Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro: A Xiaomi juntou-se à elite dos smartphones

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Stefanie Voigt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 04/23/2020

Finalmente gama alta, mas a que custo? Com o Mi 10 Pro, a Xiaomi mostrou suas verdadeiras intenções para a série Mi ingressar na elite dos smartphones, a qualquer custo. A geração Mi 10 é o começo de uma nova era para a Xiaomi. Nesta análise do smartphone Mi, determinaremos se o conceito ambicioso foi executado com sucesso.

Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Mi 10 Serie)
Placa gráfica
Memória
8192 MB 
, LPDDR5
Pantalha
6.67 polegadas 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 386 PPI, Tela táctil capacitiva, Super AMOLED, Brilhante: sim, HDR, 90 Hz
Disco rígido
256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 256 GB 
, 226 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Porta USB Type-C, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: Sensor de proximidade, acelerômetro, giroscópio, e-compass, sensor hall effect, barômetro, Miracast, transmissor e IV, USB OTG
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 5G: Sub6G: n1/n3/n7/n28/n77/n78; 4G: FDD LTE: 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/20/28/32, TD LTE: 38/40; 3G: WCDMA: B1/B2/B4/B5/B8; 2G: GSM: B2/B3/B5/B8, Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 8.96 x 162.6 x 74.8
Bateria
4500 mAh Lítio-Polímero
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Sistema Operativo
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 108 MPix (f/1.7, 1/1.33", 0.8µm) + 8 MP (f/2.0, 1.0µm) + 12 MP f/2.0, 1/2.55", 1.4µm) + 20 MP (f/2.2, 13 mm); Camera2 API: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix f/2.0, 1/3", 0,9µm
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Estéreo, 1216 super linear , Teclado: Virtual, Cabo USB, carregador modular, capa, MiUI 11, 12 Meses Garantia, Body SAR: 0,568 W/kg, head SAR: 0,428 W/kg (versão chinesa), Widevine L1, fanless
peso
208 g, Suprimento de energia: 81 g
Preço
999 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
88 %
05/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
89 %
05/2020
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
219 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.9"3200x1440
89 %
05/2020
Huawei P40 Pro
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
209 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.58"2640x1200
87 %
11/2019
OnePlus 7T Pro
SD 855+, Adreno 640
206 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"3120x1440
86 %
03/2020
Oppo Find X2 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
202 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"3168x1440
86 %
11/2019
Google Pixel 4 XL
SD 855, Adreno 640
193 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.3"3040x1440
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (r.) vs. Mi 9 (l.)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Smartphone review

Size Comparison

166.9 mm 76 mm 8.8 mm 219 g165.2 mm 74.4 mm 9.5 mm 202 g162.6 mm 74.8 mm 8.96 mm 208 g162.6 mm 75.9 mm 8.8 mm 206 g160.4 mm 75.1 mm 8.2 mm 193 g158.2 mm 72.6 mm 8.95 mm 209 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
883 (min: 834, max: 919) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
825 (min: 763, max: 855) MBit/s ∼93% -7%
Huawei P40 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
821 (min: 388, max: 998) MBit/s ∼93% -7%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
754 (min: 346, max: 881) MBit/s ∼85% -15%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Adreno 640, SD 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
631 (min: 579, max: 653) MBit/s ∼71% -29%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Adreno 640, SD 855+, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
471 (min: 347, max: 505) MBit/s ∼53% -47%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1368, n=534)
256 MBit/s ∼29% -71%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40 Pro
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1544 (min: 797, max: 1619) MBit/s ∼100% +89%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
818 (min: 425, max: 890) MBit/s ∼53% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
816 (min: 403, max: 832) MBit/s ∼53%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
509 (min: 264, max: 571) MBit/s ∼33% -38%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Adreno 640, SD 855+, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
352 (min: 311, max: 375) MBit/s ∼23% -57%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Adreno 640, SD 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
317 (min: 159, max: 363) MBit/s ∼21% -61%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1544, n=534)
242 MBit/s ∼16% -70%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø883 (834-919)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø803 (403-832)
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
GPS Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Ultra-wide angle
Ultra-wide angle
Wide angle
Wide angle

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3Scene 4
ColorChecker
19.2 ∆E
25.4 ∆E
22.2 ∆E
20.9 ∆E
24.7 ∆E
31.9 ∆E
26.1 ∆E
17.6 ∆E
15.4 ∆E
15.7 ∆E
28 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
15.6 ∆E
24.3 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
24.5 ∆E
19.3 ∆E
26.7 ∆E
25.9 ∆E
25.2 ∆E
27.4 ∆E
25.2 ∆E
20.9 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro: 22.31 ∆E min: 9.21 - max: 31.86 ∆E
ColorChecker
18.9 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
19.2 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
12.4 ∆E
12.3 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
14.3 ∆E
15.7 ∆E
1.4 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
4.4 ∆E
5 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro: 9.63 ∆E min: 1.4 - max: 19.16 ∆E
748
cd/m²
757
cd/m²
782
cd/m²
757
cd/m²
753
cd/m²
774
cd/m²
761
cd/m²
756
cd/m²
771
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 782 cd/m² Médio: 762.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.01 cd/m²
iluminação: 96 %
iluminação com acumulador: 753 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.9
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
98.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.24
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Dynamic AMOLED 2X, 3200x1440, 6.9
Huawei P40 Pro
OLED, 2640x1200, 6.58
OnePlus 7T Pro
AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.67
Oppo Find X2 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.7
Google Pixel 4 XL
P-OLED, 3040x1440, 6.3
OnePlus 8 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.78
Screen
-111%
-22%
-102%
-183%
-134%
10%
Brightness middle
753
734
-3%
584
-22%
606
-20%
778
3%
557
-26%
796
6%
Brightness
762
748
-2%
576
-24%
611
-20%
775
2%
555
-27%
779
2%
Brightness Distribution
96
95
-1%
95
-1%
95
-1%
99
3%
95
-1%
94
-2%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
0.9
3.2
-256%
1.1
-22%
3.46
-284%
4.4
-389%
3.9
-333%
0.68
24%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
1.6
6.8
-325%
2.3
-44%
5.64
-253%
8.7
-444%
6.1
-281%
1.55
3%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.5
2.7
-80%
1.8
-20%
2
-33%
5.6
-273%
3.5
-133%
1.1
27%
Gamma
2.24 98%
2.11 104%
2.16 102%
2.258 97%
2.26 97%
2.18 101%
2.237 98%
CCT
6415 101%
6299 103%
6355 102%
6779 96%
7250 90%
6127 106%
6310 103%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 373.1 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 373.1 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 373.1 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 50 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18215 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.3 ms).
Geekbench 5.1
Vulkan Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2519 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
3804 Points ∼96% +51%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3979 Points ∼100% +58%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2641 Points ∼66% +5%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2411 Points ∼61% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2519 - 2659, n=4)
2592 Points ∼65% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (118 - 4043, n=49)
1669 Points ∼42% -34%
OpenCL Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2932 Points ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4511 Points ∼100% +54%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2960 Points ∼66% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2829 - 3027, n=4)
2937 Points ∼65% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=47)
1729 Points ∼38% -41%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3338 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
2815 Points ∼84% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3165 Points ∼94% -5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3360 Points ∼100% +1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2164 Points ∼64% -35%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3309 - 3360, n=4)
3331 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (782 - 3531, n=61)
1985 Points ∼59% -41%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
906 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
940 Points ∼100% +4%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
779 Points ∼83% -14%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
911 Points ∼97% +1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
552 Points ∼59% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (906 - 911, n=4)
909 Points ∼97% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (145 - 1342, n=61)
568 Points ∼60% -37%
Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9443 Points ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
8648 Points ∼75% -8%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11557 Points ∼100% +22%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9491 Points ∼82% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9443 - 9491, n=2)
9467 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=344)
4790 Points ∼41% -49%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13186 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
12557 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
12774 Points ∼96% -3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13279 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (13186 - 13279, n=2)
13233 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 13279, n=406)
4870 Points ∼37% -63%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4261 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4791 Points ∼100% +12%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3935 Points ∼82% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4278 Points ∼89% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4261 - 4278, n=2)
4270 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=406)
1482 Points ∼31% -65%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10952 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
10255 Points ∼90% -6%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11341 Points ∼100% +4%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10442 Points ∼92% -5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11387 Points ∼100% +4%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10335 Points ∼91% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10613 - 12330, n=5)
11287 Points ∼99% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=462)
5661 Points ∼50% -48%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13142 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
14307 Points ∼100% +9%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
14352 Points ∼100% +9%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
12645 Points ∼88% -4%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13360 Points ∼93% +2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
12760 Points ∼89% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11850 - 13471, n=4)
12956 Points ∼90% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=623)
6184 Points ∼43% -53%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3830 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
3201 Points ∼79% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4057 Points ∼100% +6%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
3564 Points ∼88% -7%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3843 Points ∼95% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3452 Points ∼85% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3336 - 3888, n=4)
3724 Points ∼92% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=125)
2605 Points ∼64% -32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8173 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
8659 Points ∼100% +6%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6360 Points ∼73% -22%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6527 Points ∼75% -20%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8076 Points ∼93% -1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5685 Points ∼66% -30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8076 - 8279, n=4)
8176 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=125)
2800 Points ∼32% -66%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6578 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
6280 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5648 Points ∼86% -14%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5509 Points ∼84% -16%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6444 Points ∼98% -2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4970 Points ∼76% -24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6182 - 6618, n=5)
6486 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6618, n=125)
2526 Points ∼38% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5277 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4447 Points ∼78% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5728 Points ∼100% +9%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4683 Points ∼82% -11%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5187 Points ∼91% -2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5024 Points ∼88% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5187 - 5506, n=4)
5289 Points ∼92% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5728, n=469)
2110 Points ∼37% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9356 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9157 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6771 Points ∼72% -28%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8006 Points ∼85% -14%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9345 Points ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6950 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9345 - 9389, n=4)
9367 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9389, n=469)
1971 Points ∼21% -79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7986 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
7412 Points ∼92% -7%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6508 Points ∼81% -19%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6916 Points ∼86% -13%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7982 Points ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6404 Points ∼80% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7957 - 8111, n=5)
8019 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8111, n=470)
1830 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4283 Points ∼75%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4436 Points ∼78% +4%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5718 Points ∼100% +34%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4604 Points ∼81% +7%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5209 Points ∼91% +22%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4652 Points ∼81% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3973 - 5480, n=4)
4736 Points ∼83% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5718, n=499)
2021 Points ∼35% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12694 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9470 Points ∼75% -25%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7905 Points ∼62% -38%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
11448 Points ∼90% -10%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12573 Points ∼99% -1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9995 Points ∼79% -21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (12573 - 12694, n=4)
12633 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=499)
2616 Points ∼21% -79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8823 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
7563 Points ∼79% -14%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7286 Points ∼76% -17%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8605 Points ∼89% -2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9616 Points ∼100% +9%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7963 Points ∼83% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8499 - 9807, n=4)
9186 Points ∼96% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=499)
2200 Points ∼23% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4895 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4267 Points ∼86% -13%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4971 Points ∼100% +2%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4519 Points ∼91% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4582 Points ∼92% -6%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4612 Points ∼93% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 4987, n=4)
4819 Points ∼97% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 4987, n=549)
2003 Points ∼40% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8299 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
8257 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6465 Points ∼78% -22%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
7044 Points ∼85% -15%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8045 Points ∼97% -3%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6163 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8045 - 8371, n=4)
8205 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=549)
1646 Points ∼20% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7157 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
6836 Points ∼96% -4%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6060 Points ∼85% -15%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6266 Points ∼88% -12%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7012 Points ∼98% -2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5734 Points ∼80% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7012 - 7190, n=5)
7123 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7190, n=550)
1575 Points ∼22% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4729 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
3889 Points ∼77% -18%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4975 Points ∼98% +5%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4503 Points ∼89% -5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5054 Points ∼100% +7%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4618 Points ∼91% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4196 - 5054, n=4)
4727 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5054, n=591)
1870 Points ∼37% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12394 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
11488 Points ∼93% -7%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7499 Points ∼61% -39%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10637 Points ∼86% -14%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11458 Points ∼92% -8%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9141 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11371 - 12394, n=4)
11864 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12394, n=590)
2146 Points ∼17% -83%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9123 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
8010 Points ∼88% -12%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6739 Points ∼74% -26%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
8165 Points ∼89% -11%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8866 Points ∼97% -3%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7507 Points ∼82% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8581 - 9123, n=4)
8845 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9123, n=593)
1854 Points ∼20% -80%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
32384 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
42135 Points ∼90% +30%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46731 Points ∼100% +44%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
30561 Points ∼65% -6%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
28147 Points ∼60% -13%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
43773 Points ∼94% +35%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28147 - 32384, n=3)
30924 Points ∼66% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 46731, n=736)
14876 Points ∼32% -54%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
150281 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
79572 Points ∼53% -47%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
82652 Points ∼55% -45%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
118129 Points ∼79% -21%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
145567 Points ∼97% -3%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
105430 Points ∼70% -30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (145567 - 150281, n=3)
148288 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=734)
24225 Points ∼16% -84%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
82937 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
66452 Points ∼80% -20%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
70593 Points ∼85% -15%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
72173 Points ∼87% -13%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
75632 Points ∼91% -9%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
80296 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (75632 - 82937, n=3)
80377 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97290, n=734)
19337 Points ∼23% -77%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
203 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
200 fps ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
152 fps ∼75% -25%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
185 fps ∼91% -9%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
202 fps ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
136 fps ∼67% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (202 - 206, n=4)
203 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=750)
41.9 fps ∼21% -79%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼76%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
119 fps ∼100% +32%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼50% -33%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼50% -33%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼50% -33%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼50% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (60 - 90, n=4)
75 fps ∼63% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=759)
29.7 fps ∼25% -67%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
122 fps ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
100 fps ∼81% -18%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
118 fps ∼95% -3%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
111 fps ∼90% -9%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
123 fps ∼99% +1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
82 fps ∼66% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (122 - 126, n=4)
124 fps ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=655)
24.5 fps ∼20% -80%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
59 fps ∼67% -33%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
59 fps ∼67% -33%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
57 fps ∼65% -35%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
58 fps ∼66% -34%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
46 fps ∼52% -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (58 - 88, n=4)
73.5 fps ∼84% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=663)
21 fps ∼24% -76%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
72 fps ∼83% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
75 fps ∼86% -13%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
79 fps ∼91% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
86 fps ∼99% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
53 fps ∼61% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (86 - 88, n=5)
86.8 fps ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=518)
19.8 fps ∼23% -77%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
77 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
58 fps ∼75% -25%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
52 fps ∼68% -32%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
40 fps ∼52% -48%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼58% -42%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
27 fps ∼35% -65%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (45 - 77, n=5)
61.2 fps ∼79% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=520)
18.3 fps ∼24% -76%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
33 fps ∼100% +10%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
23 fps ∼70% -23%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
17 fps ∼52% -43%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
18 fps ∼55% -40%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
11 fps ∼33% -63%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (18 - 31, n=5)
25.4 fps ∼77% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=260)
10.7 fps ∼32% -64%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
22 fps ∼100% +10%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
19 fps ∼86% -5%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
19 fps ∼86% -5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼91% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
12 fps ∼55% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (20 - 20, n=5)
20 fps ∼91% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 68, n=258)
7.57 fps ∼34% -62%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
51 fps ∼100% +9%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
36 fps ∼71% -23%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
26 fps ∼51% -45%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
28 fps ∼55% -40%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
17 fps ∼33% -64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28 - 48, n=5)
39.6 fps ∼78% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=264)
15.9 fps ∼31% -66%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
54 (min: 20) fps ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
56 fps ∼100% +4%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
50 fps ∼89% -7%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
47 fps ∼84% -13%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
53 fps ∼95% -2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
33 fps ∼59% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (53 - 54, n=5)
53.4 fps ∼95% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 165, n=263)
17.9 fps ∼32% -67%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
50 fps ∼98% 0%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
44 fps ∼86% -12%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
48 fps ∼94% -4%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼100% +2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
32 fps ∼63% -36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (50 - 51, n=5)
50.4 fps ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=443)
13.4 fps ∼26% -73%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
44 fps ∼98% -2%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
31 fps ∼69% -31%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
24 fps ∼53% -47%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
26 fps ∼58% -42%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼36% -64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (26 - 45, n=5)
37.2 fps ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=447)
12 fps ∼27% -73%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
595466 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
498708 Points ∼83% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
496966 Points ∼83% -17%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
486654 Points ∼81% -18%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
599843 Points ∼100% +1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
426757 Points ∼71% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (557310 - 599843, n=5)
580821 Points ∼97% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 599843, n=71)
299795 Points ∼50% -50%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7156 Score ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4957 Score ∼69% -31%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5037 Score ∼70% -30%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4986 Score ∼70% -30%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4988 Score ∼70% -30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4988 - 7156, n=2)
6072 Score ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 7156, n=78)
2555 Score ∼36% -64%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1514 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
1270 Points ∼78% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1629 Points ∼100% +8%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
1236 Points ∼76% -18%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1351 Points ∼83% -11%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1502 Points ∼92% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1276 - 1514, n=4)
1409 Points ∼86% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=685)
791 Points ∼49% -48%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11567 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
10781 Points ∼92% -7%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
10138 Points ∼87% -12%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
10618 Points ∼91% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11496 Points ∼99% -1%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9356 Points ∼80% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11496 - 11842, n=4)
11659 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=685)
2297 Points ∼20% -80%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7945 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4497 Points ∼57% -43%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6038 Points ∼76% -24%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
5091 Points ∼64% -36%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6350 Points ∼80% -20%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6387 Points ∼80% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6350 - 7945, n=4)
7246 Points ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7945, n=685)
1699 Points ∼21% -79%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10002 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9478 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
9782 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
9294 Points ∼93% -7%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9555 Points ∼96% -4%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8417 Points ∼84% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9555 - 10058, n=4)
9856 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=685)
3241 Points ∼32% -68%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6072 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4915 Points ∼81% -19%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5589 Points ∼92% -8%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
4992 Points ∼82% -18%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5540 Points ∼91% -9%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5243 Points ∼86% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5540 - 6072, n=4)
5839 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=685)
1637 Points ∼27% -73%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
69.956 Points ∼100% +8%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
64.958 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
64.567 Points ∼92% -1%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
62.417 Points ∼89% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (50.9 - 65, n=4)
60.9 Points ∼87% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
51.826 Points ∼74% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=150)
38.8 Points ∼55% -40%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
116.61 Points ∼100% +1%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
115.44 Points ∼99% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
115.43 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.65 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (109 - 115, n=4)
114 Points ∼98% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
89.62 Points ∼77% -22%
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80)
84.388 Points ∼72% -27%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=582)
45.1 Points ∼39% -61%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
71.8 runs/min ∼100% +5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
71 runs/min ∼99% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
68.6 runs/min ∼96%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chome 78)
66.4 runs/min ∼92% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (56.2 - 71, n=4)
65.9 runs/min ∼92% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
63.7 runs/min ∼89% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=136)
42.3 runs/min ∼59% -38%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (100 - 118, n=4)
106 Points ∼100% +5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
101 Points ∼95%
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼94% -1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼94% -1%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
93 Points ∼88% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
86 Points ∼81% -15%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=212)
68.7 Points ∼65% -32%
Huawei P40 Pro
Points ∼0% -100%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80)
24044 Points ∼100% +5%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
23999 Points ∼100% +5%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
23690 Points ∼99% +4%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
22976 Points ∼96% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (22016 - 23678, n=4)
22876 Points ∼95% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
22834 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
19122 Points ∼80% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=743)
7401 Points ∼31% -68%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (550 - 59466, n=768)
10120 ms * ∼100% -401%
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80)
2398.3 ms * ∼24% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
2344.7 ms * ∼23% -16%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
2133.5 ms * ∼21% -6%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
2043.6 ms * ∼20% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (1945 - 2104, n=4)
2028 ms * ∼20% -0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
2021.2 ms * ∼20%
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1)
1913.7 ms * ∼19% +5%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi Mi 10 ProSamsung Galaxy S20 UltraHuawei P40 ProOnePlus 7T ProOppo Find X2 ProGoogle Pixel 4 XLAverage 256 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-13%
-14%
-47%
-14%
-52%
-27%
-84%
Random Write 4KB
258.54
221.37
-14%
271.83
5%
26
-90%
204.98
-21%
164.18
-36%
153 (24.8 - 272, n=11)
-41%
29.2 (0.14 - 272, n=827)
-89%
Random Read 4KB
264.9
202.43
-24%
228.06
-14%
169
-36%
202.63
-24%
142.24
-46%
199 (169 - 265, n=11)
-25%
54 (1.59 - 265, n=827)
-80%
Sequential Write 256KB
750.44
697.08
-7%
395.74
-47%
405
-46%
728.72
-3%
197.41
-74%
506 (387 - 750, n=11)
-33%
113 (2.99 - 750, n=827)
-85%
Sequential Read 256KB
1738.65
1632.02
-6%
1774.68
2%
1489
-14%
1605.6
-8%
870.91
-50%
1569 (1443 - 1781, n=11)
-10%
310 (12.1 - 1781, n=827)
-82%
PUBG Mobile
01020304050Tooltip
: Ø39.9 (37-41)
Asphalt 9 Legends
010203040Tooltip
: Ø29.9 (28-32)
Dead Trigger 2
0102030405060708090Tooltip
: Ø89.9 (89-90)
Carga Máxima
 30.8 °C32.1 °C32.6 °C 
 30 °C31.7 °C33.1 °C 
 29.5 °C31 °C32.5 °C 
Máximo: 33.1 °C
Médio: 31.5 °C
29.6 °C30.7 °C30.7 °C
29.8 °C30.3 °C29.7 °C
29.1 °C30.3 °C30.1 °C
Máximo: 30.7 °C
Médio: 30 °C
alimentação elétrica  25 °C | Temperatura do quarto 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31.5 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.1 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.7 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.1 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2030.538.72522.429.23121.426.34024.328.35028.238.16321.6258022.325.610020.43712518.647.416017.256.320017.55225015.15631515.260.44001564.150014.267.663013.169.480013.969.110001370.412501370.6160013.772.3200014.273.925001477.5315014.475.2400014.374.8500014.470.7630014.669.3800014.964.91000014.962.81250015.262.91600015.656.5SPL26.484.5N0.859.2median 14.6median 67.6Delta0.86.733.431.529.629.329.828.525.526.133.232.126.824.925.523.323.724.319.13318.953.317.250.917.552.81757.515.159.7156414.764.315.565.715.567.314.771.514.575.114.675.714.574.313.775.714.772.314.572.314.569.814.570.614.869.514.962.715.55626.984.40.958.1median 14.9median 65.71.38.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi 10 ProSamsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 16.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 12% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.01 / 0.23 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.61 / 1.19 / 1.23 Watt
Carga midlight 4.18 / 8.53 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
5000 mAh
Huawei P40 Pro
4200 mAh
OnePlus 7T Pro
4085 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
Google Pixel 4 XL
3700 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-35%
-9%
-121%
-118%
-14%
-59%
-25%
Idle Minimum *
0.61
0.76
-25%
0.92
-51%
2.1
-244%
1.47
-141%
0.83
-36%
1.164 (0.53 - 2.2, n=8)
-91%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=842)
-45%
Idle Average *
1.19
1.91
-61%
1.41
-18%
3
-152%
3.43
-188%
1.24
-4%
2.16 (1.19 - 3.43, n=8)
-82%
1.748 (0.6 - 6.2, n=841)
-47%
Idle Maximum *
1.23
1.96
-59%
1.47
-20%
3.5
-185%
3.52
-186%
1.25
-2%
2.37 (1.23 - 3.7, n=8)
-93%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=842)
-65%
Load Average *
4.18
4.72
-13%
3.35
20%
5.3
-27%
6.2
-48%
4.98
-19%
5.01 (3.5 - 7.4, n=8)
-20%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=836)
2%
Load Maximum *
8.53
10.15
-19%
6.37
25%
8.3
3%
10.63
-25%
9.09
-7%
9.49 (7.68 - 12.3, n=8)
-11%
6.03 (1.2 - 14.2, n=836)
29%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
35h 33min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
14h 25min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 13min
Carga (máximo brilho)
3h 18min
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
5000 mAh
Huawei P40 Pro
4200 mAh
OnePlus 7T Pro
4085 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
Google Pixel 4 XL
3700 mAh
Battery Runtime
-1%
-7%
10%
-24%
-28%
Reader / Idle
2133
1858
-13%
1474
-31%
2015
-6%
H.264
973
1131
16%
1137
17%
957
-2%
WiFi v1.3
865
720
-17%
743
-14%
912
5%
654
-24%
623
-28%
Load
198
221
12%
198
0%
283
43%

Pro

+ Incrível painel OLED
+ Ótima qualidade de construção
+ Excelente unidade de vibração
+ Alto falantes estéreo fantásticos
+ Desenvolvimento de calor e afogamento insignificantes
+ Câmeras atraentes

Contra

- Sem expansão para armazenamento de cartão SIM duplo / SD
- Arranjo e qualidade das fotos da câmera ultra grande angular
- Somente USB 2.0
- Não possui alguns recursos avançados (painel de 120 FPS ou 1440p, certificação IP)
- A câmera frontal não suporta vídeo 4K

Veredicto - Pacote competitivo com faltas na folha de dados

In review: Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen
In review: Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen

Pela primeira vez, um telefone Xiaomi não apenas se aproxima dos smartphones de elite, mas também se encontra entre eles - isso também se reflete no preço. Embora com quase 1.000 Euros (~US$ 1.086), a série Mi do fabricante chinês não seja mais a proposta de valor que já existe há anos, os compradores agora recebem uma experiência premium de smartphone que compete com a de smartphones de outros fabricantes. Os recursos de destaque incluem a alta qualidade da unidade de vibração instalada, possivelmente os melhores alto-falantes estéreo que você pode encontrar em um smartphone, uma excelente qualidade de construção e ótimas câmeras, embora a qualidade da lente grande angular ainda esteja aquém de os do Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra e do Huawei P40 Pro em particular. No entanto, isso é compensado pelos recursos de zoom do Mi 10 Pro (zoom de até 10x), que são superiores aos das câmeras de periscópio da competição.

Da mesma forma, a tela é digna de um smartphone carro-chefe de 2020. O painel do Mi 10 Pro apresenta uma alta taxa de atualização, boa precisão de cores e alta luminosidade. Enquanto isso, as críticas perguntando por que o fabricante chinês não deu tudo (120 Hz, 1440p) são válidas, embora seja improvável que o uso diário da maioria das pessoas seja afetado de maneira significativa, principalmente em comparação direta com o uso diário. a experiência do OnePlus 8 Pro. Outros pontos doloridos são a falta de uma certificação IP e a porta USB limitada a velocidades 2.0.

Sim, a série Mi não é mais barata. No entanto, o preço de rua recomendado muito alto do carro-chefe da Xiaomi é justificado - pelo menos em relação a outros smartphones do segmento de gama alta.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro - 04/18/2020 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Acabamento
88%
Teclado
67 / 75 → 89%
Mouse
96%
Conectividade
54 / 70 → 78%
Peso
88%
Bateria
90%
Pantalha
92%
Desempenho do jogos
61 / 64 → 95%
Desempenho da aplicação
82 / 86 → 96%
Temperatura
93%
Ruído
100%
Audio
78 / 90 → 87%
Camera
76%
Médio
82%
88%
Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro: A Xiaomi juntou-se à elite dos smartphones
Marcus Herbrich, 2020-04-23 (Update: 2020-04-27)