Allview E2 Jump vs Xolo Q900T

Key differences

Calculated from recorded specifications using minimum difference thresholds. These are differences, not an overall ranking. For three phones, numeric highlights compare the two extremes.

• Screen diagonalE2 Jump: 0.2 in smaller diagonalE2 Jump: 4.5 in · Q900T: 4.7 in
• ChipsetMediatek MT6582 (28 nm) / Mediatek MT6589T (28 nm)E2 Jump: Mediatek MT6582 (28 nm) · Q900T: Mediatek MT6589T (28 nm)
• DepthQ900T: 1.7 mm thinnerQ900T: 9.3 mm · E2 Jump: 11 mm
• Release year2015 / 2014E2 Jump: 2015 · Q900T: 2014

Relative size, not calibrated actual size. Front and side outlines share one scale and a bottom baseline. Generic outlines use recorded body dimensions, excluding camera bumps.

1. 1. E2 Jump

   Height

   134.6 mm

   Width

   66.8 mm

   Depth

   11 mm+1.7 mm versus Q900T

   Weight

   152 g

2. 2. Q900T

   Height

   133.8 mm

   Width

   67.6 mm

   Depth

   9.3 mm

   Weight

   Unknown

Screen size

Approximate rectangular screens calculated from recorded diagonal and aspect ratio at one relative scale. Rounded corners and cutouts are not subtracted. These are not phone outlines or calibrated actual sizes.

1. 1. E2 Jump 4.5 in · 16:9 About 55.8 cm² rectangular area
2. 2. Q900T 4.7 in · 16:9 About 60.9 cm² rectangular area

Q900T has approximately 9.1% more rectangular screen area than E2 Jump.

Memory variants

Each row compares the same storage capacity. Cells show recorded RAM alternatives, not combined maxima. Not recorded does not mean unavailable in every market.

Practical features

Explicit Yes and No values are shown directly. Qualified or regional records retain their details. Unknown means the record is missing.

Battery capacity

Capacity is not battery life. No endurance test is implied.

Open a section for more detail. Scroll inside a table to keep phone names visible; on narrow screens, swipe sideways or use the arrow keys while the table is focused. Unknown means missing data, not No. Recorded zero values are shown as recorded.