ZTE Blade V7 Lite
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix
Pricecompare
Average of 17 scores (from 22 reviews)
Reviews for the ZTE Blade V7 Lite
Darkness favors secret dealings! ZTE's Blade V7 Lite is an affordable mid-range smartphone with very appealing looks. Compared with its Blade V7 sister model, it is cheaper and aims to attract price-conscious buyers. However, the Lite version is equipped with a somewhat weaker SoC. Furthermore, it presented its dark side in our test.
Source: Trusted Reviews Archive.org version
The ZTE Blade V7 Lite is cheap, but not quite cheerful enough to justify the savings, with poor performance and a sub-par camera.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/20/2016
Rating: Total score: 60% price: 70% performance: 40% display: 60% mobility: 70% workmanship: 60%
Source: Gear Open Archive.org version
Factor in a chipset which offers thoroughly average performance levels and the Blade V7 Lite begins to look more like its £150/$225 price tag – despite the admittedly gorgeous metal bodywork, which is both svelte and comfortable to hold.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/07/2016
Source: What Mobile Archive.org version
A solid build quality and acceptable camera help this phone to stand out against similar budget handsets, but overall performance can feel slow and sluggish at times. If ZTE had included a slightly better processor, the Blade V7 Lite would’ve made a very attractive package. As it stands, this is just another good budget phone.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/03/2016
Rating: Total score: 72% price: 80% performance: 60% display: 70% workmanship: 80%
Source: Recombu Archive.org version
For less than £10 a month on contract, the Blade V7 Lite does a good job of offering a strong set of features while keeping the cost down. You get a sturdy, attractive Android handset packed with all kinds of gesture controls, plus a solid HD display and a fingerprint sensor for extra security.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/24/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Foreign Reviews
Source: PCtipp.ch DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 08/31/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: e-media - Heft 09/2016
Single Review, , Length Unknown, Date: 08/01/2016
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: WinFuture DE→EN Archive.org version
Comparison, online available, Medium, Date: 07/21/2016
Source: Curved DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/13/2016
Rating: Total score: 68% performance: 82% display: 65% mobility: 78%
Source: Android Magazin - Heft 4/2016
Single Review, , Length Unknown, Date: 07/01/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Blick DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 06/30/2016
Source: Chinahandys.net DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 06/09/2016
Rating: Total score: 58% performance: 40% display: 60% mobility: 50% workmanship: 70%
Source: FAQsAndroid ES→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 02/14/2017
Rating: Total score: 68% price: 70% display: 65% mobility: 75% workmanship: 70%
Source: Tuexperto ES→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Low price; excellent speakers; flexible fingerprint sensor; good cameras; nice display. Negative: Mediocre hardware; unsupport fast charge.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/15/2016
Source: AndroidPit.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/28/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Chimera Revo IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/22/2016
Rating: Total score: 69% price: 65% features: 65% mobility: 70% workmanship: 75% ergonomy: 75%
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/04/2016
Rating: Total score: 70% features: 60% display: 70% mobility: 60% ergonomy: 80%
Source: AndroidPit.fr FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/19/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Hitek FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/21/2016
Rating: Total score: 68% price: 80% performance: 60% display: 80% mobility: 80%
Source: Top for Phone FR→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice screen; high autonomy; beautiful design.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/11/2016
Source: Teknokulis TR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/07/2016
Rating: Total score: 70% performance: 70% workmanship: 75%
Source: Log.com.tr TR→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Good fingerprint reader; decent front cameras; metal case. Negative: Average speakers; thick screen.
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 09/06/2016
Source: Helpix RU→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/21/2017
Rating: Total score: 73%
Comment
ARM Mali-T720: Integrated graphics card in ARM based SoCs. Can be configured with up to 8 cores (T720 MP8) and 650 MHz core clock (at 28nm). Supports OpenGL ES 3.1, OpenCL 1.1, DirectX 11 FL9_3, and Renderscript.
These graphics cards are not suited for Windows 3D games. Office and Internet surfing however is possible.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
MT6735: A 64-bit quad-core SoC (4x ARM Cortex-A53) clocked at up to 1.5 GHz and designed for inexpensive tablets and smartphones.» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
5.00":
This display is tiny. You will probably see very little on the screen and be able to use mini-resolutions.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.ZTE:
ZTE is short for Zhong Xing Telecommunication Equipment Company Limited, which was founded in China in 1985 and is partly state-owned. ZTE's core business is wireless, optical transmission, data transmission equipment, telecommunications software and cell phones, USB sticks, routers and tablets.
69.83%: This rating is poor. More than three quarters of the models are rated better. That is rather not a purchase recommendation. Even if verbal ratings in this area do not sound that bad ("sufficient" or "satisfactory"), they are usually euphemisms that disguise a classification as a below-average laptop.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.