Notebookcheck Logo

Oppo A76 review - Beautiful phone with light and shadow

Narrowed perspective. The Oppo A76 is an affordable mid-range phone that looks more expensive than it is thanks to its pretty design. However, the features could be better here and there, especially in view of the strong competition. So the question remains: is the Oppo A76 recommendable?
Oppo A76
Oppo A76 (A Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G 8 x 1.8 - 2.4 GHz, Kryo 265 Gold (Cortex-A73) / Silver (Cortex-A53)
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.56 inch 20:9, 1612 x 720 pixel 269 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 90 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 128 GB 
, 105 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD (dedicated), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration sensor, proximity sensor, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B3/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.4 x 164.4 x 75.7 ( = 0.33 x 6.47 x 2.98 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer, 33 Watt Super VOOC charging
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 11
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/​2.2, phase comparison-AF, LED-flash, Videos @1080p/​30fps (Camera 1); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, depth of field (Camera 2)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/​2.0, Videos @1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, quick charger, USB cable, silicone bumper, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.81 W/kg (head), 1.22 W/kg (body), fanless
Weight
189 g ( = 6.67 oz / 0.42 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
249 Euro
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
77.7 %
06/2022
Oppo A76
SD 680, Adreno 610
189 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.56"1612x720
80.5 %
01/2022
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2
195 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.60"2400x1080
80.4 %
04/2022
Motorola Moto G41
Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2
178 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.40"2400x1080
79.6 %
08/2021
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2
203 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.60"2400x1080

Case and equipment - High-class design

The Oppo A74 last year, but we had to criticize the slow SoC and the lack of NFC. The Oppo A76 is now the successor. However, looking at the equipment list, the two smartphones have only little in common.

The Oppo A76 also looks different on the outside, offering a matte back in either light blue or black and a lower-placed standby button on the right, where the fingerprint sensor is integrated. From the front, on the other hand, you can see more similarities. In general, the smartphone is solidly built but medium pressure on the screen is enough to distort the picture.

In terms of features, the phone can boast 4 GB of RAM and 128 GB of fast UFS 2.2 storage; other storage variants are currently not available, at least in Europe. NFC is included in the Oppo A76, which is not yet a matter of course in this price range.

The microSD reader is separate and offers typical speeds for this class.

Size comparison

167.2 mm / 6.58 inch 76.4 mm / 3.01 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 203 g0.4475 lbs164.4 mm / 6.47 inch 75.7 mm / 2.98 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs163.56 mm / 6.44 inch 75.78 mm / 2.98 inch 8.75 mm / 0.3445 inch 195 g0.4299 lbs161.9 mm / 6.37 inch 73.9 mm / 2.91 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 178 g0.3924 lbs
SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
  (Angelbird V60)
44 MB/s ∼100% +72%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10.9 - 59.2, n=101, last 2 years)
26.1 MB/s ∼59% +2%
Oppo A76
  (Angelbird V60)
25.6 MB/s ∼58%
Motorola Moto G41
  (Angelbird V60)
24.3 MB/s ∼55% -5%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
  (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
15.47 MB/s ∼35% -40%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Oppo A76 Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø38.7 (29.6-50.5)
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 810, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø32 (25-46.5)
Motorola Moto G41 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø29.1 (18.9-42.3)
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB: Ø28.8 (15.3-45.8)
Oppo A76 Adreno 610, SD 680, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.8 (36.1-83.9)
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 810, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø75.5 (58.6-78.9)
Motorola Moto G41 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø67.9 (19.3-81.6)
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB: Ø70.7 (11.8-76.8)

Communication, software and operation - LTE only, but NFC is supported

The Oppo A76 does not currently have a 5G model like the predecessor, so you have to make do with LTE as the fastest mobile technology. Several frequency bands are available, but you have to check whether you can use the local mobile Internet before traveling abroad.

The Wi-Fi module supports Wi-Fi 5 as the fastest standard, which is common in this price range. However, the Oppo A76 has problems with the stability of the transmission speed: it fluctuates significantly in our test with the reference router Asus ROG GT-AXE11000 and does not quite come close to similarly priced smartphones on average. We already noticed this behavior in the Oppo A74 observed.

ColorOS 11.1 based on Android 11 is preinstalled on the smartphone. In India, a beta version of the Android 12-based ColorOS 12 has already been released for the Oppo A76, so it can be assumed that this version will also come to Europe. In general, the manufacturer talks about 2 new Android versions and security updates every 3 months.

The 90 Hz screen makes the operation feel quite smooth, but only as long as not too many apps are running in the background because the SoC hardly offers any performance reserves. The fingerprint sensor is located on the casing's right in the standby button. It does its job quite reliably, but it takes a second until the smartphone is unlocked.

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
348 (340min - 353max) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AX12
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
361 (322min - 366max) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Motorola Moto G41
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
367 (350min - 381max) MBit/s ∼100% +18%
Oppo A76
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
311 (181min - 368max) MBit/s ∼85%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Motorola Moto G41
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
332 (302min - 340max) MBit/s ∼100% +18%
Oppo A76
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
282 (186min - 332max) MBit/s ∼85%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360Tooltip
; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø282 (186-332)
; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø311 (181-368)

Cameras - Little offered

Recording front camera
Recording front camera

We search in vain for a wide-angle camera in Oppo's A76. Unlike many other models, there is only the main camera with 13 megapixels and an additional camera for blurring effects in portrait mode. Thus, there is not much flexibility in the camera system.

Unlike the predecessor, the main lens is no longer a pixel-binning camera, and thus the light sensitivity is also lower. Accordingly, pictures in dark environments are not very brightened, look blotchy and only a few details are visible. The HDR capabilities in daylight are convincing, but the detail diversity is rather mediocre and large areas have obvious pixel patterns. The main camera sometimes has problems with text display in the lab, but we like the sharpness at the picture's edges.

Videos can be recorded in 1080p with 30 fps, autofocus and exposure react quite quickly and usually accurately.

Overall, it is a decent camera for the price range, which is useful for snapshots. However, users with higher demands will have to spend more money on a higher-quality smartphone.

The front-facing camera has a resolution of 8 megapixels. The first impression is decent, but you should not enlarge the pictures too much.

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Main cameraMain cameraLow Light
click to load images
ColorChecker
15.2 ∆E
12.4 ∆E
16.1 ∆E
18.3 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
14.7 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
9 ∆E
0 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo A76: 10.59 ∆E min: 0 - max: 18.29 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.4 ∆E
54.2 ∆E
39.1 ∆E
37.8 ∆E
43.8 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
54 ∆E
34.4 ∆E
41.4 ∆E
26.5 ∆E
65.9 ∆E
64.9 ∆E
29.9 ∆E
48.3 ∆E
35.6 ∆E
76.6 ∆E
41.8 ∆E
45.3 ∆E
90.1 ∆E
70.5 ∆E
51.8 ∆E
36.7 ∆E
24.1 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo A76: 46.67 ∆E min: 13.76 - max: 90.12 ∆E

Display - Fast and bright

Subpixel structure
Subpixel structure

With its 90-Hz IPS display, the Oppo A76 has a high refresh rate ahead of many other smartphones in the price range. In terms of resolution, however, you have to make do with 720p, which is still okay but makes the display look a bit more washed out than the usual 1080p screens.

However, the maximum brightness of around 570 cd/m² is quite good, so you can also use the smartphone outdoors on brighter days. The screen's good color reproduction is also pleasing.

563
cd/m²
555
cd/m²
586
cd/m²
565
cd/m²
569
cd/m²
574
cd/m²
529
cd/m²
561
cd/m²
556
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 586 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 562 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 569 cd/m²
Contrast: 1138:1 (Black: 0.5 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.16 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.3
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.64-98 Ø5.6
94.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.177
Oppo A76
IPS, 1612x720, 6.56
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
TFT-LCD, 2400x1080, 6.60
Motorola Moto G41
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.40
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.60
Response Times
-28%
78%
15%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
41 ?(20, 21)
50 ?(25.6, 24.4)
-22%
9 ?(3, 6)
78%
32 ?(17, 15)
22%
Response Time Black / White *
26 ?(11, 15)
34.8 ?(20.8, 14)
-34%
6 ?(3, 3)
77%
24 ?(13, 11)
8%
PWM Frequency
240.4
147 ?(10)
Screen
-45%
4%
-62%
Brightness middle
569
504
-11%
713
25%
415
-27%
Brightness
562
499
-11%
712
27%
378
-33%
Brightness Distribution
90
91
1%
91
1%
76
-16%
Black Level *
0.5
0.72
-44%
0.26
48%
Contrast
1138
700
-38%
1596
40%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
2.16
3.3
-53%
1.1
49%
5.41
-150%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
3.37
6
-78%
2.39
29%
9.77
-190%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.8
4.1
-128%
3.7
-106%
4.8
-167%
Gamma
2.177 101%
2.28 96%
2.264 97%
2.348 94%
CCT
6784 96%
7041 92%
7373 88%
7748 84%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-37% / -42%
41% / 23%
-24% / -47%

* ... smaller is better

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
26 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11 ms rise
↘ 15 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 52 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (23.1 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
41 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20 ms rise
↘ 21 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 55 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (36.5 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 19928 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color space
CalMAN color space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

Performance, emissions and battery life - Oppo A76 with little power

With its Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 the Oppo A76 would be on a par with the competition if it were not for the 5G phones from Xiaomi and Samsung, which show that much more power is possible for this price. The graphics unit can only convince in on-screen tests, i.e. with the screen's low native resolution; otherwise, some rivals are ahead here as well.

However, it is pleasing that Oppo installs fast UFS 2.2 storage and thus at least helps the system to be somewhat faster when loading or launching apps. Overall, however, you have to expect that the system can only be operated very slowly or not at all at times when running more complex apps in the background. At least the maximum case temperatures remain within limits.

The mono speaker does a decent job in media playback, does not sound too unpleasantly treble-heavy, and is loud enough to fill a medium-sized room with sound. However, you naturally get a better sound with a headset. The connection via 3.5 mm port or Bluetooth 5.0 works without problems in our test. All current aptX codecs, SBC, AAC, and LDAC can be used for wireless sound transmission.

The Oppo A76 can be charged with up to 33 watts via the included charger. The phone needs about one and a half hours for a full charge. The runtimes in our WLAN test are slightly higher than those of many rivals, only the Galaxy A22 5G offers even more endurance.

Geekbench 5.4
Single-Core (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
384 Points ∼56%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
598 Points ∼87% +56%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
352 Points ∼51% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
564 Points ∼82% +47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (374 - 384, n=8)
379 Points ∼55% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1755, n=268, last 2 years)
690 Points ∼100% +80%
Multi-Core (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1675 Points ∼75%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
1809 Points ∼81% +8%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1282 Points ∼57% -23%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1712 Points ∼76% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (1557 - 1738, n=8)
1625 Points ∼73% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4914, n=268, last 2 years)
2240 Points ∼100% +34%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
6679 Points ∼65%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
9402 Points ∼92% +41%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
6749 Points ∼66% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
7434 Points ∼73% +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (5884 - 8730, n=8)
7028 Points ∼69% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 18567, n=176, last 2 years)
10243 Points ∼100% +53%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1357 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
2714 Points ∼100% +100%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1411 Points ∼52% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2360 Points ∼87% +74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (1332 - 1365, n=7)
1349 Points ∼50% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (78 - 9138, n=180, last 2 years)
2430 Points ∼90% +79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1177 Points ∼46%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
2546 Points ∼100% +116%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1238 Points ∼49% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2217 Points ∼87% +88%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (1154 - 1188, n=7)
1170 Points ∼46% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (62 - 11573, n=180, last 2 years)
2489 Points ∼98% +111%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2930 Points ∼83%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
3529 Points ∼100% +20%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
2558 Points ∼72% -13%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3047 Points ∼86% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (2683 - 2930, n=7)
2785 Points ∼79% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (688 - 5262, n=180, last 2 years)
2851 Points ∼81% -3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1352 Points ∼33%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
2770 Points ∼68% +105%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1434 Points ∼35% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2463 Points ∼60% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (1347 - 1372, n=8)
1359 Points ∼33% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (91 - 11909, n=241, last 2 years)
4075 Points ∼100% +201%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1184 Points ∼22%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
2570 Points ∼49% +117%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
1269 Points ∼24% +7%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
2290 Points ∼43% +93%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (1175 - 1242, n=8)
1194 Points ∼23% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (73 - 20955, n=241, last 2 years)
5269 Points ∼100% +345%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2683 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
3804 Points ∼100% +42%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
2662 Points ∼70% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
3350 Points ∼88% +25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (2571 - 2853, n=8)
2710 Points ∼71% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (635 - 5793, n=241, last 2 years)
3237 Points ∼85% +21%
Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
446 Points ∼14%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
1235 Points ∼40% +177%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
736 Points ∼24% +65%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1094 Points ∼36% +145%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (445 - 457, n=8)
450 Points ∼15% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (216 - 10062, n=201, last 2 years)
3079 Points ∼100% +590%
Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
439 Points ∼13%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
1210 Points ∼35% +176%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
732 Points ∼21% +67%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1074 Points ∼31% +145%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (417 - 463, n=8)
440 Points ∼13% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (205 - 11700, n=207, last 2 years)
3434 Points ∼100% +682%
Wild Life Extreme (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
22 Points ∼2%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
360 Points ∼36% +1536%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
182 Points ∼18% +727%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
316 Points ∼32% +1336%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (22 - 127, n=9)
110.7 Points ∼11% +403%
Average of class Smartphone
  (22 - 3080, n=166, last 2 years)
996 Points ∼100% +4427%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
120 Points ∼11%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
348 Points ∼32% +190%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
178 Points ∼17% +48%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
1073 Points ∼100% +794%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (112 - 124, n=7)
121.1 Points ∼11% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (101 - 2876, n=160, last 2 years)
990 Points ∼92% +725%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
17 fps ∼57%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
15 fps ∼51% -12%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
8.5 fps ∼29% -50%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
13 fps ∼44% -24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (7.8 - 17, n=8)
10.7 fps ∼36% -37%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.7 - 104, n=263, last 2 years)
29.7 fps ∼100% +75%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9.6 fps ∼27%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
17 fps ∼47% +77%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
9.6 fps ∼27% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
15 fps ∼42% +56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (5.1 - 9.8, n=8)
9.08 fps ∼25% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.9 - 136, n=264, last 2 years)
35.8 fps ∼100% +273%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
11 fps ∼53%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
9.3 fps ∼45% -15%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
5.4 fps ∼26% -51%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
8.1 fps ∼39% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (4.6 - 11, n=8)
6.35 fps ∼31% -42%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3 - 69, n=264, last 2 years)
20.7 fps ∼100% +88%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A76
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3.3 fps ∼24%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 810, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
6.2 fps ∼45% +88%
Motorola Moto G41
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 6144
3.4 fps ∼25% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 4096
5.5 fps ∼40% +67%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 4G
  (1.4 - 3.3, n=8)
3.01 fps ∼22% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.7 - 52, n=264, last 2 years)
13.7 fps ∼100% +315%
Oppo A76Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5GMotorola Moto G41Samsung Galaxy A22 5GAverage 128 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-11%
-64%
-57%
-18%
-8%
Sequential Read 256KB
980.7
964
-2%
298.5
-70%
300.5
-69%
689 ?(303 - 999, n=28)
-30%
943 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=259, last 2 years)
-4%
Sequential Write 256KB
711.7
471
-34%
172.3
-76%
210.3
-70%
459 ?(105.3 - 857, n=28)
-36%
503 ?(11.9 - 1485, n=259, last 2 years)
-29%
Random Read 4KB
174.7
148.8
-15%
86.9
-50%
118
-32%
165.3 ?(89.3 - 253, n=28)
-5%
171.4 ?(13.5 - 345, n=259, last 2 years)
-2%
Random Write 4KB
162.7
171.8
6%
64.4
-60%
69.2
-57%
164.1 ?(113.8 - 213, n=28)
1%
168.3 ?(30.3 - 475, n=260, last 2 years)
3%

Temperature

Max. Load
 38.7 °C
102 F
34.4 °C
94 F
31.3 °C
88 F
 
 38.6 °C
101 F
35.4 °C
96 F
31.6 °C
89 F
 
 37.9 °C
100 F
34.4 °C
94 F
31.5 °C
89 F
 
Maximum: 38.7 °C = 102 F
Average: 34.9 °C = 95 F
31.2 °C
88 F
34 °C
93 F
36.1 °C
97 F
32.1 °C
90 F
35.2 °C
95 F
39.3 °C
103 F
32.1 °C
90 F
35.3 °C
96 F
38.4 °C
101 F
Maximum: 39.3 °C = 103 F
Average: 34.9 °C = 95 F
Power Supply (max.)  41.2 °C = 106 F | Room Temperature 21.5 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.9 °C / 95 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 38.7 °C / 102 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 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23.5 °C / 74 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.


Heatmap front side
Heatmap front side
Heatmap back side
Heatmap back side

Speaker

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs205340.52544.540.73133.734.34033.431.65035.833.96330.128.78021.3221002124.512516.329.616014.738.220012.943.725014.350.63151352.640010.857.550012.366.263013.569.280019.569.710001575.5125014.174.4160014.972.3200011.969.8250012.864.5315015.462.9400016.570.8500016.774.9630017.270.480001863.61000017.965.31250017.667.61600018.351.8SPL2882.9N0.953.9median 15median 65.3Delta2.19.745.643.140.24033.43231.237.53540.727.524.720.119.819.619.317.222.615.931.912.438.71245.910.249.610.154.18.760.615.266.616.368.415.673.913.174.611.174.111.57411.772.914.171.114.465.617.763.616.567.716.769.718.174.117.573.218.854.927.183.50.854.2median 15.2median 66.62.613.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo A76Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo A76 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.6% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 30% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 55% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy A22 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 59% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 75% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 19% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery life

Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing
Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
5000 mAh
1156 min ∼44% +16%
Oppo A76
5000 mAh
993 min ∼38%
Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G
5000 mAh
966 min ∼37% -3%
Motorola Moto G41
5000 mAh
905 min ∼34% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (424 - 1953, n=266, last 2 years)
905 min ∼34% -9%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
16h 33min

Pros

+ high-quality design
+ bright 90 Hz display
+ no PWM
+ fast memory

Cons

- little performance
- only 720p screen
- only one usable camera
- fluctuating WLAN rates

Verdict - Oppo phone can barely trump

In the review: Oppo A76. Test device provided by:
In the review: Oppo A76. Test device provided by:
cyberport.com

Looking at the memory configuration, the Oppo A76 is slightly cheaper than its predecessor Oppo A74 however, some things are different: there is a less light-sensitive camera and no macro lens anymore, and the manufacturer now uses an IPS screen that is quite bright, colorful, does without PWM and has a 90 Hz refresh rate.

Compared with similarly priced smartphones from other manufacturers, however, further shortcomings are noticed: there is no ultra-wide-angle camera, the system performance is relatively low, the Wi-Fi signal is shaky, and the 720p screen cannot convince in terms of resolution. On the plus side are the good runtimes and the fast storage.

The Oppo A76 lacks that certain extra feature. Nevertheless, it is a solid, inexpensive mid-range phone with a 90 Hz screen.

Overall, the Oppo A76 cannot really stand out among its rivals, especially the Xiaomi Poco M4 Pro 5G, in particular, offers considerably more features at a very similar price. Samsung, too, has a good price tag with the Galaxy A22 5G - a convincing, inexpensive mid-range phone in its lineup, which could at most be deterred by its not very bright screen.

Price and availability

The Oppo A76 is available from many online retailers, with the lowest prices starting at 230 Euros at the time of testing. Also, amazon.de and our loaner cyberport.de have the smartphone on offer.

Oppo A76 - 05/28/2022 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
81%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
92%
Connectivity
48 / 70 → 68%
Weight
89%
Battery
91%
Display
87%
Games Performance
16 / 64 → 25%
Application Performance
60 / 86 → 70%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
64 / 90 → 71%
Camera
49%
Average
72%
78%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
.170
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Oppo A76 review - Beautiful phone with light and shadow
Florian Schmitt, 2022-06- 1 (Update: 2022-06- 1)