other does not. Other than that, its the same CPU/GPU combination. 1.4 to 1.5ghz is negligible and will only diminish battery while giving next to no benefits. Considering that the crapdragon processor used is already battery hungry, the combination of LCD+bigger screen+ smaller battery+higher core clocks = waaay less battery life on the HTC.

If you dont mind living on the charger, the HTC will be fine.

posted on 28 Apr 2012, 14:47

45. jeffdachef (Posts: 1; Member since: 28 Apr 2012)

my friend has the htc titan 2 and i have the lumia 900 and i compared it side by side, processor speed is pretty much even. lumia has nokia apps that htc doesnt. buuut. Camera quality is a whole different level. Nokia's pictures looks completely s**t compared to the titan 2 and the titan 2. The titan 2's pictures are way more clear crisp and brighter then the lumia 900. has way louder and clearer sound then the nokia. i was at volume level 30 and the titan 2 was at level 15 and it was drowning my music. At level 30 it still maintains clarity and its the loudest phone i ever heard. Also for style wise, the nokia looks better then the titan 2 but the titan 2 can just buy a killer looking case and that'll solve the problem. price is only 50 dollars different, i'd opt for the titan 2 if your a user thats focused on use and not looks.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories