Notebookcheck

Oppo A91 Review - Slim Smartphone with Large Display

Solid pretty boy. The A91 is advertised by Oppo as an entry-level smartphone, but at 300 Euros it is already on the threshold of the middle class. The Oppo mobile phone wants to score with a large AMOLED display, a lot of memory, a quad camera and a strong battery. You can find out whether the mix is right in the review.
Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy),
Oppo A91 (A Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio P70 8 x 2.1 GHz, Cortex-A73 / A53
Graphics adapter
ARM Mali-G72 MP3, Core: 900 MHz
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.4 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 411 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glas 5, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 128 GB 
, 108 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: Audioklinke (3,5 mm), Card Reader: microSD up to 256GB (FAT, FAT32, exFAT), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Acceleration, proximity and gyro sensor, digital compass, OTG
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM / GPRS / Edge (850, 900, 1,800 and 1,900 MHz), UMTS / HSPA + (band 1, 3 and 5), LTE Cat. 7 (volume 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40 and 41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 160.2 x 73.3 ( = 0.31 x 6.31 x 2.89 in)
Battery
4025 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.8, 26mm, 1/2.0", 0.8 µm) + 8 MPix (macro wide angle, f/2.2, 13mm, 1/4.0", 1.12 µm) + 2 MPix (portrait depth, f/2.4, 1/5.0", 1.75 µm) + 2 MPix (monochrome sensor, f/2.4, 1/5.0", 1.75 µm)
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix (f/2.0, 26mm, 1/3.1", 1.0 µm)
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: Virtual, VOOC power supply unit, USB cable, SIM tool, protective cover, headset, documentation, ColorOS 6.1, Head/body SAR: <2.0 W/kg, single-band GNSS: GPS, Glonass, BeiDou and SBAS, DRM Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
172 g ( = 6.07 oz / 0.38 pounds), Power Supply: 114 g ( = 4.02 oz / 0.25 pounds)
Price
299 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison devices

Bewertung
Rating Version
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
79 %7
05/2020
Oppo A91
Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3
172 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.4"2400x1080
81 %7
04/2020
Huawei P40 Lite
Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6
183 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2310x1080
78 %7
03/2020
Motorola Moto G8 Power
SD 665, Adreno 610
197 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.4"2300x1080
80 %7
01/2020
Samsung Galaxy A51
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
172 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2400x1080

Case, equipment and operation

Despite its size and strong battery, the Oppo A91 is comparatively light, mainly due to the absence of glass and the reduced use of aluminium. The materials are replaced by plastic. This does not diminish the smartphone's valuable impression, as the workmanship is on a good level and the gaps are both tight and even. There is no special protection against the penetration of dust and water and the battery is firmly installed. 

The features are on a similar level to those of analog expensive competitor models, but Oppo also gives the A91 a fingerprint scanner in the display and a potent quick charge technology. 

Android 9.0 Pie with the in-house ColorOS 6.1 is still used as operating system. An update to Android 10 with ColorOS 7 is planned for next August. The security patches for our test device are from April 5th, 2020 and the manufacturer is aiming for quarterly updates. 

Mobile, the Oppo smartphone only gets into the data network with LTE Cat. 7 at best and has a decent frequency equipment, with which there shouldn't be any bottlenecks within Europe. The user has a full dual SIM at his disposal. The A91 was inconspicuous during mobile phone use, unfortunately this is not the case with the WLAN module, which, in combination with our reference router Netgear Nighthawk AX12, shows clear drops in the reception of data. 

The Oppo A91 offers good system performance and smooth operation. The fingerprint scanner and face recognition work smoothly in the test and deliver good recognition rates. 

The speech quality of the Oppo A91 is quite good when held to the ear, as long as the speaker does not speak too loudly into the microphone, because then audible clipping occurs. Ambient noise is filtered out as much as possible, but the intelligibility of the user suffers as well, which is occasionally interrupted and slightly distorted by small dropouts. We positively like the loudspeaker function, which has a good range and only minimally dampens the speaker. WLAN calling is supported by the A91, but VoLTE isn't. 

Size comparison

160.2 mm / 6.31 inch 73.3 mm / 2.89 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs159.2 mm / 6.27 inch 76.3 mm / 3 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 183 g0.4034 lbs158.5 mm / 6.24 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs156 mm / 6.14 inch 76 mm / 2.99 inch 10 mm / 0.3937 inch 197 g0.4343 lbs
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy A51
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
298 (185min - 350max) MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Huawei P40 Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
298 (61min - 334max) MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Oppo A91
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
294 (80min - 338max) MBit/s ∼99%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
802.11 b/g/n
56.5 (11min - 75max) MBit/s ∼19% -81%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40 Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
338 (286min - 403max) MBit/s ∼100% +2%
Oppo A91
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
332 (312min - 337max) MBit/s ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy A51
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
297 (189min - 335max) MBit/s ∼88% -11%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
802.11 b/g/n
44.9 (2min - 75max) MBit/s ∼13% -86%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø293 (80-338)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø332 (312-337)

Cameras - Oppo A91 with four peepholes

Selfie with the A91

A quad camera sounds like a powerful piece of equipment, but the two 2-MP lenses only collect additional information for monochrome or portrait shots. The 8-MP wide-angle lens is not an ultra-wide-angle lens, but supports the main camera in macro shooting (3 cm), which works well in everyday life. The 48 MP lens takes good pictures in daylight and is supported by numerous AI features, but it does tend to overdo it with the HDR function. Given the price range, the low-light characteristics are also satisfactory. 

Videos can be recorded in Full HD and are stabilized by an effective EIS. 

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.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3Scene 4
click to load images
ColorChecker
28.5 ∆E
48.2 ∆E
37 ∆E
35.2 ∆E
40.9 ∆E
56.7 ∆E
46.6 ∆E
31.4 ∆E
35.1 ∆E
27.9 ∆E
58.1 ∆E
58.4 ∆E
29.9 ∆E
46.3 ∆E
31.2 ∆E
63.5 ∆E
38.1 ∆E
41.2 ∆E
57.1 ∆E
61 ∆E
48.1 ∆E
36 ∆E
23.4 ∆E
13.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo A91: 41.38 ∆E min: 13.38 - max: 63.45 ∆E
ColorChecker
3.9 ∆E
4 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
1.7 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo A91: 5.39 ∆E min: 1.72 - max: 11.76 ∆E

Display - AMOLED with DC-Dimming 2.0

Sub-pixel Array
DC-Dimming 2.0

The 6.4-inch AMOLED display of the Oppo A91 offers high pixel density and is protected by Corning Gorilla glass 5. With the ambient light sensor activated, the brightness climbs up to 594 cd/m² on a pure white area in the centre of the image, and even 797 cd/m² with an even distribution of light and dark areas (APL50). On the other hand, those who want to control the brightness manually will only achieve 415 cd/m². The smartphone performs well outdoors and remains easy to read in most lighting situations.

For PWM-sensitive people, Oppo also offers flicker reduction (DC dimming) in version 2.0. This reduces the flicker to a constant 60 Hz, but is intended to increase the image noise. Without this function the frequency fluctuates between 136 and 250 Hz. 

The values determined with CalMAN for the color display of the panel are at a decent level and can be adjusted to your own requirements in the settings. 

582
cd/m²
611
cd/m²
656
cd/m²
588
cd/m²
594
cd/m²
633
cd/m²
583
cd/m²
615
cd/m²
657
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 657 cd/m² Average: 613.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2.09 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 594 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.1 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 7 | 0.64-98 Ø6
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.28
Oppo A91
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.4
Huawei P40 Lite
IPS, 2310x1080, 6.4
Motorola Moto G8 Power
IPS, 2300x1080, 6.4
Samsung Galaxy A51
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Response Times
-1069%
-622%
-455%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
3.2 (2, 1.2)
46.8 (21.6, 25.2)
-1363%
46 (21, 25)
-1338%
26 (21, 5)
-713%
Response Time Black / White *
3.2 (2, 1.2)
28 (12.4, 15.6)
-775%
26 (11, 15)
-713%
24 (21, 3)
-650%
PWM Frequency
250 (99)
714.3 (15)
186%
242.7
-3%
Screen
15%
-2%
25%
Brightness middle
594
478
-20%
462
-22%
589
-1%
Brightness
613
448
-27%
483
-21%
589
-4%
Brightness Distribution
89
87
-2%
93
4%
94
6%
Black Level *
0.49
0.65
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.1
3
51%
5.7
7%
2.22
64%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.6
5.6
47%
8.9
16%
8.24
22%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
7
4.1
41%
6.5
7%
2.6
63%
Gamma
2.28 96%
2.26 97%
2.303 96%
2.111 104%
CCT
7370 88%
7282 89%
8073 81%
6508 100%
Contrast
976
711
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-527% / -256%
-312% / -208%
-215% / -135%

* ... 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
3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.7 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 detected 250 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17553 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.


Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
Mixed colors (target color space: sRGB)
Mixed colors (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (Target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (Target color space: sRGB)
Oppo A91 outdoor
Viewing angles

Performance, emissions and battery life

The Oppo A91 is powered by a Helio P70, delivering good everyday performance that is on a par with competitors with Exynos or Snapdragon SoC. Oppo, however, implements an additional performance mode that increases performance between three and 13 percent depending on the scenario.

The surface temperatures of the Oppo smartphone are at a low level and even under constant load it only gets hand-warm in places. 

The mono loudspeaker on the bottom edge delivers a pretty decent sound. The deep tones are only weakly pronounced and high voices sound slightly metallic. The audio jack has a balanced sound output and Bluetooth (SBC, AAC and LDAC) is available wirelessly. 

The Oppo A91 has the VOOC 3.0 quick charge function with 20 watts and can fully charge the 4,000 mAh battery within 80 minutes. The battery life of more than ten hours is absolutely suitable for everyday use, but the A91 brings up the rear in the comparison field. 

Pink Noise Curves (speaker)
Pink Noise Curves (audio jack)
Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1475 Points ∼76%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1430 Points ∼73% -3%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
1949 Points ∼100% +32%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1385 Points ∼71% -6%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1184 - 1475, n=5)
1385 Points ∼71% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 3531, n=118)
1936 Points ∼99% +31%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
320 Points ∼53%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
282 Points ∼47% -12%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
604 Points ∼100% +89%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
311 Points ∼51% -3%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (282 - 320, n=5)
298 Points ∼49% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=118)
550 Points ∼91% +72%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
8185 Points ∼89%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
9164 Points ∼100% +12%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6963 Points ∼76% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5649 Points ∼62% -31%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (5992 - 8365, n=10)
7761 Points ∼85% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=521)
5952 Points ∼65% -27%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
12070 Points ∼100%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8804 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6416 Points ∼53%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (7160 - 11781, n=9)
10631 Points ∼88%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=679)
6528 Points ∼54%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2621 Points ∼66%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3972 Points ∼100% +52%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2488 Points ∼63% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2311 Points ∼58% -12%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1605 - 3055, n=10)
2511 Points ∼63% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=524)
2219 Points ∼56% -15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1102 Points ∼40%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2752 Points ∼100% +150%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
988 Points ∼36% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1530 Points ∼56% +39%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (941 - 1191, n=10)
1085 Points ∼39% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 10043, n=524)
2134 Points ∼78% +94%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1265 Points ∼43%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2954 Points ∼100% +134%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1151 Points ∼39% -9%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1654 Points ∼56% +31%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1098 - 1354, n=10)
1244 Points ∼42% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8269, n=525)
1993 Points ∼67% +58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2606 Points ∼65%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
4003 Points ∼100% +54%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2493 Points ∼62% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2336 Points ∼58% -10%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2166 - 3116, n=10)
2657 Points ∼66% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=556)
2135 Points ∼53% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1747 Points ∼50%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3488 Points ∼100% +100%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1678 Points ∼48% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1993 Points ∼57% +14%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1427 - 1876, n=10)
1624 Points ∼47% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=556)
2875 Points ∼82% +65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1885 Points ∼52%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3591 Points ∼100% +91%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1809 Points ∼50% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2060 Points ∼57% +9%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1591 - 1934, n=10)
1772 Points ∼49% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=556)
2417 Points ∼67% +28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2550 Points ∼69%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3676 Points ∼100% +44%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2493 Points ∼68% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2217 Points ∼60% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2184 - 2869, n=10)
2550 Points ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=605)
2100 Points ∼57% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1117 Points ∼41%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2740 Points ∼100% +145%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
984 Points ∼36% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1473 Points ∼54% +32%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (884 - 1259, n=10)
1102 Points ∼40% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 9008, n=605)
1801 Points ∼66% +61%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1276 Points ∼44%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2904 Points ∼100% +128%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1137 Points ∼39% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1592 Points ∼55% +25%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1029 - 1417, n=10)
1259 Points ∼43% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7400, n=606)
1716 Points ∼59% +34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2568 Points ∼71%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3638 Points ∼100% +42%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2507 Points ∼69% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2225 Points ∼61% -13%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2193 - 2895, n=10)
2546 Points ∼70% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=648)
1970 Points ∼54% -23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1767 Points ∼52%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3384 Points ∼100% +92%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1626 Points ∼48% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2027 Points ∼60% +15%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1253 - 1767, n=10)
1495 Points ∼44% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12611, n=647)
2384 Points ∼70% +35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1899 Points ∼55%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3437 Points ∼100% +81%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1764 Points ∼51% -7%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2068 Points ∼60% +9%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (1406 - 1899, n=10)
1639 Points ∼48% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9549, n=650)
2048 Points ∼60% +8%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
24514 Points ∼89%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
27654 Points ∼100% +13%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
24652 Points ∼89% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
20393 Points ∼74% -17%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (15003 - 24514, n=9)
19279 Points ∼70% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=792)
15527 Points ∼56% -37%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
23159 Points ∼49%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
47563 Points ∼100% +105%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
25161 Points ∼53% +9%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
25086 Points ∼53% +8%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (17412 - 23159, n=9)
20424 Points ∼43% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=790)
26885 Points ∼57% +16%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
23447 Points ∼57%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
41003 Points ∼100% +75%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
25046 Points ∼61% +7%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23866 Points ∼58% +2%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (18037 - 23447, n=9)
20088 Points ∼49% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 112989, n=790)
20998 Points ∼51% -10%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
4.5 fps ∼35%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
13 fps ∼100% +189%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
4.5 fps ∼35% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5.5 fps ∼42% +22%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2.6 - 8.7, n=10)
5.22 fps ∼40% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=317)
11.3 fps ∼87% +151%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2.9 fps ∼36%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
7.9 fps ∼98% +172%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps ∼35% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.5 fps ∼43% +21%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (2.8 - 3.7, n=10)
3.01 fps ∼37% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=315)
8.06 fps ∼100% +178%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
7.5 fps ∼36%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
21 fps ∼100% +180%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.6 fps ∼36% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.1 fps ∼43% +21%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (6.9 - 15, n=10)
8.97 fps ∼43% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=321)
16.9 fps ∼80% +125%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
8.8 fps ∼42%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
21 fps ∼100% +139%
Motorola Moto G8 Power
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.1 fps ∼39% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼48% +14%
Average Mediatek Helio P70
  (6.1 - 9.3, n=10)
8.24 fps ∼39% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=320)
19.4 fps ∼92% +120%
Oppo A91Huawei P40 LiteMotorola Moto G8 PowerSamsung Galaxy A51Average 128 GB UFS 2.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
104%
39%
39%
28%
-20%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
60.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
70.6 (Nano Memory Card)
17%
49.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-18%
60.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
0%
54.4 (28.6 - 70.2, n=17)
-10%
51.1 (1.7 - 87.1, n=536)
-15%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
77.21 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
82.63 (Nano Memory Card)
7%
69.4 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-10%
73 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
70.3 (30.2 - 86, n=17)
-9%
69.1 (8.1 - 96.5, n=536)
-11%
Random Write 4KB
28.55
175.45
515%
132.63
365%
104.4
266%
84.8 (13.5 - 187, n=23)
197%
36 (0.14 - 319, n=888)
26%
Random Read 4KB
145.64
157.32
8%
57.7
-60%
110.8
-24%
125 (88.4 - 173, n=23)
-14%
59.4 (1.59 - 324, n=888)
-59%
Sequential Write 256KB
185.26
181.69
-2%
181.88
-2%
184.9
0%
196 (143 - 257, n=23)
6%
128 (2.99 - 911, n=888)
-31%
Sequential Read 256KB
505.44
912.99
81%
300.9
-40%
496.1
-2%
495 (409 - 733, n=23)
-2%
342 (12.1 - 1802, n=888)
-32%

Temperature

Max. Load
 35 °C
95 F
35.2 °C
95 F
32.5 °C
91 F
 
 35.1 °C
95 F
35.2 °C
95 F
32.2 °C
90 F
 
 34.3 °C
94 F
35 °C
95 F
32.1 °C
90 F
 
Maximum: 35.2 °C = 95 F
Average: 34.1 °C = 93 F
31.5 °C
89 F
33 °C
91 F
33.7 °C
93 F
31 °C
88 F
32.3 °C
90 F
33.9 °C
93 F
30.2 °C
86 F
32 °C
90 F
34.3 °C
94 F
Maximum: 34.3 °C = 94 F
Average: 32.4 °C = 90 F
Power Supply (max.)  27.4 °C = 81 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.1 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.2 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.3 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.1 °C / 88 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.


Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.833.12526.223.43123.322.34021.925.6502830.16319.922.18019.122.710019.917.512516.523.316019.638.320017.543.425017.550.431513.956.340013.960.350015.865.363015.267.48001466.910001472.4125013.973.1160013.473.1200013.875.3250014.378.131501478.7400014.582.5500014.679.9630014.576.4800014.7741000015.175.6125001574.41600014.859.2SPL26.588.9N0.872.5median 14.6median 72.4Delta111.339.544.239.937.834.532.533.83533.940.928.933.524.129.123.22823.233.522.339.32041.418.743.517.449.417.153.516.858.614.562.614.462.31669.914.370.814.3701570.814.272.114.27314.166.314.56914.569.214.971.915.265.315.557.316.156.668.227.281.722.60.949.7median 15.2median 62.62.510.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo A91Samsung Galaxy A51
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo A91 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 35% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy A51 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery life

Oppo A91
4025 mAh
Huawei P40 Lite
4200 mAh
Motorola Moto G8 Power
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing 1.3
605
1007
66%
1002
66%
698
15%
697 (223 - 2636, n=754)
15%
Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Chrome 80)
10h 05min

Pros

+ good OLED display
+ Dual-SIM plus microSD expansion
+ strong fast charging technology

Cons

- Battery life should be longer
- no radio receiver
- bluetooth 4.2 only

Verdict - Strong competition for the Galaxy A51

In review: Oppo A91. Test device provided by Oppo Germany.
In review: Oppo A91. Test device provided by Oppo Germany.

The Oppo A91 is a smartphone in the upper entry-level class and is in direct competition with Samsung's top dog, the Galaxy A51. The A91 convinces with a large AMOLED display, which convinces with both the display characteristics and the brightness in the test. The fast SoC provides an appealing performance, and there is also plenty of memory available, which can be expanded if necessary using a microSD card without having to sacrifice a SIM slot. The fingerprint scanner is integrated in the panel and with VOOC charge the smartphone is quickly recharged.

The Oppo A91 places itself with a balanced overall package between entry-level and mid-range. 

The Oppo A91's cameras convince with good shots in daylight and at close range, but the two additional 2-MP lenses do not provide any visible advantage in practice. Battery life is good, but falls short of expectations due to the large energy storage capacity. Nevertheless, Oppo succeeds in creating a very balanced smartphone, which is also a real eye-catcher optically. 

Oppo A91 - 05/26/2020 v7
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis
87%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
47 / 70 → 67%
Weight
90%
Battery
88%
Display
82%
Games Performance
16 / 64 → 24%
Application Performance
74 / 86 → 86%
Temperature
92%
Noise
100%
Audio
76 / 90 → 84%
Camera
67%
Average
75%
79%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Oppo A91 Review - Slim Smartphone with Large Display
Daniel Schmidt, 2020-05-29 (Update: 2020-05-29)
Daniel Schmidt
Editor of the original article: Daniel Schmidt - Managing Editor Mobile - @Tellheim
Already as a little dwarf I was fascinated by my Commodore 16 and ignited my enthusiasm for computers. With my first modem I surfed the Btx and later also the World Wide Web. The latest technology trends have always fascinated me and this is especially true for mobile devices like smartphones and tablets. For Notebookcheck, I have been on the ball since 2013 and I am looking forward to the innovations that are still to come and that we will put to the acid test for you.