Wiko View 2
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix
Pricecompare
Average of 15 scores (from 24 reviews)
Reviews for the Wiko View 2
Source: PCtipp.ch DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/27/2018
Rating: Total score: 90%
Source: Android Pit DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/06/2018
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Netzwelt DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/02/2018
Rating: Total score: 70% features: 80% mobility: 60% workmanship: 90%
Source: Geektopia ES→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/12/2018
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 70% display: 75% mobility: 95% workmanship: 75%
Source: Tuexperto ES→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Impressive display; long battery life; nice selfie camera. Negative: Poor display.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 06/11/2018
Source: El chapuzas Informatico ES→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Attractive design; great built quality; nice display; large screen; high performance; excellent cameras. Negative: Relatively high price; short battery life.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 05/25/2018
Source: El Androide Libre ES→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Low price; nice display; good selfie camera.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 05/17/2018
Source: PC Guia PT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 11/24/2018
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Pplware PT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/20/2018
Rating: Total score: 78% performance: 70% display: 70% mobility: 90% workmanship: 80%
Source: AndroidWorld.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 08/27/2018
Rating: Total score: 71% price: 75% features: 70% display: 75% mobility: 75% workmanship: 75% ergonomy: 75%
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/02/2018
Rating: Total score: 70% price: 70% features: 80% display: 70% mobility: 80% workmanship: 80% ergonomy: 80%
Source: InstaNews IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Modern design; good price. Negative: Poor display; mediocre speakers.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 09/20/2018
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Attractive design; nice display; high performance.
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 05/25/2018
Source: Tablets Magazine NL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 07/18/2018
Rating: Total score: 75%
Source: All About Phones NL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 06/27/2018
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: All About Phones NL→EN Archive.org version
Comparison, online available, Very Long, Date: 03/06/2018
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: AndroidWorld.nl NL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice display; face ID; good cameras; long battery life. Negative: Weak processor.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/27/2018
Source: Consumentenbond NL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Good price; decent hardware; face ID. Negative: Poor cameras; poor display.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 06/14/2018
Source: CNet France FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 08/01/2018
Rating: Total score: 61%
Source: Les Mobiles FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/01/2018
Rating: Total score: 66%
Source: Phonandroid FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 06/14/2018
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: Top for Phone FR→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Low price; nice screen; fast system. Negative: Short battery life.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 06/19/2018
Source: AndroidPit.fr FR→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Low price; attractive design; nice display; decent performance.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 02/28/2018
Source: Tabletowo PL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/05/2018
Rating: Total score: 69% performance: 60% display: 80% mobility: 70% workmanship: 75%
Comment
Qualcomm Adreno 505: Mid range graphics card integrated in the Snapdragon 430 and 435 SoCs. Based on the 500 generation and supports modern standards like Vulkan 1.0, OpenGL ES 3.1 + AE, OpenCL 2.0 and DirectX 12.
Only some 3D games with very low demands are playable with these cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
435: Lower mainstream octa-core ARM Cortex-A53 SoC clocked at up to 1.4 GHz and the Adreno 505 GPU, a DDR3L-1600 memory controller as well as an X9 LTE (Cat. 7) modem. » Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
6.00":
It is a very small display format for smartphones. You should by no means be mis-sighted and you will generally see very little on the screen and only have a small resolution available. In return, the device should be very small and handy.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.Wiko:
Wiko SAS was founded as a French smartphone manufacturer in 2011. Since 2014, the Chinese technology group Tinno Mobile has owned a majority of Wiko. They produce in China. The company has already reached a considerable market share in the French market in early years and expanded to Europe and Africa later on. Nevertheless, the world market share is low.
Reviews are only available since 2014, that is since the first international expansion. Recently, the number of reviews has increased. The ratings are average (as of 2016).
72.67%: 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.