Vivo X300 Ultra and X300 FE Debut in India: Price, Features and More
The vivo X300 Pro was perhaps the best phone of 2025, and still is. But vivo has decided to do one better by launching the even more powerful Vivo X300 Ultra, along with the X300 FE. These two smartphones highlight the company’s strategy of covering both compact flagship users and ultra-premium buyers. Each device offers a different set of features, especially in performance and camera capabilities. Here’s what you need to know about both.
Vivo X300 FE Specifications
The Vivo X300 FE is designed for convenience. With its 7.99mm thin profile and just 191 grams, users will find it easy to carry and use daily. There are three colors from which consumers can pick their preferred choice, namely Lilac Purple, Noir Black, and Urban Olive.
The smartphone has a 6.31-inch Full HD+ AMOLED display that runs at a high refresh rate of 120Hz, ensuring fluid animations and smooth page scrolling. The smartphone ensures not only good screen performance but also efficient battery usage. Furthermore, the device uses a Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 processor along with quick memory and storage.
Battery performance is another major highlight of the Vivo X300 FE. The smartphone comes with a large 6,500mAh battery designed to last through heavy daily use. It also supports 90W wired charging and 40W wireless charging for quicker top-ups.
The company has paid great attention to photography in the X300 FE. This model is equipped with a 50MP primary camera with a Sony IMX921 image sensor, a 50MP telephoto camera with 3x optical zoom, and an 8MP ultra-wide camera. The front camera has a 50MP resolution. The manufacturer has also included additional useful camera options, such as ZEISS portrait effects, adaptive zoom flash, and a dedicated street photography setting.
Vivo X300 Ultra Specifications
The Vivo X300 Ultra is built with a clear focus on professional photography and premium performance. It comes in Eclipse Black and Victory Green, with a design that reflects a camera-inspired look.
The key feature of the Vivo X300 Ultra is its high-end ZEISS Master Lenses Camera. This comes with a 50MP ultra-wide-angle camera, 200MP main camera, and 200MP APO telephoto camera. Vivo has also ensured enhanced stabilization on this device, enabling users to capture sharp, detailed pictures at various zoom levels.
The Vivo X300 Ultra now supports external telephoto lens attachments, enhancing its zoom capabilities. In addition, a Photographer’s Kit will be available, including essential photography equipment and battery support. The smartphone can capture 4K videos at 120 fps with professional-grade video features.
For performance, the Vivo X300 Ultra uses the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset paired with a large 6,600mAh battery. The device supports fast wired and wireless charging options. Vivo has also included a cooling system to prevent overheating during heavy use. Along with this, the phone will receive five years of OS updates and seven years of security support.
Price and Availability
In terms of pricing, Vivo has placed the X300 FE at Rs 79,999 for the 12GB + 256GB model and Rs 89,999 for the 12GB + 512GB variant. Meanwhile, the Vivo X300 Ultra has been priced at Rs 1,59,999 for the 16GB + 512GB variant. Both phones will be available starting May 14 through online and offline retailers, with pre-bookings already open.
Alongside its smartphones, Vivo has also launched optional photography accessories for users who want an enhanced camera experience. The X300 FE gets a Telephoto Extender Kit priced at Rs 15,999. Meanwhile, X300 Ultra buyers can purchase the Imaging Grip for Rs 11,999 and the advanced Telephoto Extender Gen 2 Ultra kit for Rs 27,999.
The vivo X300 Pro was perhaps the best phone of 2025, and still is. But vivo has decided to do one better by launching the even more powerful Vivo X300 Ultra, along with the X300 FE. These two smartphones highlight the company’s strategy of covering both compact flagship users and ultra-premium buyers. Each device offers a different set of features, especially in performance and camera capabilities. Here’s what you need to know about both.
Vivo X300 FE Specifications
The Vivo X300 FE is designed for convenience. With its 7.99mm thin profile and just 191 grams, users will find it easy to carry and use daily. There are three colors from which consumers can pick their preferred choice, namely Lilac Purple, Noir Black, and Urban Olive.
The smartphone has a 6.31-inch Full HD+ AMOLED display that runs at a high refresh rate of 120Hz, ensuring fluid animations and smooth page scrolling. The smartphone ensures not only good screen performance but also efficient battery usage. Furthermore, the device uses a Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 processor along with quick memory and storage.
Battery performance is another major highlight of the Vivo X300 FE. The smartphone comes with a large 6,500mAh battery designed to last through heavy daily use. It also supports 90W wired charging and 40W wireless charging for quicker top-ups.
The company has paid great attention to photography in the X300 FE. This model is equipped with a 50MP primary camera with a Sony IMX921 image sensor, a 50MP telephoto camera with 3x optical zoom, and an 8MP ultra-wide camera. The front camera has a 50MP resolution. The manufacturer has also included additional useful camera options, such as ZEISS portrait effects, adaptive zoom flash, and a dedicated street photography setting.
Vivo X300 Ultra Specifications
The Vivo X300 Ultra is built with a clear focus on professional photography and premium performance. It comes in Eclipse Black and Victory Green, with a design that reflects a camera-inspired look.
The key feature of the Vivo X300 Ultra is its high-end ZEISS Master Lenses Camera. This comes with a 50MP ultra-wide-angle camera, 200MP main camera, and 200MP APO telephoto camera. Vivo has also ensured enhanced stabilization on this device, enabling users to capture sharp, detailed pictures at various zoom levels.
The Vivo X300 Ultra now supports external telephoto lens attachments, enhancing its zoom capabilities. In addition, a Photographer’s Kit will be available, including essential photography equipment and battery support. The smartphone can capture 4K videos at 120 fps with professional-grade video features.
For performance, the Vivo X300 Ultra uses the Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset paired with a large 6,600mAh battery. The device supports fast wired and wireless charging options. Vivo has also included a cooling system to prevent overheating during heavy use. Along with this, the phone will receive five years of OS updates and seven years of security support.
Price and Availability
In terms of pricing, Vivo has placed the X300 FE at Rs 79,999 for the 12GB + 256GB model and Rs 89,999 for the 12GB + 512GB variant. Meanwhile, the Vivo X300 Ultra has been priced at Rs 1,59,999 for the 16GB + 512GB variant. Both phones will be available starting May 14 through online and offline retailers, with pre-bookings already open.
Alongside its smartphones, Vivo has also launched optional photography accessories for users who want an enhanced camera experience. The X300 FE gets a Telephoto Extender Kit priced at Rs 15,999. Meanwhile, X300 Ultra buyers can purchase the Imaging Grip for Rs 11,999 and the advanced Telephoto Extender Gen 2 Ultra kit for Rs 27,999.
Source link
#Vivo #X300 #Ultra #X300 #Debut #India #Price #Features
Ubisoft’s biggest franchise found itself in the perfect position to capitalize on ‘The Odyssey’ and its ongoing success.#Odyssey #Big #People #Assassins #CreedAssassin’s Creed,Christopher Nolan,The Odyssey">
Ubisoft’s biggest franchise found itself in the perfect position to capitalize on ‘The Odyssey’ and its ongoing success.#Odyssey #Big #People #Assassins #CreedAssassin’s Creed,Christopher Nolan,The Odyssey">‘The Odyssey’ Is So Big, It’s Made People Like ‘Assassin’s Creed’ Again Ubisoft’s biggest franchise found itself in the perfect position to capitalize on ‘The Odyssey’ and its ongoing success.#Odyssey #Big #People #Assassins #CreedAssassin’s Creed,Christopher Nolan,The Odyssey
Password managers are not a one-size-fits-all solution. Our top picks cover most use cases and are the best choices for most people, but your needs may be different. Fortunately, there are plenty of good password managers out there. Here are some more we’ve tested.
Google Password Manager (Free): Google has offered a password manager within Chrome for years, but it recently broadened with a dedicated Android app. Although storing passwords in your browser has a few security concerns, Google offers top-notch encryption, the option to turn on on-device encryption, and integration with biometric authentication on Android and Windows. It can even store passkeys. For most people, I recommend a third-party password manager, but if you aren’t using a password manager at all, Google Password Manager is a good option.
RoboForm ($30 Per Year, $48 Per Year for a Five-User Family Plan): RoboForm has most of the same features as the rest on this list, but it lacks some of the things that differentiate our top picks, like Bitwarden’s open source aspect and 1Password’s travel features. I’ve been testing the free plan for a while and haven’t run into any problems. There are apps for every common platform, and it’s easy to use. RoboForm recently completed an independent security audit and came out looking good.
Pass (Free): Pass is a command-line wrapper around GPG (GNU Privacy Guard), which means it is only for the nerdiest users. It supports managing encrypted .gpg files in Git, and third-party mobile apps are available. It’s not for everyone. For years, this was my password manager of choice, but eventually, Bitwarden’s ease of use won me over.
Password Managers to Avoid
Most password managers are decent. Some are more secure than others, but the top password managers largely compete on features and pricing. Security is a prerequisite. However, there are a couple of password managers you should avoid for various reasons.
ExpressKeys by ExpressVPN: ExpressKeys is from ExpressVPN (formerly Keys by ExpressVPN that I tested, but it’s the same product), which ranks among the best VPN services on the market. But ExpressKeys doesn’t live up to the same standard. It’s secure, but I struggled to get it to work with any consistency. The browser extension requires the desktop ExpressVPN app to work, and closing either will force you to sign back in all over again. Worse, ExpressKeys wouldn’t recognize that I was signed into my ExpressVPN account about half the time. It needs some serious fixes before I can recommend it. —Jacob Roach
Password managers are not a one-size-fits-all solution. Our top picks cover most use cases and are the best choices for most people, but your needs may be different. Fortunately, there are plenty of good password managers out there. Here are some more we’ve tested.
Google Password Manager (Free): Google has offered a password manager within Chrome for years, but it recently broadened with a dedicated Android app. Although storing passwords in your browser has a few security concerns, Google offers top-notch encryption, the option to turn on on-device encryption, and integration with biometric authentication on Android and Windows. It can even store passkeys. For most people, I recommend a third-party password manager, but if you aren’t using a password manager at all, Google Password Manager is a good option.
RoboForm ($30 Per Year, $48 Per Year for a Five-User Family Plan): RoboForm has most of the same features as the rest on this list, but it lacks some of the things that differentiate our top picks, like Bitwarden’s open source aspect and 1Password’s travel features. I’ve been testing the free plan for a while and haven’t run into any problems. There are apps for every common platform, and it’s easy to use. RoboForm recently completed an independent security audit and came out looking good.
Pass (Free): Pass is a command-line wrapper around GPG (GNU Privacy Guard), which means it is only for the nerdiest users. It supports managing encrypted .gpg files in Git, and third-party mobile apps are available. It’s not for everyone. For years, this was my password manager of choice, but eventually, Bitwarden’s ease of use won me over.
Password Managers to Avoid
Most password managers are decent. Some are more secure than others, but the top password managers largely compete on features and pricing. Security is a prerequisite. However, there are a couple of password managers you should avoid for various reasons.
ExpressKeys by ExpressVPN: ExpressKeys is from ExpressVPN (formerly Keys by ExpressVPN that I tested, but it’s the same product), which ranks among the best VPN services on the market. But ExpressKeys doesn’t live up to the same standard. It’s secure, but I struggled to get it to work with any consistency. The browser extension requires the desktop ExpressVPN app to work, and closing either will force you to sign back in all over again. Worse, ExpressKeys wouldn’t recognize that I was signed into my ExpressVPN account about half the time. It needs some serious fixes before I can recommend it. —Jacob Roach
#Password #Managers #Browserbuying guides,passwords,vulnerabilities,security,software,encryption">The Password Managers You Should Use Instead of Your Browser
The downside of KeePassXC is that it doesn’t have official mobile clients. However, third-party apps are available for iOS and Android. KeePassXC is a fork of KeePass that offers better cross-platform support, but there are a handful of other forks available, as well.
Password managers are not a one-size-fits-all solution. Our top picks cover most use cases and are the best choices for most people, but your needs may be different. Fortunately, there are plenty of good password managers out there. Here are some more we’ve tested.
Google Password Manager (Free): Google has offered a password manager within Chrome for years, but it recently broadened with a dedicated Android app. Although storing passwords in your browser has a few security concerns, Google offers top-notch encryption, the option to turn on on-device encryption, and integration with biometric authentication on Android and Windows. It can even store passkeys. For most people, I recommend a third-party password manager, but if you aren’t using a password manager at all, Google Password Manager is a good option.
RoboForm ($30 Per Year, $48 Per Year for a Five-User Family Plan): RoboForm has most of the same features as the rest on this list, but it lacks some of the things that differentiate our top picks, like Bitwarden’s open source aspect and 1Password’s travel features. I’ve been testing the free plan for a while and haven’t run into any problems. There are apps for every common platform, and it’s easy to use. RoboForm recently completed an independent security audit and came out looking good.
Pass (Free): Pass is a command-line wrapper around GPG (GNU Privacy Guard), which means it is only for the nerdiest users. It supports managing encrypted .gpg files in Git, and third-party mobile apps are available. It’s not for everyone. For years, this was my password manager of choice, but eventually, Bitwarden’s ease of use won me over.
Password Managers to Avoid
Most password managers are decent. Some are more secure than others, but the top password managers largely compete on features and pricing. Security is a prerequisite. However, there are a couple of password managers you should avoid for various reasons.
ExpressKeys by ExpressVPN: ExpressKeys is from ExpressVPN (formerly Keys by ExpressVPN that I tested, but it’s the same product), which ranks among the best VPN services on the market. But ExpressKeys doesn’t live up to the same standard. It’s secure, but I struggled to get it to work with any consistency. The browser extension requires the desktop ExpressVPN app to work, and closing either will force you to sign back in all over again. Worse, ExpressKeys wouldn’t recognize that I was signed into my ExpressVPN account about half the time. It needs some serious fixes before I can recommend it. —Jacob Roach
The policy does not prevent users from posting AI-generated videos elsewhere on Snapchat. It also does not disqualify every video that involves AI. Creators can continue using Snapchat’s AI tools to edit or enhance their original footage, and those videos will remain eligible for Spotlight recommendations with transparency indicators.
The line Snapchat is drawing comes down to who, or what, created the underlying video. AI can help a person make something. It cannot make the entire thing and still expect Snapchat’s recommendation system to distribute it.
“As low-quality, repetitive, AI-generated content becomes increasingly common across the internet, we want Spotlight to remain a place where people can discover authentic creativity from real people,” the company wrote in a blog post.
Keeping entirely generated videos out of Spotlight matters on the platform because recommendation is what allow a creator’s work to reach people who do not already follow them. Removing that distribution makes Spotlight far less valuable as a growth channel for automated content farms that can produce synthetic videos at scale.
It also protects a part of Snapchat that has been attracting more creators. Snap said the number of unique people contributing to Spotlight globally has increased by more than 120 percent over the past year.
Exactly how Snapchat will identify wholly AI-generated videos is less clear. The company has not explained what level of human involvement would make a video eligible or how it will distinguish an AI-enhanced recording from a generated video that received a few human edits.
Mashable Trend Report
Snap acknowledged that challenge in its announcement, saying that “no detection system is perfect.”
Social platforms are reconsidering AI slop
Snapchat isn’t the first platform to decide that the flood of repetitive AI content is becoming a problem for its users.
LinkedIn began expanding tools in July that allow members to report posts and comments that “seem like AI slop.” The company is also introducing classifiers intended to reduce low-quality AI content in recommendations and replacing its “enhance your post” writing feature with a more limited proofreading tool.
LinkedIn Chief Product Officer Hari Srinivasan emphasized that the company does not consider all AI-assisted work to be slop. The concern is content that feels automated, generic, or disconnected from the person publishing it.
Substack has taken a transparency-focused approach. On July 21, the newsletter platform introduced an optional AI-detection feature built with Pangram. Readers can scan posts, notes, replies, and comments longer than 100 words to receive an estimate of how much of the text was written by a person or with AI assistance.
TikTok has also put more of the decision in viewers’ hands. The platform began testing a setting in November that lets users increase or decrease the amount of AI-generated content that appears in their For You feeds.
Snapchat’s decision also arrives as Meta imagines a very different future for social media.
In its latest earnings remarks on July 29, Meta said its Muse image and video models would create a “nearly infinite universe of personalized content” across its platforms. That AI-generated material would become another source of recommendations alongside posts from friends and established creators.
Snapchat is making a different bet for Spotlight. As synthetic video becomes easier to produce and harder to distinguish from recorded footage, the platform is reserving its most valuable discovery space for content that begins with a person.
Drawing that line may be easier than enforcing it. Still, Snapchat has made its preference clear: AI can stay behind the scenes. Spotlight belongs to the humans.
The policy does not prevent users from posting AI-generated videos elsewhere on Snapchat. It also does not disqualify every video that involves AI. Creators can continue using Snapchat’s AI tools to edit or enhance their original footage, and those videos will remain eligible for Spotlight recommendations with transparency indicators.
The line Snapchat is drawing comes down to who, or what, created the underlying video. AI can help a person make something. It cannot make the entire thing and still expect Snapchat’s recommendation system to distribute it.
“As low-quality, repetitive, AI-generated content becomes increasingly common across the internet, we want Spotlight to remain a place where people can discover authentic creativity from real people,” the company wrote in a blog post.
Keeping entirely generated videos out of Spotlight matters on the platform because recommendation is what allow a creator’s work to reach people who do not already follow them. Removing that distribution makes Spotlight far less valuable as a growth channel for automated content farms that can produce synthetic videos at scale.
It also protects a part of Snapchat that has been attracting more creators. Snap said the number of unique people contributing to Spotlight globally has increased by more than 120 percent over the past year.
Exactly how Snapchat will identify wholly AI-generated videos is less clear. The company has not explained what level of human involvement would make a video eligible or how it will distinguish an AI-enhanced recording from a generated video that received a few human edits.
Mashable Trend Report
Snap acknowledged that challenge in its announcement, saying that “no detection system is perfect.”
Social platforms are reconsidering AI slop
Snapchat isn’t the first platform to decide that the flood of repetitive AI content is becoming a problem for its users.
LinkedIn began expanding tools in July that allow members to report posts and comments that “seem like AI slop.” The company is also introducing classifiers intended to reduce low-quality AI content in recommendations and replacing its “enhance your post” writing feature with a more limited proofreading tool.
LinkedIn Chief Product Officer Hari Srinivasan emphasized that the company does not consider all AI-assisted work to be slop. The concern is content that feels automated, generic, or disconnected from the person publishing it.
Substack has taken a transparency-focused approach. On July 21, the newsletter platform introduced an optional AI-detection feature built with Pangram. Readers can scan posts, notes, replies, and comments longer than 100 words to receive an estimate of how much of the text was written by a person or with AI assistance.
TikTok has also put more of the decision in viewers’ hands. The platform began testing a setting in November that lets users increase or decrease the amount of AI-generated content that appears in their For You feeds.
Snapchat’s decision also arrives as Meta imagines a very different future for social media.
In its latest earnings remarks on July 29, Meta said its Muse image and video models would create a “nearly infinite universe of personalized content” across its platforms. That AI-generated material would become another source of recommendations alongside posts from friends and established creators.
Snapchat is making a different bet for Spotlight. As synthetic video becomes easier to produce and harder to distinguish from recorded footage, the platform is reserving its most valuable discovery space for content that begins with a person.
Drawing that line may be easier than enforcing it. Still, Snapchat has made its preference clear: AI can stay behind the scenes. Spotlight belongs to the humans.
The policy does not prevent users from posting AI-generated videos elsewhere on Snapchat. It also does not disqualify every video that involves AI. Creators can continue using Snapchat’s AI tools to edit or enhance their original footage, and those videos will remain eligible for Spotlight recommendations with transparency indicators.
The line Snapchat is drawing comes down to who, or what, created the underlying video. AI can help a person make something. It cannot make the entire thing and still expect Snapchat’s recommendation system to distribute it.
“As low-quality, repetitive, AI-generated content becomes increasingly common across the internet, we want Spotlight to remain a place where people can discover authentic creativity from real people,” the company wrote in a blog post.
Keeping entirely generated videos out of Spotlight matters on the platform because recommendation is what allow a creator’s work to reach people who do not already follow them. Removing that distribution makes Spotlight far less valuable as a growth channel for automated content farms that can produce synthetic videos at scale.
It also protects a part of Snapchat that has been attracting more creators. Snap said the number of unique people contributing to Spotlight globally has increased by more than 120 percent over the past year.
Exactly how Snapchat will identify wholly AI-generated videos is less clear. The company has not explained what level of human involvement would make a video eligible or how it will distinguish an AI-enhanced recording from a generated video that received a few human edits.
Mashable Trend Report
Snap acknowledged that challenge in its announcement, saying that “no detection system is perfect.”
Social platforms are reconsidering AI slop
Snapchat isn’t the first platform to decide that the flood of repetitive AI content is becoming a problem for its users.
LinkedIn began expanding tools in July that allow members to report posts and comments that “seem like AI slop.” The company is also introducing classifiers intended to reduce low-quality AI content in recommendations and replacing its “enhance your post” writing feature with a more limited proofreading tool.
LinkedIn Chief Product Officer Hari Srinivasan emphasized that the company does not consider all AI-assisted work to be slop. The concern is content that feels automated, generic, or disconnected from the person publishing it.
Substack has taken a transparency-focused approach. On July 21, the newsletter platform introduced an optional AI-detection feature built with Pangram. Readers can scan posts, notes, replies, and comments longer than 100 words to receive an estimate of how much of the text was written by a person or with AI assistance.
TikTok has also put more of the decision in viewers’ hands. The platform began testing a setting in November that lets users increase or decrease the amount of AI-generated content that appears in their For You feeds.
Snapchat’s decision also arrives as Meta imagines a very different future for social media.
In its latest earnings remarks on July 29, Meta said its Muse image and video models would create a “nearly infinite universe of personalized content” across its platforms. That AI-generated material would become another source of recommendations alongside posts from friends and established creators.
Snapchat is making a different bet for Spotlight. As synthetic video becomes easier to produce and harder to distinguish from recorded footage, the platform is reserving its most valuable discovery space for content that begins with a person.
Drawing that line may be easier than enforcing it. Still, Snapchat has made its preference clear: AI can stay behind the scenes. Spotlight belongs to the humans.
Post Comment