How we score Blog Advertise
  1. dotrising.com
  2. Compare
  3. E246SC vs KX-TU260

Energizer E246SC vs Panasonic KX-TU260

What E246SC does better (4) and where KX-TU260 wins (1) — every spec side by side.

Energizer E246SC
Energizer · 2024E246SC
4 advantages≈ $55
vs
Panasonic KX-TU260
Panasonic · 2026KX-TU260
3.5Score
1 advantage≈ $55
Higher score
2.1Display2.0
Dimensions

Size comparison

E246SCKX-TU260
70 × 862155 × 13315
E246SCKX-TU260Difference
Height86 mm133 mm−47 mm
Width70 mm55 mm+15 mm
Thickness21 mm15 mm+6 mm

Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).

Why is E246SC better than KX-TU260?

  1. Battery capacity2,000 mAh vs 1,500 mAh+33%
  2. Dual SIMYes · KX-TU260: No
  3. 3.5 mm headphone jackYes · KX-TU260: No
  4. Screen-to-body ratio29.6% vs 24.5%+21%

Why is KX-TU260 better than E246SC?

  1. Thickness21 mm vs 15 mm+40%
Specifications

Side by side

Design
Weight—119 g
Thickness21 mm15 mm
Height86 mm133 mm
Width70 mm55 mm
ColoursGrayBlack
Display
Screen size2.4″2.4″
PanelTN TFTFarb-Display
OLED panelNoNo
Resolution (width)240 px240 px
Resolution (height)320 px320 px
Pixel density167 ppi167 ppi
Refresh rate60 Hz—
Peak brightness—250 nits
Screen-to-body ratio29.6%24.5%
Performance
ChipsetUnisoc T107—
Chip makerUnisoc—
Process22 nm—
CPU cores1—
CPU frequency1 GHz—
Memory
RAM0.047 GB—
Memory card slotYesYes
Camera
Main camera—1 MP
Rear cameras—1
Optical stabilisation—No
Ultra-wide camera—No
Telephoto camera—No
4K selfie videoNo—
Battery
Battery capacity2,000 mAh1,500 mAh
Battery typeLi-Ion—
Wireless charging—No
Connectivity
5G—No
eSIMNo—
Dual SIMYesNo
Bluetooth55
NFCNo—
USBUSB Type-C 2.0USB Type-C
USB version2—
Features
Stereo speakersNo—
3.5 mm headphone jackYesNo
SensorsNo—
Software
OS at launchProprietary OS—
PlatformOther—
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare