free counter
Tech

Xiaomi Poco F4 review: Great smartphone, but lacking innovation

Subtle upgrade. Poco smartphones stand for a good price-performance ratio. But the new Poco F4 is very similar to its F3 predecessor – even the processor is identical. Moreover, the manufacturer’s flagship, the F4 GT, was released earlier this year. Our review clarifies where the F4 ranks.

Benedikt Winkel, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Jacob Fisher), 🇩🇪

Poco F4? We’ve had this already. This is only nearly true, since Poco launched the F4 GT with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 processor in the summer. The F4 without GT, on the other hand, is the successor to last year’s F3 model. The device is available in two configuration variants: the smaller one comes with 6 GB of RAM and 128 GB of storage, while the larger one offers 8 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage. There are three colors to choose from: silver, black and green. Our review device is black and has the smaller storage configuration. We clarify whether the F4 achieves a top spot in terms of price-performance in the Poco tradition.

Display

6.67 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 395 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz

Storage

128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 

, 104 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, compass, proximity, OTG, IR-Blaster

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 5.2, GSM (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), UMTS (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19), LTE FDD (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28), LTE TDD (Band 38, 40, 41), 5G Sub-6G (Band 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 7.7 x 163.2 x 75.95 ( = 0.3 x 6.43 x 2.99 in)

Battery

4500 mAh Lithium-Polymer

Charging

fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 12

Camera

Primary Camera: 64 MPix (f/1.79) + 8 MPix (f/2.2) Ultrawide + 2 MPix (f/2.4) Macro

Secondary Camera: 20 MPix (f/2.45)

Additional features

Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Onscreen, 67W charger, USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), SIM tool, case, USB-C to 3.5 millimeter jack adapter, MIUI 13, 12 Months Warranty, Dual-band GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Galileo (E1, E5a), QZSS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), Beidou (B1l, B2a), NavIC, fanless

Weight

195 g ( = 6.88 oz / 0.43 pounds), Power Supply: 137 g ( = 4.83 oz / 0.3 pounds)

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

Possible Competitors in Comparison

Rating

Date

Model

Weight

Drive

Size

Resolution

Best Price

86.4 %

09/2022

Xiaomi Poco F4

SD 870, Adreno 650
195 g 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash 6.67″ 2400×1080
83.4 %

06/2022

Samsung Galaxy A53

Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4
189 g 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash 6.50″ 2400×1080
88.1 %

03/2022

Xiaomi 12X

SD 870, Adreno 650
176 g 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash 6.28″ 2400×1080
86 %

05/2021

Xiaomi Poco F3

SD 870, Adreno 650
196 g 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash 6.67″ 2400×1080
86.4 %

07/2022

Motorola Edge 30

SD 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L
155 g 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash 6.50″ 2400×1080
85.4 %

06/2022

OnePlus Nord 2T

Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9
190 g 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash 6.43″ 2400×1080
85.5 %

12/2021

Honor 50

SD 778G 5G, Adreno 642L
175 g 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash 6.57″ 2340×1080

Case – F4 with plastic frame and glass back

The Poco F4 has a glass back, with Xiaomi emphasizing a reduced thickness of 7.7 millimeters, but this does not include the protruding camera module. Although the cameras clearly protrude from the case, the smartphone does not wobble on a flat surface. The frame is made of plastic, but still ensures great rigidity. Edges are straight, making the smartphone look quite angular. The display is reinforced by Corning Gorilla Glass 5.

During the review period, our review sample did not incur any scratches or other signs of wear. The smartphone can be twisted a little under force, but there are no noises. The SIM card slot has a rubber seal, so the smartphone is presumably water resistant, even if IP certification is absent. The workmanship is very good overall, and the gaps very small and even.

Equipment – Poco with dual SIM and stereo sound

The Poco F4 is dual-SIM capable. It accepts two nano-SIM cards, but eSIM is not supported. The internal storage cannot be expanded with a micro-SD card, so the choice between the two storage variants with 128 and 256 GB should be carefully considered. The F4 also does without a jack, but Poco at least includes a jack to USB-C adapter. In return, the smartphone offers stereo speakers that are Dolby Atmos certified. There is also an infrared transmitter on the top, so the smartphone can be used as a remote control for many devices.

The power button and the volume rocker are installed on the right side of the device. Turning the smartphone on and off is no problem for right-handers, and the reviewer’s thumb easily reaches the volume down button. However, the thumb has to be stretched out for the volume up button. The notification LED has been omitted. Instead, the F4 has an always-on display. Lastly, the panel can be activated by lifting it or double-tapping it to check for received messages.

Software – F4 runs on MIUI 13

Poco’s affiliation with Xiaomi is made clear in the software, since the F4 runs MIUI 13, which is based on Android 12. At the time of review, the security patch was from August 2022. The UI has an app launcher and comes with pre-installed third-party apps such as Netflix, Audible, Amazon, Booking, Genshin Impact, Goboo, Joom, Lords Mobile, Spotify, TikTok and WPS Office, but these can all be uninstalled. In addition, a number of Google apps and programs from the Xiaomi universe, such as Mi Video, ShareMe, and Mi Remote, are installed. In total, 24 GB of storage space is already occupied in factory state.

The software supports some gestures and shortcuts for the keys. For example, users can take a screenshot via a three-finger swipe gesture or start the flashlight with a double tap on the power button. Such gestures can be customized in the menu. Poco also includes a one-hand mode that allows you to reach the entire display area with your thumb without having to change your grip.

The software also offers the option for side menus, which can be used to launch either individual programs or special functions in special usage scenarios. For example, the sidebar opens the “Game Turbo” when gaming, which can be used to quickly clean up the RAM or free up storage space. Quick access to screenshots is also possible. Furthermore, there is the option of implementing two user accounts on the device, which can be used in parallel.

The Poco software separates the notifications from the quick settings. A swipe down to the left of the selfie camera shows the current notifications, while a swipe to the right of the camera opens the quick settings. A swipe from bottom to top opens the app launcher, which can also filter the apps by categories such as communication, entertainment, photography etc. Currently, Poco and Xiaomi do not provide any precise information about an update schedule, but have stated their intention to provide the devices with updates in the long term.

Communication and GNSS – F4 comes with 5G and Wi-Fi 6

The Poco F4 supports all frequency bands relevant to Europe, including LTE and 5G mobile. Under testing, the smartphone’s reception displayed no abnormalities. The Poco device accepts two nano-SIM cards; eSIM is not supported. The device also does not support the mmWave standard.

The Poco F4 performs well with Wi-Fi 6 support in the home network: The transfer rates with our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router are solid. Although the smartphone does not outperform competing devices – with the exception of the Samsung A53 – it still ranks among the top contenders. Similarly to its predecessor, the transfer rates are also very stable and there are no dips.

Networking
Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000




677 (min: 331) MBit/s ∼92%

iperf3 transmit AXE11000




960 (min: 480) MBit/s ∼100%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000




345 (min: 328) MBit/s ∼47%

iperf3 transmit AXE11000




269 (min: 255) MBit/s ∼28%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000




736 (min: 644) MBit/s ∼100%

iperf3 transmit AXE11000




745 (min: 391) MBit/s ∼78%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AX12




884 (min: 444) MBit/s ∼100%

iperf3 receive AX12




654 (min: 311) MBit/s ∼85%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz




946 (min: 876) MBit/s ∼71%

iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz




946 (min: 884) MBit/s ∼74%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000




451 (min: 397) MBit/s ∼61%

iperf3 transmit AXE11000




884 (min: 867) MBit/s ∼92%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AX12




852 (min: 384) MBit/s ∼96%

iperf3 receive AX12




769 (min: 725) MBit/s ∼100%

Average of class Smartphone

 
iperf3 receive AXE11000





633 (min: 44.3) MBit/s ∼86%

iperf3 transmit AXE11000





669 (min: 57.7) MBit/s ∼70%

iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz





1339 (min: 853) MBit/s ∼100%

iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz





1283 (min: 598) MBit/s ∼100%

iperf3 transmit AX12





489 (min: 5.59) MBit/s ∼55%

iperf3 receive AX12





467 (min: 15.5) MBit/s ∼61%

050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900950Tooltip

Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø665 (331-713)

Xiaomi Poco F3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø644 (311-702)

Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø944 (480-997)

Xiaomi Poco F3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø869 (444-914)

Under testing, the Poco F4 proves to be quick in establishing links to satellite systems. The F4 supports GNSS with several bands. After an initial calibration, everyday navigation with Google Maps works well. Satellite positioning succeeds both indoors and outdoors within a few seconds.

In a bicycle ride with our comparison device, the Garmin Venu 2, the Poco F4 performs well with a good recording of the route traveled. The total distance recorded hardly deviates and corresponds to the satellite recording, even with curves and turns.

Telephony & Voice Quality

The call quality of the Poco F4 is inconspicuous. The other party is rendered clearly and the earpiece is loud enough. The user of the F4 is also well understood, but background noise could be filtered out better. For the phone app, Poco relies on software from Google. The user interface is tidy and clearly arranged.

The Poco F4 supports both VoLTE and calls via WLAN. When making calls via the loudspeaker, the F4 gives clear voice reproduction, especially in the mids and trebles. Voices are reproduced naturally and do not sound tinny, even at high volumes. 

Cameras – Poco with 64 MPix update

The Poco F4 offers three different cameras on the back, two of which we know from the predecessor. The 64 MPix main camera is new and replaces the 48 MPix sensor of the F3. The new sensor impresses with a large dynamic range. Image processing is swift, although the software carries out a lot of post-image sharpening. The camera also offers a manual Pro mode where ISO, white balance, shutter speed, aperture and focus can be manually adjusted. 

The leap in quality from the main to the wide-angle camera is enormous. Color reproduction deviates, the images appear paler, and there is also a lack of sharpness. The macro lens is more of a gimmick; in sufficient light, shots at close range are possible, but they lack sharpness. Video recordings are possible up to a resolution of 4K and 60 FPS, but only 1080p and 30 FPS are enabled ex-factory. The fast autofocus in video recordings is a positive aspect, but the recordings lack good stabilization and quickly become shaky.

A 20 MPix camera is used on the front, as in the predecessor. Poco specifies the camera recess in the display as having a diameter of only 2.67 millimeters. Good selfies are possible in good light conditions, but lens flares occur in backlight. Portrait mode works quickly and reliably, and even hair is not a problem for the camera. Video recordings are possible with a maximum resolution of 1080p and 30 FPS.

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 cameraWide angle5x zoomLow light

click to load images

In terms of color fidelity, the Poco F4’s camera does not come out unscathed. Most colors are greatly brightened in daylight, but appear vivid on their own. As expected, the differences are significantly larger under controlled lighting conditions at a brightness of just one lux. In a class comparison, the F4’s camera performs remarkably well, although the Samsung A53 renders colors more realistically under identical conditions.

The sharpness of the images is good, but decreases noticeably towards the edges in our test chart. In addition, the exposure of the pictures is not uniform; the lower edge of the picture is brighter than the upper one. In low light, objects and details are still recognizable in the Poco pictures, but could be brighter overall.

ColorChecker

15.7 ∆E

9.6 ∆E

17 ∆E

24.8 ∆E

12.8 ∆E

8.7 ∆E

9 ∆E

12.5 ∆E

10 ∆E

9.2 ∆E

10.6 ∆E

11.9 ∆E

8.3 ∆E

18.9 ∆E

10.6 ∆E

6.6 ∆E

8.6 ∆E

13 ∆E

6.3 ∆E

4.1 ∆E

9.9 ∆E

12.8 ∆E

5.5 ∆E

3.2 ∆E

ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco F4: 10.82 ∆E min: 3.2 – max: 24.83 ∆E
ColorChecker

29.3 ∆E

48.3 ∆E

35.8 ∆E

35.6 ∆E

41 ∆E

59.6 ∆E

48.8 ∆E

30.1 ∆E

37.7 ∆E

27.3 ∆E

59.9 ∆E

62.2 ∆E

27.8 ∆E

46.6 ∆E

35 ∆E

64.8 ∆E

40.8 ∆E

43.2 ∆E

57.3 ∆E

58.9 ∆E

47.3 ∆E

35.6 ∆E

24 ∆E

13.4 ∆E

ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco F4: 42.09 ∆E min: 13.38 – max: 64.8 ∆E

Accessories & Warranty – The F4 comes with a case and fast charger

The Poco F4 comes with a 67-watt fast charger (including a matching USB-A to USB-C cable), a transparent plastic case, a USB-C to jack adapter, a screen protector and a SIM card tool.

Xiaomi offers a 24-month warranty for Poco smartphones in Germany. This may differ in other regions, so be sure to check with your supplier before buying.

The 67-watt fast charger is included in the scope of delivery
The 67-watt fast charger is included in the scope of delivery

Input Devices & Operation – The F4 is quickly unlocked

Poco uses Google’s Gboard keyboard ex-works, so inputs in portrait and landscape mode are smooth and usually without error. The capacitive panel supports inputs of up to ten fingers simultaneously. The sampling rate is up to 360 Hz and the screen’s gliding properties are very good.

The smartphone can be unlocked via fingerprint and face recognition. The fingerprint sensor is located in the power button, and functions rapidly without erroneous inputs. Most of the time, however, the device is inadvertently unlocked by the more unsecure 2D facial recognition, which works extremely fast.

Display – The OLED panel of the F4 gets really bright

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

Poco has installed an OLED display with a refresh rate of up to 120 Hz in the F4. The rate can either be fixed at 60 or 120 Hz, or the software dynamically adjusts the refresh rates to the current content, in which case an average value of 90 Hz is also possible. 

The 6.67-inch (16.94 cm) panel has a high brightness. In testing, we determined a maximum value of 1274 cd/m² with the ambient light sensor enabled, which nearly corresponds to the 1300 nits specified by Poco. The display reaches a maximum of 502 cd/m² with the sensor disabled. The illumination of the panel is also good; the differences between individual areas are small and not perceptible in everyday use.

The display is flat and without any curvature. Display edges are not particularly narrow, but very even. Poco offers an always-on display in the F4. The function can be customized in different styles. In addition, the function can be deactivated in certain periods so that you are not disturbed by an illuminated panel at night, for example.

We also measured the PWN. The frequency at the lowest brightness is 443 Hz. As soon as the brightness exceeds 51%, the frequency is 120 Hz, which corresponds to the refresh rate of the display. No temporal dithering was detected.

910

cd/m²
918

cd/m²
943

cd/m²
901

cd/m²
917

cd/m²
939

cd/m²
917

cd/m²
920

cd/m²
939

cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

X-Rite i1Pro 3

Maximum: 943 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 922.7 cd/m² Minimum: 2.8 cd/m²

Brightness Distribution: 96 %

Center on Battery: 917 cd/m²

Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)

ΔE Color 2 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.3

ΔE Greyscale 3.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.5

97.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)

Gamma: 2.23

Xiaomi Poco F4

AMOLED, 2400×1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy A53

AMOLED, 2400×1080, 6.50
Xiaomi 12X

OLED, 2400×1080, 6.28
Xiaomi Poco F3

AMOLED, 2400×1080, 6.67
Motorola Edge 30

AMOLED, 2400×1080, 6.50
OnePlus Nord 2T

AMOLED, 2400×1080, 6.43
Honor 50

OLED, 2340×1080, 6.57
Screen

6%

31%

29%

4%

-24%

-21%

Brightness middle

917

718

-22%

910

-1%

889

-3%

632

-31%

561

-39%

731

-20%

Brightness

923

730

-21%

908

-2%

902

-2%

630

-32%

573

-38%

722

-22%

Brightness Distribution

96

92

-4%

97

1%

95

-1%

92

-4%

96

0%

97

1%

Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *

2

1.62

19%

0.8

60%

0.9

55%

1.46

27%

2.67

-34%

3.1

-55%

Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *

5.2

4.21

19%

1.8

65%

1.9

63%

3.32

36%

6.15

-18%

5.8

-12%

Greyscale dE 2000 *

3.5

2

43%

1.3

63%

1.3

63%

2.6

26%

4.1

-17%

4.2

-20%

Gamma

2.23 99%

2.156 102%

2.25 98%

2.26 97%

2.209 100%

2.245 98%

2.19 100%

CCT

6447 101%

6545 99%

6414 101%

6614 98%

6755 96%

7104 91%

6818 95%

… 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 443 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 443 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 443 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 19737 (minimum: 5 – maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Series of measurements at a fixed zoom level and different brightness settings

Thanks to its design, the OLED display of the Poco F4 scores with a perfect black level and correspondingly excellent contrasts. The overall color reproduction is also pleasing; deviations are in the imperceptible range for almost all tones.

Only the grayscale and white values are out of line and show increased deviation. The 2D CalMAN test resulted in a coverage of the sRGB color space of up to 97.3%. In everyday use, the panel convinces with crisp color reproduction.

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.

A “sunlight mode” can be activated in the menu, which further increases the brightness of the panel on sunny days. This means that the device is easy to read at all times and is at the top among comparison devices.

The Poco F4 is easy to read at all times, even in direct sunlight
The Poco F4 is easy to read at all times

The viewing angle stability of the Poco display is very good. Content can be seen very well, even from extreme angles. The smartphone’s brightness control works quickly and reliably, which ensures good legibility in all lighting scenarios.

Viewing angle stability of the Xiaomi Poco F4
Viewing angle stability of the Xiaomi Poco F4

Performance – The F4 is slower than its predecessor

Poco uses a combination of a Snapdragon 870 and an Adreno 650 in the F4 – just like the F3 predecessor. Even though newer processors are now on the market, the Poco F4 is still performs well with its built-in SoC. However, it also becomes clear in the CPU benchmarks that the Poco F4 is slightly behind the average smartphone with this processor and also lands behind its F3 predecessor.

Although Poco F4 has to admit defeat to its predecessor and the Xiaomi 12X with the same processor is faster, the other comparison devices don’t stand a chance in the benchmarks. The Snapdragon 778G(+) in the Honor 50 and the Motorola Edge 30 are in a different performance class, as is the MediaTek Dimensity 1300 in the OnePlus Nord 2T and the Exynos 1280 in the Samsung Galaxy A53.

In everyday life, the Poco F4 hardly reaches its limits. Apps start quickly and run without jerks. Switching between different apps doesn’t make the device sweat, nor does opening several apps in floating windows at the same time. 

Geekbench 5.4
Single-Core
Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


1000 Points ∼100% +4%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


998 Points ∼100% +4%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (955 – 1046, n=14)





991 Points ∼99% +3%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


963 Points ∼96%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


826 Points ∼83% -14%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


788 Points ∼79% -18%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


740 Points ∼74% -23%

Average of class Smartphone

  (58 – 1885, n=268, last 2 years)





722 Points ∼72% -25%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


415 Points ∼42% -57%

Multi-Core
Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


3377 Points ∼100% +12%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


3368 Points ∼100% +12%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (2725 – 4455, n=14)





3231 Points ∼96% +7%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


3007 Points ∼89%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


2889 Points ∼86% -4%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


2872 Points ∼85% -4%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


2700 Points ∼80% -10%

Average of class Smartphone

  (248 – 5538, n=268, last 2 years)





2329 Points ∼69% -23%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


1878 Points ∼56% -38%

Antutu v9 – Total Score
Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


714406 Points ∼100% +8%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (662980 – 716502, n=11)





692527 Points ∼97% +4%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


680139 Points ∼95% +3%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


662980 Points ∼93%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


600384 Points ∼84% -9%

Average of class Smartphone

  (111952 – 1119358, n=137, last 2 years)





574303 Points ∼80% -13%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


553328 Points ∼77% -17%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


519177 Points ∼73% -22%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


409976 Points ∼57% -38%

PCMark for Android – Work 3.0
Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


15194 Points ∼100% +18%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


13610 Points ∼90% +6%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (10829 – 16054, n=13)





13115 Points ∼86% +2%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


12866 Points ∼85%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


12076 Points ∼79% -6%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


11778 Points ∼78% -8%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


11470 Points ∼75% -11%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


10678 Points ∼70% -17%

Average of class Smartphone

  (4436 – 18567, n=187, last 2 years)





10372 Points ∼68% -19%

CrossMark – Overall
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (719 – 844, n=6)





768 Points ∼100% +5%

Average of class Smartphone

  (226 – 1178, n=78, last 2 years)





760 Points ∼99% +4%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


734 Points ∼96%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


732 Points ∼95% 0%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


719 Points ∼94% -2%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


579 Points ∼75% -21%

BaseMark OS II
Overall
Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


6356 Points ∼100% +13%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (5448 – 6369, n=11)





5973 Points ∼94% +6%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


5616 Points ∼88%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


5551 Points ∼87% -1%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


5002 Points ∼79% -11%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


4932 Points ∼78% -12%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


4856 Points ∼76% -14%

Average of class Smartphone

  (1223 – 8753, n=177, last 2 years)





4529 Points ∼71% -19%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


3626 Points ∼57% -35%

System
Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


10940 Points ∼100% +22%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


9997 Points ∼91% +12%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


9996 Points ∼91% +12%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


9880 Points ∼90% +10%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (8563 – 10489, n=11)





9482 Points ∼87% +6%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


9002 Points ∼82% 0%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


8962 Points ∼82%

Average of class Smartphone

  (2083 – 19657, n=177, last 2 years)





8001 Points ∼73% -11%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


7157 Points ∼65% -20%

Memory
Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


7692 Points ∼100% +18%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (5689 – 8167, n=11)





7213 Points ∼94% +11%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


6683 Points ∼87% +3%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


6506 Points ∼85%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


6307 Points ∼82% -3%

Average of class Smartphone

  (670 – 9044, n=177, last 2 years)





5131 Points ∼67% -21%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


4762 Points ∼62% -27%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


4699 Points ∼61% -28%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


3855 Points ∼50% -41%

Graphics
Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


12801 Points ∼100% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


12630 Points ∼99%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (10386 – 12801, n=11)





12045 Points ∼94% -5%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


10386 Points ∼81% -18%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


8672 Points ∼68% -31%

Average of class Smartphone

  (697 – 26660, n=177, last 2 years)





8448 Points ∼66% -33%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


7516 Points ∼59% -40%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


6659 Points ∼52% -47%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


5178 Points ∼40% -59%

Web
Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


1658 Points ∼100% +26%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (1315 – 1791, n=11)





1549 Points ∼93% +18%

Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


1519 Points ∼92% +16%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


1511 Points ∼91% +15%

Honor 50

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


1509 Points ∼91% +15%

Average of class Smartphone

  (718 – 2392, n=177, last 2 years)





1403 Points ∼85% +7%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


1365 Points ∼82% +4%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


1315 Points ∼79%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


1210 Points ∼73% -8%

AImark – Score v2.x
Xiaomi 12X

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192


123847 Points ∼100% +8%

Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

  (111838 – 123847, n=9)





117183 Points ∼95% +3%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


114168 Points ∼92%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144


111838 Points ∼90% -2%

OnePlus Nord 2T

MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288


58244 Points ∼47% -49%

Average of class Smartphone

  (4293 – 286905, n=156, last 2 years)





54530 Points ∼44% -52%

Motorola Edge 30

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192


5777 Points ∼5% -95%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144


4714 Points ∼4% -96%

The Poco F4 leaves a mixed impression in the GPU benchmarks. It leads the field of contenders in some GFX measurements, but mostly ranks in the middle. The smartphone is too fast for some onscreen tests, such as the Sling Shot Etreme OpenGL ES 3.1, so no results are displayed. 

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1295 Points ∼100% +6%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1232 Points ∼95% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1222 Points ∼94% 0%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1218 Points ∼94%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


768 Points ∼59% -37%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


689 Points ∼53% -43%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


621 Points ∼48% -49%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1324 Points ∼100% +10%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1237 Points ∼93% +2%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1223 Points ∼92% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


1207 Points ∼91%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


764 Points ∼58% -37%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


694 Points ∼52% -43%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


636 Points ∼48% -47%

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4548 Points ∼100% +6%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4304 Points ∼95% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4273 Points ∼94%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4271 Points ∼94% 0%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


2831 Points ∼62% -34%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


2501 Points ∼55% -41%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


2275 Points ∼50% -47%

3DMark / Wild Life Score
OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4623 Points ∼100% +8%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4309 Points ∼93% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4288 Points ∼93% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4262 Points ∼92%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


2814 Points ∼61% -34%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


2492 Points ∼54% -42%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


2293 Points ∼50% -46%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


5281 Points ∼100% +25%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


4677 Points ∼89% +11%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4547 Points ∼86% +8%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4211 Points ∼80%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4140 Points ∼78% -2%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


3097 Points ∼59% -26%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


10436 Points ∼100% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


10287 Points ∼99%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


9498 Points ∼91% -8%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


6240 Points ∼60% -39%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


5614 Points ∼54% -45%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


3982 Points ∼38% -61%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


8576 Points ∼100% +10%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


7789 Points ∼91%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


7377 Points ∼86% -5%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


5763 Points ∼67% -26%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


5375 Points ∼63% -31%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


3746 Points ∼44% -52%

3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


10277 Points ∼100% +16%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


8891 Points ∼87%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


7970 Points ∼78% -10%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


7281 Points ∼71% -18%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


6638 Points ∼65% -25%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


4645 Points ∼45% -48%

3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


14028 Points ∼100% +1%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


13857 Points ∼99%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


12033 Points ∼86% -13%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


8605 Points ∼61% -38%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


7536 Points ∼54% -46%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


5510 Points ∼39% -60%

3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


5309 Points ∼100% +35%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


4732 Points ∼89% +20%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


4684 Points ∼88% +19%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


3944 Points ∼74%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


3653 Points ∼69% -7%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


2997 Points ∼56% -24%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


101 fps ∼100% +66%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


99 fps ∼98% +62%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


90 fps ∼89% +48%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


81 fps ∼80% +33%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


71 fps ∼70% +16%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


61 fps ∼60%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


60 fps ∼59% -2%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


200 fps ∼100% +10%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


200 fps ∼100% +10%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


182 fps ∼91%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


171 fps ∼86% -6%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


148 fps ∼74% -19%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


133 fps ∼67% -27%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


92 fps ∼46% -49%

GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


102 fps ∼100% +70%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


85 fps ∼83% +42%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


68 fps ∼67% +13%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


60 fps ∼59% 0%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


60 fps ∼59%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


57 fps ∼56% -5%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


56 fps ∼55% -7%

GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


129 fps ∼100% +34%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


119 fps ∼92% +24%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


104 fps ∼81% +8%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


96 fps ∼74%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


89 fps ∼69% -7%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


77 fps ∼60% -20%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


61 fps ∼47% -36%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


74 fps ∼100% +25%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


67 fps ∼91% +14%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


59 fps ∼80% 0%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


59 fps ∼80%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


54 fps ∼73% -8%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


48 fps ∼65% -19%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


35 fps ∼47% -41%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


81 fps ∼100% +5%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


79 fps ∼98% +3%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


77 fps ∼95%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


72 fps ∼89% -6%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


63 fps ∼78% -18%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


56 fps ∼69% -27%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


38 fps ∼47% -51%

GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


45 fps ∼100% +7%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


44 fps ∼98% +5%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


42 fps ∼93%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


41 fps ∼91% -2%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


39 fps ∼87% -7%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


28 fps ∼62% -33%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


20 fps ∼44% -52%

GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


50 fps ∼100% +2%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


49 fps ∼98%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


48 fps ∼96% -2%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


43 fps ∼86% -12%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


37 fps ∼74% -24%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


33 fps ∼66% -33%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


23 fps ∼46% -53%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


33 fps ∼100% +6%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


31 fps ∼94% 0%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


31 fps ∼94%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


30 fps ∼91% -3%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


26 fps ∼79% -16%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


20 fps ∼61% -35%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


15 fps ∼45% -52%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


22 fps ∼100% 0%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


22 fps ∼100%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


18 fps ∼82% -18%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


15 fps ∼68% -32%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


14 fps ∼64% -36%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


10 fps ∼45% -55%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


9.7 fps ∼44% -56%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


50 fps ∼100%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


49 fps ∼98% -2%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


49 fps ∼98% -2%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


47 fps ∼94% -6%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


40 fps ∼80% -20%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


32 fps ∼64% -36%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


23 fps ∼46% -54%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


59 fps ∼100%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


57 fps ∼97% -3%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


56 fps ∼95% -5%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


50 fps ∼85% -15%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


39 fps ∼66% -34%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


38 fps ∼64% -36%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


26 fps ∼44% -56%

Classifying the results of the browser benchmarks is difficult because the achieved results vary strongly, depending on the browser selected. In Chrome, the Poco F4 falls in the last or one of the last places in the comparison field in the Octane 2.0 and Jetstream 2 tests. In Edge, on the other hand, the smartphone’s scores are in the upper range of competing smartphones. The Poco UI thus does not seem to harmonize particularly well with the current Chrome version when it comes to top performance. Scores for the Speedometer 2.0 benchmark are similar in both browsers and on a low level. In everyday use, no performance issues occur while browsing, no matter which browser is chosen. Pages load smoothly, and even many simultaneously opened browser tabs do not cause the system to jerk or crash.

The Poco F4 comes in two storage variants with 128 and 256 GB. Further expansion of the storage via microSD card is not possible. Our review sample is the small version; 104 GB is available in factory state. Poco uses UFS 3.1 storage, which clearly lags behind the results of the Xiaomi 12X and the OnePlus Nord 2T in the test field. The F4 seems to have the same memory as the F3 because the measured values are very similar. In sequential read and write, the Poco F4 is slightly below the device average with UFS 3.1 storage, but is slightly above average in the random values.

Xiaomi Poco F4 Samsung Galaxy A53 Xiaomi 12X Xiaomi Poco F3 Motorola Edge 30 OnePlus Nord 2T Honor 50 Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5

-16%

35%

-1%

26%

46%

8%

17%

-17%

Sequential Read 256KB

1371.56

510.1

-63%

1732

26%

1378

0%

1514.62

10%

1891.3

38%

984

-28%

1561

Gaming – The F4 offers sufficient performance for current titles

The combination of Snapdragon 870 and Adreno 650 makes the Poco F4 a solid gaming smartphone. Current titles such as PUBG Mobile or League of Legends Wild Rift can be played at the highest or very high settings. The F4 also achieves high frame rates in simpler titles such as Deag Trigger 2, although these sometimes fluctuate strongly in high graphics settings, which is shown by the measurements in Gamebench. Nevertheless, the frame drops do not prove bothersome in-game, and the rate does not drop below 70 FPS. When PUBG Mobile is played at the highest settings, the frame rate is only 40 FPS, but remains very stable and the game is always smooth. The positioning of the stereo speakers, which are not covered during gaming, is good.

0102030405060708090100110Tooltip

; Dead Trigger 2; 1.8.18: Ø103.4 (76-117)

; League of Legends: Wild Rift; 3.3.0.5735: Ø59.9 (54-61)

; PUBG Mobile; HD; 2.2.0: Ø59.8 (56-61)

; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 2.2.0: Ø39.9 (38-41)

Emissions – Poco has the Snapdragon under control

Temperature – Poco stays cool even under load

The Poco F4 stays pleasantly cool on both the front and back during everyday use. Even under load, such as during gaming or stress tests, only individual areas of the smartphone get a bit warmer, especially in the area next to the camera. Overall, the Poco never gets hot and so can always be held without discomfort. The manufacturer states that a seven-layer graphite structure, in combination with a 3.1 mm² evaporation cooling chamber, is responsible for the chip’s temperature management. This system works well in practice and cools the Snapdragon 870 reliably.

  31.4 °C

89 F
31.5 °C

89 F
29.9 °C

86 F
 
  31.4 °C

89 F
31.4 °C

89 F
30.4 °C

87 F
 
  31.3 °C

88 F
31.7 °C

89 F
30.2 °C

86 F
 
Maximum: 31.7 °C = 89 F

Average: 31 °C = 88 F
29.2 °C

85 F
30.6 °C

87 F
30.9 °C

88 F
28.9 °C

84 F
30.2 °C

86 F
31 °C

88 F
29.8 °C

86 F
30.8 °C

87 F
31.6 °C

89 F
Maximum: 31.6 °C = 89 F

Average: 30.3 °C = 87 F

Power Supply (max.)  26.5 °C = 80 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260

(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31 °C / 88 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 31.7 °C / 89 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 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F

(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27 °C / 81 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 A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


99.6 % ∼100% +9%

Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


99.4 % ∼100% +9%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


98.8 % ∼99% +8%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


91.5 % ∼92%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


82.2 % ∼83% -10%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


67.8 % ∼68% -26%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


59.1 % ∼59% -35%

Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Honor 50

Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


99.8 % ∼100% +14%

Motorola Edge 30

Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


99.1 % ∼99% +13%

Samsung Galaxy A53

Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash


97.8 % ∼98% +11%

Xiaomi Poco F4

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


87.8 % ∼88%

Xiaomi Poco F3

Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


82.2 % ∼82% -6%

Xiaomi 12X

Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


67.5 % ∼68% -23%

OnePlus Nord 2T

Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash


65.9 % ∼66% -25%

0510152025Tooltip

Xiaomi Poco F4 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø6.11 (6-6.84)

Xiaomi 12X Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø6.78 (5-7.42)

Xiaomi Poco F4 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø21.9 (21.2-23.2)

Xiaomi 12X Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø23.3 (17.5-25.8)

Speakers

The Poco F4 has stereo speakers that are Dolby Atmos certified and are located on the device’s front sides. The smartphone’s maximum volume is 86.2 dB, which makes the F4 quite loud and suitable for entertainment in loud surroundings. The sound does not become tinny, even at high volumes, and there is only slight vibration in the bottom third of the device. The speakers reproduce mids and trebles quite linearly, but bass or lower frequencies are lacking.

The F4 does not offer a jack connection, but Poco includes a USB-C to audio jack adapter with the smartphone. The audio output via Bluetooth worked flawlessly with several headphones under testing. The smartphone supports a number of audio codecs such as SBC, AAC, aptX (HD / Adaptive Audio / TWS+), LDAC and LHDC (V1-4).

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204339.62530.434.13123.230.84023.327.55036.439.16324.123.68020.325.410017.625.412515.73316013.84820016.252.225015.157.131512.660.440013.16050013.16563012.768.480014.772.1100013.472.5125012.874.5160012.876.8200012.876250013.277.1315013.775.9400013.976.4500013.173630013.969.4800013.366.1100001471.11250014.263.91600013.652.2SPL25.686.2N0.765.1median 13.6median 68.4Delta0.9928.323.923.320.520.3241926.529.835.717.225.712.926.219.426.112.139.51149.99.548.812.655.313.660.210.562.31167.99.768.411.174.811.576.812.778.913.479.112.775.813.676.314.180.41380.113.276.813.978.613.475.213.773.214.467.816.76525.189.40.679.5median 13median 73.20.99.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.toggle_831736_0’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.pn_831736_1’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.toggle_831736_1’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});” style=”text-anchor:start;font-size:0.7em” x=”55″ y=”38″>Xiaomi Poco F4 {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.toggle_831736_1’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});” style=”stroke:rgb(255, 46, 46);stroke-width:2″ x1=”74.2″ x2=”90.2″ y1=”40″ y2=”56″> {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.toggle_709775_0’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.pn_709775_1’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.toggle_709775_1’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});” style=”text-anchor:start;font-size:0.7em” x=”313.4″ y=”38″>Xiaomi Poco F3 {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});document.querySelectorAll(‘.toggle_709775_1’).forEach(element => {element.classList.toggle(‘hideEl’)});” style=”stroke:rgb(255, 46, 46);stroke-width:2″ x1=”332.6″ x2=”348.6″ y1=”40″ y2=”56″>

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

Xiaomi Poco F4 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.2 dB)

Bass 100 – 315 Hz

(-) | nearly no bass – on average 22.4% lower than median

(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)

Mids 400 – 2000 Hz

(±) | higher mids – on average 5.2% higher than median

(+) | mids are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)

Highs 2 – 16 kHz

(+) | balanced highs – only 4.9% away from median

(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)

Overall 100 – 16.000 Hz

(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)

Compared to same class

» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 80% worse

» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%

Compared to all devices tested

» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse

» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Xiaomi Poco F3 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.4 dB)

Bass 100 – 315 Hz

(-) | nearly no bass – on average 26.6% lower than median

(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)

Mids 400 – 2000 Hz

(±) | reduced mids – on average 5.1% lower than median

(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)

Highs 2 – 16 kHz

(+) | balanced highs – only 4% away from median

(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)

Overall 100 – 16.000 Hz

(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)

Compared to same class

» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 87% worse

» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%

Compared to all devices tested

» 32% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% worse

» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery Life – F4 does not live up to its potential

Power Consumption

The Poco F4 convinces across the board in terms of power consumption and is one of the best in its class. The smartphone performs well with low rates under load as well as in normal operation. Striking is the fact that the rates under load are significantly lower than those of the F3 predecessor and the Xiaomi 12X, which both use the same SoC.

The Poco smartphone charges from 10 to 100 percent in 45 minutes with the 67-watt power supply. It only takes 10 minutes to charge the device from 10 to 50 percent, and it only gets lukewarm in the process. Wireless charging is not supported.

Xiaomi Poco F4

4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A53

5000 mAh
Xiaomi 12X

4500 mAh
Xiaomi Poco F3

4520 mAh
Motorola Edge 30

4020 mAh
OnePlus Nord 2T

4500 mAh
Honor 50

4300 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G

 
Average of class Smartphone

 
Power Consumption

-18%

-28%

-11%

-3%

-9%

-57%

-50%

-18%

Idle Minimum *

0.8

0.9

-13%

0.75

6%

0.76

5%

0.9

-13%

0.9

-13%

1.02

-28%

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

012345678Tooltip

Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; 1920×1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø7.89 (7.01-8.31)

Xiaomi 12X Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; 1920×1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø5.18 (4-6.32)

Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; Idle 1min: Ø0.987 (0.869-1.276)

Xiaomi 12X Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; Idle 1min: Ø1.237 (1.126-1.787)

Battery Life

Although the power consumption values of the Poco F4 are very good, the battery life is shorter compared to comparison devices. This is not due to the size of the energy storage, which at 4,500 mAh belongs to the class average category. Only the Motorola Edge 30 has a 4,000 mAh battery, but that even lasts longer than the Poco F4 in three out of four tests.

The F4’s scores are also lower than those of its predecessor. Since the hardware is the same in most areas, hope remains that the runtimes may be improved with a software update. Regardless of the comparison with other devices, you can get through the day well enough with the F4 without recharging, even if it is used frequently. 

Battery Runtime

Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
22h 22min
WiFi Websurfing
11h 05min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
15h 29min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 06min

Pros

+ 67 watt charger included

+ bright OLED display

+ smooth performance

+ improved camera

Cons

few innovations

comparatively poor battery life

updates uncertain

Verdict – Poco F4 a convincing package overall

In review: Xiaomi Poco F4. Review sample provided by Xiaomi Germany.
In review: Xiaomi Poco F4. Review sample provided by Xiaomi Germany.

The Poco F4 is a great smartphone. The SoC still offers an enormous amount of performance, even if the chip is no longer the newest. Regardless of whether it’s multitasking or current games, the smartphone’s performance is sufficient and should also hold out in the coming years. The display is also a joy to look at. Colors are crisp and the OLED panel gets really bright when needed, so outdoor use is no problem at all. This makes the F4 very suitable for media consumption because the stereo speakers are also decent. In terms of photos and videos, the 64 MPix main camera is particularly impressive. The wide-angle lens is useful and the macro lens is a nice, decorative accessory. Overall, photos are pleasing, including the selfies. The generous scope of delivery with case, screen protector and strong 67-watt fast charger rounds off our overall positive impression. However, the Poco F4 hardly differs from its predecessor. A change is definitely not worthwhile because there are no significant changes apart from the design and the main camera.

The Poco F4 offers a great overall package, but is lacking in improvements or innovation.

Those who are looking for the best performance should take a look at Poco’s F4 GT with its Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, but the camera setup is identical there. Bargain hunters are better off with the F3, which is available at a lower price with almost the same configuration.

Price and Availability

Where applicable, interested readers are advised to check directly via Xiaomi’s official website for availability. For example, we found the device listed in the UK (£329), France (349.90€) and Italy (379.90€).

Prices are as of 22.09 and subject to change.

Xiaomi Poco F4

09/19/2022 v7



Benedikt Winkel

Connectivity

53 / 70 → 75%

Games Performance

61 / 64 → 95%

Application Performance

80 / 86 → 93%

Smartphone – Weighted Average

Please share our article, every link counts!

.170

Benedikt Winkel, 2022-09-22 (Update: 2022-09-22)

Read More

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker