Infinix Hot 10S NFC Smartphone Review: 90 Hz for $120 USD

Name: Infinix Hot 10S
Brand: Infinix

Hot and your cold. Just $120 USD can net you a fairly large 6.82-inch Android 11 smartphone and a sizeable 5000 mAh battery. There are some drawbacks, of course, but they're nothing most budget users can't live with.

Allen Ngo 👁, Published 04/30/2021 🇮🇹

Chinese Tech Smartphone Touchscreen

Officially unveiled just last week, the Hot 10S NFC is the latest inexpensive smartphone from Infinix designed for users who want a large display without having to spend hundreds of dollars more. The smartphone is also notable for carrying a MediaTek Helios G85 SoC, a 90 Hz refresh rate display, triple 48 MP rear cameras, and a large 5000 mAh battery — not bad for something retailing for just $120 USD.

A second version called the Hot 10S will also be made available on May 12 with more RAM (6 GB vs. 4 GB) and an even larger battery (6000 mAh vs. 5000 mAh) for $130 USD. Both versions are planned for Indonesia, Russia, and Latin America in Black, Green, Ocean, and Purple color options.

Test device courtesy of Infinix

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Infinix Hot 10S (Hot Series)

Processor

Mediatek Helio G85 8 x 1.8 - 2 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55

Graphics adapter

ARM Mali-G52 MP2

Memory

4 GB

Display

6.82 inch 20.5:9, 720 x 1640 pixel 263 PPI, glossy: yes, 90 Hz

Storage

128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/)

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 9.2 x 171.5 x 77.5 ( = 0.36 x 6.75 x 3.05 in)

Operating System

Android 11

Additional features

12 Months Warranty

Weight

200 g ( = 7.05 oz / 0.44 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)

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

see all specifications

[+] Add to comparison

» Compare devices

potential competitors in comparison

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Height	Size	Resolution
76 %	04/2021	Infinix Hot 10S Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2	200 g	9.2 mm	6.82"	720x1640
83 %	04/2021	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G SD 750G 5G, Adreno 619	189 g	8.4 mm	6.50"	2400x1080
71.3 %	04/2021	Doogee X95 Pro Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300	177 g	8.4 mm	6.52"	1600x720
82.2 %	04/2021	Realme 8 Pro SD 720G, Adreno 618	176 g	8 mm	6.40"	2400x1080
87.2 %	04/2021	OnePlus 9 SD 888 5G, Adreno 660	192 g	8.7 mm	6.55"	2400x1080
77.6 %	04/2021	Motorola Moto G30 SD 662, Adreno 610	197 g	9 mm	6.50"	1600x720

Case

The first thing users will notice is how large the Hot 10S is. Consequently, it's also slightly heavier and larger than many alternatives including the Samsung Galaxy A52 or Doogee X95 Pro. Build quality is otherwise nothing special with its glossy plastic back and rounded edges and corners. Our specific test unit exhibits no faulty construction or unintended gaps along the sides.

Connectivity

Communication

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
OnePlus 9 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax	685 (654^min - 709^max) MBit/s +109%
Doogee X95 Pro Broadcom 802.11a/b/g/n	360 MBit/s +10%
Infinix Hot 10S 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	327 MBit/s
Realme 8 Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	323 (279^min - 332^max) MBit/s -1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	282 (275^min - 287^max) MBit/s -14%
Motorola Moto G30 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	273 (198^min - 323^max) MBit/s -17%
iperf3 receive AX12
OnePlus 9 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax	777 (623^min - 829^max) MBit/s +115%
Infinix Hot 10S 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	362 MBit/s
Doogee X95 Pro Broadcom 802.11a/b/g/n	331 MBit/s -9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	331 (322^min - 337^max) MBit/s -9%
Realme 8 Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	304 (218^min - 328^max) MBit/s -16%
Motorola Moto G30 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	288 (198^min - 337^max) MBit/s -20%

Rear Camera

ColorChecker Infinix Hot 10S: 8.78 ∆E min: 1.73 - max: 17.26 ∆E

Display

The IPS display excels in a few aspects while falling behind in others. Contrast ratio, for example, is high for excellent black levels when viewing videos and the fast 90 Hz refresh rate makes the display more responsive to the touch. On the other hand, black-white and gray-gray response times are slow meaning ghosting is noticeable when scrolling through web pages.

Teardrop design is similar to some Huawei models


454 cd/m²	467 cd/m²	443.7 cd/m²
456.1 cd/m²	459.8 cd/m²	451 cd/m²
454.7 cd/m²	464.1 cd/m²	455 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 467 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 456.2 cd/m² Minimum: 4.26 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 459.8 cd/m²
Contrast: 2705:1 (Black: 0.17 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.36 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 5.8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
Gamma: 2.14

	Infinix Hot 10S 6.82, 720x1640	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Super AMOLED, 6.50, 2400x1080	Doogee X95 Pro IPS, 6.52, 1600x720	Realme 8 Pro AMOLED, 6.40, 2400x1080	OnePlus 9 AMOLED, 6.55, 2400x1080	Motorola Moto G30 LCD IPS, 6.50, 1600x720
Response Times		93%	-30%	82%	69%	-40%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *	45.6 ?(20.4, 25.2)	3.2 ?(1.6, 1.6) 93%	63.2 ?(29.6, 33.6) -39%	8 ?(5, 3) 82%	20 ?(11, 9) 56%	76 ?(47, 29) -67%
Response Time Black / White *	33.6 ?(18, 15.6)	2.4 ?(1.2, 1.2) 93%	40.4 ?(20, 20.4) -20%	6 ?(3, 3) 82%	6 ?(3, 3) 82%	38 ?(23, 15) -13%
PWM Frequency		250 ?(100)		114.7	323.6	176.7 ?(20)
Screen		47%	0%	17%	64%	-16%
Brightness middle	459.8	744 62%	382.2 -17%	581 26%	731 59%	284 -38%
Brightness	456	749 64%	357 -22%	563 23%	739 62%	263 -42%
Brightness Distribution	95	98 3%	86 -9%	86 -9%	96 1%	83 -13%
Black Level *	0.17		0.18 -6%			0.34 -100%
Contrast	2705		2123 -22%			835 -69%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	5.36	2.2 59%	4.4 18%	4.34 19%	0.59 89%	2.92 46%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	9.78	7 28%	8.12 17%	7.15 27%	1.3 87%	5.06 48%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	5.8	2.1 64%	3.4 41%	4.9 16%	0.9 84%	3.6 38%
Gamma	2.14 ^103%	2.06 ^107%	2.03 ^108%	2.327 ^95%	2.243 ^98%	2.307 ^95%
CCT	7980 ^81%	6516 ^100%	6963 ^93%	7658 ^85%	6573 ^99%	6780 ^96%
Total Average (Program / Settings)		70% / 58%	-15% / -6%	50% / 33%	67% / 65%	-28% / -21%

* ... smaller is better

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
33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 18 ms rise
33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 15.6 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 89 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
45.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 20.4 ms rise
45.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 25.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 75 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).

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 not detected

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.

Performance

Processor

Raw CPU performance is most similar to the Snapdragon 720 while graphics performance is only half that of the Helio 90T. It's good enough for most Play Store games including Mario Kart Tour, but more demanding titles like Genshin Impact will have shaky frame rates and plenty of frame skips.

Geekbench 5.5: OpenCL Score
PCMark for Android: Work 2.0 performance score
GFXBench: 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: 2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited | 2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics | 2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
WebXPRT 3: Overall

Geekbench 5.5 / OpenCL Score
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	4566 Points +270%
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	4464 Points +262%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	1304 Points +6%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	1237 Points 0%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	1233 Points
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	376 Points -70%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	261 Points -79%

PCMark for Android / Work 2.0 performance score
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	10743 Points +24%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	10512 Points +21%
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	10438 Points +20%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	9573 Points +10%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	8670 Points
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	8463 Points -2%
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	6135 Points -29%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	5380 Points -38%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	5316 Points -39%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	41 fps +242%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	40 fps +233%
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	40 fps +233%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	12 fps
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	11 fps -8%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	11 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	11 fps -8%
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	9.2 fps -23%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	6.5 fps -46%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	4.5 fps -62%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	30 fps +868%
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	28 fps +803%
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	27 fps +771%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	7.6 fps +145%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	7 fps +126%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	6.9 fps +123%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	3.1 fps
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	2.8 fps -10%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	2 fps -35%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	1.4 fps -55%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	58 fps +383%
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	57 fps +375%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	53.5 fps +346%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	18 fps +50%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	18 fps +50%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	17 fps +42%
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	13 fps +8%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	12 fps
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	11 fps -8%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	7.1 fps -41%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	85 fps +963%
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	67 fps +738%
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	57 fps +613%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	20 fps +150%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	20 fps +150%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	19 fps +138%
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	8.6 fps +8%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	8 fps
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	6 fps -25%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	4 fps -50%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	8947 Points +525%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	7294 Points +410%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	2927 Points +105%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	2743 Points +92%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	2568 Points +79%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	1431 Points
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	1176 Points -18%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	849 Points -41%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	469 Points -67%
Doogee X95 Pro Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D	257 Points -82%
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	0 Points -100%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	11999 Points +853%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	11824 Points +839%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	2802 Points +123%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	2642 Points +110%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	2433 Points +93%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	1259 Points
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	1081 Points -14%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	731 Points -42%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	408 Points -68%
Doogee X95 Pro Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D	214 Points -83%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	4733 Points +73%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	3466 Points +27%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	3188 Points +17%
Realme 8 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G	3164 Points +16%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	3115 Points +14%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	2734 Points
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	2164 Points -21%
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	1953 Points -29%
Nokia 2.4 Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762	981 Points -64%
Doogee X95 Pro Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D	834 Points -69%

WebXPRT 3 / Overall
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Apple A14 Bionic	191 Points +344%
OnePlus 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G	119 Points +177%
Oppo Find X3 Neo Qualcomm Snapdragon 865	118 Points +174%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G	82 Points +91%
Motorola Moto G30 Qualcomm Snapdragon 662	51 Points +19%
Realme 6 Mediatek Helio G90T	46 Points +7%
Infinix Hot 10S Mediatek Helio G85	43 Points
Motorola Moto G10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 460	42 Points -2%
Doogee X95 Pro Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D	27 Points -37%

Storage Devices

Though MicroSD cards are supported, the reader didn't seem to be working on our review unit. Transfer rates were abnormally slow at less than 2 MB/s even after several retries with different MicroSD cards.

	Infinix Hot 10S 128 GB eMMC Flash	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	Doogee X95 Pro 32 GB eMMC Flash	Realme 8 Pro 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	OnePlus 9 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	Motorola Moto G30 128 GB eMMC Flash
AndroBench 3-5		151%	-49%	20%	291%	6%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard			61.3	35.3		81.9
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard			83.3	62.7		153.8
Random Write 4KB	68.2	179.2 163%	10.95 -84%	84.8 24%	221.4 225%	12.2 -82%
Random Read 4KB	108	176.1 63%	32.59 -70%	98.5 -9%	225.4 109%	247.4 129%
Sequential Write 256KB	175.4	484.6 176%	118.6 -32%	191.7 9%	739 321%	190.2 8%
Sequential Read 256KB	307.8	927 201%	277 -10%	474 54%	1872 508%	214.5 -30%

Emissions

Temperature

Max. Load

Idle


37.2 °C 99 F	30.6 °C 87 F	29.6 °C 85 F
36.2 °C 97 F	31.2 °C 88 F	30 °C 86 F
34.6 °C 94 F	31 °C 88 F	29.8 °C 86 F

Maximum: 37.2 °C = 99 F
Average: 32.2 °C = 90 F


25.2 °C 77 F	29 °C 84 F	35.8 °C 96 F
25.6 °C 78 F	29.2 °C 85 F	38 °C 100 F
25.6 °C 78 F	29 °C 84 F	33.2 °C 92 F

Maximum: 38 °C = 100 F
Average: 30.1 °C = 86 F

Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.2 °C / 90 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 37.2 °C / 99 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 38 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.5 °C / 73 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

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

Infinix Hot 10S audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 39.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.4% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 56% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 73% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 21% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 3% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

	Infinix Hot 10S Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 128 GB eMMC Flash, , 720x1640, 6.82	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G SD 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50	Doogee X95 Pro Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, 32 GB eMMC Flash, IPS, 1600x720, 6.52	OnePlus 9 SD 888 5G, Adreno 660, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55	Motorola Moto G30 SD 662, Adreno 610, 128 GB eMMC Flash, LCD IPS, 1600x720, 6.50	Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max A14, A14 Bionic GPU, 128 GB NVMe, OLED, 2778x1284, 6.70
Power Consumption		33%	38%	7%	21%	41%
Idle Minimum *	1.7	0.92 46%	0.5 71%	0.9 47%	0.8 53%	0.8 53%
Idle Average *	2.9	1.78 39%	2 31%	1.7 41%	1.5 48%	1.5 48%
Idle Maximum *	3	1.81 40%	2.7 10%	2.7 10%	1.8 40%	1.9 37%
Load Average *	5.3	3.86 27%	3.7 30%	5.4 -2%	6.1 -15%	3.4 36%
Load Maximum *	7	6.14 12%	3.8 46%	11.1 -59%	8.4 -20%	4.7 33%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Runtimes are long at over 12 hours of real-world WLAN use thanks to the large 5000 mAh battery. Charging is also decently fast from 15 percent to 73 percent in 90 minutes with the included AC adapter.

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		20h 30min

	Infinix Hot 10S Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, Wh	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G SD 750G 5G, Adreno 619, Wh	Doogee X95 Pro Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300, Wh	Realme 8 Pro SD 720G, Adreno 618, Wh	OnePlus 9 SD 888 5G, Adreno 660, Wh	Motorola Moto G30 SD 662, Adreno 610, Wh
Battery Runtime		-42%	-29%	-18%	-31%	-13%
WiFi v1.3	1230	710 -42%	879 -29%	1006 -18%	854 -31%	1069 -13%
Reader / Idle		1917			1623	2336
Load		324			168	219

Pros

+ high contrast ratio; deep black levels

+ good camera quality for the price

+ good performance for the price

+ 90 Hz display refresh rate

+ long battery life

+ large display

+ inexpensive

Cons

- slow black-white and gray-gray response times; noticeable ghosting

- not compatible with most 4G services in U.S.

- only average color accuracy and brightness

- way too much pre-installed bloatware

- plastic backing feels cheap

- HD+ native resolution only

- Micro-USB port; no USB-C

Verdict

In review: Infinix Hot 10S NFC. Test unit provided by Infinix

The Hot 10S is one of the better smartphones in its super-cheap price range. Many of its disadvantages, including the noticeable ghosting, unremarkable native resolution, and heavy bloatware, are easy to live with for those who just want a large smartphone with an equally large display. The decent Helio G85 SoC and 90 Hz refresh rate help to make the smartphone feel faster than it really is when compared to others in its category for browsing and the occasional light gaming.

Cheap, long-lasting, and big for users who want to maximize value per dollar. However, you're likely going to uninstall all the distracting bloatware as soon as you can.

Price and availability

The Hot 10S and Hot 10S NFC will become widely available starting on May 14 in select regions.

Infinix Hot 10S - 2021-04-28 04/28/2021 v7
Allen Ngo

Chassis

66%

Keyboard

70 / 75 → 93%

Pointing Device

94%

Connectivity

14 / 70 → 20%

Weight

88%

Battery

93%

Display

83%

Games Performance

17 / 64 → 26%

Application Performance

70 / 86 → 82%

Temperature

94%

Noise

100%

Audio

69 / 90 → 76%

Camera

54%

Average

70%

76%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Allen Ngo - Lead Editor U.S. - 5192 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2011

After graduating with a B.S. in environmental hydrodynamics from the University of California, I studied reactor physics to become licensed by the U.S. NRC to operate nuclear reactors. There's a striking level of appreciation you gain for everyday consumer electronics after working with modern nuclear reactivity systems astonishingly powered by computers from the 80s. When I'm not managing day-to-day activities and US review articles on Notebookcheck, you can catch me following the eSports scene and the latest gaming news.

contact me via: @AllenNgoNBC

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Infinix Hot 10S NFC Smartphone Review: 90 Hz for $120 USD

Allen Ngo, 2021-04-30 (Update: 2021-05- 9)

Infinix Hot 10S NFC Smartphone Review: 90 Hz for $120 USD

potential competitors in comparison

Case

Connectivity

Communication

Rear Camera

Display

Display Response Times

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Performance

Processor

Storage Devices

Emissions

Temperature

Speakers

Infinix Hot 10S audio analysis

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Battery Life

Pros

Cons

Verdict

Price and availability

More articles related to this device

Related Articles

Pricecompare