- dotrising.com
- Compare
- M9 vs C200 Comfort 4G
AGM M9 vs Funker C200 Comfort 4G
What M9 does better (2) and where C200 Comfort 4G wins (1) — every spec side by side.
vs
Dimensions
Size comparison
M9C200 Comfort 4G
| M9 | C200 Comfort 4G | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 141.3 mm | 105 mm | +36.3 mm |
| Width | 59 mm | 52 mm | +7 mm |
| Thickness | 16.5 mm | 21.3 mm | −4.8 mm |
| Weight | 131 g | 128 g | +3 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is M9 better than C200 Comfort 4G?
- Dual SIMYes · C200 Comfort 4G: No
- Thickness16.5 mm vs 21.3 mm+29%
Why is C200 Comfort 4G better than M9?
- Weight131 g vs 128 g+2%
Specifications
Side by side
| Design | ||
| Weight | 131 g | 128 g |
| Thickness | 16.5 mm | 21.3 mm |
| Height | 141.3 mm | 105 mm |
| Width | 59 mm | 52 mm |
| Ingress protection | IP69 | — |
| Water resistance (IPx) | IPx9 | — |
| Colours | Black | Grey |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 2.4″ | 2.4″ |
| Panel | TFT | TFT |
| OLED panel | No | No |
| Resolution (width) | 240 px | — |
| Resolution (height) | 320 px | — |
| Pixel density | 167 ppi | — |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 21.4% | — |
| Performance | ||
| Chipset | Unisoc T107 | — |
| Chip maker | Unisoc | — |
| CPU cores | 1 | — |
| CPU frequency | 1 GHz | — |
| Memory | ||
| Memory card slot | Yes | Yes |
| Camera | ||
| Main camera | — | 0.3 MP |
| Rear cameras | — | 1 |
| Optical stabilisation | — | No |
| Ultra-wide camera | — | No |
| Telephoto camera | — | No |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | 1,000 mAh | 1,000 mAh |
| Wireless charging | No | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| 5G | No | No |
| eSIM | No | — |
| Dual SIM | Yes | No |
| Bluetooth | 5 | — |
| USB | USB Type-C | — |
| Features | ||
| 3.5 mm headphone jack | No | — |
| Software | ||
| OS at launch | ThreadX | — |
| Platform | Other | — |
