Notebookcheck
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Infinix Note 10 Pro Smartphone Review: Essentially a Mini Tablet

Huge 6.95-inch 90 Hz display. The MediaTek Helio G95 SoC, 1080p 90 Hz touchscreen, 64 MP quad camera setup, and long battery life make this $250 smartphone a great option for budget users who don't mind an oversized display.
Allen Ngo 👁, 🇮🇹
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Unlike the super-cheap Hot 10S, the Infinix Note 10 Pro (not to be confused with the Samsung Galaxy Note 10) aims to bring flagship features to a mid-range price level that more users can afford. This includes a high 90 Hz refresh rate, large 6.95-inch 1080p IPS touchscreen, high 91 percent screen-to-body ratio, and support for 33 W fast charging.

Other core specifications are impressive considering the price with its MediaTek Helios G95 SoC, roomy 256 GB UFS 2.2 storage, and 8 GB of RAM. The Note 10 Pro and Note 10 Pro NFC are expected to retail for under $250 USD each.

Infinix Note 10 Pro (Note Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G95 8 x 2 - 2.1 GHz, Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.95 inch 20.5:9, 1080 x 2460 pixel 387 PPI, glossy: yes, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 256 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): 8.77 x 172.76 x 78.32 ( = 0.35 x 6.8 x 3.08 in)
Operating System
Android 11
Additional features
XOS 7.6, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
207 g ( = 7.3 oz / 0.46 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

potential competitors in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
76 %
05/2021
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Helio G95, Mali-G76 MP4
207 g8.77 mm6.95"1080x2460
81 %
05/2021
Nokia X20
SD 480, Adreno 619
220 g9.1 mm6.67"2400x1080
86 %
05/2021
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
SD 780G 5G, Adreno 642
159 g6.81 mm6.55"2400x1080
76 %
04/2021
Infinix Hot 10S
Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2
200 g9.2 mm6.82"720x1640
83 %
04/2021
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
SD 750G 5G, Adreno 619
189 g8.4 mm6.50"2400x1080
71 %
04/2021
Doogee X95 Pro
Helio A20 MT6761D, PowerVR GE8300
177 g8.4 mm6.52"1600x720
87 %
04/2021
OnePlus 9
SD 888 5G, Adreno 660
192 g8.7 mm6.55"2400x1080

Case

The Note 10 Pro is one of the tallest smartphones we've seen beating out the OnePlus 9 or Galaxy A52 5G by quite the margin. It's also subsequently a bit heavier at around 211 g which is very close to the Samsung Galaxy Note Ultra 20. If you really value its big display, then you'll certainly have to pay for it in size.

, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 
The large screen entails a large form factor that some users will appreciate while others may find cumbersome
The large screen entails a large form factor that some users will appreciate while others may find cumbersome
Glossy plastic back attracts fingerprints and scratches
Glossy plastic back attracts fingerprints and scratches
Build quality is excellent even if it's not as dense, sleek, or "metal" as the popular higher-end smartphones from Apple or Samsung
Build quality is excellent even if it's not as dense, sleek, or "metal" as the popular higher-end smartphones from Apple or Samsung
The quad rear cameras protrude rather significantly from the rear
The quad rear cameras protrude rather significantly from the rear
172.76 mm / 6.8 inch 78.32 mm / 3.08 inch 8.77 mm / 0.3453 inch 207 g0.4564 lbs171.5 mm / 6.75 inch 77.5 mm / 3.05 inch 9.2 mm / 0.3622 inch 200 g0.4409 lbs168.9 mm / 6.65 inch 79.7 mm / 3.14 inch 9.1 mm / 0.3583 inch 220 g0.485 lbs166.7 mm / 6.56 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 177 g0.3902 lbs160 mm / 6.3 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 192 g0.4233 lbs159.9 mm / 6.3 inch 75.1 mm / 2.96 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs160.53 mm / 6.32 inch 75.72 mm / 2.98 inch 6.81 mm / 0.2681 inch 159 g0.3505 lbs

Connectivity

Ports include USB-C and the all-important 3.5 mm audio jack. Though USB OTG is supported for keyboard, mice, and external drives, attempting to connect external monitors will not work unlike on most Huawei Mate and Samsung Galaxy smartphones.

Top: No ports
Top: No ports
Bottom, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB-C w/ OTG, Speakerphone
Bottom, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB-C w/ OTG, Speakerphone
Left: 2x Nano-SIM, MicroSD reader
Left: 2x Nano-SIM, MicroSD reader
Right: Fingerprint power button, volume rocker
Right: Fingerprint power button, volume rocker

Communication

WLAN transfer rates are similar to what we recorded on the Hot 10S. 4G LTE is thankfully supported on most GSM networks in the U.S. which is more than what we can say for many other Chinese smartphones.

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
891 (847min - 921max) MBit/s ∼100% +148%
OnePlus 9
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
685 (654min - 709max) MBit/s ∼77% +90%
Doogee X95 Pro
Broadcom 802.11a/b/g/n
360 MBit/s ∼40% 0%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
360 MBit/s ∼40%
Infinix Hot 10S
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
327 MBit/s ∼37% -9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
282 (275min - 287max) MBit/s ∼32% -22%
Nokia X20
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
222 (126min - 326max) MBit/s ∼25% -38%
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
874 (833min - 900max) MBit/s ∼100% +177%
OnePlus 9
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax
777 (623min - 829max) MBit/s ∼89% +146%
Infinix Hot 10S
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
362 MBit/s ∼41% +15%
Doogee X95 Pro
Broadcom 802.11a/b/g/n
331 MBit/s ∼38% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
331 (322min - 337max) MBit/s ∼38% +5%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
316 MBit/s ∼36%
Nokia X20
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
313 (190min - 343max) MBit/s ∼36% -1%

Webcam

ColorChecker
19.6 ∆E
12 ∆E
20.6 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
16.1 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
20 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
1 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Infinix Note 10 Pro: 10.39 ∆E min: 1.02 - max: 20.64 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty

The retail packaging includes a screen protector, USB-A to USB-C cable, and AC power adapter. Warranty may be difficult to claim in North America as the device is not officially available in this region.

Display

The most distinguishing feature of the Note 10 Pro is its nearly 7-inch display. It even manages to carry a native 1080p resolution and 90 Hz refresh rate unlike the 720p display of most other inexpensive smartphones. PPI is identical to the competing Samsung Galaxy A52 5G and response times are also better than expected considering the low asking price.

The two biggest drawbacks of the display are its color inaccuracies and limited maximum brightness. Infinix advertises a maximum brightness of 480 nits, but the average is only about 423 nits since the sides of the screen are slightly dimmer than its center. The Nokia X20 is almost 50 percent brighter and the aforementioned Samsung is even brighter still for better outdoor visibility.

397.5
cd/m²
437.4
cd/m²
422.6
cd/m²
401.8
cd/m²
452.5
cd/m²
420.8
cd/m²
397.5
cd/m²
448.9
cd/m²
427.5
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 452.5 cd/m² Average: 422.9 cd/m² Minimum: 4.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 452.5 cd/m²
Contrast: 2155:1 (Black: 0.21 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.09 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.5
ΔE Greyscale 9.1 | 0.64-98 Ø5.7
Gamma: 2.19
Infinix Note 10 Pro
6.95, 1080x2460
Nokia X20
IPS, 6.67, 2400x1080
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
AMOLED, 6.55, 2400x1080
Infinix Hot 10S
6.82, 720x1640
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Super AMOLED, 6.50, 2400x1080
Doogee X95 Pro
IPS, 6.52, 1600x720
OnePlus 9
AMOLED, 6.55, 2400x1080
Response Times
-46%
83%
-91%
87%
-150%
38%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
21.6 (10.8, 10.8)
43 (23, 20)
-99%
4 (2, 2)
81%
45.6 (20.4, 25.2)
-111%
3.2 (1.6, 1.6)
85%
63.2 (29.6, 33.6)
-193%
20 (11, 9)
7%
Response Time Black / White *
19.6 (11.2, 8.4)
18 (5, 13)
8%
3.2 (2, 1.2)
84%
33.6 (18, 15.6)
-71%
2.4 (1.2, 1.2)
88%
40.4 (20, 20.4)
-106%
6 (3, 3)
69%
PWM Frequency
367.6 (68)
250 (100)
323.6
Screen
-19%
59%
14%
55%
11%
69%
Brightness middle
452.5
646
43%
863
91%
459.8
2%
744
64%
382.2
-16%
731
62%
Brightness
423
617
46%
860
103%
456
8%
749
77%
357
-16%
739
75%
Brightness Distribution
88
89
1%
93
6%
95
8%
98
11%
86
-2%
96
9%
Black Level *
0.21
0.7
-233%
0.17
19%
0.18
14%
Contrast
2155
923
-57%
2705
26%
2123
-1%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.09
5.71
-12%
3.2
37%
5.36
-5%
2.2
57%
4.4
14%
0.59
88%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
12.38
8.9
28%
5.2
58%
9.78
21%
7
43%
8.12
34%
1.3
89%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
9.1
6.2
32%
3.9
57%
5.8
36%
2.1
77%
3.4
63%
0.9
90%
Gamma
2.19 100%
2.122 104%
2.33 94%
2.14 103%
2.06 107%
2.03 108%
2.243 98%
CCT
9021 72%
8256 79%
7299 89%
7980 81%
6516 100%
6963 93%
6573 99%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-33% / -24%
71% / 65%
-39% / -7%
71% / 63%
-70% / -21%
54% / 61%

* ... smaller is better

X-Rite measurements reveal an overly cool color temperature with teal being more inaccurate than other primary and secondary colors. The XOS software has a built-in Eye Care slider that can reduce blue light for an overall warmer color temperature.

Grayscale
Grayscale
Saturation Sweeps
Saturation Sweeps
ColorChecker
ColorChecker

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
19.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.2 ms rise
↘ 8.4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 27 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
21.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10.8 ms rise
↘ 10.8 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 18 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (37.8 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 15324 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is worse than most other smartphones. The screen may be large, but brightness hasn't scaled up at all to match it.

Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Wide IPS viewing angles. Colors and contrast shift at wide angles
Wide IPS viewing angles. Colors and contrast shift at wide angles

Performance

When compared to the MediaTek Helio G85 in the Hot 10S, the Helios G95 is significantly faster. Most CPU-heavy and GPU-heavy benchmarks show the G95 to be well ahead by quite the margin. Overall performance is most comparable to the mid-range Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G.

A demanding game like Genshin Impact will run choppily on the default Medium settings when battling enemies in the open world. Lowering the settings will reduce the stuttering while improving frame rates to the 30 to 40 FPS range.

Geekbench 5.3 / OpenCL Score 5.3
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
4566 Points ∼100% +107%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
4464 Points ∼98% +102%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
2210 Points ∼48%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
1304 Points ∼29% -41%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
1237 Points ∼27% -44%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
1233 Points ∼27% -44%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
376 Points ∼8% -83%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
261 Points ∼6% -88%
PCMark for Android / Work 2.0 performance score
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
10743 Points ∼100% +6%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
10512 Points ∼98% +4%
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
10438 Points ∼97% +3%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
10153 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
9573 Points ∼89% -6%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
8670 Points ∼81% -15%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
8463 Points ∼79% -17%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
6135 Points ∼57% -40%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
5380 Points ∼50% -47%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
5316 Points ∼49% -48%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
41 fps ∼100% +273%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
40 fps ∼98% +264%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
40 fps ∼98% +264%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
12 fps ∼29% +9%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
11 fps ∼27% 0%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
11 fps ∼27% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
11 fps ∼27% 0%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
11 fps ∼27%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
9.2 fps ∼22% -16%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
6.5 fps ∼16% -41%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
4.5 fps ∼11% -59%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
30 fps ∼100% +285%
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
28 fps ∼93% +259%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
27 fps ∼90% +246%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
7.8 fps ∼26%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
7.6 fps ∼25% -3%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
7 fps ∼23% -10%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
6.9 fps ∼23% -12%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
3.1 fps ∼10% -60%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
2.8 fps ∼9% -64%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
2 fps ∼7% -74%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
1.4 fps ∼5% -82%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
58 fps ∼100% +222%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
57 fps ∼98% +217%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
53.5 fps ∼92% +197%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
18 fps ∼31% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
18 fps ∼31% 0%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
18 fps ∼31%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
17 fps ∼29% -6%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
13 fps ∼22% -28%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
12 fps ∼21% -33%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
11 fps ∼19% -39%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
7.1 fps ∼12% -61%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
85 fps ∼100% +305%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
67 fps ∼79% +219%
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
57 fps ∼67% +171%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
21 fps ∼25%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
20 fps ∼24% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
20 fps ∼24% -5%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
19 fps ∼22% -10%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
8.6 fps ∼10% -59%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
8 fps ∼9% -62%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
6 fps ∼7% -71%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
4 fps ∼5% -81%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
8947 Points ∼100% +214%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
7294 Points ∼82% +156%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
2927 Points ∼33% +3%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
2849 Points ∼32%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
2743 Points ∼31% -4%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
2568 Points ∼29% -10%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
1431 Points ∼16% -50%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
1176 Points ∼13% -59%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
849 Points ∼9% -70%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
469 Points ∼5% -84%
Doogee X95 Pro
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
257 Points ∼3% -91%
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
0 Points ∼0% -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
11999 Points ∼100% +341%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
11824 Points ∼99% +334%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
2802 Points ∼23% +3%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
2722 Points ∼23%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
2642 Points ∼22% -3%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
2433 Points ∼20% -11%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
1259 Points ∼10% -54%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
1081 Points ∼9% -60%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
731 Points ∼6% -73%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
408 Points ∼3% -85%
Doogee X95 Pro
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
214 Points ∼2% -92%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
4733 Points ∼100% +39%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
3466 Points ∼73% +2%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
3405 Points ∼72%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
3188 Points ∼67% -6%
realme 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
3164 Points ∼67% -7%
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
3115 Points ∼66% -9%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
2734 Points ∼58% -20%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
2164 Points ∼46% -36%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
1953 Points ∼41% -43%
Nokia 2.4
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762
981 Points ∼21% -71%
Doogee X95 Pro
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
834 Points ∼18% -76%
WebXPRT 3 /
Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
Apple A14 Bionic
191 Points ∼100% +306%
OnePlus 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
119 Points ∼62% +153%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
118 Points ∼62% +151%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G
82 Points ∼43% +74%
Motorola Moto G30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
51 Points ∼27% +9%
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Mediatek Helio G95
47 Points ∼25%
realme 6
Mediatek Helio G90T
46 Points ∼24% -2%
Infinix Hot 10S
Mediatek Helio G85
43 Points ∼23% -9%
Motorola Moto G10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
42 Points ∼22% -11%
Doogee X95 Pro
Mediatek Helio A20 MT6761D
27 Points ∼14% -43%

Storage Devices

Not only is storage capacity two times larger than on the Hot 10S, but sequential transfer rates are also two times faster. Smartphones with UHS 3.1, such as the OnePlus 9, can have transfer rates 2x to 4x faster than our Note 10 Pro.

MicroSD cards are supported, but we experienced the same issues as on the Hot 10S where write rates would be abnormally slow in the single digits range even after testing different UHS-I and UHS-II MicroSD cards. We're not sure why this is happening, but we highly recommend testing out the MicroSD reader immediately after purchasing for any abnormalities.

Infinix Note 10 Pro
256 GB UFS 2.2 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
Infinix Hot 10S
128 GB eMMC Flash
AndroBench 3-5
26%
-73%
-39%
102%
-50%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
61.25
35.3
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.3
62.74
Random Write 4KB
175.1
179.23
2%
10.95
-94%
84.8
-52%
221.45
26%
68.21
-61%
Random Read 4KB
193.43
176.05
-9%
32.59
-83%
98.5
-49%
225.38
17%
108.04
-44%
Sequential Write 256KB
369.37
484.62
31%
118.63
-68%
191.7
-48%
739.39
100%
175.41
-53%
Sequential Read 256KB
514.3
926.67
80%
276.96
-46%
474
-8%
1872.3
264%
307.82
-40%

Emissions

Temperature

Surface temperatures can be as warm as 41 C to 43 C when running demanding loads like games. These hot spots are small and concentrated, however, meaning most of the smartphone is still relatively cool and comfortable to handle. In comparison, the OnePlus 9 will be much warmer on average when under similar conditions.

System idle (front)
System idle (front)
Gaming stress (front)
Gaming stress (front)
System idle (back)
System idle (back)
Gaming stress (back)
Gaming stress (back)
Max. Load
 31.4 °C
89 F
33.2 °C
92 F
38.4 °C
101 F
 
 31.8 °C
89 F
33.8 °C
93 F
40.8 °C
105 F
 
 31.4 °C
89 F
33.6 °C
92 F
39.4 °C
103 F
 
Maximum: 40.8 °C = 105 F
Average: 34.9 °C = 95 F
40.4 °C
105 F
36.2 °C
97 F
33.8 °C
93 F
40.4 °C
105 F
36.6 °C
98 F
34.2 °C
94 F
44 °C
111 F
36 °C
97 F
33.6 °C
92 F
Maximum: 44 °C = 111 F
Average: 37.2 °C = 99 F
Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.9 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.8 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22.4 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 44 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.5 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

Pink noise at maximum volume. Audio quality is clear even if it is "tinny" due to the lack of bass
Pink noise at maximum volume. Audio quality is clear even if it is "tinny" due to the lack of bass
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204141.941253533.3353139.136.739.14028.529.728.55029.126.429.16331.827.831.88035.730.535.710030.826.430.812534.133.234.116042.519.542.520045.423.645.425048.619.348.631552.220.752.240053.618.653.650055.617.755.663060.215.360.280067.513.567.510006912.569125070.813.170.8160070.811.970.820007311.773250072.51272.5315076.811.976.8400078.911.578.9500073.311.773.3630070.711.870.7800070.611.770.61000068.911.768.91250068.911.468.9160006110.761SPL85.126.285.1N57.40.857.4median 68.9median 12.5median 68.9Delta8.84.28.835.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseInfinix Note 10 ProApple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Infinix Note 10 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.9% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, 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%

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 (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 19%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 2% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Idling on the home screen consumes just 2.5 W on the minimum brightness setting while maximum brightness takes about 3.6 W. The Note 10 Pro is slightly less power efficient than other 6-inch or larger smartphones.

Difference between idle and full CPU load is about 3 W
Difference between idle and full CPU load is about 3 W
Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.4 / 2.3 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 2.5 / 3.6 / 3.7 Watt
Load midlight 5 / 8.4 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Helio G95, Mali-G76 MP4, 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, , 1080x2460, 6.95
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
SD 780G 5G, Adreno 642, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
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
Power Consumption
36%
16%
43%
46%
21%
Idle Minimum *
2.5
0.83
67%
1.7
32%
0.92
63%
0.5
80%
0.9
64%
Idle Average *
3.6
1.92
47%
2.9
19%
1.78
51%
2
44%
1.7
53%
Idle Maximum *
3.7
1.97
47%
3
19%
1.81
51%
2.7
27%
2.7
27%
Load Average *
5
3.84
23%
5.3
-6%
3.86
23%
3.7
26%
5.4
-8%
Load Maximum *
8.4
8.6
-2%
7
17%
6.14
27%
3.8
55%
11.1
-32%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

We're able to record a real-world WLAN runtime of 15.5 hours from the fully charged 5000 mAh battery. Charging from 0 to 81 percent capacity takes just 60 minutes with the included 33 W AC adapter.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 32min
Infinix Note 10 Pro
Helio G95, Mali-G76 MP4,  Wh
Nokia X20
SD 480, Adreno 619,  Wh
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
SD 780G 5G, Adreno 642,  Wh
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
OnePlus 9
SD 888 5G, Adreno 660,  Wh
Battery Runtime
-6%
-21%
32%
-24%
-6%
-8%
Reader / Idle
1509
1917
1623
WiFi v1.3
932
879
-6%
734
-21%
1230
32%
710
-24%
879
-6%
854
-8%
Load
223
324
168

Pros

+ fast response times; minimal ghosting when scrolling
+ good CPU performance for the price
+ good camera quality for the price
+ large 6.95-inch FHD touchscreen
+ smooth 90 Hz refresh rate
+ ships with Android 11
+ 3.5 mm audio jack
+ good battery life

Cons

- USB-C does not support video out
- display is too dim when outdoors
- colors could be more accurate
- tons of bloatware
- large size

Verdict

In review: Infinix Note 10 Pro. Test unit provided by Infinix
In review: Infinix Note 10 Pro. Test unit provided by Infinix

The Infinix Note 10 Pro is a great example of higher-end features trickling down to lower-end models. You previously had to pay hundreds of dollars more for a 90 Hz 1080p display with 180 Hz touch sampling rate, fast response times, IR scanner, 64 MP camera, 256 GB of storage, 8 GB of RAM, and a processor that's actually decent. We suspect that future models will start to incorporate even more auxiliary features like an onscreen fingerprint reader, wireless charger, or 5G connectivity.

The Infinix Note 10 Pro has one of the largest touchscreens and smoothest UI experience for the price. The average color accuracy and brightness should be tolerable for most budget users, but the heavy bloatware leaves a sour taste in our mouth.

As with any other inexpensive smartphone, however, there are some hidden cut corners. Most notably, the display is dimmer than most mid-range to higher-end smartphones and colors are not nearly as accurate. QA is also questionable as this is the second time on an Infinix smartphone where we experienced MicroSD write issues. Otherwise, there's a lot to like here especially if you're attracted to larger displays.

Price and availability

The Infinix Note 10 Pro is not yet widely available in North America. The manufacturer is aiming for markets in South Asia, Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America instead.

Infinix Note 10 Pro - 05/30/2021 v7
Allen Ngo

Chassis
70%
Keyboard
54 / 75 → 72%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
19 / 70 → 28%
Weight
88%
Battery
91%
Display
82%
Games Performance
31 / 64 → 48%
Application Performance
77 / 86 → 90%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
77 / 90 → 86%
Camera
49%
Average
70%
76%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Allen Ngo
Allen Ngo - Lead Editor U.S. - 4641 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!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Infinix Note 10 Pro Smartphone Review: Essentially a Mini Tablet
Allen Ngo, 2021-05-29 (Update: 2021-05-30)