Free Fire vs COD Mobile: Which game is better for low-end Android devices after recent updates?

Both COD Mobile and Garena Free Fire have seen immense growth in numbers since their release on the mobile platform. Free Fire has a larger fanbase due to its size and compatibility, while COD Mobile appeals to a specific section of gamers who seek serious and immersive gaming experiences.

COD Mobile recently received its Season 6 update that welcomed an assortment of changes and additions. Fans got to see new UI, modes, maps, firearms, lucky draws, balance changes, and much more.

Similarly, Garena Free Fire's OB29 update also saw the dawn of new features like characters, a new game mode, a new weapon, character adjustments, weapon tweaks, etc. Apart from the new additions, fans are awaiting the 4th-anniversary celebrations for rewards.

Both Garena and Activision have been relatively consistent in pushing updates for their games. New updates have upscaled the quality, but performance on low-end smartphones has also been affected.

---

COD Mobile and Free Fire: Comparing both Battle Royales based on performance

System requirements

COD Mobile

COD Mobile details on the Play Store (Image via Google Play Store)

Required Android version - Android 4.3 and above

Minimum RAM - 2 GB (Recommended 3 GB for smooth gameplay)

Current version - 1.0.26

Download Size - 3.18 GB

---

Free Fire

Free Fire details on the Play Store (Image via Google Play Store)

Required Android version - Android 4.1 and above

Minimum RAM - 1 GB (Recommended 2 GB for smooth gameplay)

Current version - 1.64.2

Download Size - 716 MB

---

Graphics

COD Mobile has the best graphics among BR games on mobile platforms (Image via COD Mobile)

COD Mobile probably has the best graphics among shooters on mobiles. The game has excellent in-game physics and sound optimization with lifelike visuals. It can be considered as the peak immersive gaming experience on mobile among Battle Royale games

On the other hand, Free Fire provides a brilliant output in terms of graphics as per its size. For visuals, it stands nowhere near COD Mobile, as they seem more cartoonish than realistic.

These graphics, however, are the reason behind Free Fire's efficient performance on most devices.

---

Game modes

Zombies have returned to COD Mobile (Image via COD Mobile / Google Play Store)

Free Fire has plenty of game modes, but they seem less compared to the variety of options in COD Mobile. There are several permanent and temporary BR and MP modes in the latter.

Season 6: The Heat also marked the return of the Zombies mode, while the list of MP maps in COD Mobile upscales the variety and versatility of the game.

Free Fire, on the contrary, has a few maps in its line-up. However, its gameplay makes up for the lack of variation. There is an assortment of character abilities that makes the title a lot more interesting than it seems.

Although COD Mobile also has special operator skills, the character abilities in Free Fire are more abundant and versatile.

Free Fire game modes (Image via Free Fire)

Despite having similarities like character abilities, special weapon blueprints, revivals after in-game death, and more, both games have polarizing differences due to their tones. COD Mobile is a more serious and action-packed BR experience, while Free Fire feels more fun-oriented due to character cosmetics and emotes.

---

Which game suits low-end Android devices?

Free Fire is better option than COD Mobile for low-end devices (Image via Garena)

COD Mobile is better in every viewpoint than Free Fire except for the vibrant character outfits. The former, however, is more suitable for mid to high-end Android devices due to its gigantic download size and over 2 GB in-game resource packages.

COD Mobile sometimes faces lag issues on smartphones with decent Qualcomm processors like the Snapdragon 6 series. Free Fire, on the contrary, works fine on most smartphones, even if it's a low-end Android with Snapdragon 4 series Qualcomm processor. Hence, it is best suited for low-end Android devices.

Note: This article reflects the author's views.