Notebookcheck

Oppo Reno3智能手机评测:摄像头多还不贵

摄像头+摄像头。 Oppo Reno 3是台经典中档智能手机。但是,独特的卖点是四个相机,类似的情况也出现在更昂贵的型号中。 我们在评论中仔细研究了这台中国智能手机。
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Zewei Shen),
ARM Android Smartphone Touchscreen
Oppo Reno3
Oppo Reno3 (Reno Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio P90 8 x 2.2 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55
Graphics adapter
PowerVR GM9446
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.4 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 411 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 114 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5毫米, Card Reader: 最大256 GB的microSD, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度传感器,陀螺仪,接近传感器,罗盘, USB-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 4 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 160.2 x 73.3
Battery
4025 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f/1.8,相位比较自动对焦,OIS,双LED闪光灯,视频@ 2160p / 30fps(相机1); 13.0MP,f/2.4,长焦镜头(相机2); 8.0MP,f / 2.2,广角镜头(3号相机); 2.0MP,f / 2.4,单色,景深(4号相机)
Secondary Camera: 44 MPix f / 2.4,视频@ 1080p / 30fps
Additional features
Speakers: 混合立体声扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟, 充电器,USB电缆,耳机,硅胶套,SIM卡工具, 24 Months Warranty, SAR值:0.825W / kg(头),1.292W / kg(机体), fanless
Weight
170 g, Power Supply: 89 g
Price
329 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison devices

Bewertung
Rating Version
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
80 %7
08/2020
Oppo Reno3
Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446
170 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2400x1080
81 %7
10/2019
Oppo Reno2
SD 730G, Adreno 618
189 g256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2400x1080
81 %7
09/2019
Xiaomi Mi 9T
SD 730, Adreno 618
191 g64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.39"2340x1080
80 %7
12/2019
Motorola One Hyper
SD 675, Adreno 612
210 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2340x1080

Size comparison

161.8 mm 76.6 mm 8.9 mm 210 g160 mm 74.3 mm 9 mm 189 g160.2 mm 73.3 mm 7.9 mm 170 g156.7 mm 74.3 mm 8.8 mm 191 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno2
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
618 (532min - 671max) MBit/s ∼100% +75%
Oppo Reno3
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
353 (297min - 367max) MBit/s ∼57%
Motorola One Hyper
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
337 (325min - 346max) MBit/s ∼55% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
333 (297min - 343max) MBit/s ∼54% -6%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno2
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
355 (187min - 387max) MBit/s ∼100% +2%
Oppo Reno3
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
347 (331min - 352max) MBit/s ∼98%
Motorola One Hyper
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
314 (268min - 335max) MBit/s ∼88% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
293 (161min - 346max) MBit/s ∼83% -16%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø353 (297-367)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø347 (331-352)

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 3
click to load images
ColorChecker
29.3 ∆E
45.7 ∆E
34.9 ∆E
33.9 ∆E
40.3 ∆E
52.1 ∆E
44.9 ∆E
28.5 ∆E
33.7 ∆E
27.8 ∆E
54.1 ∆E
56.1 ∆E
25.5 ∆E
40.1 ∆E
30 ∆E
61.7 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
38.1 ∆E
59 ∆E
61.7 ∆E
47.7 ∆E
35.4 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno3: 39.77 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 61.7 ∆E
ColorChecker
3.5 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
4.4 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
2.9 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno3: 7.26 ∆E min: 2.91 - max: 10.64 ∆E
561
cd/m²
600
cd/m²
611
cd/m²
596
cd/m²
595
cd/m²
604
cd/m²
598
cd/m²
598
cd/m²
621
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 621 cd/m² Average: 598.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 595 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.96 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 4.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.307
Oppo Reno3
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.4
Oppo Reno2
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Xiaomi Mi 9T
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
Motorola One Hyper
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.5
Response Times
67%
61%
335%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
8 (3, 5)
3.6 (2, 1.6)
55%
4 (2, 2)
50%
44 (25, 19)
-450%
Response Time Black / White *
7 (4, 3)
3.2 (2, 1.2)
54%
3.2 (2, 1.2)
54%
22 (11, 11)
-214%
PWM Frequency
136
260.4 (99)
91%
245.1 (99)
80%
2404 (15)
1668%
Screen
14%
27%
-2%
Brightness middle
595
679
14%
589
-1%
455
-24%
Brightness
598
683
14%
589
-2%
444
-26%
Brightness Distribution
90
98
9%
96
7%
78
-13%
Black Level *
0.53
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.96
3.5
29%
2.5
50%
3.86
22%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.54
6.8
20%
4.9
43%
6.59
23%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.2
4.2
-0%
1.6
62%
4
5%
Gamma
2.307 95%
2.27 97%
2.24 98%
2.3 96%
CCT
7072 92%
6532 100%
6544 99%
7367 88%
Contrast
858
Total Average (Program / Settings)
41% / 32%
44% / 38%
167% / 110%

* ... smaller is better

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
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4 ms rise
↘ 3 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. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.8 ms).

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 136 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 136 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 136 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17699 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1524 Points ∼78%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
1762 Points ∼90% +16%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1524 - 1534, n=2)
1529 Points ∼78% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 3531, n=107)
1961 Points ∼100% +29%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
407 Points ∼73%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
547 Points ∼98% +34%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (407 - 416, n=2)
412 Points ∼74% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=107)
557 Points ∼100% +37%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
7129 Points ∼85%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
7134 Points ∼85% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
7533 Points ∼90% +6%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
7852 Points ∼94% +10%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (7129 - 9654, n=2)
8392 Points ∼100% +18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=509)
5915 Points ∼70% -17%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
8736 Points ∼80%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
9145 Points ∼84% +5%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9049 Points ∼83% +4%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
9304 Points ∼85% +7%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (8736 - 13156, n=2)
10946 Points ∼100% +25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=667)
6485 Points ∼59% -26%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2784 Points ∼86%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3162 Points ∼98% +14%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3241 Points ∼100% +16%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
3011 Points ∼93% +8%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2699 - 2784, n=2)
2742 Points ∼85% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=513)
2203 Points ∼68% -21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1116 Points ∼46%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2434 Points ∼100% +118%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2176 Points ∼89% +95%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1094 Points ∼45% -2%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1116 - 2217, n=2)
1667 Points ∼68% +49%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=513)
2113 Points ∼87% +89%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1287 Points ∼50%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2565 Points ∼100% +99%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2347 Points ∼92% +82%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1274 Points ∼50% -1%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1287 - 2365, n=2)
1826 Points ∼71% +42%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8269, n=514)
1973 Points ∼77% +53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2776 Points ∼84%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3112 Points ∼94% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3296 Points ∼100% +19%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
2984 Points ∼91% +7%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2575 - 2776, n=2)
2676 Points ∼81% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=544)
2114 Points ∼64% -24%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2410 Points ∼66%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3647 Points ∼100% +51%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3316 Points ∼91% +38%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1878 Points ∼51% -22%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1086 - 2410, n=2)
1748 Points ∼48% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=544)
2832 Points ∼78% +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2483 Points ∼71%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3513 Points ∼100% +41%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3312 Points ∼94% +33%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
2047 Points ∼58% -18%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1245 - 2483, n=2)
1864 Points ∼53% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=544)
2378 Points ∼68% -4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2687 Points ∼83%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3088 Points ∼96% +15%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3227 Points ∼100% +20%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
3026 Points ∼94% +13%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2499 - 2687, n=2)
2593 Points ∼80% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=594)
2086 Points ∼65% -22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1083 Points ∼48%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2243 Points ∼100% +107%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2008 Points ∼90% +85%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1000 Points ∼45% -8%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1083 - 2167, n=2)
1625 Points ∼72% +50%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=594)
1780 Points ∼79% +64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1249 Points ∼52%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2388 Points ∼100% +91%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2192 Points ∼92% +76%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1175 Points ∼49% -6%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (224 - 1249, n=2)
737 Points ∼31% -41%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7400, n=595)
1697 Points ∼71% +36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2685 Points ∼83%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3075 Points ∼95% +15%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3239 Points ∼100% +21%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
3000 Points ∼93% +12%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2486 - 2685, n=2)
2586 Points ∼80% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=636)
1950 Points ∼60% -27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2308 Points ∼66%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3504 Points ∼100% +52%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3184 Points ∼91% +38%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1814 Points ∼52% -21%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1076 - 2308, n=2)
1692 Points ∼48% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12611, n=635)
2343 Points ∼67% +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2382 Points ∼70%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3399 Points ∼100% +43%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3196 Points ∼94% +34%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
1989 Points ∼59% -16%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1248 - 2382, n=2)
1815 Points ∼53% -24%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9549, n=638)
2013 Points ∼59% -15%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
21123 Points ∼95%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
14820 Points ∼67% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
19433 Points ∼88% -8%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
19511 Points ∼88% -8%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (21123 - 23188, n=2)
22156 Points ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=782)
15420 Points ∼70% -27%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
30124 Points ∼59%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
50829 Points ∼100% +69%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
46605 Points ∼92% +55%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
30180 Points ∼59% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (27134 - 30124, n=2)
28629 Points ∼56% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=780)
26563 Points ∼52% -12%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
27518 Points ∼77%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
33007 Points ∼93% +20%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
35557 Points ∼100% +29%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
26910 Points ∼76% -2%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (26132 - 27518, n=2)
26825 Points ∼75% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 112989, n=780)
20764 Points ∼58% -25%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
5.8 fps ∼51%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼88% +72%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9.3 fps ∼82% +60%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
5.2 fps ∼46% -10%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (3.5 - 5.8, n=2)
4.65 fps ∼41% -20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=306)
11.3 fps ∼100% +95%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
3.8 fps ∼47%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6.7 fps ∼83% +76%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6.1 fps ∼75% +61%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
3.3 fps ∼41% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (3.8 - 4.3, n=2)
4.05 fps ∼50% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=304)
8.09 fps ∼100% +113%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
9.3 fps ∼55%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼95% +72%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
15 fps ∼89% +61%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
8.9 fps ∼53% -4%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (7.6 - 9.3, n=2)
8.45 fps ∼50% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=310)
16.9 fps ∼100% +82%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
11 fps ∼57%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼93% +64%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼82% +45%
Motorola One Hyper
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675, Adreno 612, 4096
9.9 fps ∼51% -10%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (8.4 - 11, n=2)
9.7 fps ∼50% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=309)
19.4 fps ∼100% +76%
Oppo Reno3Oppo Reno2Xiaomi Mi 9TMotorola One HyperAverage 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
151%
-12%
158%
181%
119%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
8.4 (Kingston 32GB)
53.54 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
537%
53.6 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
538%
58.3 (8.4 - 72.4, n=32)
594%
51 (1.7 - 87.1, n=527)
507%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
13.4 (Kingston 32GB)
74.52 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
456%
74.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
454%
73.3 (13.4 - 88.2, n=32)
447%
69 (8.1 - 96.5, n=527)
415%
Random Write 4KB
143.9
22
-85%
107.82
-25%
106.9
-26%
109 (18.2 - 290, n=59)
-24%
35.4 (0.14 - 319, n=879)
-75%
Random Read 4KB
127.3
144.24
13%
128.65
1%
129.4
2%
143 (96.8 - 239, n=59)
12%
58.7 (1.59 - 324, n=879)
-54%
Sequential Write 256KB
227.3
201.78
-11%
179.19
-21%
190.8
-16%
238 (182 - 503, n=59)
5%
127 (2.99 - 911, n=879)
-44%
Sequential Read 256KB
504.2
469.31
-7%
492.74
-2%
492.2
-2%
764 (427 - 999, n=59)
52%
339 (12.1 - 1802, n=879)
-33%
Max. Load
 44.8 °C39.9 °C36.3 °C 
 45.3 °C39.6 °C36.4 °C 
 45.2 °C40.5 °C36.7 °C 
Maximum: 45.3 °C
Average: 40.5 °C
34.5 °C38.2 °C42.5 °C
35.4 °C38.9 °C43.8 °C
35.2 °C39.3 °C42.9 °C
Maximum: 43.8 °C
Average: 39 °C
Power Supply (max.)  42.3 °C | Room Temperature 21.9 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40.5 °C / 105 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 45.3 °C / 114 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 43.8 °C / 111 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 Highs2043.837.9254141.33133.234.34033.432.25036.134.96329.430.18027.525.110025.724.512521.224.816020.431.820019.240.425018.246.231517.654.34001759.950017.763.263018.265.380016.763.210001766.9125015.271.616001672.3200015.374.9250015.776.1315015.370.6400015.863500016.263.463001668.5800016.164.91000016.760.61250016.5541600016.752.3SPL59.828.582.5N12.41.148.7median 16.7median 63.2Delta18.940.133.132.929.827.126.630.524.733.832.825.924.823.632.224.624.720.428.919.541.118.747.617.255.916.56014.461.216.362.415.363.214.6681473.414.972.314.2731573.814.776.614.578.514.379.514.676.315.176.91575.114.975.915.363.416502787.50.969.3median 15median 681.312.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Reno3Oppo Reno2
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Reno3 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 39% of all tested devices in this class were better, 14% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 62% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Oppo Reno2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Oppo Reno3
4025 mAh
Oppo Reno2
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9T
4000 mAh
Motorola One Hyper
4000 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing 1.3
802
616
-23%
991
24%
753
-6%
694 (223 - 2636, n=743)
-13%
Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 22min

Pros

+ 相机多
+ 内存大
+ 续航时间长

Cons

- PWM调光明显
- 性能储备低
- 负载下过热

总结——讨喜且耐用

In review: Oppo Reno3.
In review: Oppo Reno3.

Oppo Reno3已成为了一款不错的中端设备,可以以相对较低的价格买到四摄。 对Reno3有利的是,其前身目前在欧洲的价格甚至更高,因此尽管性能较低,但它仍可以很好地定位于中端。续航时间也比上一代更好,但屏幕亮度却不如以前。

扬声器令人信服,Oppo Reno3也是那些想要轻便的人眼中的好智能手机。您不应该期望众多的LTE频率,而PWM频率低的屏幕可能会成为某些用户的问题。


Oppo Reno3是中端机的不错选择。

尽管如此,Oppo Reno3对于那些想要很多相机和不错的续航并且不想花太多钱的人来说是一个不错的选择。

Oppo Reno3 - 06/12/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
78%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
90%
Connectivity
46 / 70 → 65%
Weight
91%
Battery
90%
Display
84%
Games Performance
17 / 64 → 26%
Application Performance
69 / 86 → 81%
Temperature
86%
Noise
100%
Audio
77 / 90 → 86%
Camera
70%
Average
74%
80%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > Oppo Reno3智能手机评测:摄像头多还不贵
Florian Schmitt, 2020-08- 7 (Update: 2020-08- 7)