Notebookcheck

Oppo Reno4 Pro Review: Slim 5G smartphone with a quality camera

90-Hz display with HDR10+ support. With the Reno4 Pro, Oppo is going after buyers who like to shoot video. The Reno4 Pro comes with improved image stabilisation and camera software. Read our review to learn how well the camera system of the 5G smartphone performs.
Mike Wobker, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Brian Burriston (translated by Stanislav Kokhanyuk),
Oppo Reno4 Pro

Lately, Oppo has been releasing smartphones with great battery life such as the 200-Euro (~$233) A52 and the 500-Euro (~$583) Find X2 Lite. Oppo also makes higher-priced smartphones such as the Find X2 Neo. The 780-Euro (~$909) Reno4 Pro is another high-priced smartphone from Oppo, which offers similar hardware and an impressive camera system.

Oppo Reno4 Pro (Reno Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G 8 x 1.8 - 2.4 GHz, Kryo 475 Gold / Silver
Graphics adapter
Memory
12288 MB 
Display
6.50 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 405 PPI, capacitive, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 237 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB Type-C , 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Proximity sensor, eCompass, USB-C
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G GSM (850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G CDMA/UMTS (1/2/4/5/6/8/19), 4G LTE FDD/TDD (1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/17/18/19/ 20/26/28/32/38/39/40/41/42/66, 5G (n1/n3/n5/n7/n8/n20/n28A/n28B/n38/n40/n41/n77/n78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.6 x 159.6 x 72.5 ( = 0.3 x 6.28 x 2.85 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix Triple: 48 MP (IMX585, f/1.7, 26mm, 1/2.0", 0.8µm) + 13 MP (2x optical zoom, f/2.4, 52mm, 1/3.4", 1.0µm) + 12 MP (IMX708, wide-angle, f/2.2, 120˚, 1/2.43", 1.4µm), Camera2 API: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix IMX616, f/2.4, 26mm, 1/2.8", 0.8µm
Additional features
Speakers: 1 speaker + headphones, stereo, Keyboard: onscreen, Keyboard Light: yes, power adapter, USB Type-C cable, earphones, protective case, ColorOS 7.2, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value (head): 0.993 W/kg, DRM Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
172 g ( = 6.07 oz / 0.38 pounds), Power Supply: 145 g ( = 5.11 oz / 0.32 pounds)
Price
780 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
83 %
10/2020
Oppo Reno4 Pro
SD 765G, Adreno 620
172 g256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
88 %
10/2020
OnePlus 8T
SD 865, Adreno 650
188 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.55"2400x1080
84 %
10/2020
Vivo X50 Pro
SD 765G, Adreno 620
181.5 g256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.56"2376x1080
84 %
10/2020
ZTE Axon 11 5G
SD 765G, Adreno 620
168 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.47"2340x1080
86 %
03/2020
Oppo Find X2 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
202 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.70"3168x1440

Case - Reno4 Pro with a proprietary colour scheme

The Reno4 Pro has a metal frame and a glass back with a matte surface. The build quality is on a good level. The smartphone comes in the following colour schemes: "Galactic Blue",  "Space Black" and "Green Glitter". According to the manufacturer, the "Green Glitter" colour scheme was developed in collaboration with Pantone. The screen is protected with Corning Gorilla Glass 5. Our review device is quite light (172 grams/~6 oz) and has very small bezels, which is why it looks very modern. 

Oppo Reno4 Pro
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Oppo Reno4 Pro

Size Comparison

165.2 mm / 6.5 inch 74.4 mm / 2.93 inch 9.5 mm / 0.374 inch 202 g0.4453 lbs160.7 mm / 6.33 inch 74.1 mm / 2.92 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs159.6 mm / 6.28 inch 72.5 mm / 2.85 inch 7.6 mm / 0.2992 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs159.2 mm / 6.27 inch 73.4 mm / 2.89 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 168 g0.3704 lbs158.46 mm / 6.24 inch 72.8 mm / 2.87 inch 8.04 mm / 0.3165 inch 181.5 g0.4001 lbs

Connectivity - Oppo smartphone without an audio jack

Our review device features neither a headphone jack nor a microSD card slot. The Oppo Reno4 Pro supports dual SIM functionality. However, only one of the two nanoSIM cards can operate in 5G networks. The Android smartphone supports both VoLTE and VoWiFi. Wired data transfers can be carried out via the USB Type-C port, which operates at USB 2.0 speeds. The Oppo smartphone also supports Widevine L1 DRM and the Level 3 Camera2 API.

Software - Android 10 with ColorOS

The Reno4 Pro runs Android 10 with Oppo’s proprietary launcher known as ColorOS (version 7.2). The security patches were last updated in September, 2020. Oppo’s launcher offers different icons and a custom settings menu when compared to stock Android. Preinstalled applications such as video editor Soloop and WPS Office can be uninstalled without any problems.

Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro
Software of the Oppo Reno4 Pro

Communication & Geolocation - 5G smartphone with Wi-Fi 5

The Oppo Reno4 Pro supports the following mobile communication standards: GSM, 3G, LTE and 5G. For short-distance communication, our review device relies on NFC, Bluetooth 5.1 and Wi-Fi 5. With our reference-grade router Netgear Nighthawk AX12, Oppo’s smartphone achieves mediocre data reception and transmission rates. When it comes to the download speeds in particular, the Reno4 Pro is beaten by the rest of the competition.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
OnePlus 8T
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
767 (611min - 837max) MBit/s ∼100% +21%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
754 (346min - 881max) MBit/s ∼98% +19%
Vivo X50 Pro
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
676 (631min - 695max) MBit/s ∼88% +7%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
661 (632min - 679max) MBit/s ∼86% +4%
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
633 (599min - 658max) MBit/s ∼83%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=623)
288 MBit/s ∼38% -55%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
OnePlus 8T
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
716 (679min - 724max) MBit/s ∼100% +19%
Vivo X50 Pro
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
642 (627min - 656max) MBit/s ∼90% +7%
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
601 (504min - 628max) MBit/s ∼84%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
509 (264min - 571max) MBit/s ∼71% -15%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Adreno 620, SD 765G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
475 (437min - 523max) MBit/s ∼66% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=623)
274 MBit/s ∼38% -54%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø633 (599-658)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø601 (504-628)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

Outdoors, the Oppo smartphone has a margin of error of up to 4 metres (~13 feet). We use an application known as GPS Test to help us determine the margin of error. In order to determine how accurate our review device is when it comes to geolocation, we take it with us on a bike ride. During this ride, we are also accompanied by the professional navigator Garmin Edge 500. The 5G smartphone was slightly less accurate than the professional navigator.

Navigation - Oppo Reno4 Pro
Navigation - Oppo Reno4 Pro
Navigation - Oppo Reno4 Pro
Navigation - Oppo Reno4 Pro
Navigation - Oppo Reno4 Pro
Navigation - Oppo Reno4 Pro
Navigation - Garmin Edge 500
Navigation - Garmin Edge 500
Navigation - Garmin Edge 500
Navigation - Garmin Edge 500
Navigation - Garmin Edge 500
Navigation - Garmin Edge 500

Telephony & Call Quality - Call partner is easy to understand

The phone application offers direct access to the favourite contacts. Users can bring up the dial pad by tapping a button. There are also two other tabs; one for call history, the other for saved contacts. The Oppo smartphone provides a high call volume. The voices on either end of the call sound clear and intelligible.

Cameras - Good optical zoom

Shot taken with the front-facing camera
Shot taken with the front-facing camera

The Reno4 Pro comes with a triple-camera system, which produces well-detailed and colour-accurate images. Photographs taken with the ultra wide-angle camera appear punchy. However, they are somewhat blurry, especially at the edges. Homogeneous surfaces are also poorly reproduced. The telephoto lens produces slightly blurry, but colour-accurate, photographs. Under low-light conditions, the camera system takes very poor photos. The camera application offers a “Pro” mode, which allows users to adjust the white balance, ISO sensitivity, brightness and the shutter speed.

The front-facing camera takes good photographs, which are not as sharp as the pictures taken with the main shooter. The portrait mode allows users to blur the background. The selfie shooter does not offer a “Pro” mode. Videos taken with the Oppo smartphone look as good as the photographs. Video can be recorded at 1080p and 720p at 60 or 30 FPS. The smartphone can only shoot 4K video at 30 FPS.

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 cameraUltra wide-angle lens 1Ultra wide-angle lens 25X Zoom Low-light photography
click to load images
ColorChecker
28.6 ∆E
50.2 ∆E
37.6 ∆E
34.1 ∆E
42.6 ∆E
56 ∆E
49.9 ∆E
32.2 ∆E
35.5 ∆E
27.6 ∆E
57.3 ∆E
58.9 ∆E
28.8 ∆E
44.4 ∆E
31.1 ∆E
66.9 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
39.2 ∆E
66.5 ∆E
64.9 ∆E
48.7 ∆E
35.9 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno4 Pro: 42.1 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 66.9 ∆E
ColorChecker
12.6 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
10 ∆E
14.4 ∆E
8 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
2.5 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
6 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
4 ∆E
4 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
4 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
1.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno4 Pro: 6.41 ∆E min: 1.45 - max: 14.38 ∆E

Accessories & Warranty - USB Type-C headset and protective case in the box

The box of the Oppo Reno4 Pro contains a USB charger with an appropriate USB Type-C cable, a silicone protective case, a SIM card removal tool and a USB Type-C headset. The manufacturer offers additional accessories such as wireless headphones on its website. 

The Reno4 Pro comes with a 24-month warranty.

Input Devices & Handling - Sluggish in-display fingerprint scanner

The Reno4 Pro comes with Android’s standard keyboard, which is known as GBoard. The touchscreen reacts reliably and promptly to inputs. The drag-and-drop functionality works well. In landscape mode, the keyboard can be moved around the screen.

The in-screen fingerprint sensor proved to be unreliable in our review. The face unlock worked much better. However, it does not get you straight to the home screen. In order to get to the home screen, users will have to swipe up on the lock screen.

Oppo Reno4 Pro - Portrait mode
Oppo Reno4 Pro - Portrait mode
Oppo Reno4 Pro - Landscape mode
Oppo Reno4 Pro - Landscape mode

Display - Responsive 90-Hz panel

Pixel arrangement
Pixel arrangement

The 6.5-inch AMOLED display of the Oppo Reno4 Pro has a native resolution of 2400x1080 pixels. Thanks to an average brightness of 789 cd/m², the Oppo smartphone takes first place in our comparison chart. In the APL50 test, in which the screen displays a pattern of alternating black and white squares of equal size, we measured an even higher brightness of 1034 cd/m². With the light sensor disabled, the screen brightness drops to 485 cd/m². The minimum brightness level amounts to 3.07 cd/m².

According to our measurements, the OLED screen of the smartphone flickers at frequencies ranging from 183.8 Hz to 367.6 Hz. 

776
cd/m²
782
cd/m²
811
cd/m²
772
cd/m²
790
cd/m²
807
cd/m²
777
cd/m²
784
cd/m²
799
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 811 cd/m² Average: 788.7 cd/m² Minimum: 3.07 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 790 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.8 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.7
ΔE Greyscale 5 | 0.64-98 Ø5.9
95.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.29
Oppo Reno4 Pro
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50
OnePlus 8T
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Vivo X50 Pro
AMOLED, 2376x1080, 6.56
ZTE Axon 11 5G
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Oppo Find X2 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.70
Screen
34%
5%
-2%
-14%
Brightness middle
790
743
-6%
784
-1%
603
-24%
778
-2%
Brightness
789
734
-7%
780
-1%
608
-23%
775
-2%
Brightness Distribution
95
91
-4%
97
2%
92
-3%
99
4%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.8
0.89
68%
3.5
-25%
3
-7%
4.4
-57%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
7.7
1.69
78%
6.4
17%
6.2
19%
8.7
-13%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5
1.4
72%
3
40%
3.8
24%
5.6
-12%
Gamma
2.29 96%
2.199 100%
1.99 111%
2.21 100%
2.26 97%
CCT
6716 97%
6423 101%
6666 98%
7242 90%
7250 90%

* ... 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 367.6 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 367.6 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 367.6 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 9653 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Both the contrast ratio and the black value of the AMOLED panel are superb. Users can adjust the colour reproduction in the settings menu.

There are two preconfigured colour profiles: "Vivid" and "Normal". In Vivid mode, there is an observable bluish cast and the colours appear oversaturated. In Normal mode, the colours appear more natural and the colour temperature is closer to the desirable target.

CalMAN: Colour accuracy (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Colour accuracy (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Colour accuracy (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour accuracy (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Colour space coverage (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Grayscale performance (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Grayscale performance (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Grayscale performance (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Grayscale performance (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Saturation sweeps (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Saturation sweeps (Vivid, P3)
CalMAN: Saturation sweeps  (Normal, sRGB)
CalMAN: Saturation sweeps (Normal, 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
2.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.6 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.6 ms).

Thanks to a high brightness, the screen of the Reno4 Pro is legible outside. However, occasionally, reflections make the screen difficult to read.

Oppo Reno4 Pro outdoors
Oppo Reno4 Pro outdoors
Oppo Reno4 Pro outdoors
Oppo Reno4 Pro outdoors

There is a green cast when the AMOLED screen of the Reno4 Pro is viewed at extreme angles. However, at normal angles, there are no issues.

Oppo Reno4 Pro - Viewing angles
Oppo Reno4 Pro - Viewing angles
Oppo Reno4 Pro - Viewing angles
Oppo Reno4 Pro - Viewing angles

Performance - Good level of performance, but not ahead of the competition

The Oppo Reno4 Pro comes with the Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G. It performs as well as other devices with the above-mentioned SoC. In our benchmarks, the Oppo smartphone is only able to compete with the ZTE Axon 11 5G. Nevertheless, in everyday use, the smartphone feels very responsive and applications work without any issues.

Geekbench 5.1 - 5.3
OpenCL Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
1256 Points ∼39%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3214 Points ∼100% +156%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1302 Points ∼41% +4%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
1252 Points ∼39% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1242 - 1302, n=8)
1268 Points ∼39% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (259 - 5532, n=53)
1894 Points ∼59% +51%
Vulkan Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
1145 Points ∼33%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3494 Points ∼100% +205%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1265 Points ∼36% +10%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
1128 Points ∼32% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (923 - 1278, n=10)
1138 Points ∼33% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72 - 4789, n=57)
1658 Points ∼47% +45%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
1784 Points ∼53%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3164 Points ∼94% +77%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1876 Points ∼56% +5%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
1816 Points ∼54% +2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3360 Points ∼100% +88%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1520 - 1966, n=15)
1769 Points ∼53% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 4160, n=151)
1959 Points ∼58% +10%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
608 Points ∼67%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
889 Points ∼98% +46%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
634 Points ∼70% +4%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
588 Points ∼65% -3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
911 Points ∼100% +50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (554 - 673, n=15)
601 Points ∼66% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1604, n=151)
567 Points ∼62% -7%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
7820 Points ∼69%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9202 Points ∼81% +18%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
8065 Points ∼71% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
7737 Points ∼68% -1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11387 Points ∼100% +46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (7245 - 9989, n=15)
8243 Points ∼72% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=551)
6067 Points ∼53% -22%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
9042 Points ∼68%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10990 Points ∼82% +22%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
9675 Points ∼72% +7%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
9168 Points ∼69% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13360 Points ∼100% +48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (8687 - 10876, n=14)
9640 Points ∼72% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=704)
6655 Points ∼50% -26%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
2605 Points ∼68%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1788 Points ∼47% -31%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
2893 Points ∼75% +11%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
2609 Points ∼68% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3843 Points ∼100% +48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2145 - 2979, n=15)
2727 Points ∼71% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4061, n=203)
2656 Points ∼69% +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3152 Points ∼38%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8372 Points ∼100% +166%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3149 Points ∼38% 0%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3192 Points ∼38% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8076 Points ∼96% +156%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2145 - 3198, n=15)
3040 Points ∼36% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 11259, n=203)
3067 Points ∼37% -3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3011 Points ∼47%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4604 Points ∼71% +53%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3087 Points ∼48% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3041 Points ∼47% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6444 Points ∼100% +114%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2287 - 3130, n=15)
2950 Points ∼46% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6977, n=203)
2710 Points ∼42% -10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3230 Points ∼59%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5485 Points ∼100% +70%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3765 Points ∼69% +17%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3225 Points ∼59% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5187 Points ∼95% +61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1898 - 3765, n=15)
3264 Points ∼60% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=558)
2276 Points ∼41% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3540 Points ∼38%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9420 Points ∼100% +166%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3556 Points ∼38% 0%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3579 Points ∼38% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9345 Points ∼99% +164%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2814 - 3592, n=15)
3456 Points ∼37% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 12146, n=558)
2271 Points ∼24% -36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3466 Points ∼43%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8125 Points ∼100% +134%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3597 Points ∼44% +4%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3494 Points ∼43% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7982 Points ∼98% +130%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2934 - 3605, n=15)
3392 Points ∼42% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 9643, n=559)
2099 Points ∼26% -39%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3241 Points ∼59%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5468 Points ∼100% +69%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3651 Points ∼67% +13%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3238 Points ∼59% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5209 Points ∼95% +61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1790 - 3651, n=15)
3251 Points ∼59% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=590)
2193 Points ∼40% -32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
5344 Points ∼41%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12878 Points ∼100% +141%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5265 Points ∼41% -1%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
5416 Points ∼42% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12573 Points ∼98% +135%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (4036 - 5437, n=15)
5159 Points ∼40% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 22052, n=590)
3096 Points ∼24% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4671 Points ∼47%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9897 Points ∼100% +112%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4819 Points ∼49% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
4712 Points ∼48% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9616 Points ∼97% +106%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (3678 - 4893, n=15)
4532 Points ∼46% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 11895, n=590)
2550 Points ∼26% -45%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3167 Points ∼65%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4900 Points ∼100% +55%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3462 Points ∼71% +9%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3133 Points ∼64% -1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4582 Points ∼94% +45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2964 - 3556, n=15)
3329 Points ∼68% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5318, n=638)
2149 Points ∼44% -32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3254 Points ∼40%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8222 Points ∼100% +153%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3342 Points ∼41% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3302 Points ∼40% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8045 Points ∼98% +147%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2048 - 3342, n=15)
3120 Points ∼38% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 11573, n=638)
1894 Points ∼23% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3234 Points ∼45%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7145 Points ∼100% +121%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3329 Points ∼47% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3263 Points ∼46% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7012 Points ∼98% +117%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2261 - 3346, n=15)
3145 Points ∼44% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 9138, n=639)
1795 Points ∼25% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3203 Points ∼63%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4882 Points ∼97% +52%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3432 Points ∼68% +7%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
3223 Points ∼64% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5054 Points ∼100% +58%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1689 - 3529, n=15)
3218 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5301, n=680)
2020 Points ∼40% -37%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
5113 Points ∼44%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11586 Points ∼100% +127%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5176 Points ∼45% +1%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
5167 Points ∼45% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11458 Points ∼99% +124%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2844 - 5832, n=15)
4844 Points ∼42% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 16670, n=679)
2514 Points ∼22% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4515 Points ∼51%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8877 Points ∼100% +97%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4652 Points ∼52% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
4556 Points ∼51% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8866 Points ∼100% +96%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2972 - 4693, n=15)
4280 Points ∼48% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 11256, n=682)
2148 Points ∼24% -52%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
15516 Points ∼55%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
17817 Points ∼63% +15%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
20631 Points ∼73% +33%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
14891 Points ∼53% -4%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
28147 Points ∼100% +81%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (14891 - 28331, n=15)
20590 Points ∼73% +33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 59268, n=824)
15851 Points ∼56% +2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
69409 Points ∼48%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
144828 Points ∼99% +109%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
68808 Points ∼47% -1%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
68840 Points ∼47% -1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
145567 Points ∼100% +110%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (56690 - 69645, n=15)
67248 Points ∼46% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 224130, n=822)
28668 Points ∼20% -59%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
39173 Points ∼52%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
56045 Points ∼74% +43%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
44918 Points ∼59% +15%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
38137 Points ∼50% -3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
75632 Points ∼100% +93%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (38137 - 48201, n=15)
44196 Points ∼58% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=822)
21990 Points ∼29% -44%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
95 fps ∼46%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
207 fps ∼100% +118%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
93 fps ∼45% -2%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
93 fps ∼45% -2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
202 fps ∼98% +113%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (48 - 97, n=13)
87.5 fps ∼42% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=822)
47.9 fps ∼23% -50%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
60 fps ∼74%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
60 fps ∼74% 0%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
81 fps ∼100% +35%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
59 fps ∼73% -2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼74% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (43 - 86, n=13)
62.9 fps ∼78% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 142, n=831)
32.2 fps ∼40% -46%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
54 fps ∼43%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
127 fps ∼100% +135%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
50 fps ∼39% -7%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
56 fps ∼44% +4%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
123 fps ∼97% +128%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (31 - 56, n=13)
50.5 fps ∼40% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 180, n=727)
28.5 fps ∼22% -47%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
48 fps ∼80%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
60 fps ∼100% +25%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
46 fps ∼77% -4%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
48 fps ∼80% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
58 fps ∼97% +21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (30 - 55, n=13)
46.2 fps ∼77% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 117, n=735)
23.4 fps ∼39% -51%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
37 fps ∼42%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100% +138%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
35 fps ∼40% -5%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
38 fps ∼43% +3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
86 fps ∼98% +132%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (22 - 38, n=13)
35 fps ∼40% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=590)
22.8 fps ∼26% -38%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
33 fps ∼55%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
60 fps ∼100% +82%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
31 fps ∼52% -6%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
32 fps ∼53% -3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼75% +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (21 - 34, n=13)
31.2 fps ∼52% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=592)
20.3 fps ∼34% -38%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
13 fps ∼43%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼100% +131%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
13 fps ∼43% 0%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
13 fps ∼43% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
18 fps ∼60% +38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (8.8 - 13, n=15)
12.1 fps ∼40% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=350)
11.7 fps ∼39% -10%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
8.4 fps ∼42%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼100% +138%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
8.3 fps ∼42% -1%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
8.6 fps ∼43% +2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼100% +138%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (5.3 - 13, n=15)
8.37 fps ∼42% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=348)
8.25 fps ∼41% -2%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
21 fps ∼45%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼100% +124%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
21 fps ∼45% 0%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
21 fps ∼45% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
28 fps ∼60% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (13 - 21, n=15)
19.9 fps ∼42% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=354)
17.5 fps ∼37% -17%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
23 fps ∼42%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
55 fps ∼100% +139%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
23 fps ∼42% 0%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
24 fps ∼44% +4%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
53 fps ∼96% +130%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (13 - 24, n=15)
22.1 fps ∼40% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=353)
20.1 fps ∼37% -13%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
21 fps ∼40%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
53 fps ∼100% +152%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
20 fps ∼38% -5%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
21 fps ∼40% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼96% +143%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (12 - 21, n=13)
19.5 fps ∼37% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 75, n=515)
15.2 fps ∼29% -28%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
19 fps ∼41%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
46 fps ∼100% +142%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
18 fps ∼39% -5%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
18 fps ∼39% -5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
26 fps ∼57% +37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (11 - 19, n=13)
17.5 fps ∼38% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=519)
13.4 fps ∼29% -29%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
316129 Points ∼53%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
576457 Points ∼96% +82%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
327208 Points ∼55% +4%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
316938 Points ∼53% 0%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
599843 Points ∼100% +90%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (285731 - 332074, n=12)
310972 Points ∼52% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 622888, n=140)
325304 Points ∼54% +3%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
1399 Points ∼95%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1466 Points ∼100% +5%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1442 Points ∼98% +3%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
1362 Points ∼93% -3%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1351 Points ∼92% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1139 - 1462, n=12)
1360 Points ∼93% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=754)
836 Points ∼57% -40%
Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
5178 Points ∼44%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11790 Points ∼100% +128%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4639 Points ∼39% -10%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
5247 Points ∼45% +1%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11496 Points ∼98% +122%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2525 - 5247, n=12)
4698 Points ∼40% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=754)
2591 Points ∼22% -50%
Memory (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4929 Points ∼62%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7899 Points ∼100% +60%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4637 Points ∼59% -6%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
5464 Points ∼69% +11%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6350 Points ∼80% +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (4556 - 5683, n=12)
5112 Points ∼65% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=754)
1948 Points ∼25% -60%
System (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
6807 Points ∼68%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10029 Points ∼100% +47%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
6936 Points ∼69% +2%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
6691 Points ∼67% -2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9555 Points ∼95% +40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (5411 - 6936, n=12)
6459 Points ∼64% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=754)
3553 Points ∼35% -48%
Overall (sort by value)
Oppo Reno4 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3949 Points ∼65%
OnePlus 8T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6083 Points ∼100% +54%
Vivo X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3857 Points ∼63% -2%
ZTE Axon 11 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 6144
4020 Points ∼66% +2%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5540 Points ∼91% +40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (3237 - 4094, n=12)
3792 Points ∼62% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=754)
1823 Points ∼30% -54%

In the browser benchmarks, the Android smartphone achieves below-average results and is only able to beat the Vivo X50 Pro. However, in day-to-day use, the scrolling is smooth and webpages and media content load quickly.

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
OnePlus 8T (Chrome 86)
118.7 Points ∼100% +122%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.65 Points ∼97% +114%
ZTE Axon 11 5G (Chrome 83)
89.305 Points ∼75% +67%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (10.8 - 96.7, n=9)
79.4 Points ∼67% +48%
Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86)
53.546 Points ∼45%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 375, n=648)
49.6 Points ∼42% -7%
Vivo X50 Pro (Chrome 85)
10.765 Points ∼9% -80%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
OnePlus 8T (Chrome 86)
108 Points ∼100% +116%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼93% +100%
ZTE Axon 11 5G (Chrome 83)
71 Points ∼66% +42%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 194, n=285)
70.8 Points ∼66% +42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (20 - 101, n=11)
70.2 Points ∼65% +40%
Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86)
50 Points ∼46%
Vivo X50 Pro (Chrome 85)
20 Points ∼19% -60%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
22976 Points ∼100% +108%
OnePlus 8T (Chrome 86)
19915 Points ∼87% +80%
ZTE Axon 11 5G (Chrome 83)
18219 Points ∼79% +65%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (3592 - 19143, n=12)
16587 Points ∼72% +50%
Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86)
11059 Points ∼48%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 58632, n=817)
8268 Points ∼36% -25%
Vivo X50 Pro (Chrome 85)
3592 Points ∼16% -68%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Vivo X50 Pro (Chrome 85)
15230.1 ms * ∼100% -236%
Average of class Smartphone (460 - 59466, n=843)
9569 ms * ∼63% -111%
Oppo Reno4 Pro (Chrome 86)
4533.9 ms * ∼30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G (2359 - 15230, n=12)
3874 ms * ∼25% +15%
ZTE Axon 11 5G (Chrome 83)
2973.3 ms * ∼20% +34%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
2043.6 ms * ∼13% +55%
OnePlus 8T (Chrome 86)
1860.1 ms * ∼12% +59%

* ... smaller is better

The Oppo smartphone features 256 GB of UFS 2.1 memory. In the storage benchmarks, the Reno4 Pro achieves mediocre read and write speeds when compared to the rest of the competition. There is no microSD card slot.

Oppo Reno4 ProOnePlus 8TVivo X50 ProZTE Axon 11 5GOppo Find X2 ProAverage 256 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
25%
-11%
-4%
50%
-13%
-67%
Random Write 4KB
139.65
121.4
-13%
156.8
12%
128.35
-8%
204.98
47%
125 (22.1 - 172, n=15)
-10%
39.3 (0.14 - 319, n=918)
-72%
Random Read 4KB
159.39
132.6
-17%
165.23
4%
166.27
4%
202.63
27%
160 (127 - 208, n=15)
0%
62.3 (1.59 - 325, n=918)
-61%
Sequential Write 256KB
473.71
728
54%
209.11
-56%
417.09
-12%
728.72
54%
322 (206 - 474, n=15)
-32%
136 (2.99 - 1321, n=918)
-71%
Sequential Read 256KB
943.36
1659.3
76%
924.65
-2%
955.97
1%
1605.6
70%
859 (687 - 967, n=15)
-9%
358 (12.1 - 2037, n=918)
-62%

Gaming - Current titles are playable

The Oppo Reno4 Pro can run all current games on high settings. The smartphone is easy to handle when gaming and the touchscreen has a very smooth surface. The motion sensor worked well when gaming.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Armajet
Armajet

Emissions - Mediocre speakers and low temperatures

Temperature

The surface temperatures of the Reno4 Pro reach 34.6 °C (94.28 °F) under load. The Oppo smartphone never gets too hot to hold in the hand.

Max. Load
 33.6 °C
92 F
33 °C
91 F
31.6 °C
89 F
 
 34.6 °C
94 F
34.2 °C
94 F
31.7 °C
89 F
 
 34.6 °C
94 F
33.9 °C
93 F
31.3 °C
88 F
 
Maximum: 34.6 °C = 94 F
Average: 33.2 °C = 92 F
30.2 °C
86 F
31.5 °C
89 F
31.6 °C
89 F
29.8 °C
86 F
31.1 °C
88 F
32.1 °C
90 F
28.1 °C
83 F
31.2 °C
88 F
32.7 °C
91 F
Maximum: 32.7 °C = 91 F
Average: 30.9 °C = 88 F
Power Supply (max.)  23.4 °C = 74 F | Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.2 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.6 °C / 94 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 32.7 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.4 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
Heat distribution (front)
Heat distribution (front)
Heat distribution (back)
Heat distribution (back)

Speakers

Frequency response
Frequency response

The speaker of the Reno4 Pro works in combination with the earpiece. The smartphone offers a relatively high volume. The highs are overrepresented, which is why voices sound very clear. For listening to music, we recommend using external speakers or headphones.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.734.52529.9343124.131.94021.229.15033.139.56325.632.88018.731.810021.535.812514.735.916018.148.920015.150.625014.959.331513.662.540011.264.850011.765.46301267.880012.370100011.474.8125012.279.3160012.181.1200011.879.3250012.479.4315012.880.9400012.881.5500013.477.2630013.670.3800013.367.81000013.370.21250014.166.51600014.356.5SPL24.990N0.677.3median 13.3median 67.8Delta1.29.640.842.235.539.329.931.430.529.23536.23031.918.918.722.921.31727.114.637.913.242.29.347.210.153.811.256.912.561.311.664.911.467.11371.113.173.212.873.712.971.312.972.812.872.713.771.614.464.615.361.816.165.11766.817.962.418.951.167.52682.520.70.750.9median 13.1median 64.61.611.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Reno4 ProOnePlus 8T
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Reno4 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

OnePlus 8T audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 23% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 50% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life - Reno4 Pro achieves great battery runtimes

Energy Consumption

According to our measurements, the Reno4 Pro is quite energy efficient. It draws slightly less power than the rest of the competition. However, the Oppo smartphone does not allow a lot of applications to run in the background.

The included 65-watt USB-C power adapter should have no trouble supplying the 5G smartphone from Oppo with enough energy.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.03 / 0.39 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.95 / 2.49 / 2.58 Watt
Load midlight 3.52 / 5.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Oppo Reno4 Pro
4000 mAh
OnePlus 8T
4500 mAh
Vivo X50 Pro
4315 mAh
ZTE Axon 11 5G
4000 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-6%
-3%
6%
-57%
7%
7%
Idle Minimum *
0.95
1.1
-16%
1.18
-24%
0.78
18%
1.47
-55%
0.958 (0.66 - 1.8, n=13)
-1%
0.892 (0.2 - 3.4, n=911)
6%
Idle Average *
2.49
1.5
40%
2.45
2%
1.43
43%
3.43
-38%
1.924 (0.82 - 2.55, n=13)
23%
1.758 (0.6 - 6.2, n=910)
29%
Idle Maximum *
2.58
1.7
34%
2.51
3%
1.54
40%
3.52
-36%
2.07 (0.85 - 2.9, n=13)
20%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=911)
21%
Load Average *
3.52
4.6
-31%
3.61
-3%
5.04
-43%
6.2
-76%
3.85 (2.73 - 6.8, n=13)
-9%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=905)
-17%
Load Maximum *
5.9
9.4
-59%
5.36
9%
7.49
-27%
10.63
-80%
5.91 (4.4 - 7.5, n=13)
-0%
6.12 (1.2 - 14.2, n=905)
-4%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

In our practically oriented Wi-Fi test, the Oppo smartphone achieves a battery runtime of almost 16 hours. This means that the 4000-mAh battery of the Reno4 Pro lasted almost as long as the 4500-mAh battery of the OnePlus 8T.

The included fast charger takes a little over half an hour to fully charge the Reno4 Pro.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
15h 50min
Oppo Reno4 Pro
4000 mAh
OnePlus 8T
4500 mAh
Vivo X50 Pro
4315 mAh
ZTE Axon 11 5G
4000 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
950
1023
8%
763
-20%
679
-29%
654
-31%

Pros

+ good build quality
+ good camera performance
+ slim design
+ good battery life

Cons

- aggressive energy management
- no microSD card reader

Verdict - Oppo Reno4 Pro slots in the 5G segment

Oppo Reno4 Pro review. Device provided courtesy of: Oppo Germany
Oppo Reno4 Pro review. Device provided courtesy of: Oppo Germany

The Oppo Reno4 Pro is a modern and slim smartphone. The camera performance is good and the system performance leaves nothing to be desired as well. The great battery life is a big positive. Moreover, the battery can be fully charged in half an hour. The Oppo smartphone scores some major points when it comes to LTE and 5G performance, but it does not do particularly well when it comes to Wi-Fi performance. 256 GB of internal storage is more than enough at the moment. However, the storage capacity is not expandable, because the Reno4 Pro does not have a microSD card slot.

The Oppo Reno4 Pro is a 5G smartphone with aggressive energy-saving features, which bring something to the table.

However, users should pay attention to the aggressive energy management. The smartphone routinely closes applications that are running in the background, which may not be welcome in certain situations. For instance, we had trouble getting an application, which prevents the screen from switching off, to run in the background. The same applies to fitness trackers and navigation applications. Howbeit, users can disable energy-saving functions for any application they choose. 

Oppo Reno4 Pro - 10/26/2020 v7
Mike Wobker

Chassis
88%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
93%
Connectivity
51 / 70 → 73%
Weight
90%
Battery
91%
Display
86%
Games Performance
35 / 64 → 55%
Application Performance
71 / 86 → 83%
Temperature
93%
Noise
100%
Audio
74 / 90 → 82%
Camera
64%
Average
77%
83%
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 Reno4 Pro Review: Slim 5G smartphone with a quality camera
Mike Wobker, 2020-10-28 (Update: 2020-10-30)
Mike Wobker
Editor of the original article: Mike Wobker - Editor
I made my first IT walking attempts on a 386 with 4 MB of RAM. After that followed various PCs and notebooks, which I looked after and repaired in my circle of friends and acquaintances. After an apprenticeship as a telecommunications systems engineer and several years of professional experience, I graduated with a bachelor's degree in industrial engineering. Today I live out my fascination for IT, technology and mobile devices by writing test reports. In my free time I like to devote myself to vegan cooking and spend time with my family, which includes a whole range of animal roommates.