Nokia C6 vs. Samsung Wave S8500 – Review

by Jerry D on August 10, 2010

Despite its 1GHz processor, the Samsung Wave has more in common with mid-range handsets like the Nokia C6, than flagship smartphones like the iPhone 4 and Motorola Droid X. This battle pits the experienced Scandinavian campaigner against its younger South Korean challenger. Let’s see who wins…

nokia c6 vs samsung wave Nokia C6 vs. Samsung Wave S8500   Review

Connectivity:

Need go-anywhere wireless? The C6 features 3G/HSDPA (3.6 Mbps), 802.11b/g Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 2.0 with A2DP. Samsung’s Wave features 3G/HSDPA (7.2 Mbps), 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 3.0 with A2DP. Three flavours of Wi-Fi and enhanced Bluetooth support gets the S8500 an early point. (0-1)

Size & Weight:

As for size and weight, the Wave is slightly skinnier than the C6 with a chassis that’s only 10.9mm thick. The Wave is 3mm wider, however, measuring 56.0mm to the C6′s 53.0mm. Checking on weight, the C6 weighs a fairly tubby 150g, while the Samsung Wave tips the scales at 118g. (0-2)

dyerware


Camera:

The C6′s 5.0 MP lens features an LED flash, geo-tagging and VGA video capture. It also features a second, front-facing camera for video chit-chat (and taking photos of yourself).

The Wave also sports a 5.0 Megapixel camera (with autofocus, an LED flash, geo-tagging, face/smile/blink detection, image stablilization and HD video recording). So while there’s no real difference in camera quality, the Wave trumps the Nokia phone with better all-round features and high-def video. A second camera on the front can also be used for video calling. (0-3)

Screen/keyboard:

Headlining the Nokia C6 is a 3.2-inch touch-sensitive LCD display with a decent resolution of 360 x 640 pixels. As for the keyboard, it’s a compact QWERTY layout that’s designed to speed up data entry. The Wave’s touch-sensitive AMOLED screen is brighter and bigger at 3.3 inches. Its 480 x 800 pixel resolution beats the display on the C6 into second place. (0-4)

Performance:

As for overall performance, the Wave is powered by an ARM Cortex A8 processor, rated at 1GHz. In comparison, the C6′s core is far slower 434MHz ARM 11 chip. Nokia is sticking with its trusty Symbian OS (Series 60) on the C6, but it’s starting to look feeble in comparison to Apple’s iOS and Android. The Wave runs Samsung’s own Bada OS. Neither are an ideal choice. (0-5)

Downloadable apps:

Storage:

Both handsets come with 2GB of internal memory. The C6 also boasts a microSD slot to increase the maximum capacity to 16GB. A microSD slot on the Wave further boosts the overall memory on Samsung’s phone to 32GB. Thus far, the C6 hasn’t managed to score a point. Are we looking at a whitewash? (0-6)

Battery life:

How does the performance compare? the C6 weighs in with 5.0 hours of talktime; the Wave in comparison boasts 8.5 hours of talktime. In terms of standby times, Nokia’s phone can last 384 hours, while Samsung’s model boasts 450 hours. A last-place finish for the C6. (0-7)

dyerware


Extras:

The C6 also includes GPS/A-GPS and a stereo FM radio (with RDS). The Wave features Stereo FM radio (with RDS and audio recording), GPS/A-GPS sat-nav (with Samsung’s own Mobile Navigator software), plus a digital compass. (0-8)

The Samsung Wave wins!

samsung wave s8500 Nokia C6 vs. Samsung Wave S8500   ReviewOoh, the Nokia C6 gets a right spanking by the Samsung Wave (0-8). The two phones might have similar sized displays and cameras, but the similarity ends there. The Wave is faster, it has the best all-round camera features (including HD video recording), a superb AMOLED screen, plus the Wave is the lighter and thinner of the two phones. If this phone ran Android, it would be nigh-on perfect… Bada? Meh.

Do you agree with the outcome of this fight? Leave us a comment below now…

    Other Posts You Might Like...

  1. HTC Aria vs. Samsung Wave S8500 – Review
  2. HTC HD Mini vs. Samsung Wave S8500 – Review
  3. Samsung Wave S8500 vs. Dell Streak – Review
  4. Samsung Wave S8500 vs. Google Nexus One – Review
  5. Samsung Wave S8500 vs. HTC Wildfire – Review

Previous post:

Next post: