Vivo X200 vs Vivo V60
Here we compared two smartphones: the 6.67-inch Vivo X200 (with MediaTek Dimensity 9400) that was released on October 14, 2024, against the Vivo V60, which is powered by Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4 and came out 10 months after. On this page, you will find tests, full specs, strengths, and weaknesses of each of the devices.
Select the amount of RAM to evaluate performance and value for money more precisely
Key differences
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200
- 2.2x better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (2727K versus 1257K)
- Has 50% more RAM: 12GB versus 8GB
- Compatible with Wi-Fi 7 wireless networks
- More recent OS version: Android 16 versus 15
- 19% higher pixel density (460 vs 388 PPI)
- Faster storage type - UFS 4.0 versus UFS 2.2
- 2.2x faster in single-core GeekBench 6 test: 2693 and 1247 points
Reasons to consider the Vivo V60
- Comes with 700 mAh larger battery capacity: 6500 vs 5800 mAh
- The phone is 10 months newer
Review
Display
Screen quality, color accuracy, brightness
Camera
Photo and video recording quality
Performance
CPU and memory performance (apps, system)
Gaming
Capabilities for playing modern games
Battery
Battery life, charging type and speed
Connectivity
Networks, ports, data transmission
Scores with a red asterisk (*) are approximate and may change in the future as we gather more data.
Select your primary usage scenario to get a more accurate NanoReview Score
Value for money (Beta)
Tests and specifications
Comparison table of technical specifications and testsDisplay
| Type | AMOLED | AMOLED |
| Size | 6.67 inches | 6.77 inches |
| Resolution | 1260 x 2800 pixels | 1080 x 2392 pixels |
| Aspect ratio | 20:9 | 20:9 |
| PPI | 460 ppi | 388 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz |
| Adaptive refresh rate | Yes (60-120 Hz) | Yes (60-120 Hz) |
| Max rated brightness | - | 1500 nits |
| Max rated brightness in HDR | 4500 nits | 5000 nits |
| HDR support | Yes, Dolby Vision | Yes, HDR10+ |
| Touch sampling rate | 300 Hz | - |
| Screen protection | Schott Xensation Alpha | Schott Xensation Core |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 89.6% | 88% |
| Display features | - DCI-P3 - Always-On Display - DC Dimming |
- DCI-P3 - Always-On Display - DC Dimming |
Peak brightness test (auto)
Design and build
| Height | 160.27 mm (6.31 inches) | 163.53 mm (6.44 inches) |
| Width | 74.81 mm (2.95 inches) | 76.96 mm (3.03 inches) |
| Thickness | 7.99 mm (0.31 inches) | 7.69 mm (0.3 inches) |
| Weight | 197 g (6.95 oz) | 192 g (6.77 oz) |
| Waterproof | IP69 | IP69 |
| Advanced cooling | Vapor chamber | Vapor chamber |
| Rear material | Glass | Glass |
| Frame material | Metal | Plastic |
| Colors | White, Black, Gray, Blue | Gold, Gray, Blue |
| Fingerprint scanner | Yes, in-display | Yes, in-display |
Screen-to-body ratio
Performance
| Chipset | MediaTek Dimensity 9400 | Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4 |
| Max clock | 3620 MHz | 2800 MHz |
| CPU cores | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) | 8 (1 + 4 + 3) |
| Architecture | - 4 cores at 2.4 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 3 cores at 3.3 GHz: Cortex-X4 - 1 core at 3.62 GHz: Cortex-X925 |
- 3 cores at 1.84 GHz: Kryo Silver (Cortex-520) - 4 cores at 2.4 GHz: Kryo Gold (Cortex-720) - 1 core at 2.8 GHz: Kryo Prime (Cortex-720) |
| L3 cache | 12 MB | 3 MB |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | TSMC |
| Lithography process | 3 nanometers | 4 nanometers |
| Neural processor (NPU) | MediaTek NPU 890 | Yes |
| Graphics | Immortalis-G925 MC12 | Adreno 722 |
| GPU shading units | 1536 | 512 |
| GPU clock | 1612 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| FLOPS | ~4952.1 GFLOPS | ~1177.6 GFLOPS |
Benchmarks
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
Compute Score (GPU)
| Compute Score (GPU) | 23954 | 6568 |
| Single-core score | 2693 | 1247 |
| Multi-core score | 8706 | 3557 |
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
| CPU | 849678 | 474474 |
| GPU | 932204 | 253163 |
| Memory | 352736 | 184094 |
| UX | 592804 | 346123 |
| Total score | 2727422 | 1257854 |
| Samples | [7 tests] | [9 tests] |
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
| Stability | 64% | 98% |
| Graphics test | 18 FPS | 5 FPS |
| Graphics score | 2369 | 667 |
3DMark Solar Bay
| Graphics test | 40 FPS | - |
| Section 1 | 43 FPS | - |
| Section 2 | 40 FPS | - |
| Section 3 | 35 FPS | - |
| Graphics score | 10403 | - |
PCMark 3.0
| Web score | 13478 | 8850 |
| Video editing | 5647 | 6242 |
| Photo editing | 28707 | 23969 |
| Data manipulation | 11877 | 10504 |
| Writing score | 23394 | 13580 |
AnTuTu 11 Ranking List (#135th place)
Recent User Tests
Vivo X200
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| π 2026-09-25 (AZA_KEN) | AnTuTu 11 | 2765026 |
| π 2026-07-12 (AKZ4R) | AnTuTu 11 | 2759839 |
| π 2025-12-27 (Losty) | AnTuTu 11 | 2661708 |
| π 2025-12-01 (Nguyeen) | AnTuTu 11 | 2844416 |
| π 2025-11-08 (Mahi) | AnTuTu 11 | 2628512 |
Vivo V60
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| π 2026-08-07 (Aman Sthapak) | AnTuTu 11 | 1250792 |
| π 2026-05-14 (CrustyName) | Geekbench 6 GPU | 6568 |
| π 2026-05-14 (CrustyName) | Geekbench 6 CPU | 1247 / 3557 |
| π 2026-03-23 (Dodi) | AnTuTu 11 | 1231015 |
| π 2026-03-21 (Dodi) | AnTuTu 11 | 1221047 |
Memory
| RAM size | 12 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR4X |
| Memory clock | 5333 MHz | 2133 MHz |
| Channels | 4 | 2 |
| Storage size | 256 GB | 128 GB |
| Storage type | UFS 4.0 | UFS 2.2 |
| Memory card | No | No |
Software
| Operating system | Android 15 (Can be upgraded to Android 16) | Android 15 |
| ROM | Funtouch OS 16 | Funtouch OS 15 |
| OS updates | 3 years | 4 years |
| Security updates | 3 years | 6 years |
Battery
| Capacity | 5800 mAh | 6500 mAh |
| Max charge power | 90 W | 90 W |
| Battery type | Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) | Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) |
| Replaceable | No | No |
| Wireless charging | No | No |
| Reverse charging | Yes | Yes |
| Bypass charging | Yes | - |
| Fast charging | Yes (78% in 30 min) | Yes (61% in 30 min) |
| Full charging time | 0:39 hr | 0:59 hr |
| Web browsing | 10:06 hr | - |
| Watching video | 15:50 hr | - |
| Gaming | 07:21 hr | - |
| Standby | 88 hr | - |
General battery life
Main camera
| Matrix | 50 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 8192 x 6144 | 8192 x 6144 |
| Zoom | Optical, 3x | Optical, 3x |
| Flash | Dual LED | Dual LED |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| 8K video recording | No | No |
| 4K video recording | Up to 60FPS | Up to 30FPS |
| 1080p video recording | Up to 60FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| Slow motion | 240 FPS (1080p) | 240 FPS (720p) |
| Angle of widest lens | 119Β° | 120Β° |
| Lenses | 1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 50 MP 3) Ultrawide: 50 MP |
1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 50 MP 3) Ultrawide: 8 MP |
| Camera features | - Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
- Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/1.6 | f/1.9 |
| Focal length | 23 mm | 23 mm |
| Sensor | Sony IMX921 | Sony IMX766 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.56" (β 0.64 inch) | 1/1.56" (β 0.64 inch) |
| Pixel size | 1 micron | 1 micron |
| Autofocus | Laser autofocus | Phase autofocus |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.6 | f/2.7 |
| Focal length | 70 mm | 73 mm |
| Sensor | Sony IMX882 | Sony IMX882 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.95" (β 0.51 inch) | 1/1.95" (β 0.51 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.7 micron | 0.8 micron |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 8 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.0 |
| Focal length | 15 mm | 15 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung ISOCELL S5KJN1 | Omnivision OV08D10 |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) | 1/4" (β 0.25 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 1.12 micron |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
Selfie camera
| Megapixels | 32 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 6528 x 4896 | 8192 x 6144 |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.2 |
| Focal length | 25 mm | 21 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung KD1 | Samsung S5KJN1 |
| Sensor size | 1/3.42" (β 0.29 inch) | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 0.64 micron |
| Autofocus | No | No |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
| Video resolution | 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS | 2160p (4K) at 30 FPS |
| Depth sensor (TOF 3D) | No | No |
Connectivity
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be) | Wi-Fi 5 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac) |
| Wi-Fi features | - Dual Band - Wi-Fi MiMO - Wi-Fi Direct - Wi-Fi Hotspot - Wi-Fi Display |
- Dual Band - Wi-Fi Direct - Wi-Fi Hotspot - Wi-Fi Display |
| Bluetooth version | 5.4 | 5.4 |
| Bluetooth features | LE | LE |
| USB type | USB Type-C | USB Type-C |
| USB version | 2 | 2 |
| USB features | - Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
- Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
| DisplayPort | Yes | No |
| GPS | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC |
| NFC* | Yes | Yes |
| Infrared port | Yes | Yes |
| Number of SIM* | 2 | 2 |
| Type of SIM card | Nano | Nano |
| Multi SIM mode | Standby | Standby |
| eSIM support* | No | No |
| Hybrid slot | No | No |
| LTE Cat* | - | 18 |
| 5G support | Yes | Yes |
Sound
| Speakers | Stereo | Stereo |
| Headphone audio jack | No | No |
| FM radio | No | No |
| Dolby Atmos | No | No |
Other
| Category | Flagship | Mid-range |
| Announced | October 2024 | August 2025 |
| Release date | October 2024 | August 2025 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $549 | $425 |
| Successor | - Vivo X300 | - Vivo V70 |
| Sensors | - Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
- Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
| Bundled charger | Not included | Yes, 90 W |
Further details
Notes on Vivo V60:
- Gold version weighs 200 g, blue 201 g, and the gray one is the lightest at 192 g. The heavier models use a glass back, while the gray version has a plastic one.
- Supports Bypass Charging.
*Disclaimer! NFC, GSM network support, and some other specs can be different depending on the country.
Conclusion
After analyzing all the data, we think that the Vivo X200 is definitely a better buy.
Cast your vote
Total votes: 6
Related comparisons
2.
Vivo X200 vs Vivo X200 Pro (1)
7.
Vivo V60 vs Oppo Reno 14 (9)