Notebookcheck

小米10 Pro智能手机评测:小米也加入了旗舰机队列

终于走向高端,但代价是什么呢? 借助Mi 10 Pro,小米首先展示了Mi系列的真正意图-不惜一切代价加入智能手机旗舰行列。 小米10是小米新时代的开始。在对Mi智能手机的评测中,我们将考验小米雄心勃勃的计划是否成功。
Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Stefanie Voigt (translated by Zewei Shen),
Android 5G Touchscreen Smartphone
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Mi 10 Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 8 x 2.4 - 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
, LPDDR5
Display
6.67 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 386 PPI, capacitive, Super AMOLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 256 GB 
, 226 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: USB Type-C port, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 接近传感器,加速计,陀螺仪,电子罗盘,霍尔效应传感器,气压计, Miracast, IR blaster, USB OTG
Networking
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
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.96 x 162.6 x 74.8
Battery
4500 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
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毫米); Camera2 API:3级
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix f/2.0, 1/3", 0.9µm
Additional features
Speakers: 立体声,1216超线性, Keyboard: 虚拟, USB电缆,模块化充电器,保护套, MiUI 11, 12 Months Warranty, 机身SAR:0.568 W / kg,头部SAR:0.428 W / kg(中文版),Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
208 g, Power Supply: 81 g
Price
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 %
07/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
89 %
03/2020
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
219 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.9"3200x1440
89 %
04/2020
Huawei P40 Pro
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
209 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.58"2640x1200
87 %
10/2019
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 - 1414, n=562)
267 MBit/s ∼30% -70%
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 - 1599, n=562)
253 MBit/s ∼16% -69%
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
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 782 cd/m² Average: 762.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.01 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 753 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6
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: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17957 (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 (24.6 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 (39.1 ms).
Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
Vulkan Score 5.1 (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
  (2487 - 3259, n=8)
2723 Points ∼68% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=66)
1633 Points ∼41% -35%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (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 - 3080, n=8)
2981 Points ∼66% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=61)
1759 Points ∼39% -40%
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
  (3076 - 3449, n=10)
3312 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (445 - 3531, n=89)
1990 Points ∼59% -40%
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
  (903 - 924, n=10)
913 Points ∼97% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=89)
567 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 - 9739, n=5)
9559 Points ∼83% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=351)
4852 Points ∼42% -49%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13186 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
12557 Points ∼94% -5%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
12774 Points ∼95% -3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13279 Points ∼99% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (13186 - 13589, n=5)
13396 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 13589, n=413)
4955 Points ∼37% -62%
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 - 4304, n=5)
4281 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=413)
1510 Points ∼32% -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
  (9822 - 13202, n=11)
11312 Points ∼99% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 13202, n=490)
5834 Points ∼51% -47%
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
  (11839 - 19711, n=10)
13515 Points ∼94% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19711, n=648)
6373 Points ∼44% -52%
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
  (3193 - 3947, n=8)
3699 Points ∼91% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=149)
2636 Points ∼65% -31%
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 - 8321, n=8)
8231 Points ∼95% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=149)
2916 Points ∼34% -64%
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
  (6106 - 6644, n=9)
6479 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6644, n=149)
2626 Points ∼40% -60%
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 - 5780, n=9)
5429 Points ∼95% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=496)
2175 Points ∼38% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9356 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9157 Points ∼97% -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 ∼99% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6950 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9157 - 9567, n=9)
9408 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=496)
2075 Points ∼22% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7986 Points ∼99%
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 ∼80% -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 ∼99% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6404 Points ∼79% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7957 - 8204, n=10)
8086 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8204, n=497)
1926 Points ∼24% -76%
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
  (3956 - 5765, n=9)
5009 Points ∼88% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=526)
2085 Points ∼36% -51%
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 ∼74% -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
  (12547 - 12895, n=9)
12716 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=526)
2762 Points ∼22% -78%
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 - 10090, n=9)
9458 Points ∼98% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=526)
2321 Points ∼24% -74%
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 - 5209, n=9)
4956 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=576)
2062 Points ∼41% -58%
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 - 8432, n=9)
8282 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=576)
1735 Points ∼21% -79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7157 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
6836 Points ∼95% -4%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6060 Points ∼84% -15%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
6266 Points ∼87% -12%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7012 Points ∼97% -2%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5734 Points ∼80% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7012 - 7323, n=10)
7198 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7323, n=577)
1658 Points ∼23% -77%
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
  (3965 - 5274, n=9)
4783 Points ∼95% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=618)
1924 Points ∼38% -59%
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 - 12494, n=9)
11794 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=617)
2277 Points ∼18% -82%
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
  (8215 - 9492, n=9)
8887 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=620)
1961 Points ∼21% -79%
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
  (26182 - 58293, n=9)
36070 Points ∼77% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=766)
15263 Points ∼33% -53%
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
  (144611 - 154375, n=9)
148492 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=764)
25897 Points ∼17% -83%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
82937 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
66452 Points ∼78% -20%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
70593 Points ∼82% -15%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
72173 Points ∼84% -13%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
75632 Points ∼88% -9%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
80296 Points ∼94% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (72524 - 112989, n=9)
85586 Points ∼100% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 112989, n=764)
20366 Points ∼24% -75%
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 ∼98% -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 ∼99% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
136 fps ∼67% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (202 - 207, n=10)
204 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=772)
43.9 fps ∼22% -78%
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=10)
72 fps ∼61% -20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=781)
30.5 fps ∼26% -66%
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
  (120 - 126, n=10)
124 fps ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=677)
25.8 fps ∼21% -79%
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=10)
69 fps ∼78% -22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=685)
21.8 fps ∼25% -75%
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 ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
72 fps ∼84% -16%
Huawei P40 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
75 fps ∼87% -13%
OnePlus 7T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ / 855 Plus, Adreno 640, 8192
79 fps ∼92% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
86 fps ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 4 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
53 fps ∼62% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (74 - 88, n=11)
85.3 fps ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=540)
20.8 fps ∼24% -76%
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
  (43 - 77, n=11)
58.1 fps ∼75% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=542)
18.9 fps ∼25% -75%
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=11)
27.5 fps ∼83% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=288)
11.2 fps ∼34% -63%
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=11)
20 fps ∼91% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=286)
8.07 fps ∼37% -60%
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 - 53, n=11)
43.6 fps ∼85% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=292)
16.6 fps ∼33% -65%
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
  (27 - 54, n=11)
51 fps ∼91% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=291)
19.3 fps ∼34% -64%
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
  (49 - 52, n=11)
50.6 fps ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=465)
14 fps ∼27% -72%
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
  (25 - 46, n=11)
38.9 fps ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=469)
12.5 fps ∼28% -72%
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 - 607937, n=11)
580619 Points ∼97% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=94)
315184 Points ∼53% -47%
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 - 7649, n=3)
6598 Score ∼92% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 7649, n=82)
2609 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 - 1576, n=10)
1450 Points ∼89% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=709)
807 Points ∼50% -47%
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 ∼93% -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
  (11445 - 11842, n=10)
11655 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=709)
2428 Points ∼21% -79%
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
  (5564 - 8874, n=10)
7263 Points ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=709)
1805 Points ∼23% -77%
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
  (8421 - 10147, n=10)
9643 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=709)
3374 Points ∼34% -66%
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
  (5264 - 6273, n=10)
5845 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=709)
1716 Points ∼28% -72%
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 - 69.5, n=10)
61.3 Points ∼88% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
51.826 Points ∼74% -20%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=171)
40.2 Points ∼57% -38%
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 (79.1 - 120, n=9)
110 Points ∼94% -5%
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=600)
46.3 Points ∼40% -60%
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 (50.8 - 74.5, n=10)
65.4 runs/min ∼91% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
63.7 runs/min ∼89% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=155)
43.1 runs/min ∼60% -37%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (99 - 118, n=10)
103 Points ∼100% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
101 Points ∼98%
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼97% -1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼97% -1%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
93 Points ∼90% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
86 Points ∼83% -15%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=236)
69.8 Points ∼68% -31%
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%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
22834 Points ∼95%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (15745 - 24369, n=10)
21331 Points ∼89% -7%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
19122 Points ∼80% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=767)
7690 Points ∼32% -66%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=793)
9892 ms * ∼100% -389%
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80)
2398.3 ms * ∼24% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80)
2344.7 ms * ∼24% -16%
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78)
2133.5 ms * ∼22% -6%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
2043.6 ms * ∼21% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
2021.2 ms * ∼20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (2000 - 2538, n=11)
1956 ms * ∼20% +3%
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%
-23%
-83%
Random Write 4KB
258.54
221.37
-14%
271.83
5%
26
-90%
204.98
-21%
164.18
-36%
180 (24.8 - 272, n=17)
-30%
33.1 (0.14 - 319, n=856)
-87%
Random Read 4KB
264.9
202.43
-24%
228.06
-14%
169
-36%
202.63
-24%
142.24
-46%
205 (169 - 265, n=17)
-23%
57.1 (1.59 - 324, n=856)
-78%
Sequential Write 256KB
750.44
697.08
-7%
395.74
-47%
405
-46%
728.72
-3%
197.41
-74%
532 (387 - 756, n=17)
-29%
122 (2.99 - 911, n=856)
-84%
Sequential Read 256KB
1738.65
1632.02
-6%
1774.68
2%
1489
-14%
1605.6
-8%
870.91
-50%
1592 (1398 - 1789, n=17)
-8%
329 (12.1 - 1802, n=856)
-81%
PUBG Mobile
01020304050Tooltip
: Ø39.9 (37-41)
Asphalt 9 Legends
010203040Tooltip
: Ø29.9 (28-32)
Dead Trigger 2
0102030405060708090Tooltip
: Ø89.9 (89-90)
Max. Load
 30.8 °C32.1 °C32.6 °C 
 30 °C31.7 °C33.1 °C 
 29.5 °C31 °C32.5 °C 
Maximum: 33.1 °C
Average: 31.5 °C
29.6 °C30.7 °C30.7 °C
29.8 °C30.3 °C29.7 °C
29.1 °C30.3 °C30.1 °C
Maximum: 30.7 °C
Average: 30 °C
Power Supply (max.)  25 °C | Room Temperature 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 33.9 °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, 61% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.23 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.61 / 1.19 / 1.23 Watt
Load 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%
-68%
-25%
Idle Minimum *
0.61
0.76
-25%
0.92
-51%
2.1
-244%
1.47
-141%
0.83
-36%
1.251 (0.53 - 2.2, n=10)
-105%
0.887 (0.2 - 3.4, n=866)
-45%
Idle Average *
1.19
1.91
-61%
1.41
-18%
3
-152%
3.43
-188%
1.24
-4%
2.25 (1.19 - 3.43, n=10)
-89%
1.754 (0.6 - 6.2, n=865)
-47%
Idle Maximum *
1.23
1.96
-59%
1.47
-20%
3.5
-185%
3.52
-186%
1.25
-2%
2.55 (1.23 - 4, n=10)
-107%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=866)
-66%
Load Average *
4.18
4.72
-13%
3.35
20%
5.3
-27%
6.2
-48%
4.98
-19%
5.28 (3.5 - 7.4, n=10)
-26%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=860)
2%
Load Maximum *
8.53
10.15
-19%
6.37
25%
8.3
3%
10.63
-25%
9.09
-7%
9.82 (7.68 - 12.3, n=10)
-15%
6.04 (1.2 - 14.2, n=860)
29%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
35h 33min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
14h 25min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 13min
Load (maximum brightness)
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%

Pros

+ 惊人的OLED面板质量
+ 出色的做工
+ 优秀的振动单元
+ 出色的立体声扬声器
+ 发热小,无降频
+ 吸引人的相机

Cons

- 没有双SIM / SD卡存储扩展
- 超广角相机的照片质量
- 仅USB 2.0
- 缺乏某些高端功能(120 FPS或1440p面板,IP认证)
- 前置摄像头不支持4K视频

Verdict - Competitive Bundle with Gaps on the Datasheet

小米10 Pro智能手机评测. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen
小米10 Pro智能手机评测. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen

小米手机不仅首次接近旗舰智能手机,而且也跻身其中-价格也体现了这一点。虽然价格已接近5000元,但它已不再是多年来的性价比产品,但如今,购买者将获得与其他制造商的旗舰智能手机相媲美的体验。出色的功能包括高质量的振动单元,很可能是您在智能手机上可以找到的最好的立体声扬声器,出色的做工和摄像头,尽管广角镜的质量仍达不到标准。特别是在三星Galaxy S20 Ultra和华为P40 Proo面前。但是,Mi 10 Pro的变焦功能(最高10倍变焦)弥补了这一点,与竞争对手的潜望镜相机相比,这些变焦功能更为出色。

同样,该屏幕是2020年旗舰智能手机的水准。 Mi 10 Pro的面板具有较高的刷新率,良好的色彩准确性和较高的亮度。同时,尽管对大多数人的日常使用不太可能有什么影响(参考一加8 Pro),但也有人质疑为何不全力堆料(120 Hz,1440p)。其他痛点是缺乏IP防水防尘认证,USB端口只有2.0速度。

是的,Mi系列不再便宜。但是,小米旗舰机的极高的建议零售价是合理的-至少相对于高端细分市场中的其他智能手机而言。

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

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

Chassis
88%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
54 / 70 → 78%
Weight
88%
Battery
90%
Display
92%
Games Performance
61 / 64 → 95%
Application Performance
82 / 86 → 96%
Temperature
93%
Noise
100%
Audio
78 / 90 → 87%
Camera
76%
Average
82%
88%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 小米10 Pro智能手机评测:小米也加入了旗舰机队列
Marcus Herbrich, 2020-07- 5 (Update: 2020-07- 5)