Verdict on the Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G
The Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G proves to be a well-built upper mid-range smartphone with clear strengths in build quality, features and battery life. Its compact chassis, high-contrast AMOLED display with a peak brightness of nearly 2,000 cd/m², and a six-year update commitment make it a reliable companion for everyday use.
The strong camera performance, particularly from the 200 MP main sensor and the optical zoom, rounds off the overall package nicely. In terms of performance, the MediaTek Dimensity 8450 delivers solid results. The generous 6,500 mAh battery impresses with excellent runtimes and fast charging speeds, while the lack of wireless charging and the inclusion of USB 2.0 remain clear shortcomings. Overall, the Reno15 Pro offers a compelling mix of everyday usability, design and technology. However, at a price of €799, it also faces strong competition from rivals such as the Poco F8 Ultra and the Galaxy S26.
Pros
Cons
Price and availability
The Reno15 Pro is available directly from Oppo's online store, but is also offered by retailers such as Amazon.
- $8.49YBFJCE Case for Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G PU Leather Wallet Cover,Flip Folio Case with Card Holders,Magnetic Phone Cover Compatible with Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G,Yellow Brown
- $13.80Elubugod Compatible with Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G Leather Case,PU Leather flip Cover Compatible with Oppo Reno 15 Pro 5G CPH2813 Case Cover Brown
- $8.00MTRIEBA [3 Pack] Compatible for Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G Tempered Glass Screen Protector [9H hardness][High Definition,Scratch-resistant and shatterproof]
Table of Contents
- Verdict on the Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G
- Specifications – Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G
- Case and features – Reno15 Pro is IP68-certified
- Connectivity and operation – Oppo smartphone with 6 GHz Wi-Fi
- Software and sustainability – six years of updates
- Cameras – Oppo smartphone with good image stabilisation
- Display – the Oppo Reno15 Pro reaches almost 2,000 cd/m²
- Performance, emissions and battery life – Reno15 Pro with solid speakers
- Notebookcheck overall rating
- Possible alternatives at a glance
The Reno15 Pro represents the top model in Oppo's upper mid-range lineup and aims to impress with its large battery and high-quality camera setup. The naming is somewhat confusing, as the model tested here is marketed as the Oppo Reno15 Pro Mini in other regions.
With an RRP of €799, it not only has to compete with the comparison devices selected here, but also, at least on paper, with models such as the Xiaomi 17 and the Samsung Galaxy S26, which offer a similar form factor.
Specifications – Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G
Case and features – Reno15 Pro is IP68-certified
The Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G is a relatively compact smartphone and, in terms of its rear design, bears some resemblance to the iPhone 16 Pro. However, Oppo takes a different approach when it comes to colours, offering two distinctive options in Dusk Black (which appears more brown in practice) and Aurora Blue (our test unit).
The matte aluminium frame is resistant to fingerprints, while the display is protected by Gorilla Glass 7i. Although the rear panel is made of plastic, it is well executed and visually appealing. Overall, the build quality is convincing, and the smartphone is IP68-certified, making it both dust- and water-resistant.
In terms of features, there are no major omissions. However, compromises include the relatively slow USB 2.0 standard, as well as the lack of UWB and wireless charging.
Connectivity and operation – Oppo smartphone with 6 GHz Wi-Fi
As its name suggests, the Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G supports the current 5G mobile standard, although its frequency band coverage is somewhat more limited than that of pricier devices. In practice, however, this is only likely to make a difference when travelling to more distant countries.
Call quality is clear and natural when holding the Reno15 Pro to the ear. Background noise suppression also works well in most cases, although the phone does reach its limits in very loud surroundings.
When it comes to Wi-Fi, the Reno15 Pro delivers a pleasant surprise: according to the spec sheet, it only supports Wi-Fi 6, but it can also use the 6 GHz spectrum, meaning Wi-Fi 6E. Transfer rates are correspondingly high and also remain stable.
| Networking | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Vivo X300 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Average Wi-Fi 6E | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Software and sustainability – six years of updates
The Reno15 Pro ships with Google Android 16 and ColorOS 16 already installed, and Oppo promises five major Android updates. In addition, the smartphone will receive security patches for six years.
The smartphone comes in slim packaging that avoids the use of obvious plastic. There is very little information on sustainability, with only a few figures on metal content listed in the specifications. The device is not intended to be repaired by the user.
Cameras – Oppo smartphone with good image stabilisation
The front camera benefits from its integrated autofocus, uses pixel binning and delivers appealing results. It can even record videos in Ultra HD at up to 60 fps.
The rear triple-camera setup uses a 200 MP main sensor with optical image stabilisation (OIS). It takes decent photos, although lens flares can occur in difficult lighting conditions. The setup is complemented by an ultra-wide-angle camera and 3x optical zoom, while digital zoom goes up to 120x. The ultra-wide-angle camera shows aberrations towards the edges and does not offer outstanding depth of field, whereas the zoom camera delivers fairly good results, including in the digital range.
The main camera can also record in 4K at 60 fps and additionally benefits from very good image stabilisation.
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.
HauptkameraHauptkameraUltraweitwinkel5-facher ZoomLow-Light
Display – the Oppo Reno15 Pro reaches almost 2,000 cd/m²
The 6.3-inch (16 cm) AMOLED display of the Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G supports refresh rates from 60 to 120 Hz and all common HDR standards.
Brightness distribution is very even. On a pure white screen, however, brightness always remains just below 1,300 cd/m² and hardly increases even when the white area is reduced. The display only gets brighter during HDR playback, reaching up to 1,967 cd/m². Outdoors, the smartphone remains easy to read in most situations.
The panel shows the OLED-typical flickering at a comparatively low base frequency, meaning sensitive users may still experience discomfort despite Oppo also using high-frequency PWM dimming at 2,160 Hz.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 98 %
Center on Battery: 1281 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.75}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 1.3 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø5}
99.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.25
CCT: 6330 K
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G AMOLED, 2640x1216, 6.3" | Samsung Galaxy S25 FE AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7" | Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra AMOLED, 2608x1200, 6.9" | Vivo X300 AMOLED, 2640x1216, 6.3" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -75% | -2% | -9% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 1281 | 1136 -11% | 1771 38% | 1537 20% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 1280 | 1132 -12% | 1773 39% | 1523 19% |
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 98 | 98 0% | 99 1% | 96 -2% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | ||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1 | 3.5 -250% | 1.3 -30% | 1.4 -40% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.9 | 5.5 -90% | 2.8 3% | 2.6 10% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.3 | 2.4 -85% | 2.1 -62% | 2.1 -62% |
| Gamma | 2.25 98% | 2.02 109% | 2.25 98% | 2.28 96% |
| CCT | 6330 103% | 6322 103% | 6452 101% | 6754 96% |
* ... smaller is better
| Display / APL18 Peak Brightness | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | |
| Vivo X300 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| Display / HDR Peak Brightness | |
| Vivo X300 | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 90 Hz Amplitude: 17.24 % Secondary Frequency: 2000 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 90 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 90 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7962 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Measurement series with fixed zoom level and different brightness settings (The amplitude curve at minimum brightness looks flat, but this is due to the scaling. The info box shows the enlarged version of the amplitude at minimum brightness)
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.4905 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.5105 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 1.05 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.4535 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.5935 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (31.3 ms). | ||
Performance, emissions and battery life – Reno15 Pro with solid speakers
The Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G is powered by a MediaTek Dimensity 8450 paired with 12 GB of LPDDR5x RAM. The SoC is positioned in the mid-range, but it delivers good everyday performance and also offers enough power for gaming. It is a pity, however, that Oppo is still using older UFS 3.1 storage here.
Surface temperatures rise noticeably under load, but remain within a safe range. However, throttling in the 3DMark stress test is quite pronounced.
The speakers deliver decent sound quality, although lower frequencies are somewhat muffled and weak. Auracast is not supported at present.
At 6,500 mAh, the Reno15 Pro 5G's battery is not only large but also delivers very good runtimes. With a suitable charger, the phone can be charged at up to 80 watts. In that case, a full charge takes just 51 minutes (50%: 22 min, 80%: 37 min).
| Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | |
| Average of class Smartphone (23.8 - 358, n=126, last 2 years) | |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 8450 (n=1) | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | Vivo X300 | Average 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 89% | 240% | 187% | 82% | 90% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s) | 1748.66 | 3756.44 115% | 4064.33 132% | 2056.87 18% | 1876 ? 7% | 2098 ? 20% |
| Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s) | 1701.38 | 2450.19 44% | 3987.65 134% | 1997.76 17% | 1366 ? -20% | 1797 ? 6% |
| Random Read 4KB (MB/s) | 237.39 | 382.44 61% | 575.86 143% | 332.61 40% | 289 ? 22% | 293 ? 23% |
| Random Write 4KB (MB/s) | 84.58 | 198.68 135% | 551.82 552% | 654.09 673% | 354 ? 319% | 347 ? 310% |
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 45.1 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 44.5 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
3DMark Stress Tests
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Vivo X300 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Vivo X300 | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| Solar Bay Stress Test Stability | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
| Vivo X300 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 35%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.3% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 35%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 7% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
| Battery runtime - WiFi v1.3 | |
| Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 FE | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | |
| Vivo X300 | |
Notebookcheck overall rating
The Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G impresses with its strong display, long battery life, capable cameras and generous update policy, but falls short in terms of performance, storage and features.
Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G
- 03/23/2026 v8
Daniel Schmidt
Total Sustainability Score: Possible alternatives at a glance
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 82.6%  | Oppo Reno15 Pro 5G MediaTek Dimensity 8450 ⎘ ARM Mali-G720 MP7 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB | List Price: 799€ | 188 g | 512 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.32" 2640x1216 460 PPI AMOLED |
2. 85.6%  | Samsung Galaxy S25 FE Samsung Exynos 2400 ⎘ Samsung Xclipse 940 ⎘ 8 GB Memory, 256 GB | Amazon: List Price: 809€ | 190 g | 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.70" 2340x1080 382 PPI AMOLED |
3. 88.2%  | Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB | List Price: 900€ | 220 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.90" 2608x1200 416 PPI AMOLED |
4. 88%  | Vivo X300 MediaTek Dimensity 9500 ⎘ Arm Mali G1- Ultra MC12 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB | List Price: 1049€ | 190 g | 256 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.31" 2640x1216 461 PPI AMOLED |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Add as a preferred
