Infinix GT 50 Pro vs Lava Yuva 5G
The Infinix GT 50 Pro (2026) runs on the MediaTek Dimensity 8400 Ultimate, while the Lava Yuva 5G (2024) runs on the Unisoc T750; launch prices were $349 and $127. By overall MobileRank rating, the Infinix GT 50 Pro leads — 65/100 vs 38/100 (a 27-point difference). Key differences: the Infinix GT 50 Pro has the bigger battery (6500 mAh vs 5000); the Infinix GT 50 Pro has NFC for contactless payments, the Lava Yuva 5G doesn't.
Profile comparison
Category scores
Infinix GT 50 Pro
Lava Yuva 5G
What makes Infinix GT 50 Pro better?
- Bigger battery: 6500 vs 5000 mAh
- Faster charging: 45W vs 18W
- Higher refresh rate: 144Hz vs 90Hz
- Lighter: 200g vs 208g
- Better camera (34/100 vs 30/100)
- Longer battery life (69/100 vs 43/100)
- Better display (92/100 vs 44/100)
- Better portability (60/100 vs 43/100)
What makes Lava Yuva 5G better?
- Cheaper at launch: $127 vs $349
- Overall rating 38/100
Comparison verdict
Comparing the Infinix GT 50 Pro vs the Lava Yuva 5G, the Infinix GT 50 Pro scores 27 points higher (65/100 vs 38/100). In the "battery" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro leads (69/100 vs 43/100). Value score: Infinix GT 50 Pro — 64/100, Lava Yuva 5G — 56/100; it shows how far a model sits above or below the usual level for its price, and is not part of the overall rating. In the "display" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro significantly outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G (92/100 vs 44/100). In the "camera" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro and the Lava Yuva 5G are nearly equal (34/100 vs 30/100). In the "battery" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro notably outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G (69/100 vs 43/100). In the "portability" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro notably outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G (60/100 vs 43/100).
Specs comparison
| Specification | Infinix GT 50 Pro | Lava Yuva 5G | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | MediaTek Dimensity 8400 Ultimate | Unisoc T750 | |
| AnTuTu | 1959760 | — | |
| Geekbench Single | 1579 | — | |
| Geekbench Multi | 6100 | — | |
| Display | 6.8" AMOLED | 6.5" IPS LCD | |
| Resolution | 1208x2644 | 720x1600 | |
| Refresh rate | 144 Hz | 90 Hz | |
| Battery | 6500 mAh | 5000 mAh | |
| Charging | 45W | 18W | |
| Wireless charging | 30W | 0W | |
| Main camera | 50 MP | 50 MP | |
| Ultrawide | 8 MP | 0 MP | |
| Front camera | 13 MP | 8 MP | |
| RAM | 12GB | 4GB | |
| Storage | 256GB / 512GB | 64GB / 128GB | |
| OS | Android 15 | Android 13 | |
| Brightness (peak) | 4500 nits | — | |
| NFC | yes | no | |
| Protection | IP64 | — | |
| Dimensions | — | 163.4×76.2×9.1 mm | |
| Weight | 200 g | 208 g | |
| Launch price | $349 | $127 |
Camera comparison
Infinix GT 50 Pro
- Main: 50MP f/1.8
- Ultrawide: 8MP
- Front: 13MP
Lava Yuva 5G
- Main: 50MP
- Front: 8MP
Display comparison
Infinix GT 50 Pro
- 6.8" AMOLED
- Resolution: 1208x2644
- Refresh rate: 144 Hz
Lava Yuva 5G
- 6.5" IPS LCD
- Resolution: 720x1600
- Refresh rate: 90 Hz
Battery and charging
Infinix GT 50 Pro
- 6500 mAh
- Wired: 45W
- Wireless: 30W
Lava Yuva 5G
- 5000 mAh
- Wired: 18W
- No wireless charging
Benchmarks
Launch prices and where to check today's
Launch price difference: $222. Lava Yuva 5G was $222 cheaper at launch.
Detailed category analysis
display
In the "display" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro significantly outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G (92/100 vs 44/100).
camera
In the "camera" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro and the Lava Yuva 5G are nearly equal (34/100 vs 30/100).
battery
In the "battery" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro notably outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G (69/100 vs 43/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Infinix GT 50 Pro notably outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G (60/100 vs 43/100).
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Infinix GT 50 Pro or the Lava Yuva 5G?
The Infinix GT 50 Pro significantly outperforms the Lava Yuva 5G by 27 points (65/100 vs 38/100).
What is the rating of the Infinix GT 50 Pro and the Lava Yuva 5G?
The Infinix GT 50 Pro has a MobileRank rating of 65/100, the Lava Yuva 5G — 38/100.
Should you choose the Infinix GT 50 Pro over the Lava Yuva 5G?
The Infinix GT 50 Pro is a better fit for active users.