Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
Magyar
Oppo Reno12 Pro Smartphone Review: Light and slim is back
Benedikt Winkel, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Vaidyanathan Subramaniam (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 🇩🇪 🇫🇷 ...
The Reno series is Oppo's mid-range offering. The manufacturer offers not just one Reno12 but four different models. In addition to the normal Reno12, there are two cheaper Reno12 F offshoots and the top model, the Reno12 Pro. And even the mid-range can no longer do without AI — Oppo calls the Reno12 Pro an "AI Phone".
The Reno12 Pro is available in two variants with 256 GB or 512 GB of storage space with 12 GB of RAM in both models. There are also three colors to choose from: Space Brown, Sunset Gold and Nebula Silver.
Our test device is the Nebula Silver variant. It changes color depending on the incidence of light, but it looks more purple than silver and has a green shimmer.
Possible competitors in comparison
Rating | Version | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 78.3 % | v8 | 09 / 2024 | Oppo Reno12 Pro Dimensity 7300, Mali-G615 MP2 | 184 g | 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" | 2412x1080 | |
| 82.1 % | v8 | 08 / 2024 | Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740 | 209 g | 1 TB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.67" | 3200x1440 | |
| 80.5 % | v8 | 07 / 2024 | Honor 200 Pro SD 8s Gen 3, Adreno 735 | 199 g | 512 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.78" | 2700x1224 | |
| 87.4 % v7 (old) | v7 (old) | 05 / 2024 | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Exynos 1480, Xclipse 530 | 213 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.60" | 2340x1080 | |
| 75.4 % | v8 | 07 / 2024 | Motorola Edge 50 Fusion SD 7s Gen 2, Adreno 710 | 175 g | 256 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 6.70" | 2400x1080 |
Note: We have updated our rating system and the results of version 8 are not comparable with the results of version 7 here available here.
Case - Reno12 Pro is slim and stable
The 6.7-inch display of the Reno12 Pro is slightly rounded on all sides, but it is still not an edge display. However, this makes the smartphone very comfortable to hold and, at 184 g, is also quite light. The display is protected by Corning Gorilla Glass Victus 2.
The frame is made of an alloy and has a glossy finish, so it magically attracts fingerprints although they are barely visible on the matte back of the review device. The Reno12 Pro's workmanship is very good. The gaps are even, and the buttons sit firmly and have a good pressure point. The phone barely twists even under pressure.
The camera bump on the back protrudes clearly from the device. If the smartphone is placed on a table, it wobbles considerably when inputs are made. The Reno12 Pro is protected against the ingress of dust and water in accordance with IP65.
Features: Reno12Pro with IR blaster and memory expansion
Oppo has used UFS 3.1 memory for the Reno12 Pro. The SoC is a MediaTek Dimensity 7300 in combination with a Mali-G615 MP2 graphics unit. The Oppo smartphone supports Bluetooth 5.4, Wi-Fi 6, and NFC. The storage space can be expanded using a microSD card that can be inserted in a hybrid slot. Either two SIM cards or one SIM and one memory card can be used. An IR blaster is also on board.
The USB-C port only corresponds to USB 2.0. In conjunction with a Samsung 980 Pro hard disk, we measured transfer speeds of 20.15 MB/s. The Reno12 Pro is USB-OTG compatible and supports exFAT and NTFS.
microSD card reader: Slow transfer on the Reno12 Pro
The memory of the Oppo Reno12 Pro can be expanded using a microSD card. We used our AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60 reference card in the test. We achieved an average transfer speed of 9.78 MB/s from three measurements.
This makes the transfer quite slow. A Samsung Galaxy A55 is more than five times as fast in the same test.
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)
Software: Oppo AI functions remain a gimmick
Oppo delivers the Reno12 Pro with Android 14 and its own ColorOS 14 UI. At the time of testing, the security patch is from July 2024 and therefore quite up-to-date. A 1 GB update with some additional AI functions was released during the review period.
The factory memory capacity is around 29 GB. A lot of bloatware is installed, including games, Amazon, and WPS Office. However, these programs can be deleted without any problems. The manufacturer intends to provide the Reno12 Pro with OS updates for three years and security updates for four years.
Oppo advertises the Reno12 Pro as an AI smartphone. The AI functions are primarily used for image processing. The smartphone is designed to set faces in scene, avoid closed eyes in pictures and offer a "magic eraser" for distracting elements.
Other functions include AI LinkBoost, which is designed to help establish fast and stable connections to various networks. Oppo also provides features for summarizing text and spoken language. An Oppo account must be created to use the services, and the voice functions are not yet available in German.
Sustainability: Reno12 Pro in plastic-free packaging
Oppo has dispensed with plastic in the packaging of the Reno12 Pro. Only the smartphone is wrapped in a biodegradable film, the rest of the packaging is made of cardboard. The manufacturer does not provide any information on recycled materials in the smartphone.
However, Oppo claims that the Reno12 Pro is well protected against bumps and knocks thanks to integrated shock absorbers, even without a case.
Communication and GNSS: Inaccurate positioning on the Reno12 Pro
Oppo advertises the Reno12 Pro with Wi-Fi 6, but only 2.4 and 5 GHz bands are supported. The transmission speeds in conjunction with our reference router, the Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000, are at a good level. The Reno12 Pro is faster than most of the comparison devices. However, there are also a few significant drops in the test.
The Reno12 Pro is 5G-capable and supports 47 mobile phone bands. Reception worldwide should therefore not be a problem. Reception was generally good in the test. However, the smartphone sometimes shows a 5G connection even though no data traffic is possible.
| Networking | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 |
|
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 |
|
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 |
|
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 |
|
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 |
|
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 |
|
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 |
|
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 |
|
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 |
|
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 |
|
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 |
|
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 |
|
All common satellite systems are supported by the Reno12 Pro, including SBAS, but only as single-band. The accuracy of the system leaves a lot to be desired. On a shared bike tour with a Garmin Venu 2, it is noticeable that the route recorded by the smartphone is not always on roads, which is particularly noticeable in built-up areas.
In everyday life, however, navigation with Google Maps, for example, is possible without any problems.
Phone functions and voice quality: No abnormalities with the Reno12 Pro
Oppo relies on the Google phone app. The software is clearly laid out, but does not offer any special functions. The advertised AI suppression of background noise does not appear as an option in the app.
The phone quality is good. Voices from both partners are reproduced clearly and without interference. The device is loud enough when making calls via the loudspeaker. However, background noise should be filtered out better.
Cameras: Reno12 Pro with three 50 MP sensors
Oppo has installed three 50 MP sensors in the Reno12 Pro. In addition to the main camera, the portrait telephoto lens and the selfie cam also offer the same resolution. The ultra-wide camera, on the other hand, has to make do with 8 MP sensor. The images from the main camera are pleasing, but the manufacturer overdoes it in terms of saturation.
The smartphone's low-light performance is surprisingly good. Although it lacks some sharpness, the shots are beautifully atmospheric. The portraits and selfies are also impressive.
The image quality of the ultra-wide-angle camera falls short in comparison. It lacks sharpness and there is visible curvature at the edges of the image.
The Reno12 Pro also falls short when it comes to zoom, at least when it goes beyond the 2x magnification of the portrait lens.
Videos are possible on the front and back in a maximum of 4K and 30 fps. If "Ultra image stabilization" is activated, the resolution automatically changes to 1080p and 60 FPS. The stabilization of the videos is good, as is the sound quality.
However, the colors are clearly oversaturated and the colors of an object in the video fluctuate enormously depending on the viewing angle.
A few of the AI functions are somewhat hidden; the adjustment of face lighting is listed under filters. Also, the magic eraser is not convincing in all situations.
Sometimes the retouching is clearly visible, but in other examples the program works very well. People in the background are usually recognized and removed reliably.
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 cameraUltra-wide5x ZoomLow Light
Accessories and Warranty: Protective film included with Oppo
The scope of delivery with the Reno12 Pro is small. In addition to the smartphone, the box only contains a USB cable (USB-A to USB-C), a SIM tool and a quick start guide.
A protective film is applied to the display at the factory. This fits well, but air bubbles appear during the test and the film peels off.
Oppo offers a 24-month warranty on the smartphone in Germany.
Input devices and operation: Cheap vibration motor in the Reno12 Pro
Oppo uses GBoard as the keyboard ex works. Inputs are usually possible without errors and touches are also reliably recognized in the edge areas. Even with the protective film applied, the gliding properties of the display are very good, although fingers glide even more smoothly without the film.
The Reno12 Pro can be unlocked using the optical in-display fingerprint sensor or 2D face recognition via the camera. Both methods worked extremely reliably and quickly in the test. The speed of facial recognition is particularly fast and the lock screen can be skipped. Camera unlocking works reliably even in very low light.
The ERM vibration motor spoils what is otherwise a pretty good picture in terms of inputs. It is loud and has spongy feedback. This does not match the otherwise very fine operating impression of the smartphone.
Display: Reno12 Pro with 120 Hz non-LTPO panel
The Reno12 Pro features a 6.7-inch AMOLED display with FHD+ resolution. The panel supports a maximum refresh rate of 120 Hz. However, it is not an LTPO display; supported refresh rates are 60 Hz, 90 Hz, and 120 Hz. The software automatically adjusts the refresh rate ex works depending on the content. The maximum touch sampling rate is 240 Hz.
Oppo advertises a peak brightness of 1,200 cd/m². We could achieve this in our measurements with the ambient light sensor switched on. Without the sensor, the device achieves a maximum of 587 nits. With HDR content, we can even measure a maximum brightness of 1529 cd/m². This puts the Reno12 Pro in a good position in comparison with its peers.
However, we also noticed a basic flickering with a frequency of 60 Hz. However, this only occurs at maximum manual screen brightness. There is a PWM dimming mode with up to 2160 Hz, which increases with increasing brightness.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 1192 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 2.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.33
| Oppo Reno12 Pro AMOLED, 2412x1080, 6.7" | Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.7" | Honor 200 Pro OLED, 2700x1224, 6.8" | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.6" | Motorola Edge 50 Fusion P-OLED, 2400x1080, 6.7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 9% | 30% | 11% | 22% | |
| Brightness middle | 1192 | 1025 -14% | 1208 1% | 962 -19% | 1213 2% |
| Brightness | 1209 | 1021 -16% | 1194 -1% | 967 -20% | 1190 -2% |
| Brightness Distribution | 92 | 98 7% | 98 7% | 99 8% | 93 1% |
| Black Level * | |||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.8 | 1.2 33% | 0.9 50% | 1.6 11% | 1.36 24% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4 | 3 25% | 1.4 65% | 2.6 35% | 2.3 42% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.9 | 2.4 17% | 1.3 55% | 1.5 48% | 1.1 62% |
| Gamma | 2.33 94% | 2.21 100% | 2.29 96% | 2.13 103% | 2.254 98% |
| CCT | 6242 104% | 6656 98% | 6413 101% | 6382 102% | 6624 98% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 60 Hz Amplitude: 16.91 % |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 60 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 60 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8799 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Measurement series with fixed zoom level and different brightness settings (The amplitude curve at minimum brightness looks flat, but this is due to the scaling. The info box shows the enlarged version of the amplitude at minimum brightness)
The panel's color reproduction is fine. Although there are deviations, they are not serious. A look at the comparison devices shows that there is room for improvement in this class. The panel of the Honor 200 Pro is significantly better tuned.
However, the color deviations are not noticeable in everyday use, and this also applies to the not entirely homogeneous illumination of the panel.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1.04 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.5205 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.517 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 0.1 (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 (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 1.08 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.4835 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.5935 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33 ms). | ||
The brightness of the Reno12 Pro is sufficient for content to be recognized even in sunlight. Although the performance is not sufficient to outshine all reflections, the smartphone can be used without compromises.
The viewing angle stability of the Reno12 Pro is okay — there are no color shifts even from acute viewing angles. However, parts of the display are darker and content is therefore more difficult to recognize.
Performance: Reno12 Pro overtaken by the competition
In the Reno12 Pro, Oppo relies on a MediaTek Dimensity 7300 as the SoC. In the benchmark measurements, the smartphone is usually only left with the red lantern in comparison. The Honor 200 Pro with the Snapdragon 8s Gen 3 and the Poco F6 Pro with Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 are in a completely different league in terms of performance.
The Dimensity 7300 scores well only in the Procyon AI Inference for Android and the Geekbench ML. In the memory benchmark, on the other hand, the Reno12 Pro is in the midfield.
In everyday use, however, there is not much to criticize about the smartphone's performance. Apps launch quickly, scrolling is smooth and the UI runs without any noticeable stutters.
| Geekbench ML | |
| 0.6 TensorFlow Lite CPU | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Average of class Smartphone (246 - 1342, n=34, last 2 years) | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 0.6 TensorFlow Lite GPU | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Average of class Smartphone (123 - 1478, n=33, last 2 years) | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 0.6 TensorFlow Lite NNAPI | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Average of class Smartphone (186 - 3410, n=29, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (1267 - 74958, n=144, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
The graphics performance of the Reno12 Pro is similar to the CPU performance. The performance of the built-in Mali-G615 MP2-Graphics unit is only good enough for the bottom places in the comparison. With the Motorola Edge 50 Fusion the Oppo smartphone is in a neck-and-neck race.
The devices from Honor and Poco deliver considerably higher graphics performance in our benchmark measurements.
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | 3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
3DMark: Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score | Steel Nomad Light Score
| 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| 3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion (Chrome 126) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 () | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Honor 200 Pro (Chrome 126) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=148, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion (Chrome 126) | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 () | |
| Honor 200 Pro (Chrome 126) | |
| WebXPRT 4 - Overall | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (22 - 271, n=153, last 2 years) | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion (Chrome 126) | |
| Honor 200 Pro (Chrome 126) | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 () | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=84, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=199, last 2 years) | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion (Chrome 126) | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 (23567 - 31742, n=2) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro (chrome 127) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion (Chrome 126) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro (chrome 127) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | Honor 200 Pro | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | Average 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 78% | 13% | -13% | -21% | 6% | 4% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 1777.39 | 3070.33 73% | 1992.32 12% | 1688.53 -5% | 967.8 -46% | 1843 ? 4% | 1804 ? 1% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 1700.51 | 2987.47 76% | 1644.98 -3% | 831.44 -51% | 800.5 -53% | 1189 ? -30% | 1398 ? -18% |
| Random Read 4KB | 228.05 | 381.58 67% | 276.23 21% | 351.47 54% | 281.5 23% | 281 ? 23% | 272 ? 19% |
| Random Write 4KB | 265.4 | 520.87 96% | 321.09 21% | 132.11 -50% | 241.4 -9% | 331 ? 25% | 302 ? 14% |
Gaming performance
Emissions: Hardly any throttling with the Reno12 Pro
Temperature: Reno12 Pro stays cool in everyday use
The Reno12 Pro remains pleasantly cool in everyday use. It only gets noticeably warm under load, for example when gaming, but not uncomfortably so. The heat is mainly generated in the area next to the camera hump.
In our measurements with the burnout benchmark, the smartphone reached a maximum of 44.8 °C on the top and 44.3 °C on the bottom. Throttling only occurs minimally under heavy load.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.8 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 44.3 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.5 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
3DMark Steel Nomad Stress Test
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
Speakers: Loud stereo sound on the Reno12 Pro
The Reno12 Pro has stereo speakers. On the top, the sound is emitted to the front via the earpiece and to the top via openings in the frame. Only at maximum volume do slight vibrations occur at the rear.
The sound of the Oppo smartphone is good and quite rich for a smartphone. Unless the "ultra-volume mode" is used. This makes the smartphone even louder, but the quality suffers significantly and low frequencies are lost.
The Reno12 Pro does not have an analog jack connection. However, it connects to Bluetooth headphones without any problems thanks to Bluetooth 5.4.
The smartphone supports SBC, AAC, aptX Audio, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive Audio, aptX TWS+, LDAC, and LHDC audio codecs.
Oppo Reno12 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (92.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.4% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 31% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Battery life: Very fast charging but only with Oppo standard
Energy consumption: The Reno12 Pro is economical
The Reno12 Pro is frugal when it comes to energy consumption. The SoC requires very little energy, especially in idle mode.
But even under load, the MediaTek 7300 is significantly more frugal than the high-end Snapdragons in the Poco F6 Pro and Honor 200 Pro.
| Off / Standby |   0.01 / 0.18 Watt |
| Idle |  0.69 / 1.42 / 1.47 Watt |
| Load |
3.05 / 8.25 Watt |
    
| |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro 5000 mAh | Honor 200 Pro 5200 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G 5000 mAh | Motorola Edge 50 Fusion 5000 mAh | Average MediaTek Dimensity 7300 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -45% | -82% | -29% | -29% | 0% | -33% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.69 | 0.79 -14% | 1.11 -61% | 0.85 -23% | 1 -45% | 0.69 ? -0% | 0.898 ? -30% |
| Idle Average * | 1.42 | 1.05 26% | 2.67 -88% | 1.51 -6% | 1.3 8% | 1.42 ? -0% | 1.442 ? -2% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.47 | 1.13 23% | 2.75 -87% | 1.71 -16% | 1.9 -29% | 1.47 ? -0% | 1.602 ? -9% |
| Load Average * | 3.05 | 7.88 -158% | 8.13 -167% | 4.87 -60% | 5.1 -67% | 3.05 ? -0% | 6.3 ? -107% |
| Load Maximum * | 8.25 | 16.48 -100% | 8.64 -5% | 11.73 -42% | 9.4 -14% | 8.25 ? -0% | 9.48 ? -15% |
* ... smaller is better
Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)
Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)
Battery life: Reno12 Pro in the class average
Oppo has installed a 5,000 mAh battery in the Reno12 Pro. This can be charged with a maximum of 80 W but only with Oppo's own Supervooc Flash Charge chargers.
We did not have this available during the review. The smartphone draws a maximum of 40 W on an Anker charger. This charges it from 0 to 35% in 12 minutes. After 30 minutes, the charge is 71%. The Reno12 Pro is fully charged in the test after 60 minutes of charging.
In our realistic Wi-Fi web surfing test, the Reno12 Pro lasted more than 16 hours. This corresponds to the class average.
Without intensive use, the smartphone also lasts for two days before it needs to be charged again. Wireless charging is not supported.
| Battery Runtime - WiFi v1.3 | |
| Oppo Reno12 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Poco F6 Pro | |
| Honor 200 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
| Motorola Edge 50 Fusion | |
Pros
Cons
Verdict: Oppo Reno12 Pro focuses on design instead of performance
Oppo is back in many European countries and wants to score points in the mid-range with the Reno12 Pro. The focus is on the design and AI functions. In everyday use, the device impresses with its low weight, good feel in the hand, and impeccable workmanship. Only the spongy and loud vibration motor detracts from the picture.
The AI functions are more of a gimmick at this stage. They are mostly useful for image processing but are not a unique selling point. All language functions are not yet available in German. In any case, registration with an Oppo account is required and additional costs are sometimes incurred, for example for the AI Studio app.
The smartphone's performance is okay. The UI runs smoothly and even current games such as PUBG Mobile or Genshin Impact can be played smoothly. However, a look at the competition, such as the Poco F6 Pro or the Honor 200 Pro, also shows that other manufacturers offer better performance in this class.
The Oppo Reno12 Pro has a slim design and feels good in the hand. In terms of performance, others offer more for the money.
The Reno12 Pro's camera is impressive. The images have good sharpness and a high dynamic range. Oppo overdoes it a little with the saturation in videos. The ultra-wide-angle camera falls behind in comparison. Telephoto zoom is also not a core competence of the Reno12 Pro. However, portrait shots and low-light photography work well with the smartphone.
Our impression of the AMOLED display is also positive with its thin, symmetrical display edges. We achieved the promised brightness of 1,200 cd/m² in the test as well as a refresh rate of 120 Hz. Only the basic flickering with a frequency of 60 Hz disturbs the good impression somewhat, but the display is quite easy on the eyes overall thanks to PWM dimming.
The Reno12 Pro is very suitable for media consumption given good output from its stereo speakers.
With the Reno12 Pro, Oppo delivers a well-rounded overall package with good features, but it cannot set highlights in any category. The Poco F6 Pro and the Honor 200 Pro deliver better performance. The Motorola Edge 50 Fusion is similarly slim and makes for a viable alternative as well.
Price and availability
The RRP for the Reno12 Pro is €599 for the base memory version. It is unclear how much extra is charged for double the memory in Germany.
There is also no start date for official sales in Germany. The smartphone is not yet on sale at major retailers. However, it is already on sale at smaller retailers and on marketplaces, with prices starting at around €430 at the time of review.
Note: We have updated our rating system and the results of version 8 are not comparable with the results of version 7 here available here.
Oppo Reno12 Pro
-
08/30/2024 v8
Benedikt Winkel
Total Sustainability Score: Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.