Notebookcheck Logo

Oppo Find X5 Smartphone Review: Budget Smartphone with a Four Digit Price Tag

Still premium. The Find X5 inherits most of its features from Oppo's flagship Find X5 Pro smartphone, but costs considerably less. While you’ll have to invest around 1000 Euros, you’ll be rewarded with a very strong high-end bundle overall.

Oppo is seeking to establish itself as a premium brand. The manufacturer has given a price tag of 1000 Euros for the Find X5, and this is not even the top model of the current series. This honor belongs to the Find X5 Pro, which officially costs another 300 Euros. Only the Find X5 Lite, which is available in online shops for less than 500 Euros, is reasonably cheap.

Just like the Find X5 Pro, the Find X5 also claims to be high-end, for it has inherited many features from the flagship and is thus equal to it in many respects. One example is the camera unit, which was developed in cooperation with Hasselblad. Unlike the Find X5 Pro, however, the Find X5 is not powered by the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, but "only" by the Snapdragon 888, but this offers more than enough performance for everyday use.

Oppo Find X5 (Find X5 Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G 8 x 1.8 - 2.8 GHz, Cortex-X1 / A78 / A55 (Kryo 680)
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.55 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 402 PPI, capacitive, AMOLED, FHD+, 10 Bit colour depth, Corning Gorilla Glass Victus, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 229.5 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Geomagnetic sensor, Ambient light sensor, Colour temperature sensor, Proximity sensor, Accelerometer, Gravity sensor, Gyroscope, Pedometer, Dolby Atmos, VoLTE, VoWiFi, eSIM, IP54 rating, Head SAR 0.992 W/kg, Body SAR 1.216 W/kg
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.2, 2G (850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G (Band 1/2/4/5/6/8/19), 4G (Band 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/13/17/18/19/20/25/26/28/32/34/38/39/40/41/66), 5G (n1/3/5/7/8/12/13/18/20/26/28/38/40/41/66/77/78), Dual SIM, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.7 x 160.3 x 72.6 ( = 0.34 x 6.31 x 2.86 in)
Battery
4800 mAh
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 12
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix MP main camera (f/1.8, FOV 84°, 6P lens, AF, OIS) + 50MP Ultra-wide Angle Camera (f/2.2, FOV 110°, 7P lens, AF) + 13MP Telephoto camera (f/2.4, FOV 45°, 5P lens, AF), videos up to [email protected]
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix MP (f/2.4, FOV 81°, 5P), videos up to [email protected]
Additional features
Speakers: stereo, Keyboard: virtual, 80W Charger, USB Data Cable, USB Dongle (Type-A to Type-C), SIM Ejector Tool, Protective Case, Quick Start Guide, Safety Guide, ColorOS 12.1, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
196 g ( = 6.91 oz / 0.43 pounds), Power Supply: 107 g ( = 3.77 oz / 0.24 pounds)
Price
999 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
87.8 %
04/2022
Oppo Find X5
SD 888 5G, Adreno 660
196 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.55"2400x1080
88.6 %
10/2021
Apple iPhone 13
A15, A15 GPU 4-Core
173 g128 GB NVMe6.10"2532x1170
87.7 %
03/2022
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
196 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.70"2400x1080
87.1 %
03/2022
realme GT 2 Pro
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
189 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.70"3216x1440
86.8 %
10/2021
Sony Xperia 5 III
SD 888 5G, Adreno 660
168 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.10"2520x1080
87.5 %
03/2022
Xiaomi 12
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
179 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.28"2400x1080

Case - All-around glass, matte and velvet back cover

The Oppo Find X5 is a slick piece of technology. Unlike the Oppo Find X5 Pro, the back cover is not made of ceramic, but of glass. Our review sample looks very classy with its matte white back cover and leaves practically no fingerprints. The surface also feels very high quality due to its velvety texture. Oppo also offers the smartphone in black.

The most striking design feature on the back is the camera unit. It does not use a rectangular bezel, but it has a slight tilt upwards at the lower right corner. Furthermore, the back cover and lens ensemble seem to have merged into one unit. The camera unit protrudes visibly and tangibly from the casing, but curves into the back, which further reinforces the initial impression of the smartphone as being of an overall high quality. However, the Find X5 wobbles quite a bit on the table, even when using the included protective cover.

The display glass of the Find X5 is also made of Gorilla Glass Victus, but still comes covered with a factory-standard protective film. The curved screen edges connect seamlessly to the metal frame that holds the front and back firmly together. Overall, the Find X5 is impressive with its high build quality and looks as if it was made from one piece. A pity, however, that Oppo did away with an IP certification of the smartphone. The Find X5 Pro, on the other hand, is waterproof and dustproof according to IP68 certification.  

Size Comparison

163.1 mm / 6.42 inch 76 mm / 2.99 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 196 g0.4321 lbs163.2 mm / 6.43 inch 74.7 mm / 2.94 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs160.3 mm / 6.31 inch 72.6 mm / 2.86 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 196 g0.4321 lbs157 mm / 6.18 inch 68 mm / 2.68 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 168 g0.3704 lbs152.7 mm / 6.01 inch 69.9 mm / 2.75 inch 8.66 mm / 0.3409 inch 179 g0.3946 lbs146.7 mm / 5.78 inch 71.5 mm / 2.81 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 173 g0.3814 lbs

Hardware - Oppo Find X5 with 8 GB RAM and 256 GB storage

The Oppo Find X5 is only available in one storage configuration: 8GB of LPDDR5 RAM and 256GB of UFS 3.1 storage. If you subtract the storage space taken up by the Android 12, ColorOS 12.1 and the preinstalled apps, the actual available storage space amounts to almost 230 GB. This cannot be expanded due to the lack of a microSD slot.

Oppo's smartphone does not have a 3.5 mm jack or an FM radio. Instead, the USB-C port supports OTG as well as USB 3.2 Gen.1, meaning that data can be transferred at a nominal rate of 5 Gb/s. Many competitors would do well to take note of this, since most devices, including many high-priced models, only run at USB 2.0 speed.

The USB cable supplied with our review sample only supported USB 2.0, which did not allow for more than 30 MB/s on average. The Find X5 achieved the promised USB 3.2 Gen.1 speed with a USB 3.0 cable. 

Left: volume rocker
Left: volume rocker
Left: power button
Left: power button
Top: microphone
Top: microphone
Bottom: Dual-SIM, microphone, USB-C 3.2 Gen.1, speaker
Bottom: Dual-SIM, microphone, USB-C 3.2 Gen.1, speaker

Software - Android 12 and ColorOS 12.1

The Oppo Find X5 runs Android 12 and the manufacturer's own ColorOS 12.1 user interface. At the time of testing (early April), the Android security patches were from February 1 and are thus still quite up to date.

The clearly designed ColorOS 12.1 stands out with some software settings that are usually lacking in a standard Android, such as a split-screen view. This is activated via a three-finger swipe and displays two apps on the screen at the same time. The Multi Screen Connect feature allows for the smartphone to be mirrored and operated on Windows PCs.

Fortunately, Oppo was restrained in its choice of software offerings on the Find X5. Alongside the standard Google apps and several manufacturer tools such as a phone manager, clone app and compass, only a few third-party apps have found their way into ROM. These apps, including Facebook, Netflix, TikTok and AliExpress, can all be uninstalled. 

Communication and GNSS – Fast WiFi, average GPS

Apart from mmWave, Oppo's Find X5 supports all common mobile network standards including 5G-SA (17 bands) and 5G-NSA (13 bands), so there should be no reception problems anywhere.   

In terms of WLAN, the Find X5 uses Wi-Fi 6 with MIMO support. Connected to our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router, it achieved stable and fast transfer rates in both send and receive directions, which are roughly on par with the comparison devices. NFC and Bluetooth 5.2 are also part of the Find X5's connectivity repertoire. 

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
933 (833min - 949max) MBit/s ∼100% +18%
realme GT 2 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
862 (780min - 919max) MBit/s ∼92% +9%
Oppo Find X5
Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
789 (351min - 863max) MBit/s ∼85%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72.5 - 1736, n=49, last 2 years)
636 MBit/s ∼68% -19%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Oppo Find X5
Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
976 (953min - 1017max) MBit/s ∼100%
realme GT 2 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
933 (826min - 963max) MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
898 (852min - 931max) MBit/s ∼92% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (78.3 - 1710, n=49, last 2 years)
657 MBit/s ∼67% -33%
055110165220275330385440495550605660715770825880935990Tooltip
; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø777 (351-863)
; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø976 (953-1017)
GPS signal indoors
GPS signal indoors
GPS signal outdoors
GPS signal outdoors

The Oppo smartphone determines its location via GPS, BeiDou, GLONASS, Galileo and QZSS, but is limited to one band in each case. Nevertheless, the Oppo X5 was able to determine its current position within a few seconds with an accuracy of up to 3 meters (~10 feet), both indoors and outdoors.

However, our initially positive impression of the GPS system faded a little on our little bike tour test. The Oppo X5 performed equally as well in terms of accuracy as the Garmin Venu 2 on stretches with a lot of open spaces, but it was sometimes way off the mark in densely built-up areas. However, its overall performance should suffice for everyday navigation with Google Maps and the like. 

GPS-Test: overview
GPS-Test: overview
GPS-Test: around the lake
GPS-Test: around the lake
GPS-Test: turning point
GPS-Test: turning point

Telephone features and speech quality

The Oppo Find X5 delivers good voice quality during calls. Our calls to the fixed and mobile networks were always well understood by both parties. Voices also sound natural in loudspeaker mode and are largely free of interference thanks to effective noise suppression.

Two nano-SIM cards fit in the Find X5. Alternatively, the smartphone can also use an eSIM instead of a physical card. VoLTE and VoWiFi are supported. 

Cameras - Almost the same setup as the Find X5 Pro

Photo with the main camera
Photo with the main camera
Photo with the main camera
Photo with the main camera

The Find X5 uses almost the same camera setup as the top model Oppo Find X5 Pro. The selfie camera works with 32 MP and is concealed behind a punch-hole integrated into the top left of the display. It offers good recording quality as well as numerous filters and retouching effects. Video recording is limited to 1080p.

Oppo has developed the main camera setup in collaboration with Hasselblad. It consists of a 50 MP wide-angle and uItra-wide-angle camera (both with the Sony IMX 766 chip) and a 13 MP telephoto camera. Unlike the Find X5 Pro, the main camera of the Find X5 uses a 2-axis instead of a 5-axis image stabilizer. For this, the same image processing NPU in the form of the MariSilicon X is used.

Photos taken with the Find X5 look really good. Colors and contrasts look natural, and the image sharpness also functions well in the targeted areas. In some cases, however, the camera uses a slightly cold white balance and occasionally omits details in dark areas of the image. But at nighttime, the Find X5 nevertheless manages to capture a lot of light.

The ultra-wide-angle camera does its job almost as well and delivers sharp pictures with only minimal chromatic aberrations at the edges of the image. At the same time, it also serves as a macro camera, thus operating in a focus range of up to 4 centimeters (~1.6 inches). The telephoto camera also delivers good image quality, but is somewhat limited in its usage options due to its 2x optical zoom.

During video recordings, which can be recorded at a maximum of 4K at 60 frames per second, you can conveniently switch between the wide-angle and ultra-wide-angle cameras via a stepless slider. The picture quality is also good here. 

Photo with the selfie camera
Photo with the selfie camera
Photo with the ultra-wide-angle camera
Photo with the ultra-wide-angle camera
Photo with the main camera
Photo with the main camera

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.

Daylight 1Daylight 2Ultra wide-angle5x ZoomLowlight

Under controlled lighting conditions, the Oppo Find X5 reproduces colors very accurately. Even at an illuminance of just 1 lux, it captures the test chart clearly and with all details but has trouble focusing sharply on it.

ColorChecker
7.5 ∆E
1.5 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
5 ∆E
1.2 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
1.7 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
5 ∆E
2.1 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
1.3 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Find X5: 4.57 ∆E min: 1.16 - max: 9.12 ∆E
ColorChecker
20.3 ∆E
22 ∆E
21.9 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
24.6 ∆E
30.7 ∆E
25.6 ∆E
17.6 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
20.8 ∆E
27.2 ∆E
31.1 ∆E
19 ∆E
26.6 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
25.7 ∆E
22.8 ∆E
29.1 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
26 ∆E
29 ∆E
22.1 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Find X5: 23.39 ∆E min: 12.77 - max: 31.13 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - 80-watt SUPERVOOC power supply

With the Find X5, Oppo includes an 80-watt rapid charger, a USB data cable (Type C to A), a SIM tool, a protective case, a quick-start guide, and a leaflet with safety instructions. An OTG adapter is also included.

The Oppo Find X5 comes with a 24-month warranty. 

Input devices & operation - Optical fingerprint sensor and 2D face unlock

The capacitive touchscreen of the Find X5 works with a sampling rate of up to 240 Hz and responds accurately to touch input, regardless of where it is made on the screen. The smartphone is equipped with a factory standard protective screen foil that fits almost seamlessly with the touchscreen on the two short sides, but only covers the curvature on the two rounded long sides up to about half of the curve. The protective foil can be felt quite easily when holding the Oppo in your hands and the transition to the touchscreen feels quite hard.

Biometric authentication on the Find X5 takes place via the optical fingerprint sensor, which is hidden under the display. This functioned reliably and quickly in the test. The second unlocking method is 2D face recognition, which runs just as quickly in bright ambient light. Speed also remains high in the dark, but the recognition hit rate drops considerably. Then again, with a sufficiently bright display, the face unlock is normally very reliable. 

Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - landscape
Keyboard - above
Keyboard - above

Display - AMOLED panel screen with 120 Hz

Subpixel
Subpixel

The 6.55-inch AMOLED screen of the Find X5 with a resolution of 2400 x 1080 pixels is protected by Gorilla Glass Victus and operates with a refresh rate of 60 or 120 Hz.

According to the manufacturer, the screen is supposed to achieve a peak brightness of 1000 cd/m², but falls a little short in the test with a maximum of 813 cd/m² in the APL50 measurement. Nevertheless, the luminance is really good with the brightness sensor enabled, averaging around 718 cd/m². The Oppo also illuminates the display area very well with 95%. Without the brightness sensor, the screen achieves a maximum of 500 cd/m². At the lowest brightness level, it still shines with 2.14 cd/m².

The OLED flickering ranges from 120.2 to 371.3 Hz at a brightness level of less than 55%. Above that, it remains a constant 120 Hz (when the 120 Hz refresh rate is enabled).

709
cd/m²
720
cd/m²
735
cd/m²
707
cd/m²
709
cd/m²
738
cd/m²
706
cd/m²
703
cd/m²
733
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 738 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 717.8 cd/m² Minimum: 2.14 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 709 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.3 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.4
ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.64-98 Ø5.6
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.27
Oppo Find X5
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Apple iPhone 13
OLED, 2532x1170, 6.10
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.70
realme GT 2 Pro
AMOLED, 3216x1440, 6.70
Sony Xperia 5 III
OLED, 2520x1080, 6.10
Xiaomi 12
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.28
Screen
21%
-1%
-94%
-72%
-17%
Brightness middle
709
831
17%
649
-8%
740
4%
554
-22%
867
22%
Brightness
718
830
16%
649
-10%
732
2%
559
-22%
867
21%
Brightness Distribution
95
98
3%
98
3%
98
3%
95
0%
98
3%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.3
0.77
41%
1.18
9%
3.25
-150%
2.22
-71%
1.7
-31%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
2.5
1.52
39%
2.07
17%
6.46
-158%
5.94
-138%
4.4
-76%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.3
1.2
8%
1.5
-15%
4.7
-262%
3.6
-177%
1.8
-38%
Gamma
2.27 97%
2.209 100%
2.236 98%
2.213 99%
2.193 100%
2.2 100%
CCT
6489 100%
6501 100%
2538 256%
5663 115%
7000 93%
6762 96%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 371.3 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 371.3 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 371.3 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 21833 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

minimum display brightness
minimum display brightness
25% display brightness
25% display brightness
50% display brightness
50% display brightness
Custom Settings
Custom Settings

In "Natural" color mode, the AMOLED display is limited to the sRGB color space, while the preset "Vivid" color mode covers the larger DCI-P3 color space. This occurred at 98.7% in our test device and is thus very close to the promised 100% color space coverage.

The Find X5 also delivered the best color reproduction in "Vivid" color mode and an adjusted color temperature (see screenshot for settings). Color precision and temperature as well as the RGB balance were all exemplary.

Color accuracy (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Color accuracy (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Color space (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Color space (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Grayscale (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Grayscale (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Saturation (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)
Saturation (Vivid color mode, DCI-P3 target color space)

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
1.215 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.583 ms rise
↘ 0.632 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. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
1.034 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.49 ms rise
↘ 0.544 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 0.692 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (36.8 ms).

The Oppo Find X5 can be used well outdoors due to its high screen brightness. Even in direct sunlight, content can still be recognized without much difficulty.

Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors in direct sunlight
Outdoors in direct sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade

The viewing angle stability receives a thumbs up from us. At very flat viewing angles, the display can appear slightly greenish or bluish in color, which is typical for AMOLEDs, and it also loses a bit of brightness. However, both have little or no effect on readability.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance - Oppo Find X5 with Snapdragon 888

The Find X5 is equipped with the Snapdragon 888, one of the fastest smartphone SoCs currently available. The Adreno 660 graphics chip is also in the high-end segment. Together with 8 GB of LPDDR5 RAM and fast UFS 3.1 memory, the Find X5 impresses with excellent system performance, ensuring short loading and response times in everyday use.

Sony's Xperia 5 III, which is also equipped with the Snapdragon 888, has a tough duel with the Find X5. The Oppo achieves a larger score advantage in AnTuTu v9, but unlike the Sony, it is limited to a maximum of 60 FPS in GFXBench. In practice, both smartphones have so much power that they can hardly be maxed out by any app. This also applies to the comparison devices with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, which still computes a few percentage points faster than the Snapdragon 888 across all benchmarks.

Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
1755 Points ∼100% +57%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1267 Points ∼72% +13%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
1237 Points ∼70% +10%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1195 Points ∼68% +7%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1137 Points ∼65% +1%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1121 Points ∼64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (976 - 1198, n=27)
1118 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1755, n=254, last 2 years)
669 Points ∼38% -40%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
4820 Points ∼100% +43%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
3659 Points ∼76% +8%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
3641 Points ∼76% +8%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
3581 Points ∼74% +6%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
3572 Points ∼74% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (3204 - 3810, n=27)
3571 Points ∼74% +6%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
3376 Points ∼70%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4914, n=254, last 2 years)
2190 Points ∼45% -35%
Vulkan Score 5.3
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7199 Points ∼100% +46%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6965 Points ∼97% +41%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
6541 Points ∼91% +33%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
4924 Points ∼68%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (3894 - 6176, n=26)
4711 Points ∼65% -4%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
4399 Points ∼61% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72 - 8702, n=198, last 2 years)
2596 Points ∼36% -47%
OpenCL Score 5.3
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6291 Points ∼100% +35%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6165 Points ∼98% +32%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
5972 Points ∼95% +28%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
4673 Points ∼74% 0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
4671 Points ∼74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (3100 - 4786, n=26)
4617 Points ∼73% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (255 - 9069, n=199, last 2 years)
2565 Points ∼41% -45%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
14729 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
14508 Points ∼98% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (11435 - 17085, n=21)
14307 Points ∼97% +3%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
13913 Points ∼94%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
13611 Points ∼92% -2%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
12279 Points ∼83% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 18567, n=144, last 2 years)
10155 Points ∼69% -27%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (7991 - 9221, n=3)
8422 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 11256, n=177, last 2 years)
3383 Points ∼40%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (10111 - 13263, n=3)
11212 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (54 - 16670, n=177, last 2 years)
3878 Points ∼35%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (4462 - 4609, n=3)
4556 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (677 - 5301, n=177, last 2 years)
2845 Points ∼62%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
11384 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (8065 - 11534, n=20)
10135 Points ∼89% -11%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
9693 Points ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (149 - 13121, n=223, last 2 years)
4942 Points ∼43% -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
24177 Points ∼100% +41%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
17179 Points ∼71%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (10491 - 17179, n=20)
15130 Points ∼63% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (122 - 31940, n=223, last 2 years)
6921 Points ∼29% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5220 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (2975 - 5434, n=20)
4760 Points ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
3754 Points ∼72% -28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (651 - 6394, n=221, last 2 years)
3237 Points ∼62% -38%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1)
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (6140 - 7596, n=2)
6868 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (78 - 9138, n=178, last 2 years)
2510 Points ∼37%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (6816 - 9436, n=2)
8126 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (62 - 11573, n=178, last 2 years)
2609 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (4514 - 4557, n=2)
4536 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (688 - 5318, n=178, last 2 years)
2846 Points ∼63%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
10618 Points ∼100% +32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (6110 - 9839, n=21)
8532 Points ∼80% +6%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
8029 Points ∼76%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
5713 Points ∼54% -29%
Average of class Smartphone
  (91 - 11528, n=231, last 2 years)
4014 Points ∼38% -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
18286 Points ∼100% +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (7930 - 12914, n=21)
11629 Points ∼64% 0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
11599 Points ∼63%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
9878 Points ∼54% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (73 - 19364, n=231, last 2 years)
5009 Points ∼27% -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (2579 - 5366, n=21)
4511 Points ∼100% +17%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
4303 Points ∼95% +11%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
3865 Points ∼86%
Average of class Smartphone
  (635 - 5793, n=231, last 2 years)
3234 Points ∼72% -16%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
2307 Points ∼51% -40%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited
Average of class Smartphone
  (426 - 6977, n=160, last 2 years)
2363 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (349 - 11259, n=160, last 2 years)
2604 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics
Average of class Smartphone
  (1567 - 3958, n=160, last 2 years)
2571 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
Points ∼0%
Wild Life Score
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
9713 Points ∼100% +65%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
9571 Points ∼99% +63%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
8788 Points ∼90% +50%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6351 Points ∼65% +8%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5873 Points ∼60%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5787 Points ∼60% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (3958 - 5942, n=26)
5674 Points ∼58% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (216 - 10062, n=181, last 2 years)
3210 Points ∼33% -45%
Wild Life Unlimited Score
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
10164 Points ∼100% +73%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
9979 Points ∼98% +69%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
9782 Points ∼96% +66%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6483 Points ∼64% +10%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5888 Points ∼58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (3959 - 5925, n=26)
5617 Points ∼55% -5%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5064 Points ∼50% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (174 - 11700, n=182, last 2 years)
3405 Points ∼34% -42%
Wild Life Extreme
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
2594 Points ∼100% +68%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
2586 Points ∼100% +68%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
2470 Points ∼95% +60%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1629 Points ∼63% +6%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1542 Points ∼59%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (1236 - 1602, n=21)
1516 Points ∼58% -2%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1456 Points ∼56% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (22 - 3080, n=137, last 2 years)
1001 Points ∼39% -35%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
2545 Points ∼100% +66%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
2418 Points ∼95% +58%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
2313 Points ∼91% +51%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1567 Points ∼62% +2%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1535 Points ∼60%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (974 - 1564, n=21)
1421 Points ∼56% -7%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1256 Points ∼49% -18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (101 - 2864, n=133, last 2 years)
983 Points ∼39% -36%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
121 fps ∼100% +102%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
119 fps ∼98% +98%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
117 fps ∼97% +95%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (60 - 143, n=20)
102.5 fps ∼85% +71%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.5 - 143, n=194, last 2 years)
69.1 fps ∼57% +15%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
60.1 fps ∼50% 0%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
60 fps ∼50%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
428 fps ∼100% +46%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
416.3 fps ∼97% +42%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
380 fps ∼89% +29%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
306 fps ∼71% +4%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
294 fps ∼69%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (173 - 294, n=20)
247 fps ∼58% -16%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
202 fps ∼47% -31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6 - 439, n=194, last 2 years)
139.9 fps ∼33% -52%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
121 fps ∼100% +95%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
119 fps ∼98% +92%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
113 fps ∼93% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (55 - 121, n=20)
93.9 fps ∼78% +51%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
62 fps ∼51%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
60.2 fps ∼50% -3%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
60 fps ∼50% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.5 - 121, n=193, last 2 years)
56.1 fps ∼46% -10%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
217.4 fps ∼100% +21%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
213 fps ∼98% +18%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
194 fps ∼89% +8%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
180 fps ∼83%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
158 fps ∼73% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (101 - 180, n=20)
141.7 fps ∼65% -21%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
129 fps ∼59% -28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.4 - 251, n=194, last 2 years)
80.1 fps ∼37% -55%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
121 fps ∼100% +98%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
109 fps ∼90% +79%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (36 - 105, n=20)
71.5 fps ∼59% +17%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
61 fps ∼50%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
60.1 fps ∼50% -1%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
60 fps ∼50% -2%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
58 fps ∼48% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.1 - 121, n=193, last 2 years)
43.6 fps ∼36% -29%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
164 fps ∼100% +30%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
143 fps ∼87% +13%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
138.6 fps ∼85% +10%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
126 fps ∼77%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
119 fps ∼73% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (69 - 126, n=20)
98.9 fps ∼60% -22%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
71 fps ∼43% -44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 169, n=194, last 2 years)
54.2 fps ∼33% -57%
GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
81 fps ∼100% +35%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
68 fps ∼84% +13%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
60 fps ∼74%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
58.5 fps ∼72% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (26 - 61, n=20)
47.2 fps ∼58% -21%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
42 fps ∼52% -30%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
39 fps ∼48% -35%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.3 - 81, n=193, last 2 years)
27.5 fps ∼34% -54%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
96.6 fps ∼100% +31%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
86 fps ∼89% +16%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
86 fps ∼89% +16%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
78 fps ∼81% +5%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
74 fps ∼77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (42 - 74, n=20)
60.6 fps ∼63% -18%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
48 fps ∼50% -35%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 97, n=193, last 2 years)
32.8 fps ∼34% -56%
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
98 fps ∼100% +63%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
93 fps ∼95% +55%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
60 fps ∼61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (32 - 73, n=26)
55.7 fps ∼57% -7%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
53 fps ∼54% -12%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
45 fps ∼46% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.5 - 98, n=249, last 2 years)
28.7 fps ∼29% -52%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
112.9 fps ∼100% +45%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
101 fps ∼89% +29%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
100 fps ∼89% +28%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
99 fps ∼88% +27%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
78 fps ∼69%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (46 - 87, n=27)
70.4 fps ∼62% -10%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
57 fps ∼50% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.9 - 123, n=250, last 2 years)
34 fps ∼30% -56%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
69 fps ∼100% +35%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
60 fps ∼87% +18%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
54.9 fps ∼80% +8%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
51 fps ∼74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (25 - 51, n=26)
38.5 fps ∼56% -25%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
37 fps ∼54% -27%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
37 fps ∼54% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.1 - 69, n=250, last 2 years)
19.8 fps ∼29% -61%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
42 fps ∼100% +45%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
41 fps ∼98% +41%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
39 fps ∼93% +34%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
37.2 fps ∼89% +28%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
29 fps ∼69%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (19 - 32, n=26)
27.5 fps ∼65% -5%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
23 fps ∼55% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.7 - 47, n=250, last 2 years)
13 fps ∼31% -55%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
982789 Points ∼100% +19%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
970465 Points ∼99% +18%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
965911 Points ∼98% +17%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
824694 Points ∼84%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
813876 Points ∼83% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (636471 - 824694, n=17)
767997 Points ∼78% -7%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
714551 Points ∼73% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (111952 - 1041980, n=108, last 2 years)
553757 Points ∼56% -33%
AImark - Score v2.x
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
261820 Points ∼100% +2%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
257002 Points ∼98%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (171404 - 264766, n=15)
243759 Points ∼93% -5%
Apple iPhone 13
Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 4-Core, 4096
105623 Points ∼40% -59%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4293 - 286905, n=128, last 2 years)
61072 Points ∼23% -76%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
6766 Points ∼3% -97%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7147 Points ∼100% +3%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7070 Points ∼99% +2%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
6921 Points ∼97%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
6860 Points ∼96% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (5839 - 6985, n=20)
6495 Points ∼91% -6%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
6362 Points ∼89% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (895 - 8124, n=169, last 2 years)
4231 Points ∼59% -39%
System
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
11207 Points ∼100%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
10927 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (9119 - 11774, n=20)
10766 Points ∼96% -4%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
10739 Points ∼96% -4%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
10334 Points ∼92% -8%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
10247 Points ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1542 - 19657, n=169, last 2 years)
7493 Points ∼67% -33%
Memory
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
7610 Points ∼100%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
7357 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (5352 - 9044, n=20)
7316 Points ∼96% -4%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
6535 Points ∼86% -14%
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
6162 Points ∼81% -19%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
5573 Points ∼73% -27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1012 - 9044, n=169, last 2 years)
4850 Points ∼64% -36%
Graphics
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
21885 Points ∼100% +48%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
18370 Points ∼84% +24%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
17159 Points ∼78% +16%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
15739 Points ∼72% +7%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
14770 Points ∼67%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (9399 - 15739, n=20)
13676 Points ∼62% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (478 - 25642, n=169, last 2 years)
7348 Points ∼34% -50%
Web
realme GT 2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1888 Points ∼100% +4%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288
1843 Points ∼98% +1%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1827 Points ∼97% 0%
Oppo Find X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G, Adreno 660, 8192
1822 Points ∼97%
Xiaomi 12
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 8192
1785 Points ∼95% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
  (1434 - 1983, n=20)
1683 Points ∼89% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (718 - 2392, n=169, last 2 years)
1386 Points ∼73% -24%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (12.4 - 58042, n=168, last 2 years)
407 Points ∼100% +225%
Apple iPhone 13 (Safari 15)
180 Points ∼44% +44%
Oppo Find X5 (Chrome 99.0.4844.73)
125.1 Points ∼31%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro (Chrome 99)
121.6 Points ∼30% -3%
Sony Xperia 5 III (Chrome93)
119.3 Points ∼29% -5%
Xiaomi 12 (Chrome 99.0.4844.58)
113.8 Points ∼28% -9%
realme GT 2 Pro (Chrome 99)
102.3 Points ∼25% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (61.3 - 125.1, n=13)
96.1 Points ∼24% -23%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 (Safari 15)
399.8 Points ∼100% +83%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro (Chrome 99)
236.6 Points ∼59% +8%
Oppo Find X5 (Chrome 99.0.4844.73)
218.4 Points ∼55%
Xiaomi 12 (Chrome 99.0.4844.58)
209.7 Points ∼52% -4%
Sony Xperia 5 III (Chrome93)
209.3 Points ∼52% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (77 - 223, n=19)
168.8 Points ∼42% -23%
realme GT 2 Pro (Chrome 99)
121.9 Points ∼30% -44%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 414, n=170, last 2 years)
114.4 Points ∼29% -48%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 13 (Safari 15)
244 runs/min ∼100% +102%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro (Chome 99)
129 runs/min ∼53% +7%
realme GT 2 Pro (Chome 99)
127 runs/min ∼52% +5%
Oppo Find X5 (Chrome 99.0.4844.73)
121 runs/min ∼50%
Xiaomi 12 (Chrome 99.0.4844.58)
107 runs/min ∼44% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (46.9 - 121, n=12)
84.1 runs/min ∼34% -30%
Average of class Smartphone (9 - 244, n=154, last 2 years)
60.7 runs/min ∼25% -50%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone 13 (Safari 15)
219 Points ∼100% +20%
Oppo Find X5 (Chrome 99.0.4844.73)
182 Points ∼83%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro (Chrome 99)
167 Points ∼76% -8%
Xiaomi 12 (Chrome 99.0.4844.58)
148 Points ∼68% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (103 - 182, n=18)
143.1 Points ∼65% -21%
Average of class Smartphone (20 - 265, n=177, last 2 years)
91.8 Points ∼42% -50%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 (Safari 15)
62664 Points ∼100% +36%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro (Chrome 99)
50626 Points ∼81% +10%
Oppo Find X5 (Chrome 99.0.4844.73)
46054 Points ∼73%
Sony Xperia 5 III (Chrome93)
45930 Points ∼73% 0%
realme GT 2 Pro (Chrome 99)
37650 Points ∼60% -18%
Xiaomi 12 (Chrome 99.0.4844.58)
37279 Points ∼59% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (23491 - 47543, n=20)
35591 Points ∼57% -23%
Average of class Smartphone (3526 - 65969, n=182, last 2 years)
23168 Points ∼37% -50%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 15230, n=182, last 2 years)
3203 ms * ∼100% -247%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (891 - 1841, n=20)
1319 ms * ∼41% -43%
realme GT 2 Pro (Chrome 99)
1137 ms * ∼35% -23%
Xiaomi 12 (Chrome 99.0.4844.58)
930 ms * ∼29% -1%
Oppo Find X5 (Chrome 99.0.4844.73)
923 ms * ∼29%
Sony Xperia 5 III (Chrome93)
919 ms * ∼29% -0%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro (Chrome 99)
819 ms * ∼26% +11%
Apple iPhone 13 (Safari 15)
413.6 ms * ∼13% +55%

* ... smaller is better

Oppo Find X5Motorola Edge 30 Prorealme GT 2 ProSony Xperia 5 IIIXiaomi 12Average 256 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
14%
12%
-7%
41%
4%
-43%
Sequential Read 256KB
1964
1832
-7%
1749
-11%
1593
-19%
1851
-6%
1781 ?(1330 - 2037, n=47)
-9%
926 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=247, last 2 years)
-53%
Sequential Write 256KB
782
1028
31%
1225
57%
740
-5%
1417
81%
954 ?(452 - 1559, n=47)
22%
469 ?(11.9 - 1485, n=247, last 2 years)
-40%
Random Read 4KB
272.9
277.7
2%
273
0%
253.4
-7%
325.2
19%
265 ?(181 - 345, n=47)
-3%
165.6 ?(13.5 - 345, n=247, last 2 years)
-39%
Random Write 4KB
259.3
339.5
31%
264
2%
271.3
5%
437.5
69%
274 ?(218 - 458, n=48)
6%
158.9 ?(56.5 - 458, n=248, last 2 years)
-39%

Gaming - Powerful gaming smartphone

Stereo speakers, performance galore, smoothly functioning position and motion sensors, and a precise touchscreen: Games are fun on the Find X5. Despite the activated 120 Hz display, our two test games. Armajet and PUBG Mobile, could not manage to run at more than 30 frames per second. However, there were no performance drops or stutters at any point. The frame rates determined with our test tool Gamebench remained practically fixed at 30 FPS. 

Armajet
Armajet
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
051015202530Tooltip
; Armajet; 1.61.6: Ø29.9 (27-31)
; PUBG Mobile; 1.8.0: Ø29.9 (28-31)

Emissions - Sufficient performance despite throttling

Temperature

The Oppo Find X5's glass surfaces heat up to a maximum of 37.5 °C (99.5 °F) in use, which does not feel uncomfortable when held in the hand. Internally, however, the Snapdragon 888 throttles its performance as soon as it gets too hot. And this happens rather quickly, as 3DMark's Wild Life stress tests show. GFXBench would probably have delivered similar results, but unfortunately, the app always shut down before displaying the results.

The reduced SoC performance is unnoticeable in everyday use because there is still more than enough power on demand. However, we had to let the smartphone cool down for a while after each test run in order to obtain the best possible benchmark scores and thus meaningful comparison rates, as full power was otherwise no longer available.

Max. Load
 36.8 °C
98 F
36.6 °C
98 F
35 °C
95 F
 
 37.4 °C
99 F
35.3 °C
96 F
34.5 °C
94 F
 
 37.5 °C
100 F
36.8 °C
98 F
33.4 °C
92 F
 
Maximum: 37.5 °C = 100 F
Average: 35.9 °C = 97 F
34.7 °C
94 F
35.8 °C
96 F
35.7 °C
96 F
33.8 °C
93 F
34.8 °C
95 F
35.6 °C
96 F
32.5 °C
91 F
33.1 °C
92 F
36.5 °C
98 F
Maximum: 36.5 °C = 98 F
Average: 34.7 °C = 94 F
Power Supply (max.)  28.2 °C = 83 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.9 °C / 97 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 37.5 °C / 100 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 36.5 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.7 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Apple iPhone 13
A15 GPU 4-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
80.1 (44.5min) % ∼100% +45%
realme GT 2 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
63.6 (36.7min) % ∼79% +15%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
63.2 (19.4min) % ∼79% +15%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57.4 (34.3min) % ∼72% +4%
Oppo Find X5
Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
55.1 (19.3min) % ∼69%
Xiaomi 12
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
46.3 (27.5min) % ∼58% -16%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Apple iPhone 13
A15 GPU 4-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe
77 (12.3min) % ∼100% +20%
Oppo Find X5
Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
64.4 (5.98min) % ∼84%
realme GT 2 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
63.7 (9.62min) % ∼83% -1%
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59.6 (9.21min) % ∼77% -7%
Sony Xperia 5 III
Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
55.2 (5.08min) % ∼72% -14%
Xiaomi 12
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
% ∼0% -100%
0510152025303540455055Tooltip
Oppo Find X5 Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø6.84 (5.98-9.29)
Apple iPhone 13 A15 GPU 4-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 0.0.0.0: Ø13.1 (12.3-16)
Motorola Edge 30 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø10.9 (9.21-15.5)
realme GT 2 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø10.2 (9.62-15.1)
Sony Xperia 5 III Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.5.1: Ø6.51 (5.08-9.2)
Oppo Find X5 Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø25.3 (19.3-35.1)
Apple iPhone 13 A15 GPU 4-Core, A15, 128 GB NVMe; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø47 (44.5-55.5)
Motorola Edge 30 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø38.6 (34.3-59.7)
realme GT 2 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø43.1 (36.7-57.7)
Sony Xperia 5 III Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø21.3 (19.4-30.7)
Xiaomi 12 Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø35.6 (27.5-59.4)

Speakers

The Find X5 uses two Dolby Atmos-compatible stereo speakers that are located on the two short sides and can be played relatively loudly without distortion. However, they do not sound particularly uniform in the mid and high ranges and almost completely omit the bass range.

Audio devices can be connected to the Oppo via a USB jack adapter, which is wireless via Bluetooth 5.2. Supported Bluetooth audio codecs are SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD and LDAC. 

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs203533.8253032.43121.922.84022.827.85034.835.86324.324.48023.224.810027.823.512514.727.416020.940.520021.243.825017.550.431513.456.340014.160.150013.16563011.569.380013.174100011.773.7125011.874.416001374.1200012.177.3250012.179.7315012.380.3400012.580.450001378.1630013.274.6800013721000013.765.61250013.559.61600014.250.7SPL25.188.7N0.772.3median 13.1median 69.3Delta1.111.63536.23030.221.934.122.833.734.839.824.337.423.234.727.840.914.744.120.95521.253.617.559.813.460.814.160.413.169.111.571.513.171.711.777.811.878.91377.112.178.612.180.812.382.412.578.91379.113.280.91379.413.770.813.564.414.267.425.190.70.786.3median 13.1median 71.51.19.6hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Find X5Xiaomi 12
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Find X5 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 67% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 26% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Xiaomi 12 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 25% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery life - 80 watts charging power and 50 watts wireless charging

Power consumption

The Find X5 is economical with its battery power. Compared to Sony's Xperia 5 III, which is also equipped with the Snapdragon 888, the Oppo smartphone's power consumption was sometimes significantly lower in all load scenarios.

The 4800 mAh battery can be recharged very quickly via the included 80-watt power supply. In the test, it only took 40 minutes to fully recharge an empty battery. Wireless charging (30 watts) and reverse wireless charging (10 watts) are also available on the Find X5.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.05 / 0.46 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.01 / 1.59 / 1.6 Watt
Load midlight 3.87 / 8.74 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.
Oppo Find X5
4800 mAh
Apple iPhone 13
3240 mAh
Motorola Edge 30 Pro
4800 mAh
realme GT 2 Pro
5000 mAh
Sony Xperia 5 III
4500 mAh
Xiaomi 12
4500 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
18%
-26%
-11%
-61%
-3%
-13%
-3%
Idle Minimum *
1.01
0.6
41%
1.2
-19%
1
1%
1.8
-78%
0.87
14%
1.066 ?(0.46 - 1.8, n=23)
-6%
0.913 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=194, last 2 years)
10%
Idle Average *
1.59
1
37%
1.6
-1%
1.4
12%
2.6
-64%
1.7
-7%
1.58 ?(0.74 - 2.6, n=23)
1%
1.67 ?(0.65 - 3.6, n=194, last 2 years)
-5%
Idle Maximum *
1.6
1.3
19%
2.5
-56%
1.7
-6%
3.1
-94%
1.82
-14%
1.733 ?(0.78 - 3.1, n=23)
-8%
1.897 ?(0.69 - 3.7, n=194, last 2 years)
-19%
Load Average *
3.87
4.5
-16%
5.2
-34%
5.3
-37%
5.3
-37%
4.68
-21%
5.46 ?(3.87 - 6.7, n=23)
-41%
4.49 ?(2.1 - 7.74, n=194, last 2 years)
-16%
Load Maximum *
8.74
7.8
11%
10.4
-19%
11.1
-27%
11.5
-32%
7.41
15%
9.79 ?(5.89 - 11.7, n=23)
-12%
7.33 ?(3.56 - 11.9, n=194, last 2 years)
16%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

01234567891011121314