Motorola EM35 vs Nokia 6290

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.

• Depth

  EM35: 4.8 mm thinner

  EM35:

  16 mm

  6290:

  20.8 mm

• Height

  6290: 13 mm shorter

  EM35:

  107 mm

  6290:

  94 mm

• Release year

  EM35:

  2008

  6290:

  2006

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. EM35

   Height:

   107 mm +13 mm versus 6290

   Width:

   49.5 mm

   Depth:

   16 mm

2. 2. 6290

   Height:

   94 mm

   Width:

   50 mm

   Depth:

   20.8 mm +4.8 mm versus EM35

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. EM35

   Screen diagonal:

   2.2 in

   Aspect ratio (height:width):

   4:3

   Approximate rectangular screen area:

   15 cm²

2. 2. 6290

   Screen diagonal:

   2.2 in

   Aspect ratio (height:width):

   4:3

   Approximate rectangular screen area:

   15 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.

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.