Notebookcheck

Oppo Reno3 Pro Smartphone Review – Mid-range Mobile Phone with Four Cameras

Slim camera expert. The Oppo Reno3 Pro is a mid-range smartphone with a high-resolution camera and chic exterior. Whether Oppo can also gain a foothold in the west with it, we'll take a closer look at in our review.
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy),
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Oppo Reno3 Pro (Reno Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G 8 x 1.8 - 2.4 GHz, Kryo 475 Gold / Silver
Graphics adapter
Memory
12288 MB 
Display
6.5 inch 20.9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 405 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, glossy: yes, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 235 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: Audioausgabe via USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.1, 025 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B6/​B8/​B19), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B12/​B17/​B18/​B19/​B20/​B26/​B28/​B32/​B38/​B39/​B40/​B41/​B66) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.7 x 159.4 x 72.4 ( = 0.3 x 6.28 x 2.85 in)
Battery
4025 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f/1.7, phase comparison AF, OIS, dual LED flash, video @2160p/30fps (camera 1); 13.0MP, f/2.4, telephoto lens (camera 2); 8.0MP, f/2.2, wide angle lens (camera 3); 2.0MP, f/2.4, monochrome, depth of field (camera 4)
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix f/​2.4, Videos @1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: Hybrid Stereo Speakers, Keyboard: Virtual, Charger, USB cable, headset, silicone case, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value: 0.825W/kg (head), 1.292W/kg (body), fanless
Weight
171 g ( = 6.03 oz / 0.38 pounds), Power Supply: 89 g ( = 3.14 oz / 0.2 pounds)
Price
529 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison devices

Bewertung
Rating Version
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
84 %7
06/2020
Oppo Reno3 Pro
SD 765G, Adreno 620
171 g256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.5"2400x1080
84 %7
01/2020
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
SD 730G, Adreno 618
208 g256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.47"2340x1080
82 %7
02/2020
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18
199 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.7"2400x1080
84 %7
05/2020
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
SD 765G, Adreno 620
171 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.5"2400x1080

Case, equipment and operation - Large memory

The Oppo Reno3 Pro mid-range smartphone is available worldwide in numerous variants: We have already tested the 5G model with less memory, there are models with a 64GB camera, with two cameras on the front and other color variants. Our model comes with a 48 megapixel quad-cam and a single camera on the front and is currently available in Central Europe in black and blue with a color gradient. Oppo also offers a version as Find X2 Neo in Central Europe, and we'll have a look at whether there are any differences in a separate review.

The Oppo Reno3 Pro is clearly different from the Oppo Reno3, and the two can already be clearly distinguished externally. For example, the Pro model has a high-resolution punchhole camera in the display and has narrow edges around the screen. The back of our blue test device is matt, which looks very chic, the device feels slim and high-quality in the hand. Oppo could have rounded off just a few edges a bit better. The smartphone is relatively light at 171 grams.

With 12 GB RAM and 256 GB mass storage, the Reno3 Pro is a memory giant in the upper middle class. However, there is no possibility to use a microSD for memory expansion. Dual-SIM is available, but you can't use an eSIM.

The Oppo phone can make good use of WiFi 5 and is very fast when surfing via WLAN. Numerous 4G networks are supported, so you can use the smartphone in many countries.

The installed ColorOS 7 is based on Android 10, the security patches are up to date at the time of testing.

Size comparison

163.7 mm / 6.44 inch 76.1 mm / 3 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 199 g0.4387 lbs157.8 mm / 6.21 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs159.4 mm / 6.28 inch 72.4 mm / 2.85 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 171 g0.377 lbs159.4 mm / 6.28 inch 72.4 mm / 2.85 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 171 g0.377 lbs
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno3 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
639 (556min - 658max) MBit/s ∼100%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
623 (611min - 633max) MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
370 (342min - 372max) MBit/s ∼58% -42%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
329 (284min - 350max) MBit/s ∼51% -49%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
642 (549min - 664max) MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Oppo Reno3 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
634 (526min - 657max) MBit/s ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
415 (295min - 452max) MBit/s ∼65% -35%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
313 (306min - 319max) MBit/s ∼49% -51%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø639 (556-658)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø634 (526-657)

Cameras - Reno3 Pro with Pixel Binning

Recording front camera
Recording front camera

We already know the 48 megapixel camera with three more lenses on the back from the Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G. Here, there is also a wide angle and a telephoto lens, one can zoom in small steps between the lenses, whereby depending on the available light, the telephoto lens or the faster and higher resolution main lens is used in order to zoom closer to objects.

The images of the main camera are, as already in the 5G model, quite strongly exposed. This is probably also due to the fact that pixel binning is used, thus usually not 48 megapixel images are recorded, but four pixels are taken together and a 12 megapixel image is recorded with a high light efficiency. The level of detail and sharpness of the images are on a high level. Even in low light this has advantages and high contrasts can be easily compensated.

The user can record videos in 4K with 30 fps at the maximum, but then only digital zoom is possible. If you lower your demands a bit and record in 1080p, all three lenses are available for filming and even optical zoom is possible. 

The front camera offers 32 megapixels, but the sharpness of detail suffers partly from the strong graininess of the images.

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
24.8 ∆E
38.6 ∆E
29.8 ∆E
28.8 ∆E
34.6 ∆E
46.8 ∆E
37.6 ∆E
25 ∆E
26.1 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
44.2 ∆E
48.5 ∆E
22 ∆E
32.5 ∆E
20.6 ∆E
40.3 ∆E
29.3 ∆E
34.1 ∆E
41.6 ∆E
40.6 ∆E
38.7 ∆E
31.4 ∆E
22.7 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno3 Pro: 32.31 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 48.47 ∆E
ColorChecker
4.1 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
8 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
6 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
3 ∆E
2 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
2.6 ∆E
3.8 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno3 Pro: 5.3 ∆E min: 1.99 - max: 8.54 ∆E

Display - 90 Hz display in Oppo mobile phone

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

A 90 Hz display comes with the Oppo Reno3 Pro. That's a great thing for its price range, which makes movements on the smartphone seem smoother and the operation is also noticeably faster. The resolution is at class level, the maximum brightness good, but not as excellent as the Reno3 Pro 5G.

PWM flickering is a problem with all AMOLED displays, and the Oppo Reno3 Pro is no exception. On the other hand, the response times are fast, so that gamers also get their money's worth.

556
cd/m²
551
cd/m²
551
cd/m²
549
cd/m²
601
cd/m²
597
cd/m²
557
cd/m²
600
cd/m²
603
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 603 cd/m² Average: 573.9 cd/m² Minimum: 3 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 601 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.84 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 5.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.276
Oppo Reno3 Pro
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Response Times
-107%
-18%
1%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
8 (3, 5)
8 (3, 5)
-0%
10 (5, 5)
-25%
8 (3, 5)
-0%
Response Time Black / White *
6 (3, 3)
24 (19, 5)
-300%
6 (3, 3)
-0%
6 (3, 3)
-0%
PWM Frequency
328.9
255
-22%
229.4
-30%
337.8
3%
Screen
4%
-21%
6%
Brightness middle
601
579
-4%
510
-15%
774
29%
Brightness
574
576
0%
536
-7%
778
36%
Brightness Distribution
91
89
-2%
91
0%
95
4%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.84
4.61
5%
6.6
-36%
5.28
-9%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.26
7.72
7%
17.56
-113%
8.55
-4%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.2
4.2
19%
2.9
44%
6.2
-19%
Gamma
2.276 97%
2.244 98%
2.242 98%
2.292 96%
CCT
7164 91%
7201 90%
6989 93%
7319 89%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-52% / -33%
-20% / -20%
4% / 4%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 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. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 328.9 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 328.9 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 328.9 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9599 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.


CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Color accuracy
CalMAN Color accuracy
CalMAN Color space
CalMAN Color space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

Performance, emissions and battery life - Good stamina

With the Snapdragon 765G the Reno3 Pro has the same SoC as the 5G variant, but the 5G modem was apparently deactivated here. The additional RAM makes itself positively noticeable in elaborate benchmarks, so that a few additional points are included here. The differences should turn out minimal in everyday life, though. The UFS 2.1 memory is also very fast in the Reno3, the system can be operated smoothly overall and feels a bit faster thanks to the 90 Hz screen.

Interestingly enough, the 4G variant gets significantly warmer under heavy load than the variant with a 5G modem, and perhaps there are other internal differences here. The temperatures are noticeable, but not critical. The loudspeaker does its job well, it is supported by the earphones, which results in a stereo effect. The sound is still a bit too high pitched under full load. External audio devices can either be connected via USB-C port and, if necessary, an adapter to a 3.5mm jack or via Bluetooth. Both work without problems.

The runtime of the 4.025 mAh battery is about 15 hours in our WLAN test, which is about the same as the 5G variant's runtimes and is a decent value overall. There are also smartphones with significantly larger batteries and thus longer runtimes at this price level, but these are then also significantly heavier. The Reno3 Pro is fully charged again in a maximum of 1:30 hours thanks to the 30 watt quick charge.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
1799 Points ∼92%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1676 Points ∼85% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1520 - 1966, n=12)
1787 Points ∼91% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 4160, n=126)
1961 Points ∼100% +9%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
606 Points ∼100%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
595 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (554 - 673, n=12)
602 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1604, n=126)
562 Points ∼93% -7%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
8573 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
7551 Points ∼88% -12%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
5851 Points ∼68% -32%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
7896 Points ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (7737 - 9989, n=12)
8355 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=528)
5988 Points ∼70% -30%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
9647 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
9240 Points ∼95% -4%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
6571 Points ∼68% -32%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
9454 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (8730 - 10876, n=12)
9679 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=686)
6572 Points ∼68% -32%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3381 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3202 Points ∼95% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3120 Points ∼92% -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3304 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1898 - 3765, n=12)
3247 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=531)
2236 Points ∼66% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3531 Points ∼73%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2492 Points ∼52% -29%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4806 Points ∼100% +36%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3448 Points ∼72% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2834 - 3589, n=12)
3489 Points ∼73% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 10043, n=531)
2174 Points ∼45% -38%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3497 Points ∼81%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2567 Points ∼60% -27%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4291 Points ∼100% +23%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3415 Points ∼80% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2934 - 3605, n=12)
3414 Points ∼80% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8386, n=532)
2027 Points ∼47% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3440 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3155 Points ∼92% -8%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3148 Points ∼92% -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3337 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1790 - 3651, n=12)
3225 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=563)
2153 Points ∼63% -37%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
5223 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3648 Points ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3958 Points ∼76% -24%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5070 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (4036 - 5437, n=12)
5214 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=563)
2928 Points ∼56% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4684 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3522 Points ∼75% -25%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3744 Points ∼80% -20%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4545 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (3678 - 4893, n=12)
4555 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=563)
2457 Points ∼52% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3324 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3202 Points ∼96% -4%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3056 Points ∼92% -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3233 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (3133 - 3547, n=12)
3334 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=612)
2114 Points ∼63% -36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3251 Points ∼74%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2245 Points ∼51% -31%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4422 Points ∼100% +36%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3174 Points ∼72% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2106 - 3342, n=12)
3181 Points ∼72% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 9167, n=612)
1833 Points ∼41% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3267 Points ∼81%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2405 Points ∼60% -26%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4022 Points ∼100% +23%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3187 Points ∼79% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2315 - 3346, n=12)
3199 Points ∼80% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7678, n=613)
1743 Points ∼43% -47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3357 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3228 Points ∼96% -4%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3087 Points ∼92% -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3224 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1689 - 3529, n=12)
3196 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=655)
1985 Points ∼59% -41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4976 Points ∼89%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3485 Points ∼62% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
5586 Points ∼100% +12%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4834 Points ∼87% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2844 - 5832, n=12)
4960 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 13305, n=654)
2430 Points ∼44% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4494 Points ∼95%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3424 Points ∼72% -24%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4734 Points ∼100% +5%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4351 Points ∼92% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2972 - 4693, n=12)
4347 Points ∼92% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9611, n=657)
2083 Points ∼44% -54%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
20054 Points ∼99%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
19888 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (14891 - 28331, n=12)
20159 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 58293, n=799)
15611 Points ∼77% -22%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
66415 Points ∼98%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
66655 Points ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (60281 - 69645, n=12)
67892 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=797)
27419 Points ∼40% -59%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
43875 Points ∼100%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
43778 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (38137 - 48201, n=12)
44075 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=797)
21279 Points ∼48% -52%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
13 fps ∼76%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼59% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
17 fps ∼100% +31%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
13 fps ∼76% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (8.8 - 13, n=12)
12.2 fps ∼72% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=324)
11.5 fps ∼68% -12%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
8.3 fps ∼75%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6.7 fps ∼61% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
11 fps ∼100% +33%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
8.6 fps ∼78% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (5.3 - 13, n=12)
8.59 fps ∼78% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=322)
8.13 fps ∼74% -2%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
21 fps ∼75%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼57% -24%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
28 fps ∼100% +33%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
20 fps ∼71% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (13 - 21, n=12)
20.2 fps ∼72% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=328)
17.1 fps ∼61% -19%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
23 fps ∼74%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼58% -22%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
31 fps ∼100% +35%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
24 fps ∼77% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (13 - 24, n=12)
22.7 fps ∼73% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=327)
19.7 fps ∼64% -14%
Oppo Reno3 ProXiaomi Mi Note 10 ProSamsung Galaxy Note10 LiteOppo Reno3 Pro 5GAverage 256 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-38%
-24%
1%
-13%
-68%
Random Write 4KB
146.7
108.5
-26%
142
-3%
145
-1%
123 (22.1 - 172, n=14)
-16%
37.1 (0.14 - 319, n=895)
-75%
Random Read 4KB
153.1
119.2
-22%
132
-14%
159.1
4%
160 (127 - 208, n=14)
5%
60.3 (1.59 - 324, n=895)
-61%
Sequential Write 256KB
471.6
205.1
-57%
190.8
-60%
476.3
1%
330 (209 - 474, n=14)
-30%
131 (2.99 - 911, n=895)
-72%
Sequential Read 256KB
966.5
499.2
-48%
776.7
-20%
960.5
-1%
854 (687 - 967, n=14)
-12%
348 (12.1 - 1802, n=895)
-64%

Temperature

Max. Load
 42.6 °C
109 F
41.2 °C
106 F
39.4 °C
103 F
 
 43.6 °C
110 F
41.3 °C
106 F
38.6 °C
101 F
 
 43.2 °C
110 F
40.9 °C
106 F
38.9 °C
102 F
 
Maximum: 43.6 °C = 110 F
Average: 41.1 °C = 106 F
37.6 °C
100 F
39.4 °C
103 F
39.9 °C
104 F
37.2 °C
99 F
40.1 °C
104 F
41.9 °C
107 F
37.1 °C
99 F
41 °C
106 F
40.5 °C
105 F
Maximum: 41.9 °C = 107 F
Average: 39.4 °C = 103 F
Power Supply (max.)  43.8 °C = 111 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41.1 °C / 106 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 43.6 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.9 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.3 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.


Heatmap Front
Heatmap Front
Heatmap Back
Heatmap Back

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2043.842.3254141.23133.232.24033.436.85036.139.86329.431.68027.528.910025.726.812521.229.516020.438.920019.244.625018.246.331517.654.24001761.450017.765.463018.268.280016.769.810001773.9125015.27916001675.9200015.375.3250015.775315015.371.4400015.871.8500016.265.563001662.9800016.162.81000016.765.21250016.560.71600016.753.4SPL59.828.585.1N12.41.157median 16.7median 65.2Delta110.445.841.541.436.931.231.43635.635.635.331332627.723.723.321.726.619.137.118.243.317.149.415.655.515.359.116.161.8146313.666.41471.613.674.614.872.714.472.214.666.613.763.813.865.414.16814.369.814.670.21564.715.37015.757.365.526.681.718.50.849.8median 14.8median 64.71.79.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Reno3 ProXiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Reno3 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 16% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 77% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 43% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life

Oppo Reno3 Pro
4025 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
5260 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
4500 mAh
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
4025 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing 1.3
893
1112
25%
904
1%
876
-2%
698 (223 - 2636, n=761)
-22%
Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
14h 53min

Pros

+ 90 Hz screen
+ slim case
+ good camera quality
+ fast WLAN
+ a lot of memory

Cons

- no 5G
- no eSIM
- no microSD slot
- Front camera should offer more details

Verdict - Well equipped

In review: Oppo Reno3 Pro.
In review: Oppo Reno3 Pro.

The Oppo Reno3 Pro is also a good offer in the 4G variant, especially as it offers more memory than the 5G variant, but is in similar price ranges. With a 90 Hz display, a chic case, a slim waist and yet reasonable battery life and good cameras, you can definitely recommend this mid-range device.

Those who value high-end features like extreme performance, WiFi 6, 4K videos with 60 Hz or an eSIM will have to look around in higher price ranges, but those who are also satisfied with mid-range features can save a few hundred euros and still get a powerful device.

The Oppo Reno3 Pro is a powerful, well equipped mid-range device.

Really negative aspects can hardly be pinpointed, at best the occasionally somewhat sloppy or (still) untranslated interface of ColorOS is a small damper, but it's very rarely noticeable.

Oppo Reno3 Pro - 06/10/2020 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
95%
Connectivity
45 / 70 → 64%
Weight
91%
Battery
91%
Display
84%
Games Performance
39 / 64 → 60%
Application Performance
80 / 86 → 92%
Temperature
87%
Noise
100%
Audio
75 / 90 → 84%
Camera
70%
Average
77%
84%
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 Reno3 Pro Smartphone Review – Mid-range Mobile Phone with Four Cameras
Florian Schmitt, 2020-06-10 (Update: 2020-06-10)
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile
When I was 12, the first computer came into the house and immediately I started tinkering around, taking it apart, getting new parts and replacing them - after all, there always had to be enough power for the current games. When I came to Notebookcheck in 2009, I was passionate about testing gaming notebooks. Since 2012, my attention has been focused on smartphones, tablets and future technologies.