Notebookcheck

Oppo Reno2 Z Smartphone Review: Pseudo quad-cam phone with ups and downs

MediaTek Helio P90 smartphone. The Oppo Reno2 Z is a slightly lower-end version of the Reno2. However, our measurements indicate grave differences between the two Oppo phones - more than one might think from a quick glance at the specifications. In this review of the mid-range smartphone, we determine whether the Reno2 Z still receives our recommendation.
Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Marius S.),
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

With the Reno series, the Chinese manufacturer Oppo is trying to make a name for itself in Germany. At an MSRP of 380 Euros (~$430), the specifications of the lower-end model from the Reno2 series are decent, even though the smartphone does not exactly challenge the market at its current price.

The performance of the Oppo phone is dictated by the new MediaTek SoC Helio P90, complemented by 8 GB of RAM. As with its higher-end sibling, the Reno2 Z features four cameras on the back as well as a pop-up selfie camera, which is not as "slanted" as the one on the normal Reno2.

Oppo Reno2 Z (Reno Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio P90 8 x 2.2 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.5 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 396 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, AMOLED, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 128 GB 
, 108 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm jack, Card Reader: microSD (256GB), (FAT, FAT32, exFAT), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Gyroscope, motion sensor, digital compass, proximity sensor, OTG (only without SD card); GNSS: GPS, Glonass, Galileo and BeiDou
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM: 850/900/1800/1900MHz, WCDMA: Bands 1/2/4/5/6/8/19, FDD-LTE: Bands 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/18/19/20/26/28, TD-LTE: Bands 38/39/40/41, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9.01 x 161.8 x 75.8 ( = 0.35 x 6.37 x 2.98 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix Quad: 48MP (f/1.7, 26mm, 1/2.0", 0.8µm) + 8MP (f/2.2, 13mm, 1/4", 1.12µm) + 2MP (f/2.4, 1/5", 1.75µm) + 2MP (f/2.4, 1/5", 1.75µm), Camera2 API: Full
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix Pop-up (f/2.0, 26mm, 1/3.1", 1.0µm)
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: Virtual, USB Type-C cable, headset, charger, quick start guide, SIM tool, screen protector, protective case, ColorOS, 24 Months Warranty, Head SAR: 0.78 W/kg, body SAR: 1.18, Widevine L1,, fanless
Weight
195 g ( = 6.88 oz / 0.43 pounds), Power Supply: 82 g ( = 2.89 oz / 0.18 pounds)
Price
380 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
79 %
03/2020
Oppo Reno2 Z
Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446
195 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2340x1080
81 %
03/2020
Oppo Reno2
SD 730G, Adreno 618
189 g256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2400x1080
82 %
02/2020
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
SD 765G, Adreno 620
208 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.67"2400x1080
81 %
07/2019
Xiaomi Mi 9T
SD 730, Adreno 618
191 g64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.39"2340x1080
80 %
01/2020
Samsung Galaxy A51
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
172 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2400x1080
79 %
11/2019
Nokia 7.2
SD 660, Adreno 512
180 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080

Case - Oppo Reno2 Z with Flawed Build Quality

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Color options of the Oppo Reno2 Z

The front consists of scratch-resistant 5th generation Corning Gorilla Glass. There is no hole or notch in the 6.5-inch display of the Reno2 Z. A pop-up camera makes this possible and allows for a screen-to-body ratio of 85%, one of the best in the entire mid-range segment - although the Oppo phone does not quite achieve the 91% promised by the Chinese manufacturer. Our test device also exhibits flaws in terms of the control elements on the sides. The buttons feel very wobbly and the SIM card slot is not flush with the frame of the case, either.

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Size Comparison

165.3 mm / 6.51 inch 76.6 mm / 3.02 inch 8.79 mm / 0.3461 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs161.8 mm / 6.37 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 9.01 mm / 0.3547 inch 195 g0.4299 lbs160 mm / 6.3 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs159.92 mm / 6.3 inch 75.15 mm / 2.96 inch 8.25 mm / 0.3248 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs158.5 mm / 6.24 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs156.7 mm / 6.17 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 191 g0.4211 lbs

Features - Oppo Smartphone with Widevine L1

The internal UFS storage of our test device has a capacity of 128 GB, approximately 108 GB of which is available to users ex-factory. Via the microSD slot, the storage can be expanded by up to 256 GB without compromising the dual-SIM functionality in the process. That being said, USB-OTG is only available when no SD card is used.

Since Widevine DRM L1 is supported, video content from streaming services can be viewed in HD resolution.

Software - Only Android 9 for the Reno2 Z

The Chinese manufacturer installs Android version 9 as the operating system, complemented by the highly customized user interface ColorOS 6.1. The release of an update to Android 10 for the Reno2 Z is planned in Q1 2020. At the time of our review, the security patches date back to January 2019, making them fairly recent.

As with Xiaomi's MiUI, the system operates fairly restrictively and although an alternative launcher can now be used, active background apps are constantly closed, which leads to delayed or missed push notifications.

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Communication and GPS - Oppo Reno2 Z with Somewhat Weak Wi-Fi Module

Despite the manufacturer's claims, an NFC chip is available for wireless communication with peripheral devices. Additionally, the dual SIM phone supports Bluetooth version 5.0. For a mid-range smartphone, the high number of supported frequency bands is worth mentioning. The Oppo phone supports a total of 17 LTE bands. Thus, there are no limitations for local use.

Although the transfer speeds between the Oppo smartphone and our reference router Netgear Nighthawk AX12 are significantly slower than those of the Redmi K30 and the Reno2 when it comes to receiving data - they are satisfactory in light of the price.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
687 (min: 345, max: 697) MBit/s ∼100% +111%
Oppo Reno2
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
618 (min: 532, max: 671) MBit/s ∼90% +90%
Nokia 7.2
Adreno 512, SD 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
344 (min: 336, max: 352) MBit/s ∼50% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Adreno 618, SD 730, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
333 (min: 297, max: 343) MBit/s ∼48% +2%
Oppo Reno2 Z
PowerVR GM9446, Helio P90, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
325 (min: 167, max: 346) MBit/s ∼47%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
298 (min: 185, max: 350) MBit/s ∼43% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=562)
267 MBit/s ∼39% -18%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno2
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
355 (min: 187, max: 387) MBit/s ∼100% +5%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
341 (min: 280, max: 399) MBit/s ∼96% +1%
Oppo Reno2 Z
PowerVR GM9446, Helio P90, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
337 (min: 165, max: 344) MBit/s ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
297 (min: 189, max: 335) MBit/s ∼84% -12%
Nokia 7.2
Adreno 512, SD 660, 64 GB eMMC Flash
296 (min: 223, max: 308) MBit/s ∼83% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Adreno 618, SD 730, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
293 (min: 161, max: 346) MBit/s ∼83% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=562)
253 MBit/s ∼71% -25%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø316 (167-346)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø332 (165-344)
GPS outdoors
GPS outdoors
GPS indoors
GPS indoors

In order to test the real-world locating capabilities of our test device, we simultaneously record our test track with the GPS bike computer Garmin Edge 500 and the Oppo smartphone. For a route with a total length of 9.5 kilometers, the difference between the Reno2 Z and the professional navigator only amounts to 80 meters. Relative to the price class, the discrepancies of the GPS module are small and the representation of the route indicates decent navigation capabilities.

GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Oppo Reno2 Z
GPS Oppo Reno2 Z
GPS Oppo Reno2 Z
GPS Oppo Reno2 Z
GPS Oppo Reno2 Z
GPS Oppo Reno2 Z

Telephony and Call Quality - Oppo Phone Reproduces Voices Clearly

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

The call quality is good overall. There were no connection issues during our tests and voices are clearly reproduced, even during videotelephony.

However, the reception of the integrated radio module is subpar. Lastly, we could not find a dual-VoLTE feature or Wi-Fi calling in the settings.

Cameras - Reno2 Z with Pop-Up Cam and Pseudo Quad-Camera

16 MP pop-up camera shot
16 MP pop-up camera shot

Apart from the 48 MP wide-angle module, the quad-cam of the Reno2 Z also features two 2 MP telephoto optics for portrait shots. The telephoto lenses collect depth information in order to create a three-dimensional impression of the subject, although since there are no error messages or visual differences when blocking them with a finger, they do not appear to influence "normal" portrait shots. Thus, the two lower-resolution optics are only used for portrait shots with a monochromatic or retro-style filter.

The 48 MP camera module is based on a Sony IMX586 and has a light-sensitive maximum aperture of f/1.7. However, low-light scenes suffer from significant image noise and the pictures then exhibit artifacts and a lack of sharpness.

In daylight, the picture quality is good and matches other Sony IMX competitors. We were pleased with both the image details and the color representation. That said, pictures taken with the Reno2 Z have a slight red tint in some cases and tend to be overexposed. The color balance is too warm as well.

Pictures taken with the ultra wide-angle lens are significantly darker and less detailed. While post processing is able to reliably cancel out warping effects outside of the image center in the final pictures, the lack of sharpness becomes more pronounced towards the edges.

The quality of the 16 MP front camera and its f/2.0 aperture is high. However, selfies in daylight tend to be overexposed as well, although the image sharpness and details are still excellent. As with many other pop-up camera phones, the Reno2 Z comes with fall protection.

48 MP main camera picture
48 MP main camera picture
8 MP ultra-wide angle picture
8 MP ultra-wide angle picture
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
ColorChecker
29.6 ∆E
48.2 ∆E
39.3 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
44.9 ∆E
60.7 ∆E
47.6 ∆E
34.4 ∆E
35.4 ∆E
31.2 ∆E
62.8 ∆E
61.5 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
46.7 ∆E
32.7 ∆E
71.1 ∆E
42 ∆E
41.5 ∆E
73.7 ∆E
68.5 ∆E
51.6 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno2 Z: 44.37 ∆E min: 13.91 - max: 73.69 ∆E
ColorChecker
22.3 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
22.7 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
18.3 ∆E
12.4 ∆E
17.3 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
12.7 ∆E
15.1 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
15.6 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
20 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno2 Z: 12.48 ∆E min: 3.12 - max: 22.67 ∆E
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Accessories and Warranty - Oppo Smartphone with Many Extras

Aside from the smartphone itself, the package includes a USB cable, a protective plastic case, a headset as well as a modular charger (4 A, 5 V).

The warranty period is 24 months.

Input Devices & Handling - Oppo Reno2 Z with Good Fingerprint Sensor

There is an optical fingerprint sensor below the Reno2 Z's OLED panel and biometric authentication via 2D facial recognition with the pop-up cam. Both variants unlock the Oppo phone reliably and fairly quickly.

The 6.5-inch touchscreen display responds well to inputs all the way to the edges.

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Display - Reno2 Z with Surprisingly Dim OLED Panel

Subpixel array
Subpixel array
DC dimming feature
DC dimming feature

The OLED panel of the Reno2 Z measures 16.5 centimeters diagonally and offers Full HD+ resolution with an aspect ratio of 19.5:9, which translates to 2340x1080 pixels. When displaying an all white area, the Oppo phone reaches a low maximum brightness of 394 cd/m². Additionally, we tested the brightness level of an evenly distributed portion of dark and bright areas (APL50). In this test, we were able to measure a brightness of 514 cd/m².

As per usual with OLED displays, the Reno2 Z uses PWM with a low frequency of 232 Hz to 250 Hz. While enabling DC dimming evens out the frequency to some degree, the flickering does not fully disappear.

385
cd/m²
391
cd/m²
406
cd/m²
386
cd/m²
387
cd/m²
402
cd/m²
386
cd/m²
395
cd/m²
405
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 406 cd/m² Average: 393.7 cd/m² Minimum: 2.08 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 387 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.9 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 6.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6
Gamma: 2.27
Oppo Reno2 Z
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.5
Oppo Reno2
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
LCD IPS, 2400x1080, 6.67
Xiaomi Mi 9T
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
Samsung Galaxy A51
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Nokia 7.2
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Screen
41%
49%
46%
38%
16%
Brightness middle
387
679
75%
658
70%
589
52%
589
52%
604
56%
Brightness
394
683
73%
643
63%
589
49%
589
49%
593
51%
Brightness Distribution
95
98
3%
93
-2%
96
1%
94
-1%
92
-3%
Black Level *
0.49
0.4
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.9
3.5
29%
1.8
63%
2.5
49%
2.22
55%
5.1
-4%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.7
6.8
30%
4.4
55%
4.9
49%
8.24
15%
10.3
-6%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.5
4.2
35%
3.8
42%
1.6
75%
2.6
60%
6.4
2%
Gamma
2.27 97%
2.27 97%
2.22 99%
2.24 98%
2.111 104%
2.23 99%
CCT
7193 90%
6532 100%
6255 104%
6544 99%
6508 100%
8149 80%
Contrast
1343
1510

* ... 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 250 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

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

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

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17878 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

The Reno2 Z lacks the color profiles of its larger sibling Reno2. As our analysis with the spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software confirms, the average DeltaE deviations of 4.9 (colors) and 6.5 (grayscale) from the sRGB color space are relatively high. Due to the underlying technology, the black value and thus the contrast ratio of the Reno2 Z's OLED display are excellent.

Color accuracy (target color space: sRGB)
Color accuracy (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (target color space: sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (target color space: sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (target color space: sRGB)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39 ms).

The outdoor usability of the Reno2 Z is limited. In direct sunlight, the screen's content is barely discernible, since the Oppo phone lacks the required luminance. By contrast, the viewing angles are good, even though a slight yellow veil can be observed when viewing the display from a steep angle.

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Performance - Oppo Phone with MediaTek Helio P90

The MediaTek Helio P90 is an ARM SoC based on the 12-nanometer FinFET process that features two CPU clusters with a total of eight CPU cores. The two Cortex A75 performance cores can achieve a maximum clock speed of 2.2 GHz, whereas the six smaller Cortex A55 cores are limited to a maximum clock frequency of only 2 GHz.

According to our benchmarks, the CPU performance of the Reno2 Z is slightly slower than that of the Snapdragon 730 inside the Xiaomi Mi 9T. Similarly, the Oppo phone falls behind the Xiaomi competition in PCMark for Android's system tests.

The integrated PowerVR GM 9446 supports APIs such as OpenGL ES 3.2, Vulkan 1.1 and OpenCL 1.2. The GPU performance of the Helio P90 is significantly lower compared to the Snapdragon 730's Adreno 618 and only marginally faster than the Adreno 512 inside the Nokia 7.2.

In conjunction with 8 GB of RAM, the Helio P90 subjectively offers a good system performance during daily use. Animations are smooth and stutters are few and far between. Similarly, the relatively fast UFS 2.0 storage facilitates quick loading even for more-demanding apps.

On the other hand, the microSD card slot of the Reno2 Z disappoints. In combination with our reference card Toshiba Exceria Pro M501, the performance was subpar.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
Vulkan Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
118 Points ∼7%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
812 Points ∼50% +588%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1035 Points ∼63% +777%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
118 Points ∼7% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=66)
1633 Points ∼100% +1284%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
Points ∼0%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
1080 Points ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1212 Points ∼69%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=61)
1759 Points ∼100%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1534 Points ∼78%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
1762 Points ∼90% +15%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1520 Points ∼78% -1%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1524 - 1534, n=2)
1529 Points ∼78% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 3531, n=92)
1961 Points ∼100% +28%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
416 Points ∼73%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
547 Points ∼96% +31%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
569 Points ∼100% +37%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (407 - 416, n=2)
412 Points ∼72% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=92)
558 Points ∼98% +34%
Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
5541 Points ∼64%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
8591 Points ∼100% +55%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
7795 Points ∼91% +41%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
5541 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=352)
4861 Points ∼57% -12%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
6162 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
6213 Points ∼90% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6871 Points ∼100% +12%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
6162 Points ∼90% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 13589, n=414)
4962 Points ∼72% -19%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1994 Points ∼74%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
2689 Points ∼100% +35%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2527 Points ∼94% +27%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
1994 Points ∼74% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=414)
1513 Points ∼56% -24%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
9654 Points ∼97%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
7134 Points ∼71% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
9989 Points ∼100% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
7533 Points ∼75% -22%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5649 Points ∼57% -41%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
5917 Points ∼59% -39%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (7129 - 9654, n=2)
8392 Points ∼84% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 13202, n=494)
5834 Points ∼58% -40%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
13156 Points ∼100%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
9145 Points ∼70% -30%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
10689 Points ∼81% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9049 Points ∼69% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6416 Points ∼49% -51%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (8736 - 13156, n=2)
10946 Points ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19711, n=652)
6378 Points ∼48% -52%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2898 Points ∼100%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2621 Points ∼90% -10%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
2588 Points ∼89% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2786 Points ∼96% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2161 Points ∼75% -25%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2207 Points ∼76% -24%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2770 - 2898, n=2)
2834 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=151)
2634 Points ∼91% -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1333 Points ∼42%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2155 Points ∼68% +62%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3167 Points ∼100% +138%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
1917 Points ∼61% +44%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1438 Points ∼45% +8%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1141 Points ∼36% -14%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1333 - 1377, n=2)
1355 Points ∼43% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=151)
2899 Points ∼92% +117%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1509 Points ∼51%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2244 Points ∼75% +49%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
2978 Points ∼100% +97%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2060 Points ∼69% +37%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1554 Points ∼52% +3%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1278 Points ∼43% -15%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1509 - 1550, n=2)
1530 Points ∼51% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6644, n=151)
2613 Points ∼88% +73%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2699 Points ∼83%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3162 Points ∼98% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
2965 Points ∼91% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3241 Points ∼100% +20%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2311 Points ∼71% -14%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2693 Points ∼83% 0%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2699 - 2784, n=2)
2742 Points ∼85% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=500)
2171 Points ∼67% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2217 Points ∼62%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2434 Points ∼68% +10%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3554 Points ∼100% +60%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2176 Points ∼61% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1530 Points ∼43% -31%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1256 Points ∼35% -43%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1116 - 2217, n=2)
1667 Points ∼47% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=500)
2067 Points ∼58% -7%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2365 Points ∼69%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2565 Points ∼75% +8%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3412 Points ∼100% +44%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2347 Points ∼69% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1654 Points ∼48% -30%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1425 Points ∼42% -40%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1287 - 2365, n=2)
1826 Points ∼54% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8204, n=501)
1920 Points ∼56% -19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2575 Points ∼78%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3112 Points ∼94% +21%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3198 Points ∼97% +24%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3296 Points ∼100% +28%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2336 Points ∼71% -9%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2640 Points ∼80% +3%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2575 - 2776, n=2)
2676 Points ∼81% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=530)
2081 Points ∼63% -19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1086 Points ∼20%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3647 Points ∼68% +236%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5367 Points ∼100% +394%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3316 Points ∼62% +205%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1993 Points ∼37% +84%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2007 Points ∼37% +85%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1086 - 2410, n=2)
1748 Points ∼33% +61%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=530)
2754 Points ∼51% +154%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1245 Points ∼27%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3513 Points ∼76% +182%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4643 Points ∼100% +273%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3312 Points ∼71% +166%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2060 Points ∼44% +65%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2120 Points ∼46% +70%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1245 - 2483, n=2)
1864 Points ∼40% +50%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=530)
2316 Points ∼50% +86%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2499 Points ∼77%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3088 Points ∼95% +24%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3256 Points ∼100% +30%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3227 Points ∼99% +29%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2217 Points ∼68% -11%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2649 Points ∼81% +6%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2499 - 2687, n=2)
2593 Points ∼80% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=580)
2058 Points ∼63% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2167 Points ∼66%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2243 Points ∼68% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3287 Points ∼100% +52%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2008 Points ∼61% -7%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1473 Points ∼45% -32%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1181 Points ∼36% -46%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1083 - 2167, n=2)
1625 Points ∼49% -25%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=580)
1730 Points ∼53% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
224 Points ∼7%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2388 Points ∼73% +966%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3277 Points ∼100% +1363%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2192 Points ∼67% +879%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1592 Points ∼49% +611%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1347 Points ∼41% +501%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (224 - 1249, n=2)
737 Points ∼22% +229%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7323, n=581)
1653 Points ∼50% +638%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2486 Points ∼72%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3075 Points ∼90% +24%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3432 Points ∼100% +38%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3239 Points ∼94% +30%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2225 Points ∼65% -10%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2632 Points ∼77% +6%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (2486 - 2685, n=2)
2586 Points ∼75% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=622)
1922 Points ∼56% -23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1076 Points ∼21%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3504 Points ∼69% +226%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5115 Points ∼100% +375%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3184 Points ∼62% +196%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2027 Points ∼40% +88%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
1913 Points ∼37% +78%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1076 - 2308, n=2)
1692 Points ∼33% +57%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=621)
2272 Points ∼44% +111%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1248 Points ∼27%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3399 Points ∼73% +172%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4654 Points ∼100% +273%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3196 Points ∼69% +156%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2068 Points ∼44% +66%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
2037 Points ∼44% +63%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (1248 - 2382, n=2)
1815 Points ∼39% +45%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=624)
1958 Points ∼42% +57%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
23188 Points ∼100%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
14820 Points ∼64% -36%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
23203 Points ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
19433 Points ∼84% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
20393 Points ∼88% -12%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
18094 Points ∼78% -22%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (21123 - 23188, n=2)
22156 Points ∼95% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=770)
15259 Points ∼66% -34%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
27134 Points ∼40%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
50829 Points ∼74% +87%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
68634 Points ∼100% +153%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
46605 Points ∼68% +72%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
25086 Points ∼37% -8%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
28898 Points ∼42% +7%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (27134 - 30124, n=2)
28629 Points ∼42% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=768)
25884 Points ∼38% -5%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
26132 Points ∼55%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
33007 Points ∼69% +26%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
47824 Points ∼100% +83%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
35557 Points ∼74% +36%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23866 Points ∼50% -9%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
25513 Points ∼53% -2%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (26132 - 27518, n=2)
26825 Points ∼56% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 112989, n=768)
20357 Points ∼43% -22%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
57 fps ∼60%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
85 fps ∼89% +49%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
95 fps ∼100% +67%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
77 fps ∼81% +35%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
46 fps ∼48% -19%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
50 fps ∼53% -12%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
57 fps ∼60% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=774)
43.9 fps ∼46% -23%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
49 fps ∼57%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
60 fps ∼70% +22%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
86 fps ∼100% +76%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
58 fps ∼67% +18%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
40 fps ∼47% -18%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
46 fps ∼53% -6%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
49 fps ∼57% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=783)
30.5 fps ∼35% -38%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
27 fps ∼50%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
42 fps ∼78% +56%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
54 fps ∼100% +100%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
38 fps ∼70% +41%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
24 fps ∼44% -11%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
23 fps ∼43% -15%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
27 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=679)
25.8 fps ∼48% -4%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
20 fps ∼42%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
36 fps ∼75% +80%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
48 fps ∼100% +140%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
34 fps ∼71% +70%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23 fps ∼48% +15%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
21 fps ∼44% +5%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
20 fps ∼42% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=687)
21.8 fps ∼45% +9%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
18 fps ∼49%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
30 fps ∼81% +67%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
37 fps ∼100% +106%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
27 fps ∼73% +50%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
15 fps ∼41% -17%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
15 fps ∼41% -17%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
18 fps ∼49% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=542)
20.8 fps ∼56% +16%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
12 fps ∼36%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
26 fps ∼79% +117%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
33 fps ∼100% +175%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
24 fps ∼73% +100%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼42% +17%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
13 fps ∼39% +8%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
12 fps ∼36% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=544)
18.9 fps ∼57% +58%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
3.5 fps ∼32%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼90% +186%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
8.9 fps ∼80% +154%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9.3 fps ∼84% +166%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5.5 fps ∼50% +57%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
4.9 fps ∼44% +40%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (3.5 - 5.8, n=2)
4.65 fps ∼42% +33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=292)
11.1 fps ∼100% +217%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
4.3 fps ∼33%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6.7 fps ∼52% +56%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
13 fps ∼100% +202%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6.1 fps ∼47% +42%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.5 fps ∼27% -19%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
3.2 fps ∼25% -26%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (3.8 - 4.3, n=2)
4.05 fps ∼31% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=290)
7.98 fps ∼61% +86%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
7.6 fps ∼36%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼76% +111%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
21 fps ∼100% +176%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
15 fps ∼71% +97%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.1 fps ∼43% +20%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
7.7 fps ∼37% +1%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (7.6 - 9.3, n=2)
8.45 fps ∼40% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=296)
16.5 fps ∼79% +117%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
8.4 fps ∼37%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼78% +114%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
23 fps ∼100% +174%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼70% +90%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼43% +19%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
8.7 fps ∼38% +4%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
  (8.4 - 11, n=2)
9.7 fps ∼42% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=295)
19.1 fps ∼83% +127%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
8.7 fps ∼41%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
17 fps ∼81% +95%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
21 fps ∼100% +141%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼76% +84%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼48% +15%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
9 fps ∼43% +3%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
8.7 fps ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=467)
14 fps ∼67% +61%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
7.7 fps ∼41%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
15 fps ∼79% +95%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
19 fps ∼100% +147%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
13 fps ∼68% +69%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.6 fps ∼45% +12%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
8.2 fps ∼43% +6%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
7.7 fps ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=471)
12.4 fps ∼65% +61%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
217799 Points ∼70%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
260154 Points ∼83% +19%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
298925 Points ∼96% +37%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
181295 Points ∼58% -17%
Nokia 7.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Adreno 512, 4096
157877 Points ∼51% -28%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
217799 Points ∼70% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=96)
312334 Points ∼100% +43%
Basemark GPU 1.1
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
10.66 (min: 5.9, max: 30.7) fps ∼46%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
23.1 (min: 11.15, max: 38.98) fps ∼100% +117%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16.91 fps ∼73% +59%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
10.7 fps ∼46% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7.73 - 85.6, n=73)
19.2 fps ∼83% +80%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
8.8 (min: 5.8, max: 18.9) fps ∼55%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
fps ∼0% -100%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
13.56 fps ∼85% +54%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
8.8 fps ∼55% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 63, n=64)
16 fps ∼100% +82%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
8.6 (min: 5.9, max: 18.6) fps ∼39%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
21.97 (min: 12.98, max: 44.43) fps ∼100% +155%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
15.51 fps ∼71% +80%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
8.6 fps ∼39% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 71.6, n=62)
19.9 fps ∼91% +131%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
1309 Points ∼95%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
1190 Points ∼86% -9%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1378 Points ∼100% +5%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
1099 Points ∼80% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 Points ∼1% -99%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
1309 Points ∼95% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=711)
808 Points ∼59% -38%
Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2603 Points ∼51%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3858 Points ∼76% +48%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5087 Points ∼100% +95%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3559 Points ∼70% +37%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2168 Points ∼43% -17%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
2603 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=711)
2428 Points ∼48% -7%
Memory (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2475 Points ∼47%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3678 Points ∼70% +49%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5278 Points ∼100% +113%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
4646 Points ∼88% +88%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1605 Points ∼30% -35%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
2475 Points ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=711)
1809 Points ∼34% -27%
System (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
6275 Points ∼91%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6751 Points ∼98% +8%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
6870 Points ∼100% +9%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6760 Points ∼98% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4738 Points ∼69% -24%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
6275 Points ∼91% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=711)
3376 Points ∼49% -46%
Overall (sort by value)
Oppo Reno2 Z
Mediatek Helio P90, PowerVR GM9446, 8192
2937 Points ∼74%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3268 Points ∼82% +11%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3990 Points ∼100% +36%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3329 Points ∼83% +13%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
634 Points ∼16% -78%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
2937 Points ∼74% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=711)
1717 Points ∼43% -42%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G (Chrome 80)
53.145 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
47.131 Points ∼89% +8%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
45.819 Points ∼86% +5%
Oppo Reno2 Z (Chrome 80)
43.532 Points ∼82%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
43.5 Points ∼82% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=173)
40.1 Points ∼75% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
27.681 Points ∼52% -36%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G (Chrome 80)
94.778 Points ∼100% +25%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
87.488 Points ∼92% +15%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
83.953 Points ∼89% +11%
Oppo Reno2 Z (Chrome 80)
75.936 Points ∼80%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
75.9 Points ∼80% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
51.257 Points ∼54% -32%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=602)
46.3 Points ∼49% -39%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G (Chrome 80)
54.9 runs/min ∼100% +32%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
46.46 runs/min ∼85% +12%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
43.6 runs/min ∼79% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=157)
42.9 runs/min ∼78% +3%
Oppo Reno2 Z (Chrome 80)
41.5 runs/min ∼76%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
41.5 runs/min ∼76% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
29.1 runs/min ∼53% -30%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Oppo Reno2 Z (Chrome 80)
91 Points ∼100%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
91 Points ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
86 Points ∼95% -5%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G (Chrome 80)
80 Points ∼88% -12%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=238)
69.7 Points ∼77% -23%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
66 Points ∼73% -27%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
57 Points ∼63% -37%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G (Chrome 80)
18809 Points ∼100% +29%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
17501 Points ∼93% +20%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
17345 Points ∼92% +19%
Oppo Reno2 Z (Chrome 80)
14607 Points ∼78%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
14607 Points ∼78% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
10194 Points ∼54% -30%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=769)
7696 Points ∼41% -47%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=795)
9886 ms * ∼100% -219%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
4375.1 ms * ∼44% -41%
Oppo Reno2 Z (Chrome 80)
3098.4 ms * ∼31%
Average Mediatek Helio P90
3098 ms * ∼31% -0%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
3054.3 ms * ∼31% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G (Chrome 80)
2787 ms * ∼28% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T (Chrome 75.0.3770.101)
2563.9 ms * ∼26% +17%

* ... smaller is better

Oppo Reno2 ZOppo Reno2Xiaomi Redmi K30 5GXiaomi Mi 9TSamsung Galaxy A51Nokia 7.2Average 128 GB UFS 2.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
20%
91%
67%
69%
7%
47%
2%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
28.59 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
53.54 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
87%
60.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
110%
63.99 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
124%
52.3 (26.1 - 70.2, n=16)
83%
50.8 (1.7 - 87.1, n=514)
78%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
45.99 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
74.52 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62%
73 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
59%
83.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
81%
67.2 (29.2 - 86, n=16)
46%
68.8 (8.1 - 96.5, n=514)
50%
Random Write 4KB
27.33
22
-20%
100.99
270%
107.82
295%
104.4
282%
13.38
-51%
76.2 (13.5 - 180, n=20)
179%
33.2 (0.14 - 319, n=862)
21%
Random Read 4KB
148.87
144.24
-3%
96.8
-35%
128.65
-14%
110.8
-26%
79.64
-47%
122 (88.4 - 173, n=20)
-18%
57.2 (1.59 - 324, n=862)
-62%
Sequential Write 256KB
198.32
201.78
2%
312.76
58%
179.19
-10%
184.9
-7%
161.4
-19%
192 (143 - 257, n=20)
-3%
122 (2.99 - 911, n=862)
-38%
Sequential Read 256KB
519.1
469.31
-10%
889.67
71%
492.74
-5%
496.1
-4%
290.83
-44%
494 (409 - 733, n=20)
-5%
329 (12.1 - 1802, n=862)
-37%

Gaming - Reno2 Z with PowerVR GM 9446

While the installed PowerVR GM 9446 is not particularly powerful, it still manages to run even demanding games from Google's Play Store. For the most part, demanding Android titles can be played smoothly at the lowest settings with the GPU installed in the Reno2 Z, although we recorded periodic frame-rate drops with the GameBench app.

Both the touchscreen and the gyroscope respond quickly and reliably to our inputs.

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
PUBG mobile
01020304050Tooltip
; Balanced: Ø39.7 (31-41)
; HD: Ø29.2 (15-31)
Asphalt 9 Legends
010203040Tooltip
; High Quality: Ø29.2 (18-31)
; Standard / low: Ø28.5 (20-31)
Dead Trigger 2
0102030405060Tooltip
: Ø59.8 (59-60)

Emissions - No Throttling for the Reno2 Z

Temperature

The surface temperature of the Oppo smartphone barely increases even during continuous load. Furthermore, we analyze the heat development of the Helio P90 during continuous load with GFXBench's battery test. Over the course of the demanding Manhattan test (OpenGL ES 3.1), there was no considerable throttling.

Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Max. Load
 31.5 °C
89 F
31.1 °C
88 F
30.1 °C
86 F
 
 31.9 °C
89 F
31.8 °C
89 F
29.7 °C
85 F
 
 32.5 °C
91 F
32.7 °C
91 F
29.5 °C
85 F
 
Maximum: 32.7 °C = 91 F
Average: 31.2 °C = 88 F
27.5 °C
82 F
29.1 °C
84 F
29.1 °C
84 F
28.3 °C
83 F
29.3 °C
85 F
29.9 °C
86 F
27.7 °C
82 F
30.1 °C
86 F
30.6 °C
87 F
Maximum: 30.6 °C = 87 F
Average: 29.1 °C = 84 F
Power Supply (max.)  26.3 °C = 79 F | Room Temperature 21.4 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31.2 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 32.7 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.6 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.6 °C / 76 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review
Oppo Reno2 Z smartphone review

Speaker

Speaker test: Pink noise
Speaker test: Pink noise

Even though the speaker on the bottom edge of the Reno2 Z achieves a sufficient maximum volume level of almost 88 dB(A), the quality is disappointing. However, the mono speaker is absolutely suitable for short video playback.

Music fans have access to sound output via a 3.5 mm audio jack for a good audio experience and a sufficient maximum volume level.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.133.32532.925.93127.126.44030.528.45033.833.66325.926.98023.629.110024.626.912520.432.916019.543.920018.744.725017.255.431516.558.340014.459.750016.362.763015.36780014.666.110001474.3125014.974.9160014.27420001576.3250014.777.6315014.577.8400014.378500014.677.6630015.176.480001576.31000014.971.61250015.359.6160001650.6SPL2787.6N0.970.1median 15median 67Delta1.312.337.22924.428.927.324.822.723.23333.526.72623.426.42125.517.62818.245.514.744.51549.81653.715.756.314.461.614.362.514.26914.272.513.874.214.974.814.574.914.675.214.374.814.47614.976.414.473.814.6731573.815.167.515.55726.785.90.863.8median 14.7median 690.611.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Reno2 ZXiaomi Redmi K30 5G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Reno2 Z audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 39% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 62% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.9% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (1.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 51% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life - Oppo Smartphone with a Big Battery

Energy Consumption

The Oppo smartphone is equipped with a 4,000 mAh battery, which can be fully recharged within 90 minutes thanks to the quick-charge technology.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.19 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.57 / 1.2 / 1.33 Watt
Load midlight 3.13 / 5.46 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Oppo Reno2 Z
4000 mAh
Oppo Reno2
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9T
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Nokia 7.2
3500 mAh
Average Mediatek Helio P90
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-25%
-70%
12%
-44%
-62%
0%
-39%
Idle Minimum *
0.57
0.7
-23%
0.66
-16%
0.54
5%
0.9
-58%
0.77
-35%
0.57
-0%
0.887 (0.2 - 3.4, n=866)
-56%
Idle Average *
1.2
1.25
-4%
2.37
-98%
0.95
21%
1.7
-42%
2.32
-93%
1.2
-0%
1.754 (0.6 - 6.2, n=865)
-46%
Idle Maximum *
1.33
1.36
-2%
2.42
-82%
1.08
19%
1.8
-35%
2.41
-81%
1.33
-0%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=866)
-53%
Load Average *
3.13
5.38
-72%
6.8
-117%
2.7
14%
5.2
-66%
4.44
-42%
3.13
-0%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=860)
-31%
Load Maximum *
5.46
6.71
-23%
7.5
-37%
5.4
1%
6.6
-21%
8.79
-61%
5.46
-0%
6.04 (1.2 - 14.2, n=860)
-11%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The Reno2 Z phone lasts for almost 10 hours in our Wi-Fi test and although this is a decent result, competing Xiaomi devices offer significantly more stamina.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
9h 38min
Oppo Reno2 Z
4000 mAh
Oppo Reno2
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi K30 5G
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9T
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Nokia 7.2
3500 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
578
616
7%
802
39%
991
71%
698
21%
570
-1%

Pros

+ design
+ fast UFS storage
+ dual-SIM+SD cards
+ low heat development
+ many supported LTE bands

Cons

- Wi-Fi module (transfer speeds when receiving data)
- display brightness
- build quality flaws
- slow microSD card slot
- 2-MP telephoto optics with no real purpose

Verdict - Reno2 Z with Mixed Results

In review: Oppo Reno2 Z. Test device courtesy of:
In review: Oppo Reno2 Z. Test device courtesy of:

The Reno2 Z is not a bad smartphone, however, the execution of the idea behind the Oppo phone lacks conviction. While the design is good, there is room for improvement when it comes to a few aspects of the build quality. The OLED display offers a rich contrast ratio, although it is fairly dim and the color representation could have been more accurate.

Even though the Reno2 Z is a good mid-range smartphone, there is some fine-tuning left to do.

The call quality is pleasant, although the Reno2 Z's signal strength evidently struggles to match competitors. The transfer rates of the UFS storage are good, while the SD card slot is rather disappointing. The MediaTek processor is more than sufficient for daily use, but the performance is lacking compared to competing solutions, however - particularly in terms of the GPU.

Oppo Reno2 Z - 03/09/2020 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 90%
Pointing Device
89%
Connectivity
48 / 70 → 68%
Weight
88%
Battery
88%
Display
81%
Games Performance
20 / 64 → 32%
Application Performance
66 / 86 → 77%
Temperature
95%
Noise
100%
Audio
72 / 90 → 80%
Camera
62%
Average
74%
79%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Oppo Reno2 Z Smartphone Review: Pseudo quad-cam phone with ups and downs
Marcus Herbrich, 2020-03- 9 (Update: 2020-03-11)
Marcus Herbrich
Editor of the original article: Marcus Herbrich - Editor
My great passion has always been mobile technologies, especially smartphones. As a technology enthusiast, the half-life of my devices is not exactly high and the latest hardware is just good enough - manufacturer or operating system plays a minor role, the main thing is state-of-the-art