Notebookcheck Logo

Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G评测--作为一款中高档智能手机,这还不够。

大量的内存,很少的溢价。 Reno8 Lite以其奢侈的双环灯提供了一个有趣的设计特征,但这不能弥补明显的缺点。阅读这篇评论,了解Oppo手机的不足之处,以及相比Reno8 Lite 5G,我们更喜欢哪款中档手机。
5G Touchscreen Smartphone
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

除了 Find X5 Liteoppo以Reno8 Lite为首,Oppo现在在其产品组合中增加了另一款中档智能手机,然而,它并不基于 联发科SoC而是基于 骁龙695.它还拥有8GB的内存和128GB的内部存储。虽然Reno8 Lite的建议零售价为389欧元,但它只使用了60赫兹的AMOLED显示屏和一个单声道扬声器。

我们将在这篇评论中仔细看看Oppo的新中档设备与同价位的强大对手相比如何。

Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G (Reno Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G 8 x 1.7 - 2.2 GHz, Kryo 660 Gold (Cortex-A77) / Silver (Cortex-A55)
Graphics adapter
Qualcomm Adreno 619, Core: 840 MHz
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.43 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 409 PPI, capacitive Touchscreen , OLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 128 GB 
, 110 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3,5 mm jack, Card Reader: micoSD up to 1 TB, exFAT support, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, , OTG, Miracast
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B5/​B6/​B8/​B19), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B12/​B17/​B18/​B19/​B20/​B26/​B28/​B38/​B39/​B40/​B41/​B66), 5G (n1/​n3/​n5/​n7/​n8/​n20/​n28/​n38/​n40/​n41/​n77/​n78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.49 x 159.85 x 73.17
Battery
4500 mAh Lithium-Ion
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 11
Camera
Primary Camera: 64 MPix (f/​1.7, Videos @1080p/​30fps, Camera 1); 2.0 MP (f/​2.4, macro lens); 2.0 MP (f/​2.4, depth of field), camera2 api: level3
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix (f/​2.4)
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: Onscreen, charger, case, USB cable, ColorOS 12, 24 Months Warranty, SAR-Wert 0.967 W/kg (head), 1.194 W/kg (body), widevine L1, fanless
Weight
173 g, Power Supply: 115 g
Price
389 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
82.1 %
07/2022
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
SD 695 5G, Adreno 619
173 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.43"2400x1080
83 %
07/2022
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4
186 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.40"2400x1080
85.3 %
02/2022
Motorola Moto G200 5G
SD 888+ 5G, Adreno 660
202 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.80"2460x1080
81.4 %
07/2022
Motorola Moto G82 5G
SD 695 5G, Adreno 619
173 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.60"2400x1080
85.9 %
04/2021
Xiaomi Poco F3
SD 870, Adreno 650
196 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.67"2400x1080

外壳 - Oppo手机,具有IP等级

彩虹光谱中的Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
彩虹光谱中的Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

Reno8 Lite 5G主要是想以其引人注目的设计在中档竞争中脱颖而出。奥普的智能手机有一个长方形的摄像头模块,两个镜头周围各有一个LED环。一旦收到新的通知或电话,这些 "轨道灯 "就会亮起,颜色有电蓝、浅蓝、青蓝或婴儿蓝。除了我们的黑色版本,Oppo还提供了一个带有颜色梯度的变体,称为 "彩虹光谱",据说它可以根据光线的入射情况提供特别闪亮的效果。

除了这些引人注目的设计元素,Reno8 Lite还获得了IPX4认证,因此,在雨中行走,防汗和防溅的外壳应该不是问题。制造质量符合中高档手机的要求,但我们不能说触觉也是如此:塑料背面和塑料框架的手感相当符合200欧元的智能手机,而且由于后盖的扁平设计,我们还发现人体工程学有点笨重。

测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

尺寸比较

168.1 mm 75.5 mm 8.9 mm 202 g163.7 mm 76.4 mm 7.8 mm 196 g160.9 mm 74.5 mm 8 mm 173 g159.7 mm 74 mm 8.1 mm 186 g159.85 mm 73.17 mm 7.49 mm 173 g

设备 - Reno8 Lite 5G,带3.5毫米插孔

这款中档智能手机的功能包括Always-On显示功能、3.5毫米插孔和USB OTG,它允许通过USB-C端口连接外围设备。该接口的数据传输遵循USB 2.0标准。内部UFS存储的容量为128GB,其中约110GB保留给操作系统和预装的应用程序。此外,内部UFS存储器可用于物理工作存储器的虚拟RAM扩展,最高可达5GB。

微型SD卡读卡器

高达1TB的存储卡可以被安装到microSD插槽中。我们用我们的参考存储卡AV PRO V60仔细观察一下存储槽的速度。CPDT基准测试和我们的JPEG复制测试结果都证明了Oppo手机的体面性能。

SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
59.21 MB/s ∼100% +62%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
36.46 MB/s ∼62%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Angelbird V60)
27.5 MB/s ∼46% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10.9 - 59.2, n=98, last 2 years)
26.3 MB/s ∼44% -28%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

0102030405060708090100110Tooltip
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø36.2 (29.1-43.4)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø43.7 (29-56.7)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø68.1 (26-80.3)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø83.8 (43.5-112.8)

软件 - Oppo Phone withAndroid 11

这家中国制造商仍然安装现在已经过时的Android 11作为操作系统,但在测试时有2022年5月以来的安全补丁。OPPO将其内部的ColorOS 12用户界面与新的空气手势叠加在一起。然而,通过手势滚动浏览信息目前只适用于Facebook、Instagram、TikTok和YouTube。我们无法知道是否以及何时会发布Android 12的更新。然而,Oppo也曾为Reno系列发布过更新保证,根据该保证,每季度也将为Reno8 Lite提供三年的安全更新。

测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

通信和GNSS - Oppo手机带WiFi 5

在通信模块方面,Oppo依靠蓝牙5.1版本和一个NFC芯片进行非接触式支付。集成的WLAN模块只支持Wi-Fi 5,因为 骁龙695不支持802.11ax标准。尽管如此,在日常使用中,使用Reno8 Lite 5G和我们的参考路由器华硕ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000,可以实现稳固的传输速率。

OPPO智能手机通过快速的5G网络接入移动互联网。然而,在LTE频段方面,这款中档手机也支持与德语区相关的所有4G频率。

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Average of class Smartphone
  (44.3 - 1736, n=71, last 2 years)
609 MBit/s ∼100% +79%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
343 (337min - 348max) MBit/s ∼56% +1%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
342 (321min - 351max) MBit/s ∼56% +1%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
340 (323min - 349max) MBit/s ∼56%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Average of class Smartphone
  (61.4 - 1710, n=71, last 2 years)
636 MBit/s ∼100% +80%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
364 (349min - 382max) MBit/s ∼57% +3%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
354 (185min - 367max) MBit/s ∼56%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
268 (133min - 280max) MBit/s ∼42% -24%
iperf3 transmit AX12
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
884 (444min - 914max) MBit/s ∼100%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
864 (759min - 906max) MBit/s ∼98%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.59 - 1395, n=200, last 2 years)
486 MBit/s ∼55%
iperf3 receive AX12
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
836 (809min - 863max) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
654 (311min - 702max) MBit/s ∼78%
Average of class Smartphone
  (15.5 - 1348, n=200, last 2 years)
471 MBit/s ∼56%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900Tooltip
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 619; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø339 (323-349)
Motorola Moto G200 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 660; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø836 (809-863)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 619; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø348 (185-367)
Motorola Moto G200 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 660; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø864 (759-906)
户外定位
户外定位
在建筑物内定位
在建筑物内定位

为了能够评估Reno8 Lite在实践中的跟踪精度,我们与Garmin Venu 2并行记录了一条路线,以便进行比较。在10公里的路线终点,偏差总共只有50米。然而,详细的路线显示了Oppo手机的一两个不准确之处,特别是在改变方向时。测试中使用了GPS(L1)、GLONASS、QZSS、Galileo(E1)和Beidou(B1)卫星网络进行定位。

Oppo Reno8 Lite vs. Garmin Venu 2
Oppo Reno8 Lite vs. Garmin Venu 2

手机功能和语音质量 - Reno8 Lite 5G双卡双待功能

测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

这款双SIM卡手机为两张nanoSIM卡和VoLTE以及Wi-Fi通话功能提供了空间。通过听筒或扬声器进行的测试通话和视频通话的语音质量都很吸引人。我们的对话者也证实了Reno8 Lite的良好可懂性。

摄像头 - Oppo手机的 "三重摄像头"

与里诺8 Lite 5G自拍
与里诺8 Lite 5G自拍

前面的1600万像素摄像头在光线充足的情况下可以捕捉到漂亮但有点过于柔和的自拍。背面的三重摄像头模块包括一个64MP的主摄像头,外加一个微距和长焦镜头,用于拍摄景深信息。Reno8 Lite中没有安装超广角摄像头。视频也只能以最大的1080p和最多30fps的速度录制。

OPPO没有透露任何关于图像传感器的具体选择,但这款中档手机可以拍摄高质量的照片,在白天有良好的色彩还原。然而,由于图像清晰度通常有点低,特别是在周边地区,照片中丰富的细节在某种程度上被丢失。当天色变暗时,照片会出现图像噪点和模糊现象。在这个价格范围内,照度也是一般的。

测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

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.

Main cameraMain cameraLow Light5x Zoom
click to load images
ColorChecker
15.2 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
11.7 ∆E
15.8 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
12 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
7 ∆E
9 ∆E
14.1 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
13.1 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
2.2 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G: 8.51 ∆E min: 2.23 - max: 15.76 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.8 ∆E
54.5 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
44.9 ∆E
63.2 ∆E
54.2 ∆E
35.2 ∆E
43.4 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
66.2 ∆E
64.7 ∆E
30.3 ∆E
48.8 ∆E
37.9 ∆E
77 ∆E
43.9 ∆E
44.1 ∆E
93.7 ∆E
71 ∆E
52 ∆E
37.1 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G: 47.18 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 93.71 ∆E

附件和保修 - Reno8 Lite 5G带电源适配器

包括一个快速充电器,但只有30瓦的功率。此外,交货范围内还包括一条USB-C电缆和一个SIM卡工具以及一个保护罩。

Oppo在德国为其智能手机提供24个月的保修。

输入设备和操作 - 带有FaceUnlock的Oppo手机

6.43英寸OLED屏幕上的输入被准确而快速地实现,但屏幕变化或滚动明显不如刷新率更高的竞争对手平滑。对于特殊应用,如游戏,支持180赫兹的采样率,因此触摸屏每秒被轮询180次。

OLED面板上的光学指纹扫描仪能可靠地识别用户,但比电源按钮上的良好传感器要慢一些。还支持通过使用前置摄像头的二维面部识别进行生物识别认证。

测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

显示屏 - Oppo手机采用OLED技术

子像素结构
子像素结构

奥普手机的OLED面板,刷新率为60赫兹,在2400 x 1080像素的分辨率和6.43英寸的对角线上实现了约400 PPI的像素密度。

Reno8 Lite使用频率为116至252赫兹的PWM来调节亮度,亮度低于48%--高于这个频率,我们测量的是恒定的60赫兹。在我们测量的峰值中,最大亮度约为600cd/m²,这很好,但在这个价格范围内没有什么特别。这同样适用于现实的APL18测试,其结果是最大亮度为802 cd/m²。

593
cd/m²
591
cd/m²
599
cd/m²
593
cd/m²
602
cd/m²
607
cd/m²
593
cd/m²
601
cd/m²
613
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 613 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 599.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.7 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 602 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.3
ΔE Greyscale 3.7 | 0.64-98 Ø5.6
92.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.43
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.40
Motorola Moto G200 5G
IPS LCD, 2460x1080, 6.80
Motorola Moto G82 5G
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.60
Xiaomi Poco F3
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Screen
28%
-21%
-19%
47%
Brightness middle
602
693
15%
512
-15%
635
5%
889
48%
Brightness
599
695
16%
488
-19%
640
7%
902
51%
Brightness Distribution
96
98
2%
87
-9%
96
0%
95
-1%
Black Level *
0.36
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
2
1.3
35%
3.42
-71%
2.96
-48%
0.9
55%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
5.2
3.5
33%
5.9
-13%
7.63
-47%
1.9
63%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
3.7
1.3
65%
3.7
-0%
4.8
-30%
1.3
65%
Gamma
2.26 97%
2.14 103%
7154 0%
2.214 99%
2.26 97%
CCT
6996 93%
6530 100%
1.944 334362%
6970 93%
6614 98%
Contrast
1422

* ... 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 252.3 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 252.3 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 252.3 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 19984 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

最小面板亮度
分钟。
25 % 面板亮度
25 %
50 % 面板亮度
50 %
75 % 面板亮度
75 %
最大的手动面板亮度
100 %

在一个固定的变焦水平和各种亮度设置下进行测量

在光谱仪和CalMAN软件的帮助下,进行显示颜色分析。色彩表现的偏差很低,但灰度没有得到最佳的校准。特别是蓝色调不是Reno8 Lite的强项,deltaE超过5。

色彩准确度(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常,软)。
色彩准确度(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常,软)。
色彩空间(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常、柔和)。
色彩空间(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常、柔和)。
灰度(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常,软)。
灰度(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常,软)。
色彩饱和度(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常,软)。
色彩饱和度(目标色彩空间:sRGB;配置文件:正常,软)。

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
1.97 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.996 ms rise
↘ 0.973 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 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.2 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.23 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.646 ms rise
↘ 1.585 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 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (36.5 ms).

有机显示屏提供足够的亮度,即使在晴天也能阅读显示内容。然而,应避免反射。视角的稳定性很好,即使在平坦的视角下,亮度的下降也很低。

测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

性能 - 采用高通SoC的Reno8 Lite 5G

Reno8 Lite 5G配备了一个 高通骁龙695集成了一个阿德雷诺619作为图形单元,并提供一个有吸引力的系统速度。在基准测试中,Oppo智能手机的表现与Moto G82相当。 摩托G82它也是基于相同的高通SoC。然而,Reno8 Lite 5G在面对强大的中端设备时没有机会。即使是一个 Exynos 1280中的 Galaxy A33有时也要好得多。安装的UFS内存的速度也低于这个价格的平均水平,但这可以归因于骁龙695的低内存带宽。

Geekbench 5.4
Single-Core
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1076 Points ∼100% +57%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
998 Points ∼93% +46%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
737 Points ∼68% +8%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
685 Points ∼64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (659 - 697, n=9)
682 Points ∼63% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1755, n=270, last 2 years)
682 Points ∼63% 0%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
671 Points ∼62% -2%
Multi-Core
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3368 Points ∼100% +68%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
3286 Points ∼98% +64%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4914, n=270, last 2 years)
2220 Points ∼66% +11%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
2008 Points ∼60%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1946 Points ∼58% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (1663 - 2038, n=9)
1909 Points ∼57% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
1905 Points ∼57% -5%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
794271 Points ∼100% +109%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
680139 Points ∼86% +79%
Average of class Smartphone
  (111952 - 1119358, n=126, last 2 years)
556641 Points ∼70% +47%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
409358 Points ∼52% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
398969 Points ∼50% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (379222 - 409358, n=6)
391734 Points ∼49% +3%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
379222 Points ∼48%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
18567 Points ∼100% +145%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
13610 Points ∼73% +80%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
11077 Points ∼60% +46%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 18567, n=171, last 2 years)
10184 Points ∼55% +35%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (7569 - 10834, n=8)
9492 Points ∼51% +25%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
7843 Points ∼42% +4%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
7569 Points ∼41%
CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (226 - 1169, n=67, last 2 years)
737 Points ∼100% +25%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
588 Points ∼80%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (552 - 604, n=6)
584 Points ∼79% -1%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
552 Points ∼75% -6%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
6356 Points ∼100% +65%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5711 Points ∼90% +48%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1223 - 8753, n=179, last 2 years)
4331 Points ∼68% +13%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
3848 Points ∼61%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3705 Points ∼58% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (3535 - 3848, n=7)
3683 Points ∼58% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
3477 Points ∼55% -10%
System
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
9997 Points ∼100% +24%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
8546 Points ∼85% +6%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
8059 Points ∼81%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
7986 Points ∼80% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (6969 - 8059, n=7)
7767 Points ∼78% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2083 - 19657, n=179, last 2 years)
7678 Points ∼77% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
7184 Points ∼72% -11%
Memory
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
7692 Points ∼100% +64%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5648 Points ∼73% +21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (670 - 9044, n=179, last 2 years)
4956 Points ∼64% +6%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
4836 Points ∼63% +3%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
4684 Points ∼61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (4092 - 4836, n=7)
4438 Points ∼58% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
3829 Points ∼50% -18%
Graphics
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
13865 Points ∼100% +221%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12801 Points ∼92% +196%
Average of class Smartphone
  (697 - 26660, n=179, last 2 years)
7712 Points ∼56% +78%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
5104 Points ∼37% +18%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
4423 Points ∼32% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (4295 - 4426, n=7)
4372 Points ∼32% +1%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
4323 Points ∼31%
Web
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1665 Points ∼100% +25%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
1658 Points ∼100% +24%
Average of class Smartphone
  (718 - 2392, n=179, last 2 years)
1388 Points ∼83% +4%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
1334 Points ∼80%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (1103 - 1334, n=7)
1218 Points ∼73% -9%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1103 Points ∼66% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
1041 Points ∼63% -22%
AImark - Score v2.x
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
286905 Points ∼100% +5599%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
111838 Points ∼39% +2122%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4293 - 286905, n=146, last 2 years)
55254 Points ∼19% +998%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (4924 - 5839, n=7)
5221 Points ∼2% +4%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 8192
5034 Points ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
4926 Points ∼2% -2%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
4924 Points ∼2% -2%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
358 Points ∼25%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
617 Points ∼42% +72%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1453 Points ∼100% +306%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
354 Points ∼24% -1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1222 Points ∼84% +241%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
362 Points ∼23%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
632 Points ∼40% +75%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1564 Points ∼100% +332%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
363 Points ∼23% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1223 Points ∼78% +238%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1223 Points ∼21%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2238 Points ∼39% +83%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5711 Points ∼100% +367%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1204 Points ∼21% -2%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4271 Points ∼75% +249%
3DMark / Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1211 Points ∼21%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2262 Points ∼39% +87%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5765 Points ∼100% +376%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1209 Points ∼21% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4288 Points ∼74% +254%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2873 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2594 Points ∼90% -10%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2898 Points ∼100% +1%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2711 Points ∼69%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3911 Points ∼100% +44%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2736 Points ∼70% +1%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2728 Points ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3514 Points ∼100% +29%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2770 Points ∼79% +2%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3511 Points ∼72%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3035 Points ∼62% -14%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4864 Points ∼100% +39%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3529 Points ∼73% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4140 Points ∼85% +18%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2986 Points ∼27%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3922 Points ∼36% +31%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10875 Points ∼100% +264%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3001 Points ∼28% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9498 Points ∼87% +218%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3055 Points ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3683 Points ∼45% +21%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8234 Points ∼100% +170%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3104 Points ∼38% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7377 Points ∼90% +141%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3349 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2833 Points ∼83% -15%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3415 Points ∼100% +2%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4398 Points ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5216 Points ∼100% +19%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4414 Points ∼85% 0%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4102 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4395 Points ∼100% +7%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4156 Points ∼95% +1%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2973 Points ∼83%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3592 Points ∼100% +21%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2959 Points ∼82% 0%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2823 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3885 Points ∼100% +38%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2837 Points ∼73% 0%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3329 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2842 Points ∼82% -15%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3481 Points ∼100% +5%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4002 Points ∼50%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4630 Points ∼58% +16%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4286 Points ∼54% +7%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7970 Points ∼100% +99%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4277 Points ∼36%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5418 Points ∼45% +27%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4573 Points ∼38% +7%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
12033 Points ∼100% +181%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3283 Points ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3069 Points ∼84% -7%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3515 Points ∼96% +7%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3653 Points ∼100% +11%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
60 fps ∼50%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
78 fps ∼64% +30%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
121 fps ∼100% +102%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
71 fps ∼59% +18%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
95 fps ∼48%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
91 fps ∼46% -4%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
161 fps ∼81% +69%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
95 fps ∼48% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
200 fps ∼100% +111%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
41 fps ∼51%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
59 fps ∼73% +44%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
81 fps ∼100% +98%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
43 fps ∼53% +5%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼74% +46%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
68 fps ∼57%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
60 fps ∼50% -12%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
92 fps ∼77% +35%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
48 fps ∼40% -29%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps ∼100% +75%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
29 fps ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
37 fps ∼63% +28%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
54 fps ∼92% +86%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
30 fps ∼51% +3%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps ∼100% +103%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
35 fps ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
38 fps ∼47% +9%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
62 fps ∼77% +77%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
35 fps ∼43% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
81 fps ∼100% +131%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps ∼36%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
21 fps ∼48% +31%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
35 fps ∼80% +119%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
17 fps ∼39% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
44 fps ∼100% +175%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
20 fps ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
23 fps ∼48% +15%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps ∼88% +110%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
20 fps ∼42% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
48 fps ∼100% +140%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps ∼36%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps ∼48% +33%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps ∼100% +175%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
12 fps ∼36% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps ∼100% +175%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
7.7 fps ∼35%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
10 fps ∼45% +30%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
19 fps ∼86% +147%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
7.8 fps ∼35% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
22 fps ∼100% +186%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
18 fps ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
25 fps ∼51% +39%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps ∼86% +133%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
19 fps ∼39% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps ∼100% +172%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
21 fps ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
26 fps ∼46% +24%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps ∼68% +86%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
21 fps ∼37% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57 fps ∼100% +171%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G200 5G (Chrome97)
75.9 Points ∼100% +56%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
75.1 Points ∼99% +54%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G (Chrome)
66.011 Points ∼87% +36%
Average of class Smartphone (12.4 - 182.6, n=179, last 2 years)
64.4 Points ∼85% +32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (48.6 - 64.5, n=7)
57.8 Points ∼76% +19%
Motorola Moto G82 5G (Chrome 102)
56.647 Points ∼75% +16%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G (Chrome 103)
48.664 Points ∼64%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Motorola Moto G200 5G (Chrome97)
147 Points ∼100% +31%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
125 Points ∼85% +12%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G (Chrome 103)
112 Points ∼76%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (75 - 112, n=6)
94.2 Points ∼64% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (20 - 265, n=187, last 2 years)
94.2 Points ∼64% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G (Chrome 102.0.5005.99)
82 Points ∼56% -27%
Motorola Moto G82 5G (Chrome 102)
75 Points ∼51% -33%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G200 5G (Chrome97)
28695 Points ∼100% +61%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
26577 Points ∼93% +49%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G (Chrome 102.0.5005.99)
24521 Points ∼85% +37%
Average of class Smartphone (3526 - 65969, n=194, last 2 years)
24228 Points ∼84% +36%
Motorola Moto G82 5G (Chrome 102)
21468 Points ∼75% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (17849 - 22938, n=6)
21185 Points ∼74% +19%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G (Chrome 103)
17849 Points ∼62%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 15230, n=192, last 2 years)
3023 ms * ∼100% -21%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G (Chrome 103)
2501.3 ms * ∼83%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (1923 - 2501, n=6)
2068 ms * ∼68% +17%
Motorola Moto G82 5G (Chrome 102)
2009.8 ms * ∼66% +20%
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G (Chrome)
1856.6 ms * ∼61% +26%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
1744 ms * ∼58% +30%
Motorola Moto G200 5G (Chrome97)
1358 ms * ∼45% +46%

* ... smaller is better

Oppo Reno8 Lite 5GSamsung Galaxy A33 5GMotorola Moto G200 5GMotorola Moto G82 5GXiaomi Poco F3Average 128 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
22%
117%
5%
71%
16%
33%
Sequential Read 256KB
498.54
512.84
3%
1898
281%
473.4
-5%
1378
176%
690 ?(303 - 999, n=26)
38%
946 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=263, last 2 years)
90%
Sequential Write 256KB
438.49
487.66
11%
712
62%
445.7
2%
684
56%
457 ?(105.3 - 857, n=26)
4%
500 ?(11.9 - 1485, n=263, last 2 years)
14%
Random Read 4KB
155.32
216.48
39%
155.9
0%
180.8
16%
208
34%
165 ?(89.3 - 253, n=26)
6%
171.1 ?(13.5 - 345, n=263, last 2 years)
10%
Random Write 4KB
143.54
194.12
35%
322.5
125%
155.5
8%
170.6
19%
163.5 ?(113.8 - 213, n=26)
14%
167.7 ?(30.3 - 475, n=264, last 2 years)
17%

排放--Oppo智能手机保持冷静

温度

在日常使用中,即使在负载下,外壳也几乎不发热。在我们的测试中,Reno8 Lite 5G内部的废热并没有降低其性能。3DMark的两个压力测试运行没有问题,超过99%的分数。

Max. Load
 33.2 °C32.2 °C31.1 °C 
 33.3 °C32.7 °C31.5 °C 
 32.9 °C31.2 °C30.9 °C 
Maximum: 33.3 °C
Average: 32.1 °C
31.1 °C32.8 °C32.9 °C
30.8 °C31.8 °C33 °C
30.5 °C32.1 °C33 °C
Maximum: 33 °C
Average: 32 °C
Power Supply (max.)  27.7 °C | Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.1 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.3 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.6 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99.5 % ∼100% 0%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.5 % ∼100% 0%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99.4 % ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82.2 % ∼83% -17%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
80.4 % ∼81% -19%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99.3 % ∼100% 0%
Motorola Moto G82 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.1 % ∼100% 0%
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
99.1 % ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82.2 % ∼83% -17%
Motorola Moto G200 5G
Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
79 % ∼80% -20%
051015202530Tooltip
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø2.17 (2.16-2.18)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø3.77 (3.76-3.79)
Motorola Moto G200 5G Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.7.2: Ø7.57 (7.1-8.98)
Motorola Moto G82 5G Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø2.16 (2.16-2.18)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.27 (7.25-7.29)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø13.5 (13.4-13.5)
Motorola Moto G200 5G Adreno 660, SD 888+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø28.8 (27.4-34.2)
Motorola Moto G82 5G Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø7.24 (7.23-7.27)
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机
测试Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G智能手机

演讲者

Oppo在其中档手机中只安装了一个单声道扬声器,但它可以变得非常响亮,超过92分贝,并实现线性再现。一个低噪音的3.5毫米插孔(信噪比:99.4 dBFS)也可以用来获得立体声体验。另外,蓝牙5.1也可用于无线耳机。

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs203943.52524.433.93120.435.34018.340.15030.742.36325.544.58023.939.410018.142.71252045.116025.249.920016.850.225014.457.8315176040011.863.750012.969.663014.672.680013.676.3100012.278.2125013.678.3160013.879.7200013.482250013.483.3315013.482.3400013.580.1500013.481.1630013.575.1800013.280.81000013.581.71250013.6761600013.365.3SPL25.992.1N0.792.5median 13.5median 76Delta1.610.137.643.334.837.632.633.237.132.242.836.832.726.622.922.220.224.217.931.415.941.11244.71146.913.450.51156.912.664.912.568.711.867.811.472.411.573.510.572.79.971.910.671.611.972.212.873.313.970.114.462.515.2661669.415.964.216.658.125.382.90.654.3median 12.6median 66210.6hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Reno8 Lite 5GMotorola Moto G82 5G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (92.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 24% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Motorola Moto G82 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

电池寿命 - Reno8 Lite 5G,4,500 mAh

能源消耗

采用33W SUPERVOOC快速充电技术,电池充满电大约需要70分钟;不支持无线充电。Reno8 Lite在负载下的耗电量非常低。

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.29 / 0.28 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.69 / 1.58 / 1.6 Watt
Load midlight 2.59 / 4.47 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G200 5G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G82 5G
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Poco F3
4520 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-34%
-39%
-7%
-32%
-15%
-37%
Idle Minimum *
0.69
0.88
-28%
0.6
13%
0.9
-30%
0.76
-10%
0.82 ?(0.56 - 1.01, n=6)
-19%
0.897 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=202, last 2 years)
-30%
Idle Average *
1.58
1.47
7%
0.9
43%
1.2
24%
1.29
18%
1.715 ?(1 - 2.47, n=6)
-9%
1.652 ?(0.65 - 3.6, n=202, last 2 years)
-5%
Idle Maximum *
1.6
1.52
5%
1.5
6%
1.4
12%
1.45
9%
1.842 ?(1.4 - 2.52, n=6)
-15%
1.869 ?(0.69 - 3.7, n=202, last 2 years)
-17%
Load Average *
2.59
5.38
-108%
7
-170%
3.3
-27%
4.6
-78%
3.18 ?(2.4 - 4.83, n=6)
-23%
4.42 ?(2.1 - 7.74, n=202, last 2 years)
-71%
Load Maximum *
4.47
6.62
-48%
8.4
-88%
5.2
-16%
8.87
-98%
4.96 ?(4.47 - 5.68, n=6)
-11%
7.27 ?(3.56 - 11.9, n=202, last 2 years)
-63%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 nits)

012345678Tooltip
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G: Ø2.79 (0.898-5.35)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Samsung Exynos 1280: Ø4.77 (1.049-8.56)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 nits)

00.20.50.711.21.41.71.92.22.42.62.93.13.33.63.84.14.34.5Tooltip
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø3.07 (2.86-3.38)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Samsung Exynos 1280; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø4.07 (3.46-4.78)
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G; Idle 1min: Ø1.021 (0.997-1.153)
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G Samsung Exynos 1280; Idle 1min: Ø1.112 (1.07-1.512)

电池寿命

在我们的WLAN测试中,调整后的显示亮度为150cd/m²,Oppo的手机持续了15个小时以上,相对于60Hz的面板来说,这是一个稳定的速度。

Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 103)
15h 04min
Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G200 5G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G82 5G
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Poco F3
4520 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
904
771
-15%
905
0%
1022
13%
805
-11%

Pros

+ 明亮的OLED面板
+ 别致的设计
+ 3.5毫米插孔
+ 包含电源

Cons

- 单声道扬声器
- 只有60赫兹的面板
- 触觉
- Android 11
- 没有超广角摄像头

判决书

在审查中。Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G。测试设备由德国Oppo公司提供
在审查中。Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G。测试设备由德国Oppo公司提供

鉴于与竞争对手相比,Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G有许多不足之处,我们不能给予推荐。除了包括双环灯在内的漂亮设计,Oppo的智能手机缺乏许多功能,无法证明其近400欧元的建议零售价是合理的。这些价格区间的买家可以期待立体声扬声器、超广角镜头、频率超过60赫兹的面板、更好的手感,或更强大的芯片组等等。在软件方面,Oppo并没有完全用过时的Android 11来覆盖自己的荣耀。然而,Reno8 Lite由于其相当紧凑和轻便的结构,仍然可以积极地吸引一个或另一个用户。

为了使Reno8 Lite具有竞争力,它的价格必须与类似的低成本中端产品一致,如Moto G52或Redmi Note 11。

在300欧元左右的价格区间,我们推荐我们的评论,即 三星Galaxy A33或还有 Poco F3.如果你可以不使用5G标准,你会发现一个很好的选择,那就是 Redmi Note 11是一个可比的总包,价格只是Reno8 Lite 5G的一半。

价格和可用性

Oppo Reno8 Lite的建议零售价为389欧元,其中在amazon.de。,有售。

Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G - 07/13/2022 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
81%
Keyboard
66 / 75 → 88%
Pointing Device
87%
Connectivity
49 / 70 → 70%
Weight
90%
Battery
91%
Display
87%
Games Performance
33 / 64 → 52%
Application Performance
76 / 86 → 89%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
80 / 90 → 89%
Camera
64%
Average
77%
82%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G评测--作为一款中高档智能手机,这还不够。
Marcus Herbrich, 2022-07-19 (Update: 2022-07-19)