Tecno Spark Go 2 VS Xiaomi Poco C71

Both the Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 are water resistant, but they differ in their Ingress Protection (IP) ratings. The Spark Go 2 has a higher IP64 rating, offering more robust protection against dust and water splashes, while the Poco C71 is rated IP52, providing only limited protection against dust and light water spray.

When it comes to size, both phones have the same thickness of 8.3 mm, making them equally slim. However, the Poco C71 is slightly larger in overall dimensions with a height of 171.8 mm and a width of 77.8 mm, compared to the Spark Go 2's 165.6 mm height and 77 mm width. This gives the Poco C71 a larger volume of 110.94 cm³, compared to the Spark Go 2's 105.83 cm³.

Neither phone has a rugged build, nor can they be folded, which means both models are designed for typical smartphone usage without added durability features like foldability or extreme ruggedness.

Both the Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 feature LCD, IPS displays with similar specifications, but there are a few differences. The Spark Go 2 has a 6.67" screen, while the Poco C71 has a slightly larger 6.88" display. The resolution on both is quite close, with the Spark Go 2 offering 720 x 1600 px and the Poco C71 providing 720 x 1640 px, making the Poco's display a little taller.

In terms of pixel density, the Spark Go 2 has a slightly higher value at 263 ppi, compared to the Poco C71’s 260 ppi. Both displays have a 120Hz refresh rate, which should provide a smooth viewing experience. Neither phone includes branded damage-resistant glass, supports HDR10, HDR10+, Dolby Vision, or an Always-On Display. Additionally, neither device has a secondary screen.

Both phones have a touch screen, with no significant differences in this regard.

The Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 have similar performance specifications, with both using the same chipset: the Unisoc T7250. The GPU in both devices is the Mali G57, running at a clock speed of 850 MHz. Their CPUs are identical as well, featuring a big.LITTLE architecture with 2 cores running at 1.8 GHz and 6 cores at 1.6 GHz, totaling 8 threads. Both devices also support multithreading and 64-bit processing.

When it comes to memory, the Spark Go 2 comes with 4GB of RAM, while the Poco C71 has 6GB of RAM, providing a slight advantage in memory capacity. The internal storage also differs, with the Spark Go 2 offering 256GB of storage compared to the Poco C71’s 128GB. Both phones support the same maximum memory amount of 12GB, though the Spark Go 2 has a larger base storage option.

In terms of benchmarks, the Geekbench 6 and 5 results are identical for both phones: 1461 for multi-core and 437 for single-core in Geekbench 6, and 1350 for multi-core and 357 for single-core in Geekbench 5. Both phones have the same thermal design power of 10W, the same L3 cache of 1MB, and the same GPU execution units and shading units at 2 and 64, respectively. Both devices also feature the same RAM speed of 1866 MHz and use eMMC 5.1 storage technology.

The Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 both feature 8MP front cameras, but differ in their main camera setups. The Spark Go 2 has a 13 MP main camera, while the Poco C71 boasts a higher 32 MP main camera. Both phones have a wide aperture of 1.8f on their main cameras and offer 1080p video recording at 30 fps.

Neither phone includes optical image stabilization or dual-lens (or multi-lens) cameras. Both devices come with phase-detection autofocus for photos and continuous autofocus during video recording. Additionally, both phones support slow-motion video recording, have a built-in HDR mode, and allow manual exposure adjustments. The Spark Go 2 uses a dual-tone LED flash with 2 LEDs, while the Poco C71 has a single LED flash.

Both phones offer additional manual controls such as manual ISO, manual white balance, serial shot mode, manual focus, and touch autofocus. Neither device supports HDR10 or Dolby Vision recording, nor do they offer 3D photo/video recording or a front-facing LED flash. Both phones also allow in-camera panoramas, though neither has a front camera under the display or a dual-lens front camera.

Both the Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 run on Android 15 and offer a similar set of features. Both devices include clipboard warnings, location and camera/microphone privacy options, and theme customization. They can block app tracking, support on-device machine learning, and provide notification and media picker options. Additionally, both phones allow users to play games while they download and offer dark mode, battery health check, and an extra dim mode.

For privacy and control, both phones support customizable notifications, Live Text, full-page screenshots, split screen, and Picture-in-Picture (PiP). Neither device offers Wi-Fi password sharing or focus modes, and both lack Quick Start. Both devices can offload apps, support widgets, and have a multi-user system, child lock, and voice recognition features.

Despite these similarities, both phones also share the limitation of not receiving direct OS updates, and neither offers PiP functionality in the same way a PC might. Additionally, both are free and open source, and both track the current position of the device, but neither has Mail Privacy Protection or cross-site tracking blocking capabilities.

The Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 have very similar battery specifications. Both devices are equipped with non-removable rechargeable batteries, with the Spark Go 2 featuring a 5000 mAh battery and the Poco C71 slightly ahead with a 5200 mAh battery. Both phones support fast charging at a rate of 15W and come with a charger included in the box. Neither phone supports wireless charging.

Both devices also feature a battery level indicator, making it easy for users to monitor remaining battery life. In addition, both phones provide a rechargeable battery, ensuring longevity for regular use.

While the battery capacities are quite close, the Poco C71 has a marginally larger battery, though both devices share similar charging speeds and other battery-related features.

Both the Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 are equipped with a 3.5 mm audio jack, allowing for wired audio connectivity. Neither device has stereo speakers, which means audio playback is limited to mono sound. Additionally, neither phone supports high-definition audio codecs such as aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, aptX Lossless, or LDAC.

Both phones also include an FM radio, providing an option for users to listen to live radio broadcasts without requiring an internet connection.

Overall, the audio features on both devices are quite similar, with both offering the basic 3.5 mm audio jack and FM radio functionality, but lacking advanced audio features like stereo speakers or high-quality Bluetooth audio support.

The Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 are similar in many of their connectivity and feature specifications. Both phones lack 5G support but offer Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n). The Poco C71 goes a step further by also supporting Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac), providing potentially faster wireless speeds in supported networks. Both phones feature dual SIM support and have an external memory slot for expandable storage, as well as a USB Type-C port.

When it comes to download and upload speeds, both devices support speeds of 300 MBits/s for downloads and 150 MBits/s for uploads. Both phones also include a fingerprint scanner for added security. Neither device includes NFC, and neither offers emergency SOS via satellite, crash detection, or DLNA certification. Both phones also feature GPS and support the Galileo navigation system.

Additional common features include an accelerometer, cellular module, and support for Wi-Fi. Both phones lack an infrared sensor, barometer, HDMI output, 3D facial recognition, iris scanner, stylus, motion or optical tracking, and built-in projectors. Neither device supports ANT+ or includes a heart rate monitor.

Both the Tecno Spark Go 2 and Xiaomi Poco C71 come with a video light, which can assist in low-light situations for photography or video recording. Neither device features sapphire glass displays, curved displays, or e-paper displays, so their screens are likely more traditional in design.

In summary, both phones offer the same set of features in this category, including the video light, and lack more specialized display technologies such as sapphire glass, curved edges, or e-paper screens.

Overall, there are no significant differences between the two in terms of these additional, miscellaneous features.