Vivo T4 Pro VS Vivo V60 (256GB / 8GB RAM)

In terms of physical design, the Vivo T4 Pro and Vivo V60 are identical across every measurable dimension: both weigh 192 g, measure 163.5 × 77 × 7.5 mm, and share the same calculated volume of 94.42 cm³. This level of parity is unusual and suggests these two devices may share a common chassis or manufacturing platform.

Both phones carry an IP68 rating with a waterproof depth of 1.5 m, meaning either can handle submersion in fresh water without damage — a reassuring feature for everyday use in rain or near water. Neither has a rugged build or a folding form factor, so both occupy the same standard candy-bar smartphone category.

Given that every design spec is a perfect match, this category is a clear tie. There is no design-based reason to choose one over the other — any differentiator between these two products will need to come from other spec groups such as performance, display, or camera.

Both phones share a strong display foundation: a 6.77″ OLED/AMOLED panel running at 1080 × 2392 px with a pixel density of 388 ppi and a 120Hz refresh rate. In practice, this means smooth scrolling, punchy colors, and sharp text on both devices — there is no perceptible difference in everyday viewing between them at this resolution and screen size.

The meaningful split comes down to HDR support. The Vivo T4 Pro supports both HDR10 and HDR10+, while the V60 supports neither. HDR10+ in particular enables dynamic, scene-by-scene tone mapping, which translates to noticeably richer contrast and more accurate highlights when streaming compatible content on platforms like Amazon Prime Video. For media consumption, this is a tangible real-world difference — not just a spec-sheet checkbox.

The Vivo T4 Pro takes a clear edge in this category. The shared panel quality means the V60 is by no means a poor display, but the T4 Pro's HDR10+ support makes it the superior choice for users who regularly consume HDR video content.

Under the hood, these two phones are built on the exact same foundation: the Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4 on a 4 nm process, with identical CPU configuration, a 1000 MHz GPU, and LPDDR5 memory running at 4200 MHz. For day-to-day tasks, gaming, and sustained workloads, both will behave virtually the same — the chipset is capable, power-efficient at 6W TDP, and fully modern in its graphics and compute support.

The sole differentiator is RAM: the Vivo T4 Pro ships with 12 GB versus the V60's 8 GB. This gap matters more than it might initially seem. With 12 GB, the T4 Pro can keep significantly more apps suspended in the background without forcing reloads, which makes multitasking noticeably smoother over time. It also provides more headroom for memory-intensive tasks like video editing, high-fidelity gaming, or running multiple large apps simultaneously. The V60's 8 GB is adequate for typical use, but under sustained multitasking pressure it will hit its ceiling sooner.

The Vivo T4 Pro holds a clear advantage here. The identical chipset means raw processing power is a draw, but the additional 4 GB of RAM gives it a practical edge in longevity and multitasking — a difference that tends to compound over the lifespan of the device.

The primary and telephoto lenses are closely matched — both phones use a 50 MP main sensor and a 50 MP periscope-style lens with identical f/2.7 apertures and 3x optical zoom. The main lens aperture is nearly the same too (f/1.8 vs f/1.9), so low-light performance from the primary camera will be comparable. Where the rear systems diverge is the third lens: the Vivo V60 pairs it with an 8 MP / f/2.0 sensor versus the T4 Pro's 2 MP / f/2.4 depth assist unit. The V60's third lens is a far more capable imaging sensor, capturing meaningful detail rather than serving purely as a depth helper.

The V60 also extends its focal range further, with a minimum focal length of 15 mm compared to the T4 Pro's 26 mm — a significant difference that translates to a genuinely wider ultra-wide field of view for architecture, landscapes, and tight spaces. Add to that a 4-LED flash array versus a single LED on the T4 Pro, which means more even, powerful artificial lighting for night shots. The front camera gap is equally striking: the V60 offers a 50 MP / f/2.2 selfie sensor against the T4 Pro's 32 MP / f/2.5, giving it both higher resolution and better light intake for selfies and video calls.

The Vivo V60 holds a clear and multi-faceted advantage in this category. Across the third rear lens, the ultra-wide focal range, flash power, and front camera, it consistently outspecifies the T4 Pro — making it the stronger choice for users who prioritize camera versatility and selfie quality.

Running Android 15 on both devices, the software experience here is a complete mirror image. Every single feature in this spec group — from privacy controls like camera/microphone permissions and app tracking blocks, to productivity tools like split-screen, Picture-in-Picture, and widgets — is identical across the Vivo T4 Pro and Vivo V60. Neither receives direct OS updates, which is a shared limitation worth noting for buyers concerned about long-term software support.

This is a tie in every meaningful sense. With no differentiating features between the two on the software side, the operating system cannot be a deciding factor in this comparison.

Battery is another category where these two phones are indistinguishable on paper. Both pack a 6500 mAh cell — a generous capacity that comfortably places them in heavy-use, multi-day endurance territory for most users — and both top up at 90W fast charging, which at this wattage typically means a full charge in well under an hour. A charger is included in the box with both, which is increasingly uncommon and worth acknowledging.

Neither phone offers wireless charging or reverse wireless charging, so users dependent on Qi pads will need to adapt. That said, this is a shared constraint rather than a differentiator. The verdict here is a clear tie — there is no battery-based reason to choose one device over the other.

Audio is yet another draw between these two devices. Both the Vivo T4 Pro and Vivo V60 feature stereo speakers and forgo the 3.5 mm headphone jack — a now-common trade-off in the mid-to-upper segment that pushes users toward Bluetooth or USB-C audio. Stereo speakers are a genuine everyday benefit, providing wider soundstage for media playback compared to a single-speaker setup.

On the wireless audio side, neither phone supports high-resolution codecs such as LDAC, aptX HD, or aptX Adaptive. This means audiophiles using high-end Bluetooth headphones will be limited to standard SBC or AAC quality — a shared limitation that affects both equally. This category is a tie with no differentiating factors between the two.

Across the bulk of this category, the two phones are evenly matched — both support 5G, Bluetooth 5.4, NFC, dual SIM, USB Type-C, and an identical sensor suite including gyroscope, GPS, compass, and infrared. These are solid, modern connectivity credentials that cover virtually every real-world use case from contactless payments to navigation and device control.

The single differentiator is Wi-Fi: the Vivo T4 Pro supports Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) in addition to Wi-Fi 5 and Wi-Fi 4, while the V60 tops out at Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac). Wi-Fi 6 brings meaningful real-world benefits — higher throughput, lower latency, and significantly better performance in congested environments like apartments or offices with many connected devices. For users with a Wi-Fi 6 router, the T4 Pro will make better use of that infrastructure.

The Vivo T4 Pro takes a narrow but genuine edge here solely due to Wi-Fi 6 support. It is not a dramatic gap, but in dense network environments or when future-proofing connectivity matters, it is the more capable device.

The miscellaneous specs for these two devices are identical across every data point provided. Both the Vivo T4 Pro and Vivo V60 include a video light — a handy torch-style assist for video recording in low-light conditions — and neither features a curved display, sapphire glass, or e-paper screen, keeping both firmly in the mainstream smartphone category.

With no differentiating factors present, this category is a complete tie and has no bearing on a purchase decision between the two.