Vivo Y400 5G VS Vivo Y400 Pro 5G

The most significant differentiator in this group is water protection. The Vivo Y400 5G carries an IP68 rating, meaning it can withstand submersion in water — typically up to 1.5 meters for 30 minutes — whereas the Vivo Y400 Pro 5G is rated IP65, which only guarantees protection against low-pressure water jets and splashing. In practical terms, the Y400 5G can survive an accidental drop in a sink or pool, while the Y400 Pro 5G should only be trusted in rain or light splash scenarios. This is a meaningful real-world gap for users who want genuine peace of mind around water exposure.

On physical comfort, the balance shifts. The Y400 Pro 5G is noticeably lighter at 182 g versus 197 g for the Y400 5G — a 15 g difference that is perceptible during prolonged use, such as long calls or extended browsing sessions. It is also marginally thinner at 7.7 mm compared to 7.9 mm, giving it a slightly more premium in-hand feel. Both devices share a nearly identical footprint in width, and neither features a rugged or foldable form factor.

Overall, the two phones present a genuine trade-off: the Y400 5G holds a clear edge in water resistance, offering a meaningfully superior IP68 rating that the Pro cannot match. However, the Y400 Pro 5G counters with a lighter, slightly slimmer build that will be more comfortable for daily handling. Users who prioritize durability around water should choose the Y400 5G; those who value everyday ergonomics and a lighter profile will prefer the Y400 Pro 5G.

Both phones use an OLED/AMOLED panel with a 120Hz refresh rate, 1080p resolution, HDR10 support, and Always-On Display — so the baseline viewing experience is genuinely comparable. Smooth scrolling, deep blacks, and vivid colors are guaranteed on either device, and neither holds an advantage in panel technology or feature set at this level.

Where the two diverge is in size and brightness. The Y400 Pro 5G offers a slightly larger 6.77″ screen versus 6.67″ on the Y400 5G — a modest but real difference for media consumption and gaming. Its pixel density is marginally lower at 388 ppi compared to 395 ppi, but this gap is essentially invisible to the naked eye at normal viewing distances. More meaningfully, the Pro peaks at 1300 nits of typical brightness against 1200 nits on the standard model — a 100-nit advantage that translates to slightly better legibility under direct sunlight.

In this category, the Y400 Pro 5G holds a narrow but genuine edge: the combination of a larger screen and higher peak brightness gives it a slight advantage for outdoor use and immersive media viewing. Neither phone has branded damage-resistant glass, so that is not a differentiating factor. For users who prioritize display real estate and outdoor visibility, the Pro is the better pick; those content with a slightly more compact screen will find the Y400 5G more than adequate.

Underneath near-identical specs on paper — same 256GB storage, 8GB RAM, 4nm fabrication, DDR5 memory, and 8-thread big.LITTLE architecture — the two phones take meaningfully different silicon paths. The Y400 5G runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 2 with a CPU configuration of 2 high-performance cores at 2.3 GHz backed by 6 efficiency cores at 2 GHz, while the Y400 Pro 5G uses the MediaTek Dimensity 7300 with a more balanced 4+4 cluster: 4 performance cores at 2.5 GHz and 4 efficiency cores at 2 GHz. In sustained workloads — gaming, video editing, or heavy multitasking — the Pro's four fast cores give it a broader performance ceiling.

The memory and GPU story reinforces this gap. The Y400 Pro 5G's RAM operates at 6400 MHz, double the 3200 MHz of the Y400 5G, meaning faster data throughput between the processor and memory — a real benefit for multitasking and app switching. Its Mali G615 MC2 GPU also runs at a higher clock of 1047 MHz versus the Adreno 613 at 955 MHz on the Y400 5G, which translates to a modest but tangible advantage in graphics-intensive tasks like gaming. One counter-point: the Y400 5G supports 2 external displays, while the Pro is limited to 1 — a niche but notable perk for productivity-oriented users.

Taking the data as a whole, the Y400 Pro 5G holds a clear performance edge: faster CPU cluster, significantly faster RAM, and a higher GPU clock speed collectively point to a more capable chip for demanding use cases. The Y400 5G's dual-display support is the one area where it pulls ahead, but for the vast majority of users focused on raw day-to-day and gaming performance, the Pro is the stronger performer in this category.

Strip away the model names and the camera specs are virtually a carbon copy: identical 50 MP + 2 MP dual rear cameras, matching apertures, a 32 MP front shooter, the same autofocus systems, and an equally comprehensive set of manual controls on both devices. Neither phone offers OIS, optical zoom, or RAW capture, so still photography capabilities are effectively tied across the board.

The single — but significant — differentiator is video. The Y400 Pro 5G tops out at 4K (2160p) at 30 fps, while the Y400 5G is capped at 1080p at 30 fps. In practical terms, 4K recording delivers roughly four times the pixel count of 1080p, which means sharper footage, more flexibility to crop or reframe clips in post-production, and a noticeably more future-proof video output — especially on larger screens or high-resolution displays.

For anyone who primarily shoots photos, these two phones are essentially identical and the choice should rest on other spec groups. But for users who care about video quality, the Y400 Pro 5G has a clear and meaningful advantage — 4K recording is a concrete, real-world capability gap that the Y400 5G simply cannot close.

This is the rarest outcome in a spec comparison: a perfect tie. Both the Vivo Y400 5G and Y400 Pro 5G run Android 15 and share an identical feature set across every single data point in this category — from privacy controls like location and camera/microphone permissions, to usability features like split-screen, Picture-in-Picture, dynamic theming, and offline voice recognition.

The shared software profile is genuinely well-rounded. Noteworthy inclusions on both devices include on-device machine learning, Live Text, app offloading, and a battery health check — features that were once flagship-tier and now meaningfully benefit mid-range users. Neither phone gets direct OS updates, which is worth flagging: this means software upgrades are dependent on Vivo's own update rollout schedule rather than being pushed straight from Google.

Given that every tracked software spec is identical, the operating system category offers no basis for choosing one device over the other. Users should treat the software experience as equivalent and let other spec groups — performance, design, cameras — drive their decision.

Charging infrastructure is identical on both phones: 90W fast charging, no wireless charging, and a non-removable battery. At 90W, both devices are capable of very rapid top-ups — filling a large battery from near-empty in well under an hour — so neither has an advantage in how quickly you can get back to full.

Where they part ways is capacity. The Y400 5G packs a 6000 mAh battery, compared to 5500 mAh on the Y400 Pro 5G — a 500 mAh difference, or roughly 8% more energy storage. In real-world terms, this translates to a meaningful buffer of additional screen-on time, particularly for heavy users who stream video, game, or stay connected throughout long days without easy access to a charger. It is worth noting that the Y400 5G is also the heavier device, so that larger cell does contribute to its extra weight.

For battery longevity between charges, the Y400 5G has a clear advantage. The 6000 mAh cell is genuinely large by any standard and gives it a practical edge over the Pro for users who prioritize endurance. Those who recharge frequently and value the Pro's lighter build may consider the 5500 mAh capacity sufficient — but on raw stamina alone, the Y400 5G wins this category.

Audio is another category where the two phones are completely indistinguishable. Both feature stereo speakers and drop the 3.5mm headphone jack, which means wired audio requires a USB-C adapter or a switch to wireless. Neither device supports any high-resolution Bluetooth audio codec — no aptX, no LDAC, no aptX HD or Adaptive — so wireless listening is limited to standard Bluetooth quality regardless of which model you choose.

The absence of hi-res wireless codec support is a shared limitation worth noting for audiophiles. LDAC in particular, which is natively supported in Android 15, can deliver near-lossless audio over Bluetooth when paired with compatible headphones — its omission on both phones means that capability is off the table on either device. For casual listeners, however, standard Bluetooth audio through modern earbuds will be perfectly adequate in day-to-day use.

With every tracked audio spec identical, this category is a complete tie. There is no audio-based reason to prefer one device over the other, and users with strong audio priorities should look to external accessories — wireless earbuds or a USB-C DAC — rather than the phone hardware itself to meet their needs.

The connectivity foundations are shared: both phones offer 5G, dual SIM, NFC, USB Type-C, Wi-Fi 5, GPS with Galileo support, and a fingerprint scanner. For most everyday tasks — tap-to-pay, navigation, app downloads — users of either device will have an equivalent experience. Neither supports external memory expansion, and both are capped at USB 2.0, which limits wired data transfer speeds regardless of the cable used.

Look closer, though, and the Y400 Pro 5G pulls ahead in two areas that matter for wireless performance. Its Bluetooth 5.4 is a newer standard than the Bluetooth 5.0 on the Y400 5G, bringing improvements in connection stability, reduced latency, and more efficient power consumption — tangible benefits for wireless audio and peripherals. More striking is the cellular throughput gap: the Pro supports upload speeds of up to 3270 Mbits/s compared to just 900 Mbits/s on the Y400 5G — over three times faster. Its download ceiling is also higher at 3270 Mbits/s versus 2500 Mbits/s. In practice, this means the Pro is significantly better equipped for upload-heavy tasks like video calls, cloud backups, and sharing large files over 5G.

The Y400 Pro 5G holds a clear edge in this category. The newer Bluetooth version is a modest but genuine upgrade, and the cellular upload speed advantage is substantial — relevant for any user who regularly transfers large amounts of data over mobile networks. For light users who mostly browse and stream, the difference will be less felt, but the Pro is the more capable device on paper for connectivity.

The miscellaneous category yields another clean tie. Both the Y400 5G and Y400 Pro 5G share every tracked feature here: a curved display, a video light, no sapphire glass, and no e-paper panel. There is simply no differentiating data point to analyze between them in this group.

The curved display is the most noteworthy shared trait — it gives both devices a more premium aesthetic and a smoother in-hand feel compared to flat-panel alternatives, which is a meaningful design choice at this price tier. The video light, while a minor feature, is a handy addition for content creators who shoot short clips in low light without a dedicated flash mode.

As with the software and audio categories, this group offers no basis for preferring one device over the other. Both phones are visually and functionally identical on these particular attributes, and the decision should continue to rest on the more substantive differences found in other specification groups.