Micromax A89 Ninja vs Microsoft Lumia 435

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.

• Chipset

  A89 Ninja:

  Mediatek MT6577 (40 nm)

  Lumia 435:

  Qualcomm MSM8210 Snapdragon 200 (28 nm)

• Release year

  A89 Ninja:

  2013

  Lumia 435:

  2015

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. A89 Ninja

   Height:

   Unknown

   Width:

   Unknown

   Depth:

   Unknown

   Weight:

   Unknown

   Unavailable dimensions are omitted from the drawing.

2. 2. Lumia 435

   Height:

   118.1 mm

   Width:

   64.7 mm

   Depth:

   11.7 mm

   Weight:

   134.1 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. A89 Ninja

   Screen diagonal:

   3.97 in

   Aspect ratio (height:width):

   5:3

   Approximate rectangular screen area:

   44.9 cm²

2. 2. Lumia 435

   Screen diagonal:

   4 in

   Aspect ratio (height:width):

   5:3

   Approximate rectangular screen area:

   45.5 cm²

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. 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.