Wiko Wim Lite
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix
Average of 5 scores (from 9 reviews)
Reviews for the Wiko Wim Lite
Source: Android Smartphone - 6/18
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 11/01/2018
Rating: Total score: 60% performance: 40% display: 80% mobility: 45% workmanship: 100%
Source: Android Mag DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/01/2017
Rating: Total score: 90% price: 94% performance: 100% features: 80% display: 100% mobility: 60% workmanship: 100%
Source: 4G News PT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice display; good ergonomy; great built quality; low price.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 03/07/2017
Source: HDblog.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 08/16/2017
Rating: Total score: 67%
Source: Andrea Galeazzi IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 08/09/2017
Rating: Total score: 75% price: 75% display: 72% mobility: 80% workmanship: 80%
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice display; decent hardware; beautiful design; long battery life. Negative: Slippery; easy getting fingerprints.
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 11/30/2017
Source: Tech Different IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Low price; decent cameras; nice design.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/25/2017
Source: Nieuwe Mobiel.nl NL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Attractive design; nice display; good cameras. Negative: No quick charger.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/14/2017
Source: Tabletowo PL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/01/2017
Rating: Total score: 75% performance: 75% display: 75% mobility: 55% workmanship: 80%
It seems that most manufacturers are producing lite versions of their mainstream products hoping to capture more market share and French android manufacturer Wiko is no different with the Wiko Wim Lite a cut down version of its older brother the Wiko Wim. Overall aesthetics remain the same with its higher spec-ed sibling with only changes to its hardware. Decking out its hardware is Qualcomms budget end Snapdragon 435, 3GB of memory and 16GB of internal storage which is the same with most manufacturers aiming for the budget sector. Overall chassis design is generally rounded with materials similar to its bigger brother, its generally a mix of metal and plastic with the metal being the frame and plastic for its back cover and Gorilla Glass for the display. The Wiko Wim Lite is still as glossy as its sibling which means users had better have a microfiber cloth with them if they wish to keep it free from fingerprints. Speaking of fingerprints, the fingerprint reader is located at the rear just slightly below of the camera. It’s really peculiar that most manufacturers seem to not want to integrate the fingerprint reader to the home button but then again it could be design limitations for the manufacturer itself. As with the Wiko Wim, the Wiko Wim Lite is equipped with a FHD IPS display which is still hard to come by for the given price bracket. Colors remain well calibrated and vibrant however blacks aren’t that deep. Overall the display does have reasonable contrast which is important to avoid blurry screens.
Over at the camera department the Wiko Wim Lite is a little interesting in that the rear camera has a lower MP count compared to the front which are 13 and 16MP respectively. While it is generally understood that megapixel count isn’t everything its surprising that Wiko has focused more on the selfie camera as opposed to the rear camera most people would be shooting with. Under good lighting conditions the picture quality is reasonably good however under bad lighting conditions the camera does fall slightly short even with flash enabled it seems that the image quality does feel a little over exposed Because the Wiko Wim Lite is powered by a budget orientated Snapdragon processor users shouldn’t expect too much from the processor, while it will perform well under single task loads having multiple applications can cause the Wiko Wim Lite to slow down noticeably, however with the recent Android Nougat 7.0 being preloaded users can expect the optimizations included with the recent release to be less taxing on the processor. Despite that the included android is by no means vanilla as Wiko has included their own Wiko launcher and some preloaded bloatware. Finally, with battery life the Wiko Wim Lite is equipped with a 3000mAh battery which should get users by a normal working day with at least 10~15% charge on moderate to low usage, this might be a slight benefit of using a low-end Snapdragon as this means power consumption will also be low. Final verdict being if the older sibling is too much to spend on and you don’t have much expectations the Wiko Wim Lite is more or less acceptable but nothing special when compared to better choices out there.
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.
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.
This is a typical smartphone diagonal.» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.
Only few smartphones are more lightweight than this.
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).
73.4%: This rating is bad. Most notebooks are better rated. This is not a recommendation for purchase.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.