Amoi E860 vs Mitac MIO A702

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.

• WidthMIO A702: 3 mm narrowerMIO A702: 57.5 mm · E860: 60.5 mm
• DepthE860: 0.7 mm thinnerE860: 15.8 mm · MIO A702: 16.5 mm
• HeightMIO A702: 2 mm shorterMIO A702: 110 mm · E860: 112 mm

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. E860

   Height

   112 mm+2 mm versus MIO A702

   Width

   60.5 mm+3 mm versus MIO A702

   Depth

   15.8 mm

   Weight

   150 g

2. 2. MIO A702

   Height

   110 mm

   Width

   57.5 mm

   Depth

   16.5 mm+0.7 mm versus E860

   Weight

   148 g

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. E860 2.8 in · 4:3 About 24.3 cm² rectangular area
2. 2. MIO A702 2.7 in · 4:3 About 22.6 cm² rectangular area

E860 has approximately 7.5% more rectangular screen area than MIO A702.

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.

No unambiguous storage/RAM pairings are recorded. See the original specifications below.

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. On narrow screens, swipe sideways or use Left/Right arrow keys while the table is focused. Unknown means missing data, not No. Recorded zero values are shown as recorded.