Nokia 702T vs Nokia 800c

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.

• Weight702T: 15 g lighter702T: 127 g · 800c: 142 g
• Screen diagonal702T: 1.24 in smaller diagonal702T: 2.46 in · 800c: 3.7 in
• Depth702T: 2.1 mm thinner702T: 10 mm · 800c: 12.1 mm
• Release year2011 / 2012702T: 2011 · 800c: 2012

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. 702T

   Height

   117.1 mm

   Width

   60.4 mm

   Depth

   10 mm

   Weight

   127 g

2. 2. 800c

   Height

   116.5 mm

   Width

   61.2 mm

   Depth

   12.1 mm+2.1 mm versus 702T

   Weight

   142 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. 702T 2.46 in · 4:3 About 18.7 cm² rectangular area
2. 2. 800c 3.7 in · 5:3 About 39 cm² rectangular area

800c has approximately 107.9% more rectangular screen area than 702T.

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.