RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380
Roll over image to zoom in
Best RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 Amazon.com Deals for Tuesday 28th of April 2026
Lexerd - Compatible with Rim BlackBerry Curve 9380 TrueVue Crystal Clear Cell Phone Screen Protector (Dual Pack Bundle)...
$15.99
Lexerd - Compatible with Rim BlackBerry Curve 9380 TrueVue Anti-Glare Cell Phone Screen Protector...
$9.95
Lexerd - Compatible with Rim BlackBerry Curve 9380 TrueVue Anti-Glare Cell Phone Screen Protector (Dual Pack Bundle)...
$15.99
Lexerd - Compatible with Rim BlackBerry Curve 9380 TrueVue Crystal Clear Cell Phone Screen Protector...
$9.95
Professional Kingston MicroSDHC 16GB (16 Gigabyte) Card for RIM BlackBerry Curve Touch 9380 Phone with custom formatting...
$5.59
BlackBerry Curve 9380 Unlocked GSM Phone with OS 7, Touchscreen, GPS and 5MP Camera + Video Recording - Black...
Professional Kingston MicroSDHC 16GB (16 Gigabyte) Card for RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 Phone with custom formatting and S...
$5.59
Professional Ultra SanDisk 32GB MicroSDHC Card for RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 is custom formatted for high speed, lossles...
$20.67
EMPIRE RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 Adjustable Car Windshield Mount (Black) [EMPIRE Packaging]...
$6.94
Best RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 Ebay.com Deals for Tuesday 28th of April 2026
Design
| Display Options | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 vs average RIM display options comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 | Difference in % | Difference in units | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 vs average smartphone display options comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resolution | 172800 px vs 270545.5 px | 97745.45 px lower resolution | -36.1% | 172800 px | -87.1% | 1161946.99 px lower resolution | 172800 px vs 1334747 px |
| Pixel Density | 188 ppi vs 233.3 ppi | 45.27 ppi less pixel density | -19.4% | 188 ppi | -41% | 130.8 ppi lower pixel density | 188 ppi vs 318.8 ppi |
| Screen Size | 3.2 " vs 2.9 " | 0.25 " larger screen size | +8.6% | 3.2 " | -37.1% | 1.89 " smaller screen size | 3.2 " vs 5.1 " |
| Touch Screen | YES vs 70% YES | YES | YES vs 98.8% YES | ||||
| LCD Displays 3 Subpixels per Pixel | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 89.8% YES | ||||
| Summary | |||||||
Features
| Networks Connectivity | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 vs average RIM Networks connectivity features comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 | Difference in % | Difference in units | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 vs average smartphone Networks connectivity features comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supports Cellular Networks | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 99.9% YES | ||||
| GPS Navigation | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 98.7% YES | ||||
| Supports WiFi Connections | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 99.4% YES | ||||
| Bluetooth Version | 2.1 vs 2.4 | 0.25 older Bluetooth version | 2.1 | 1.85 older Bluetooth version | 2.1 vs 3.9 | ||
| Supports NFC Connections | YES vs 90% YES | YES | YES vs 54.9% YES | ||||
| 802.11n WiFi Connections | YES vs 100% YES | YES | YES vs 99.8% YES | ||||
| Summary | |||||||
Capacity
| Model Benchmarks | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 vs average RIM Benchmarks performance comparison | Difference in units | Difference in % | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 | Difference in % | Difference in units | RIM BlackBerry Curve 9380 vs average smartphone Benchmarks performance comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Head SAR (US) Radio Frequency Absorption Rate | 1.38 W/kg vs 1.3 W/kg | 0.13 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | +10% | 1.38 W/kg | +70.4% | 0.57 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | 1.38 W/kg vs 0.8 W/kg |
| Head SAR (EU) Radio Frequency Absorption Rate | 1.09 W/kg vs 1.1 W/kg | 0.02 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (EU) | +1.5% | 1.09 W/kg | +58.8% | 0.4 W/kg higher Head radio frequency energy absorption rate (EU) | 1.38 W/kg vs 0.8 W/kg |
| Body SAR (US) Radio Frequency Absorption Rate | 0.77 W/kg vs 0.9 W/kg | 0.16 W/kg lower Body radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | -16.8% | 0.77 W/kg | -17.7% | 0.17 W/kg lower Body radio frequency energy absorption rate (US) | 0.77 W/kg vs 0.9 W/kg |
| Summary | |||||||
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.