Nothing Phone (2) vs Vivo X300 Ultra | TechTalkTown
Nothing Phone (2) vs Vivo X300 Ultra
Nothing Phone (2)
Nothing
7.9
Best design-led $599 phone of 2023
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo
8.7
The video and zoom monster
Nothing Phone (2)
What Reviewers Agree On
Best industrial design of any 2023 phone — transparent back + 33-zone Glyph LED interface + clean aluminum chassis make it instantly recognizable.
Nothing OS 2.0 is the cleanest Android skin of 2023 — minimal bloat, fast updates, distinctive monochrome icon pack, and the universal search box.
$599 US launch (Nothing's first officially-sold-in-US phone) hits a clean price/value sweet spot — competes with Pixel 7a + iPhone SE 3rd gen.
Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 + 12GB RAM delivers genuine flagship-tier 2022 performance — beat iPhone 14 Plus in 9to5Mac's speed test.
5,000mAh battery + efficient 4nm chip delivers ~1.5-day endurance in normal use per MrMobile.
Deal Breakers
Pros & Cons
Nothing Phone (2)
Pros
Best industrial design of any 2023 phone — transparent back + 33-zone Glyph LED interface + clean aluminum chassis make it instantly recognizable.
Nothing OS 2.0 is the cleanest Android skin of 2023 — minimal bloat, fast updates, distinctive monochrome icon pack, and the universal search box.
$599 US launch (Nothing's first officially-sold-in-US phone) hits a clean price/value sweet spot — competes with Pixel 7a + iPhone SE 3rd gen.
Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 + 12GB RAM delivers genuine flagship-tier 2022 performance — beat iPhone 14 Plus in 9to5Mac's speed test.
Detailed Comparison
Display
Nothing Phone (2)
The 6.7-inch LTPO AMOLED at 1600 nits peak with 120Hz adaptive refresh is class-competitive for the $599 price — slightly behind the Galaxy S23 + Pixel 8 Pro on peak HDR but ahead of mid-range rivals.
6.7-inch flexible LTPO AMOLED, 120Hz adaptive, 1600 nits peak brightness — excellent display for the $599 price point.
6 Months Later: 'looks great with good viewing angles and excellent clarity' — premium-class panel after months of use.
Snazzy Labs: 'screen looks pretty freaking good in direct sunlight' but only adequate indoors with low ambient light.
Vivo X300 Ultra
A 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED, now flat rather than quad-curved. Lab measurements put real brightness near 1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits on a small window — among the best panels on any phone — and reviewers single out content consumption and clarity as standouts.
TechTalkTown may earn a commission from purchases made through links below. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. This does not influence our reviews. Learn more.
Only IP54 dust + splash resistance — not submergible, lags Galaxy S23/iPhone 15 Pro Max IP68 baseline by a clear margin.
Dual-camera setup (50MP main + 50MP ultrawide) with NO telephoto — biggest hardware gap vs the $799 Pixel 8 Pro or $599 Pixel 7a's hybrid zoom.
33W wired + 15W wireless charging — slow vs OnePlus 11's 80W and Galaxy S23 Ultra's 45W; full charge ~55 minutes per SuperSaf.
Vivo X300 Ultra
What Reviewers Agree On
The camera system — twin ~1-inch 200MP main and 200MP 85mm periscope plus a large ultrawide — is the best-equipped on any 2026 phone and the entire reason the device exists.
Video is class-leading: 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device (no SSD), 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on every lens including the selfie.
Battery life is genuinely strong — roughly 16 hours active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on time, and 13–14 hour days with charge to spare, on the 6,600mAh cell.
The Zeiss 200mm/400mm telephoto extenders deliver real, usable optical reach (8.7x and 17.4x) with surprisingly good handheld stabilisation.
100W wired charging refills the big battery in roughly 46–50 minutes, with 40W wireless on top.
The 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED is among the best displays available, hitting ~1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits peak.
Deal Breakers
The 35mm (~1.5x) default main focal length is polarising — many reviewers find it too tight/zoomed versus the usual 24mm.
It heats up quickly under sustained camera or gaming load and throttles to roughly 60–65% stability in prolonged stress tests.
The full experience needs the expensive Photography Kit — the global bundle approaches €2,600 and the 200mm lens isn't in every box.
Notebookcheck found it 'hardly better than the X300 Pro in camera performance despite top-notch hardware', and Linus preferred Oppo's less over-sharpened processing.
It launched in China first with a rocky early software state (fixed via updates), and global availability/pricing is limited and steep.
5,000mAh battery + efficient 4nm chip delivers ~1.5-day endurance in normal use per MrMobile.
Cons
Only IP54 dust + splash resistance — not submergible, lags Galaxy S23/iPhone 15 Pro Max IP68 baseline by a clear margin.
Dual-camera setup (50MP main + 50MP ultrawide) with NO telephoto — biggest hardware gap vs the $799 Pixel 8 Pro or $599 Pixel 7a's hybrid zoom.
33W wired + 15W wireless charging — slow vs OnePlus 11's 80W and Galaxy S23 Ultra's 45W; full charge ~55 minutes per SuperSaf.
Vivo X300 Ultra
Pros
The camera system — twin ~1-inch 200MP main and 200MP 85mm periscope plus a large ultrawide — is the best-equipped on any 2026 phone and the entire reason the device exists.
Video is class-leading: 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device (no SSD), 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on every lens including the selfie.
Battery life is genuinely strong — roughly 16 hours active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on time, and 13–14 hour days with charge to spare, on the 6,600mAh cell.
The Zeiss 200mm/400mm telephoto extenders deliver real, usable optical reach (8.7x and 17.4x) with surprisingly good handheld stabilisation.
100W wired charging refills the big battery in roughly 46–50 minutes, with 40W wireless on top.
The 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED is among the best displays available, hitting ~1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits peak.
Cons
The 35mm (~1.5x) default main focal length is polarising — many reviewers find it too tight/zoomed versus the usual 24mm.
It heats up quickly under sustained camera or gaming load and throttles to roughly 60–65% stability in prolonged stress tests.
The full experience needs the expensive Photography Kit — the global bundle approaches €2,600 and the 200mm lens isn't in every box.
Notebookcheck found it 'hardly better than the X300 Pro in camera performance despite top-notch hardware', and Linus preferred Oppo's less over-sharpened processing.
It launched in China first with a rocky early software state (fixed via updates), and global availability/pricing is limited and steep.
We measured a maximum of over 1,900 nits in auto-brightness mode and over 3,300 nits when lighting up a smaller portion of the screen.
Consuming content, scrolling the web, pixel-peeping and zooming in on text — it doesn't get any clearer, or with the 144Hz any smoother, than the display on the X300 Ultra.
It delivers an excellent max brightness of around 1,935 nits with a 75% white pattern and a peak of 3,328 nits with a 10% pattern.
Vivo has gone with a flat display this time, a clear shift from the quad-curved style of the X200 Ultra.
It's a 6.82-inch AMOLED with a claimed 4,500-nit HDR peak that can reach that figure in a one-person window watching HDR content; PWM sits around 3.5% at max brightness, better for flicker-sensitive users.
An absolutely stunning display with terrific, bass-heavy stereo speakers to match.
Cameras
Nothing Phone (2)
Dual 50MP setup (main + ultrawide) with no telephoto — solid daylight performance per GSMArena + 6 Months Later, but the missing zoom lens limits versatility against $499 Pixel 7a hybrid zoom or $799 Pixel 8 Pro periscope.
50MP f/1.88 main with OIS + 50MP f/2.2 ultrawide — saves 12.5MP by default, those output 'excellent' per GSMArena.
No telephoto camera — biggest hardware gap vs $499 Pixel 7a (2× hybrid zoom) and $799 Pixel 8 Pro (5× periscope).
Auto Night Mode delivers excellent ultrawide shots with detail, exposure, dynamic range — competitive low-light for the class.
4K @ 60fps main + ultrawide; 1080p selfie video — competitive video specs for the $599 class.
4K video stutter + dropped frames during recording — MrMobile flagged this as the most annoying day-to-day camera issue.
6 Months Later: 'as good if not better than Pixel 8 for daytime video with contrast and fewer digital artifacts' — surprising creator comparison.
Portrait mode relies entirely on AI (no depth sensor) — works on humans but inconsistent on objects/pets.
Vivo X300 Ultra
The reason the X300 Ultra exists: a near-1-inch 200MP 35mm main (Sony Lytia 901), a 200MP 85mm periscope, and the best ultrawide sensor on the market, tuned with Zeiss. Reviewers near-universally rate it the best-equipped camera phone of 2026 — with two important caveats: the 35mm default is divisive, and on raw image quality it's only marginally ahead of the cheaper X300 Pro.
At the center is a 200MP main that's nearly a 1-inch sensor (Sony Lytia 901), backed by a 200MP 85mm-equivalent periscope telephoto — the phone is focused on camera quality and, even more so, video.
Featuring three extra-large image sensors, the X300 Ultra's uncompromising camera hardware earned a solid rating — but it's hardly better than the cheaper X300 Pro in actual camera performance despite the top-notch hardware.
I'm not sure I've seen better results from even 1-inch sensors — it's so close to 1-inch and the 35mm focal length makes for more cinematic-looking shots; the 85mm periscope is the sweet spot for portraits.
It still holds the record for the best portrait-mode photos on a smartphone, especially at 85mm and 135mm; the 14mm ultrawide is sharp edge to edge.
Performance
Nothing Phone (2)
Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 + 12GB RAM is last-gen flagship silicon — the deliberate cost choice that keeps the Phone (2) at $599 vs $799+ for a 2023 SD 8 Gen 2 device. Real-world performance is excellent and battery efficiency is strong.
Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 (4nm, last year's flagship) + 12GB RAM + 256/512GB UFS 3.1 storage.
9to5Mac speed test: beat iPhone 14 Plus by 6 seconds at $200 less — strong 2023 real-world performance.
SD 8 Gen 2 was deliberately skipped to keep the price at $599 — pros call it a smart choice, critics call it 'not a true flagship' (SuperSaf).
Vivo X300 Ultra
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 plus Vivo's custom imaging silicon delivers flagship benchmark numbers and strong gaming, but the camera-heavy hardware runs hot — sustained stress tests show roughly 60–65% stability and the camera app warms it up fast.
At the heart is Qualcomm's current flagship Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, supplemented by Vivo's custom VS1 and V3-Plus imaging chips.
It boots in 16 seconds (vs 21s for the S26 Ultra and 19s for the iPhone 17 Pro Max) and posts an AnTuTu score over 3,800,000, stronger than Samsung.
In a prolonged stress test it throttled CPU performance to about 60% of peak — in line with other high-powered flagships — and 3DMark stability landed around 63–66%.
It gets a bit hot after 30–40 minutes of gaming, but with no throttling even past an hour and never uncomfortable to hold; boost mode at max graphics gives around 4 hours of Wuthering Waves on a full charge.
Native 120fps gaming with smooth/very-high graphics in many titles, with temperature barely crossing 35°C and power draw around 4W in battle-royale modes.
Under sustained camera/imaging load the front reached ~46.8°C and the back ~45.2°C, and around 47°C the refresh rate drops slightly though not all the way to 60Hz.
Battery & Charging
Nothing Phone (2)
5,000mAh battery + 4nm-chip efficiency delivers ~1.5-day endurance per MrMobile and Cashify — but 33W wired + 15W wireless charging is firmly mid-tier vs OnePlus 11's 80W or Galaxy S23 Ultra's 45W.
5,000mAh battery + 4nm SD 8+ Gen 1 efficiency — MrMobile reported 'a day and a half' typical endurance.
Cashify long-term: '4,700mAh battery + 4nm chipset + lightweight software can last an entire day' — confirms all-day endurance after months.
33W wired charging: full charge in ~55 minutes per SuperSaf — slow vs OnePlus 11's 80W (~25 min) and Galaxy S23 Ultra's 45W.
No charger in the box — buyers must source their own 33W+ USB-C PD brick.
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo grew the silicon-carbon cell 10% to 6,600mAh while keeping the body the same size. Real-world endurance is strong — ~16h active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on, 13–14 hour days with charge to spare — and 100W wired refills it in under an hour, with 40W wireless.
Vivo increased the battery by 10% to 6,600mAh despite the phone being practically the same size on paper.
In our battery test it earned an active-use score of almost 16 hours; 100W charging took it 0–66% in 30 minutes and a full charge in 46 minutes, plus 40W wireless. A charger is in the box except in Europe.
On the China version I'm finishing entire 13–14 hour days with 25–30% left; the global version keeps the 6,600mAh cell so battery life should comfortably last 12–13 hours of heavy use.
Getting nearly 7 hours of screen-on time with very heavy usage from the 6,600mAh silicon-carbon unit, with 100W wired and 40W wireless charging support.
After a 4-hour heavy-usage simulation the phone still had ~45% battery left, which is solid by today's standards, and 100W wired charging takes about 45 minutes to full.
In a head-to-head charge race against the Oppo Find X9 Ultra (80W), the Vivo on 100W finished first at 50 minutes 20 seconds to the Oppo's 52:39.
Comparing it directly with the Oppo Find X9 Ultra, even though the Vivo looks great at a glance you could edit the Oppo image and get better detail because the Vivo isn't all over-sharpened and crusty.
Schools the Galaxy S26 Ultra in zoom quality without an excessive camera count — shaping up to be one of the best camera phones not just for 2026 but 2027 and 2028.
The 35mm main is divisive — many feel 24mm is better for phone photography and that 35mm is too tight; cropping to 23–28mm shows a noticeable detail drop.