- dotrising.com
- Compare
- 210 4G vs 300 Charge
Nokia 210 4G vs Nokia 300 Charge
What 210 4G does better (4) and where 300 Charge wins (1) — every spec side by side.
vs
2.1Display2.1
2.1Battery2.3
Dimensions
Size comparison
210 4G300 Charge
| 210 4G | 300 Charge | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 126.1 mm | 136.6 mm | −10.5 mm |
| Width | 50.5 mm | 55 mm | −4.5 mm |
| Thickness | 13 mm | 15 mm | −2 mm |
| Weight | 93 g | 138 g | −45 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is 210 4G better than 300 Charge?
- RAM0.062 GB vs 0.004 GB16×
- Weight93 g vs 138 g+49%
- Screen-to-body ratio28% vs 23.7%+18%
- Thickness13 mm vs 15 mm+15%
Why is 300 Charge better than 210 4G?
- Battery capacity1,450 mAh vs 3,700 mAh2.6×
Specifications
Side by side
| Design | ||
| Weight | 93 g | 138 g |
| Thickness | 13 mm | 15 mm |
| Height | 126.1 mm | 136.6 mm |
| Width | 50.5 mm | 55 mm |
| Colours | Dark Blue, Silver | Green, Sandstone, Black |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 2.4″ | 2.4″ |
| Panel | TFT LCD | TFT |
| OLED panel | No | No |
| Resolution (width) | 240 px | 240 px |
| Resolution (height) | 320 px | 320 px |
| Pixel density | 167 ppi | 167 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 60 Hz | 60 Hz |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 28% | 23.7% |
| Performance | ||
| Chipset | — | Unisoc SC6531E |
| Chip maker | — | Unisoc |
| Memory | ||
| RAM | 0.062 GB | 0.004 GB |
| Memory card slot | Yes | Yes |
| Camera | ||
| Main camera | 0.3 MP | — |
| Rear cameras | 1 | — |
| Optical stabilisation | No | — |
| Ultra-wide camera | No | — |
| Telephoto camera | No | — |
| Selfie camera | 0.3 MP | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | 1,450 mAh | 3,700 mAh |
| Battery type | Li-Ion | — |
| Wired charging | — | 10 W |
| Wireless charging | No | No |
| Connectivity | ||
| 5G | No | — |
| eSIM | No | No |
| Dual SIM | Yes | Yes |
| Bluetooth | 5 | — |
| NFC | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C | USB Type-C |
| Features | ||
| Stereo speakers | No | No |
| 3.5 mm headphone jack | Yes | Yes |
| Sensors | No | — |
