vivo X90 Pro+评论。vivo以其旗舰智能手机设定了很高的标准

Name: Vivo X90 Pro+
Brand: Vivo

2023年的第一个参考电话。 vivo X90 Pro+是市场上首批采用新型骁龙8代SoC的手机之一。除了高性能之外，这款vivo手机还提供了强大的摄像头、非常明亮的LTPO面板和广泛的功能--这是一个必须被即将到来的高端智能手机击败的总包。

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), Published 02/16/2023 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

5G Smartphone Touchscreen

去年11月，vivo在中国正式推出其X90智能手机系列，包括X90 Pro+作为旗舰机。X90系列可以通过进口购买，但有迹象表明在不久的将来会在全球上市。然而，这将是在没有，Pro+变体，与去年一样，它将不会在欧洲市场上发布。

X90 Pro+有一套与旗舰智能手机相称的强大功能。vivo使用120 Hz 1,440p+ AMOLED面板，峰值亮度为1,800尼特。高通Snapdragon 8 Gen 2SoC。vivo X90 Pro+在相机设置方面也是真正的王牌，采用了索尼的IMX989--一个1英寸图像传感器。

Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Vivo X90 Pro+ (X90 Series)

Processor

Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 8 x 2 - 3.2 GHz, Cortex-X3 / A715 / A710 / A510 (Kryo)

Graphics adapter

Qualcomm Adreno 740

Memory

12 GB

, LPDDR5x

Display

6.78 inch 20:9, 3200 x 1440 pixel 518 PPI, Capacitive Touchscreen , AMOLED, Samsung E6, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz

Storage

256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash, 256 GB

, 219 GB free

Connections

1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 0 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 20Gbps, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, color spectrum, OTG, Miracast

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 5.3, 5G: N1/N2/N3/N5/N7/N8/N12/N20/N28/N38/N40/N41/N66/N77/N78/N79; 4G: FDD-LTE: B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B12/B17/B18/B19/B20/B25/B26/B28/B66/B34/B38/B39/B40/B41/ B42; 3G:850/1900/2100MHz; 2G: 850/900/1800/1900 MHz, Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 9.7 x 164.35 x 75.29

Battery

4700 mAh Lithium-Polymer

Charging

wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 13

Camera

Primary Camera: 50 MPix (f/1.8, 23mm, OIS) + 50 MP (3.5x optical zoom, f/3.5, 90mm, 1/2.0", 0.7µm) + 50 MP (2x optical zoom, f/1.6, 50mm, 1/2.4", 0.7µm) + 48MP (f/2.2, 14mm, 1/2.0", 0.8µm); 8K@30fps, 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps, Camera2 API: Level3
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix f(/2.5, 24mm, 1/2.8", 0.8µm)

Additional features

Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: OnScreen, charger, info material, USB cable, Origin OS, 12 Months Warranty, widevine L1, GNSS: GPS L1+L5, BeiDou, Glonass L1, Galileo E1+E5, SBAS , fanless, waterproof

Weight

221 g, Power Supply: 158 g

Price

1100 Euro

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Drive	Size	Resolution
90 %	02/2023	Vivo X90 Pro+ SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740	221 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.78"	3200x1440
89.4 %	03/2022	Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920	228 g	128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.80"	3088x1440
89.1 %	02/2023	Xiaomi 13 SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740	189 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.36"	2400x1080
89.1 %	11/2022	Google Pixel 7 Pro Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7	212 g	128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.70"	3120x1440
88.5 %	09/2022	Vivo X80 Pro SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730	215 g	256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.78"	3200x1440

案例。带冲孔的Vivo智能手机

X90 Pro+的外壳由大猩猩玻璃Vicutus、铝制框架和素食皮革背面组成。X90 Pro+拿在手里感觉非常高级，由于OLED面板周围的窄边，90%的屏体比例成为可能。由于弯曲的显示屏，侧面几乎没有任何分散注意力的边缘。

我们的评测样品的制造质量是一流的，X90 Pro+还带有官方的IP68认证。因此，外壳既能防尘又能防水。

尺寸比较

设备。Vivo X90 Pro Plus，配备UFS 4.0

X90 Pro+有两个不同的版本（12 GB + 256 GB和12 GB + 512 GB）。在我们的评测样本中，内部UFS 4.0存储的容量为256GB，但在交付状态下，用户只能获得约219GB的自由空间。如果存储空间不够，你将不得不购买更大的存储SKU，因为vivo旗舰机不支持通过micro-SD卡扩展。

其他功能包括Miracast、蓝牙5.3和NFC，包括谷歌支付（可获得Play Protect认证）。外围设备，如记忆棒，可以通过USB-C端口使用OTG适配器连接。USB接口的数据传输是基于3.2 Gen1标准的。

软件。vivo X90 Pro+配备了Android 13

X90 Pro+不是基于vivo手机常见的Funtouch操作系统，而是基于中国的同类操作系统，即Origin OS。UI是基于Android 13，但非常适应中国市场。

不过，包括德语在内的许多语言都可以选择。甚至谷歌服务也可以很容易地激活，所以谷歌商店和其他谷歌应用程序可以相对顺利地使用。由于Widevine L1的认证，流媒体内容的高分辨率也是可能的。

Origin OS 3在测试时带有2022年12月的安全补丁。vivo计划在操作系统升级和安全更新方面支持X90 Pro+多久，目前官方还不清楚。

通信和GNSS：vivo X90 Pro+，带Wi-Fi 6

X90 Pro+支持接入移动5G网络和广泛的4G频率。这款vivo手机可以接入总共22个LTE频段，包括20和28频段。

这款旗舰手机在国内无线局域网内提供快速的Wi-Fi 6，结合我们的华硕ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000参考路由器，足以实现超过900Mbps的平均传输速率，但6GHz频率范围（Wi-Fi 6E）却没有。

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1383 (1126^min - 1462^max) MBit/s +49%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	931 (890^min - 944^max) MBit/s
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	904 (453^min - 912^max) MBit/s -3%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	894 (803^min - 944^max) MBit/s -4%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	716 (539^min - 791^max) MBit/s -23%
Average of class Smartphone (34.8 - 1875, n=211, last 2 years)	651 MBit/s -30%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1328 (378^min - 1471^max) MBit/s +35%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	981 (965^min - 1014^max) MBit/s
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	945 (917^min - 968^max) MBit/s -4%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	770 (459^min - 912^max) MBit/s -22%
Average of class Smartphone (40.5 - 1810, n=212, last 2 years)	687 MBit/s -30%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	521 (311^min - 704^max) MBit/s -47%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	1894 (955^min - 1923^max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1704 (852^min - 1767^max) MBit/s
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1645 (1586^min - 1695^max) MBit/s
Average of class Smartphone (229 - 1894, n=61, last 2 years)	1536 MBit/s
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1743 (1585^min - 1798^max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1702 (1642^min - 1735^max) MBit/s
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	1656 (1620^min - 1684^max) MBit/s
Average of class Smartphone (598 - 1840, n=61, last 2 years)	1364 MBit/s

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Qualcomm Adreno 740; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø925 (890-944)

Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Qualcomm Adreno 730; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1380 (1126-1462)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Qualcomm Adreno 740; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø982 (965-1014)

Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Qualcomm Adreno 730; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1306 (378-1471)

为了在实践中评估GPS跟踪的准确性，我们同时用Garmin Venu 2记录了一条路线，以进行比较。

详细的路线几乎没有显示出X90 Pro+的任何不准确之处，总体上显示出非常准确的跟踪。

电话和语音质量。vivo双SIM卡的智能手机

vivo的这款双SIM卡智能手机支持VoLTE，也可以通过家庭Wi-Fi（Wi-Fi通话）进行通话。像 X80 Pro一样，目前的旗舰机缺乏对eSIM的支持。

语音质量并不令人惊讶，安装的麦克风可以将声音清晰地传送给通话者。在测试中，通过内置前置摄像头和内置扬声器与Skype应用程序进行视频通话也没有问题。

照相机。Vivo X90 Pro+配备索尼IMX989

X90 Pro+与蔡司的合作，将一个基于索尼IMX989传感器的5000万像素主摄像头与一个4800万像素的超广角镜头、一个5000万像素的人像摄像头和一个6400万像素的潜望式长焦镜头相结合。

相机单元的核心是大型1英寸索尼传感器，在白天和夜间都能提供非常好的拍摄效果。照片有很宽的动态范围，但在锐度水平上也不时有弱点。在色彩再现方面，vivo手机也能让人信服，但X90 Pro+经常能捕捉到相当酷的主题。

在受控的照明条件下，我们还在ColorChecker中测得了较低的DeltaE偏差，但绿色调除外。

除了坚实的超广角相机，实际上是相机四重奏中最弱的镜头，vivo X90 Pro+还具有出色的变焦品质。特别是在5倍无损放大时，X90 Pro+保留了大量的细节。即使是100倍变焦也是相当可用的。

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.

Hauptkamera Hauptkamera Low Light Ultraweitwinkel Zoom 5x

click to load images

Vivo X90 Pro Plus

Oppo Find X5 Pro

Mototola Edge 30 Ultra

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Vivo X90 Pro Plus

Oppo Find X5 Pro

Mototola Edge 30 Ultra

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Vivo X90 Pro Plus

Oppo Find X5 Pro

Mototola Edge 30 Ultra

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Vivo X90 Pro Plus

Oppo Find X5 Pro

Mototola Edge 30 Ultra

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Vivo X90 Pro Plus

Oppo Find X5 Pro

Mototola Edge 30 Ultra

Canon EOS 90D

ColorChecker Vivo X90 Pro+: 5.49 ∆E min: 1.28 - max: 11.31 ∆E

配件和保修。vivo X90 Pro+配备了一个电源适配器

交付范围包括一条USB电缆、一个非常高质量的保护套和一个模块化的80 W CN电源。TradingShenzhen还包括一个用于该国插座的欧盟适配器，但这不是标准交货范围的一部分，是贷款人的一项服务。

担保保修期是12个月。我们来自TradingShenzhen的评测样品还提供了在保修期内将X90 Pro+发送到德国运输地址的选择。

输入设备和操作。Vivo手机带有巨大的指纹传感器

由于高达120赫兹的刷新率，即使是快速滚动的段落也能顺利显示。OLED面板下的巨大超声波指纹传感器不仅是市场上最快的传感器之一，而且在检测两个手指并行时也很可靠。

高通3D声波超声波传感器显然是这款旗舰机的独特卖点。一个相对不安全的2D FaceUnlock功能也在船上。

显示屏。vivo X90 Pro Plus采用OLED技术

X90 Pro+有一个6.78英寸的LTPO AMOLED显示屏，分辨率高达3200 x 1440像素，支持高达120赫兹的自适应刷新率--在测试中，我们可以从系统中读到最低频率为5赫兹。

在亮度、照度和清晰度方面，vivo旗舰机在全白显示中实现了超过1100cd/m²的平均亮度，可以说是一直都很有说服力。在APL18的测量中，我们发现屏幕中心的亮度为1,614 cd/m²。因此，该面板非常适用于再现HDR内容。

由于采用了OLED技术，vivo手机也未能幸免于屏幕闪烁。低于43%的显示亮度，PWM频率在120赫兹（66至222赫兹）的原始刷新率附近波动。在这个亮度设置以上，PWM增加到706 Hz。使用直流调光（抗疲劳模式），闪烁相当于一个恒定的120 Hz。


1114 cd/m²	1117 cd/m²	1151 cd/m²
1106 cd/m²	1109 cd/m²	1134 cd/m²
1137 cd/m²	1118 cd/m²	1130 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3

Maximum: 1151 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1124 cd/m² Minimum: 1.99 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 1109 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.25

	Vivo X90 Pro+ AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.78	Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Dynamic AMOLED, 3088x1440, 6.80	Xiaomi 13 OLED, 2400x1080, 6.36	Google Pixel 7 Pro OLED, 3120x1440, 6.70	Vivo X80 Pro AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.78
Screen		8%	-1%	12%	9%
Brightness middle	1109	1077 -3%	1209 9%	1022 -8%	938 -15%
Brightness	1124	1093 -3%	1208 7%	1025 -9%	947 -16%
Brightness Distribution	96	97 1%	98 2%	99 3%	97 1%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	1.1	1.2 -9%	1.2 -9%	0.9 18%	0.9 18%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	2.7	2 26%	3 -11%	2.1 22%	1.9 30%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	2	1.3 35%	2.1 -5%	1.1 45%	1.3 35%
Gamma	2.25 ^98%	2.37 ^93%	2.26 ^97%	2.22 ^99%	2.2 ^100%
CCT	6605 ^98%	6526 ^100%	6504 ^100%	6650 ^98%	6518 ^100%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

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

222 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 222 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 222 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

具有固定变焦水平和不同亮度设置的测量系列

我们使用Calman分析软件检查OLED面板的色彩校准。相当大的DCI-P3色彩空间被控制在出厂设置中。除了蔡司模式外，还有其他三种模式可供选择。我们用分光光度计测量的结果是，蔡司模式的平均Delta-E偏差非常低，为1.1（颜色）和2.0（灰度）。

Display Response Times

ℹ

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
0.93 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.5365 ms rise
0.93 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 0.3895 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 0.1 (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 (21.5 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
1.44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.736 ms rise
1.44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 0.7055 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).

X90 Pro+能以其高亮度很好地补偿明亮的环境光线。即使是高反射率的表面也很难导致在阳光直射下的可读性问题。OLED面板的可视角度稳定性非常好。

性能。配备高通SoC的X90 Pro Plus

正如2023年的旗舰产品所预期的那样，X90 Pro+依赖于一个强大的SoC，即骁龙8代2.Kryo CPU由四个具有不同架构的集群组成。一个快速的Cortex-X3主核（3.2 GHz）以及两个Cortex-A715（2.8 GHz）和两个Cortex-A710核在我们的基准测试中提供了非常高的结果，特别是在Geekbench多核测试中。然而，所取得的分数有点低于小米13.

此外，在图形工作负载方面，由 Adreno 740在图形工作负载方面，vivo X90 Pro+的表现非常好，而小米13的表现要好10-15%左右。

由于SoC的高性能和快速的UFS 4.0内存，在日常使用中没有明显的滞后，系统运行平稳。在Chrome浏览器中的浏览也是如此，尽管基准测试相当低。

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1489 Points
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1478 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (1048 - 1574, n=18)	1452 Points -2%
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	1234 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	1154 Points -22%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	1048 Points -30%
Average of class Smartphone (119 - 2138, n=219, last 2 years)	913 Points -39%
Multi-Core
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	5090 Points +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (4192 - 5243, n=18)	4945 Points +3%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	4786 Points
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	3685 Points -23%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	3560 Points -26%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	3222 Points -33%
Average of class Smartphone (473 - 6681, n=219, last 2 years)	2996 Points -37%

Antutu v9 - Total Score
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1273775 Points +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (1111522 - 1322448, n=15)	1263746 Points 0%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1262638 Points
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	944782 Points -25%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	773857 Points -39%
Average of class Smartphone (102602 - 1650926, n=153, last 2 years)	738503 Points -42%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	704479 Points -44%

PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (11562 - 19783, n=19)	15689 Points +23%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	14094 Points +11%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	12748 Points
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	12579 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (4761 - 21385, n=214, last 2 years)	11787 Points -8%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	11397 Points -11%
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	10140 Points -20%

CrossMark - Overall
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1219 Points +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (778 - 1356, n=17)	1154 Points +11%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1038 Points
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	942 Points -9%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	886 Points -15%
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	879 Points -15%
Average of class Smartphone (200 - 1474, n=165, last 2 years)	837 Points -19%

BaseMark OS II
Overall
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (7354 - 9730, n=17)	8759 Points +14%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	8153 Points +6%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	7684 Points
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	7085 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	6319 Points -18%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	6164 Points -20%
Average of class Smartphone (411 - 11438, n=166, last 2 years)	5759 Points -25%
System
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	13646 Points +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (10786 - 15148, n=17)	13206 Points +3%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	12847 Points
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	10464 Points -19%
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	9765 Points -24%
Average of class Smartphone (2376 - 16475, n=166, last 2 years)	9672 Points -25%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	9294 Points -28%
Memory
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (6601 - 10821, n=17)	9382 Points +28%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	8179 Points +12%
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	7492 Points +2%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	7330 Points
Average of class Smartphone (670 - 12716, n=166, last 2 years)	6267 Points -15%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	6212 Points -15%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	5456 Points -26%
Graphics
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (22837 - 32334, n=17)	27673 Points +21%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	23966 Points +5%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	22837 Points
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	20288 Points -11%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	17104 Points -25%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	16375 Points -28%
Average of class Smartphone (697 - 58651, n=166, last 2 years)	14220 Points -38%
Web
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (1077 - 2044, n=17)	1749 Points +12%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	1739 Points +11%
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	1698 Points +9%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1652 Points +6%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1564 Points
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 2145, n=166, last 2 years)	1495 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	1434 Points -8%

UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Vivo X80 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	74725 Points +354%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	42662 Points +159%
Average of class Smartphone (207 - 84787, n=150, last 2 years)	21814 Points +32%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	16465 Points
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	15961 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (11338 - 16880, n=16)	15326 Points -7%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	10841 Points -34%

3DMark: Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | Wild Life Extreme | Wild Life Unlimited Score
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3707 Points +17%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3173 Points
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2456 Points -23%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1916 Points -40%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1807 Points -43%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3751 Points +18%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3192 Points
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2567 Points -20%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2044 Points -36%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1847 Points -42%

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	14038 Points
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	14002 Points 0%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10151 Points -28%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	7288 Points -48%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6721 Points -52%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	118 fps -2%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	490 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	395 fps -19%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	302 fps -38%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	267 fps -46%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	251 fps -49%

GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps +1%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	119 fps
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	108 fps -9%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	84 fps -29%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	299 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	257 fps -14%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	187 fps -37%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	147 fps -51%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	139 fps -54%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps +13%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	106 fps
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	71 fps -33%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -43%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	56 fps -47%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	218 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	181 fps -17%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	127 fps -42%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	101 fps -54%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	99 fps -55%

GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	93 fps +50%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	62 fps
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	49 fps -21%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	39 fps -37%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	37 fps -40%

GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	127 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	105 fps -17%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	68 fps -46%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	68 fps -46%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	50 fps -61%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	66 fps +32%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	52 fps +4%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	50 fps
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	31 fps -38%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	28 fps -44%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	61 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	56 fps -8%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	34 fps -44%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	31 fps -49%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	30 fps -51%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	113 fps +41%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	80 fps
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -25%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	42 fps -47%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	38 fps -52%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	156 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	142 fps -9%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	87 fps -44%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	75 fps -52%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	68 fps -56%

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	143.264 Points +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (62.7 - 179.2, n=18)	128.9 Points +11%
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	116.455 Points
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=173, last 2 years)	106.1 Points -9%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	98.153 Points -16%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G (Chrome 99)	96.8 Points -17%
Vivo X80 Pro	72.786 Points -37%

Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (62.9 - 199, n=14)	124 runs/min
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	113 runs/min
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G (Chrome 99)	108 runs/min
Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=157, last 2 years)	107.1 runs/min
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	104 runs/min
Vivo X80 Pro (Chrome 103)	87.9 runs/min

WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	139 Points
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	136 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (28 - 183, n=17)	125.5 Points -10%
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 202, n=160, last 2 years)	100.2 Points -28%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	90 Points -35%

WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (115 - 238, n=9)	199.8 Points
Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years)	133.1 Points
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G (Chrome 99)	124 Points
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	98 Points
Vivo X80 Pro (Chrome 103)	79 Points

Octane V2 - Total Score
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (19870 - 65418, n=20)	44774 Points +60%
Vivo X80 Pro (Chrome 103)	44631 Points +60%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	44245 Points +58%
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	43632 Points +56%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G (Chrome 99)	34055 Points +22%
Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=213, last 2 years)	33503 Points +20%
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	27938 Points

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	1773.4 ms *
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=173, last 2 years)	1595 ms * +10%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G (Chrome 99)	1259 ms * +29%
Vivo X80 Pro (Chrome 103)	1240.1 ms * +30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (654 - 1837, n=17)	1049 ms * +41%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	1011.5 ms * +43%
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	870.7 ms * +51%

* ... smaller is better

	Vivo X90 Pro+	Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G	Xiaomi 13	Google Pixel 7 Pro	Vivo X80 Pro	Average 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		-43%	4%	-55%	-34%	-6%	-49%
Sequential Read 256KB	3397.4	1653 -51%	3454.01 2%	1346.78 -60%	1856.39 -45%	3558 ?(3249 - 4384, n=19) 5%	1508 ?(226 - 4512, n=218, last 2 years) -56%
Sequential Write 256KB	2834.4	1074 -62%	2722.77 -4%	874.73 -69%	1424.91 -50%	2443 ?(1014 - 3346, n=19) -14%	1118 ?(57.5 - 3678, n=218, last 2 years) -61%
Random Read 4KB	373.88	322.3 -14%	393.81 5%	219.01 -41%	303.72 -19%	414 ?(368 - 460, n=19) 11%	247 ?(22.2 - 543, n=218, last 2 years) -34%
Random Write 4KB	484.29	273.1 -44%	536.76 11%	253.18 -48%	382.17 -21%	367 ?(152.9 - 595, n=19) -24%	272 ?(13 - 709, n=218, last 2 years) -44%

排放--vivo X90 Pro Plus保持冷静

温度

在我们的稳定性测试中，X90 Pro+的外壳在负载下几乎没有升温。尽管如此，Vivo手机在3DMark压力测试中显示出性能的下降。

这就是说，系统性能比X80 Pro+更稳定。 X80 Pro与骁龙8代并同时提供明显更好的性能。

Max. Load

Idle


30.6 °C	30.3 °C	30.6 °C
30.3 °C	31.1 °C	29.7 °C
30.7 °C	30.1 °C	29.9 °C

Maximum: 31.1 °C
Average: 30.4 °C


29.2 °C	29.2 °C	28.3 °C
29.2 °C	29.5 °C	30 °C
29 °C	30.3 °C	30.4 °C

Maximum: 30.4 °C
Average: 29.5 °C

Power Supply (max.) 25.2 °C | Room Temperature 21.4 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260

(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.4 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.1 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.4 °C / 87 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 32.7 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	88.5 %
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	78.9 % -11%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	68.1 % -23%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	67.9 % -23%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	58.5 % -34%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	87 %
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	79.1 % -9%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	75.6 % -13%
Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	73.3 % -16%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	61.8 % -29%

Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø21.4 (19.4-22.3)

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø9.2 (7.76-12.6)

Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø20.6 (17.7-22.4)

Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø9.93 (8.31-11)

Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø13.2 (11.5-15.7)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø76.6 (70.7-80)

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.2 (25.9-44.2)

Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø68.6 (62.7-79.5)

Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.8 (26.2-38.6)

Vivo X80 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø46.8 (40.4-59.3)

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø32.3 (26.8-43.4)

Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø80 (76.5-84.2)

Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø36.5 (30.7-39.8)

扬声器

vivo的旗舰产品依靠两个扬声器，最大音量超过90分贝。我们的测量显示，X90 Pro+的中音有相当线性的频率响应，但高音，尤其是超高音明显下降。还可以通过USB-C和蓝牙5.3提供有线或无线耳机解决方案。

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Vivo X90 Pro+ audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 77% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

电力消耗。VIVO手机80W充电

能源消耗

4,700毫安时的强大电池可以用80瓦有线充电或50瓦无线充电。X90 Pro+的耗电量高于小米13.特别是在空闲模式下，vivo手机的耗电量很大，超过1.7W。

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.16 / 0.32 Watt
Idle	0.92 / 1.76 / 1.88 Watt
Load	3.65 / 6.24 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: 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.

	Vivo X90 Pro+ 4700 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G 5000 mAh	Xiaomi 13 4500 mAh	Google Pixel 7 Pro 5000 mAh	Vivo X80 Pro 4700 mAh	Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2	Average of class Smartphone
Power Consumption		-8%	21%	10%	-17%	-24%	-11%
Idle Minimum *	0.92	0.58 37%	0.76 17%	0.78 15%	0.92 -0%	1.052 ?(0.7 - 2.37, n=18) -14%	0.897 ?(0.42 - 2.37, n=162, last 2 years) 2%
Idle Average *	1.76	0.71 60%	1.1 37%	1.61 9%	2.04 -16%	1.49 ?(0.8 - 2.16, n=18) 15%	1.452 ?(0.69 - 4.26, n=162, last 2 years) 17%
Idle Maximum *	1.88	1.16 38%	1.13 40%	1.63 13%	2.05 -9%	1.632 ?(1.07 - 2.2, n=18) 13%	1.629 ?(0.79 - 4.45, n=162, last 2 years) 13%
Load Average *	3.65	7.07 -94%	2.99 18%	3.29 10%	4.29 -18%	6.81 ?(2.61 - 15.3, n=18) -87%	5.55 ?(2.3 - 16.5, n=162, last 2 years) -52%
Load Maximum *	6.24	11.32 -81%	6.63 -6%	6.01 4%	8.75 -40%	9.29 ?(4.57 - 17.8, n=18) -49%	8.31 ?(3.53 - 20.8, n=162, last 2 years) -33%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.3 (1.574-11.4)

Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø5.84 (0.888-13.8)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.193 (1.109-1.298)

Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.833 (0.772-1.019)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø9.77 (9.38-10.2)

Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø7.55 (6.97-8.54)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.193 (1.109-1.298)

Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.833 (0.772-1.019)

电池寿命

vivo X90 Pro+提供15小时的电池运行时间，在测试时与 Galaxy S22 Ultra ，显示亮度为150 cd/m²，分辨率为1440p，包括自适应刷新率，基本持平。电池可以在大约35分钟内从0充到100%。

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing (Chrome Beta 110)		15h 05min

Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing
Xiaomi 13 4500 mAh	1021 min +13%
Average of class Smartphone (424 - 2844, n=229, last 2 years)	914 min +1%
Vivo X90 Pro+ 4700 mAh	905 min
Vivo X80 Pro 4700 mAh	852 min -6%
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G 5000 mAh	844 min -7%
Google Pixel 7 Pro 5000 mAh	676 min -25%

Pros

+ 明亮的LTPO面板

+ 强大的性能

+ 优秀的指纹传感器

+ 有价值的外壳

+ 良好的照片质量

Cons

- 没有WiFi 6E

- 没有eSIM卡

- 带弱点的超广角摄像头

判决书

在审查中。Vivo X90 Pro+。测试设备由TradingShenzhen提供

vivo X90 Pro+铺平了道路，展示了旗舰机在2023年必须如何在高端领域具有竞争力。这家中国制造商的旗舰智能手机提供了出色的成像能力--除了超广角镜头之外。你还得到了日常使用中毋庸置疑的性能和功能，包括快速的UFS 4.0存储和明亮节能的LTPO-4面板。由于采用了节能组件，尽管分辨率和帧率很高，但X90 Pro+的运行时间也同样吸引人。

vivo可以稍微改进其能源管理和充电速度--后者仍处于X80 Pro.其他中国智能手机，如小米和一加在这种情况下明显领先。在设备方面的小缺陷，如Wi-Fi 6E/Wi-Fi 7和eSIM支持，可望在下一代产品中得到弥补。

vivo用X90 Pro+为2023年创造了一款参考手机。不幸的是，它可能永远不会正式进入欧洲和美国。

那些不喜欢进口vivo X90 Pro+的人可以通过三星Galaxy S23找到合适的替代品。谷歌Pixel 7 Pro或小米13 Pro.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

价格和可用性

配备12GB内存和256GB闪存的vivo X90 Pro+在我们的合作伙伴Trading Shenzhen起价约1050欧元（约1050美元）。.

Vivo X90 Pro+ - 2023-02-21 02/21/2023 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

92%

Keyboard

67 / 75 → 89%

Pointing Device

94%

Connectivity

67 / 70 → 96%

Weight

88%

Battery

91%

Display

94%

Games Performance

74 / 64 → 100%

Application Performance

93 / 86 → 100%

Temperature

95%

Noise

100%

Audio

79 / 90 → 87%

Camera

79%

Average

86%

90%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Editor of the original article: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 389263 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008

contact me via: Facebook

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Notebookcheck中文版（NBC中国） > 评测 > vivo X90 Pro+评论。vivo以其旗舰智能手机设定了很高的标准

Marcus Herbrich, 2023-02-16 (Update: 2023-02-16)

vivo X90 Pro+评论。vivo以其旗舰智能手机设定了很高的标准

潜在的竞争对手比较

案例。带冲孔的Vivo智能手机

尺寸比较

设备。Vivo X90 Pro Plus，配备UFS 4.0

软件。vivo X90 Pro+配备了Android 13

通信和GNSS：vivo X90 Pro+，带Wi-Fi 6

电话和语音质量。vivo双SIM卡的智能手机

照相机。Vivo X90 Pro+配备索尼IMX989

配件和保修。vivo X90 Pro+配备了一个电源适配器

输入设备和操作。Vivo手机带有巨大的指纹传感器

显示屏。vivo X90 Pro Plus采用OLED技术

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

性能。配备高通SoC的X90 Pro Plus

排放--vivo X90 Pro Plus保持冷静

温度

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

扬声器

Vivo X90 Pro+ audio analysis

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G audio analysis

电力消耗。VIVO手机80W充电

能源消耗

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

电池寿命

Pros

Cons

判决书

价格和可用性

More articles related to this device

Transparency

Pricecompare