Notebookcheck

Realme X50 Pro Smartphone Review - Price-performance Hit?

Peaks and valleys. The X50 Pro shines with a great case design and good specifications. However, the Realme flagship smartphone lacks a few premium features compared to its high-end competition. In this review, we will take a look at the drawbacks that buyers of the X50 Pro will have to contend with.
Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Marius S.),
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

On paper, the X50 Pro looks like a promising smartphone. The 6.44-inch 90-Hz Super-AMOLED panel is supposed to reach a brightness of above 1000 nits and offer full DCI-P3 coverage. Additionally, the smartphone comes with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, a fast UFS 3.0 storage interface and LPDDR5.

In Europe, the prices for the Realme flagship range from 599 Euros (~$674) for the model with 128 GB of storage space and 8 GB of RAM to 749 Euros (~$843) for the X50 Pro with 12 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage.

realme X50 Pro (X Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 8 x 2.4 - 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Graphics adapter
Memory
12288 MB 
Display
6.44 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 409 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, OLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 256 GB 
, 227 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: USB Type-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor, compass, OTG, Miracast
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 5G NR: n77/78/38/40/41/1/3/5/7/28; FDD-LTE: Bands 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/17/18/19/20/26/28/32/66; TD-LTE: Bands 38/39/40/41/42; WCDMA: B1/2/4/5/6/8/19; GSM: 850/900/1800/1900, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.9 x 158.96 x 74.24 ( = 0.35 x 6.26 x 2.92 in)
Battery
4200 mAh Lithium-Ion
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 64 MPix (26mm, FOV 78.6°, f/1.8, 6P lens Samsung GW1, 1/1.72”) + 12 MP (54.0mm, f/2.5, 5P lens) + 8 MP (15.7mm, FOV 119°) + 2MP (FOV 88.8°, f/2.4), Camera2 API: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix (FOV 80.4°, f/2.5, 5P lens Sony IMX 616) + 8 MP (FOV 105°, f/2.2, 5P lens)
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Onscreen, USB cable, modular charger, protective case, screen protector, realme UI, 24 Months Warranty, Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
205 g ( = 7.23 oz / 0.45 pounds), Power Supply: 115 g ( = 4.06 oz / 0.25 pounds)
Price
750 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
86 %
06/2020
realme X50 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
205 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.44"2400x1080
88 %
05/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
88 %
06/2020
OnePlus 8
SD 865, Adreno 650
180 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.55"2400x1080
87 %
04/2020
Huawei P40
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
175 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.10"2340x1080
81 %
05/2020
Motorola Edge
SD 765, Adreno 620
190 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.70"2340x1080
88 %
03/2020
Samsung Galaxy S20
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
163 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.20"3200x1440
Realme X50 Pro in Moss Green
Realme X50 Pro in Moss Green

The front of the X50 Pro consists of scratch-resistant 5th generation Corning Gorilla Glass, which seamlessly transitions into the metal frame. The back of the case is slightly curved, also made of glass and it is available in the frosted color variants "Moss Green" and "Rust Red", which look very visually appealing in our opinion.

While the 6.44-inch OLED panel is surrounded by slim bezels on the sides, the "chin" bezel in particular is fairly wide, resulting in a reduced screen-to-body ratio of only 85%, which is somewhat low compared to other devices in this price class. The punch-hole camera module, which houses both of the front cameras, disrupts the otherwise attractive design of the Realme flagship - like on the Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus, it looks fairly large due to the presence of two optics.

The build quality is excellent, the materials are of high quality, and the physical buttons sit firmly within the frame. However, the Realme phone does not have an IP certification.

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

Size Comparison

162.6 mm / 6.4 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.96 mm / 0.3528 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs161.6 mm / 6.36 inch 71.1 mm / 2.8 inch 9.3 mm / 0.3661 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs160.2 mm / 6.31 inch 72.9 mm / 2.87 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs158.96 mm / 6.26 inch 74.24 mm / 2.92 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 205 g0.4519 lbs151.7 mm / 5.97 inch 69.1 mm / 2.72 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 163 g0.3594 lbs148.9 mm / 5.86 inch 71.1 mm / 2.8 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs

Features - Realme Smartphone without an SD Card Reader

The features of the X50 Pro include Miracast, which makes it possible to wirelessly output video to external monitors, and USB OTG, which allows the smartphone to recognize external storage mediums - this is particularly handy, since there is no SD card reader. Even though the USB port comes in the Type-C form factor, it only supports USB 2.0 speeds.

Since the Realme phone supports Widevine DRM level L1, video content from streaming services can be viewed in HD quality. By contrast, there is no IR blaster, FM radio, or 3.5-mm headphone jack. Furthermore, the device lacks a notification LED and the always-on-display feature.

Top edge
Top edge
Left edge
Left edge
Right edge
Right edge
Bottom edge
Bottom edge

Software - X50 Pro with Android 10

The operating system of the X50 Pro is based on Android 10 and updated with security patches from April 2020. On top of the OS, the Chinese manufacturer has installed version 1.0 of its own UI.

Aside from visual adjustments, the system software also offers various customization options and a dark mode. Ex-factory, there are some bloatware apps preinstalled and some of them cannot even be uninstalled (e.g. Netflix).

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

Communication and GPS - Realme X50 Pro with fast Wi-Fi

The Realme X50 Pro supports the latest Wi-Fi standard Wi-Fi 6 in both the 2.4-GHz and the 5.0-GHz frequency ranges. Since the Realme smartphone supports MIMO technology, the X50 Pro achieves good results in our Wi-Fi test. In conjunction with our reference router Netgear Nighthawk AX12, the data transfer rates are fast and fairly consistent.

Furthermore, the mono-SIM phone supports all modern standards that can be used to connect to mobile communications networks, and it is compatible with a very wide range of frequencies. This includes 5G for download speeds of up to 3.45 Gb/s and many LTE bands such as band 28 and 32.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1368 (1104min - 1442max) MBit/s ∼100% +50%
realme X50 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
914 (888min - 928max) MBit/s ∼67%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
903 (881min - 916max) MBit/s ∼66% -1%
OnePlus 8
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
894 (864min - 925max) MBit/s ∼65% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
827 (791min - 846max) MBit/s ∼60% -10%
Motorola Edge
Adreno 620, SD 765, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
561 (216min - 668max) MBit/s ∼41% -39%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=618)
286 MBit/s ∼21% -69%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1296 (1095min - 1376max) MBit/s ∼100% +53%
OnePlus 8
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
937 (466min - 960max) MBit/s ∼72% +10%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
882 (847min - 902max) MBit/s ∼68% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
867 (440min - 907max) MBit/s ∼67% +2%
realme X50 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
849 (414min - 930max) MBit/s ∼66%
Motorola Edge
Adreno 620, SD 765, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
657 (608min - 667max) MBit/s ∼51% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=618)
273 MBit/s ∼21% -68%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920930Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø912 (888-928)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø836 (414-930)
GPS indoors
GPS indoors
GPS outdoors
GPS outdoors

The X50 Pro accesses both the L1 and the L5 bands, the latter of which is primarily used in the professional space, to determine the position. In our review unit, the satellite networks GPS, GLONASS, Galileo and BeiDou are used.

In order to test the real-world accuracy of our test device, we simultaneously recorded the route with the navi Garmin Edge 500 and the Realme smartphone. The detailed course of the GPS route only shows small deviations. At the end of the test track, only a distance of 200 meters separates the smartphone GPS module from the navigation device. Thus, the locating capabilities suffice for daily navigation tasks.

GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS realme X50 Pro
GPS realme X50 Pro
GPS realme X50 Pro
GPS realme X50 Pro
GPS realme X50 Pro
GPS realme X50 Pro

Telephony and Call Quality - Realme Smartphone with VoLTE

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

We did not encounter any issues when making video calls via Skype using the front camera. The call quality with the Realme smartphone's integrated microphone is solid.

We were also pleased with the call quality over cellular networks. The voice of our conversational partner sounds distinct and the volume level is sufficient. Users of the X50 Pro also have access to VoLTE and Wi-Fi calling.

Cameras - X50 Pro with Quad-cam System

Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Wide-angle selfie
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Wide-angle selfie
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Ultra-wide-angle selfie
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Ultra-wide-angle selfie

The selfie cameras are based on a 32-MP wide-angle camera (Sony IMX616) and an ultra-wide-angle optics with a 105-degree field of view and a resolution of 8 MP. However, the Chinese manufacturer could have simply omitted the latter, since it often fails to achieve a satisfactory level of sharpness in addition to making skin tones look unnatural. Conversely, the primary wide-angle camera shines with good sharpness and an appealing color representation.

Like cheaper Realme models, the main camera on the X50 Pro relies on the 64-MP sensor GW1 from Samsung. The pictures possess a good dynamic range and color reproduction, although the photos always suffer from an increased color temperature. In low-light situations, the Realme flagship reveals its weak points. While the image sharpness is good in daylight shots, it quickly declines with worsening lighting conditions. Similarly, the X50 Pro's pictures suffer from noticeable image noise.

The 12-MP telephoto lens only has a focal length of 54 mm, which translates to about 2x lossless optical zoom. The 20x maximum zoom level specified by the manufacturer primarily relies on a digital zoom that generally results in zoomed-in pictures with a poorer quality. However, pictures taken at lower zoom levels (5x) are more than suitable for social media, even though there are noticeable artifacts as well as exposure and sharpness issues.

The 8-MP ultra-wide-angle main camera captures a 119-degree angle. Unfortunately, the quality of the results is insufficient for the price category of our test device. Details of complex structures get lost in blurriness and indistinct outlines.

With the April update, Realme has unlocked the UHD-60-FPS video mode for the X50 Pro. Sadly, the resulting video recordings look unnaturally fast, as if they were shot in time lapse, and movements appear fake and the image looks grainy. Furthermore, any semblance of image stabilization during video recordings is barely noticeable. Due to the poor quality of 4K60 recordings, users should instead use 4K30. The image stabilization at 1080p and 60 FPS is satisfactory as well.

Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Ultra-wide-angle
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Ultra-wide-angle
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Wide-angle
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: Wide-angle
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: 2x zoom
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: 2x zoom
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: 5x zoom
Picture taken with the X50 Pro: 5x zoom
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3Scene 4Scene 5

Our tests under controlled lighting conditions confirm our real-world impression. Particularly the autofocus does not do a good job in darkness, which results in a lack of sharpness. While the X50 Pro produces convincing results in good lighting, the edges are blurry and the image appears somewhat grainy.

In well-lit scenes, the color reproduction is adequate, although the software of the X50 Pro overexposes colors and makes white tones look too warm.

ColorChecker
27.6 ∆E
43 ∆E
36.5 ∆E
33.4 ∆E
40.3 ∆E
53.1 ∆E
41.9 ∆E
29.6 ∆E
29.4 ∆E
28.3 ∆E
52.1 ∆E
54.9 ∆E
29.9 ∆E
40.2 ∆E
23.1 ∆E
49.6 ∆E
34.2 ∆E
40.2 ∆E
46.7 ∆E
48.6 ∆E
44.5 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
ColorChecker realme X50 Pro: 37.51 ∆E min: 13.91 - max: 54.92 ∆E
ColorChecker
21.4 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
14.3 ∆E
24.5 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
16 ∆E
10.8 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
7 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
16.1 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
16.6 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
14.7 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
ColorChecker realme X50 Pro: 11.42 ∆E min: 2.33 - max: 24.46 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - Realme Phone with Protective Case

"SuperDart" AC adapter rated for 65 watts
"SuperDart" AC adapter rated for 65 watts

Aside from a modular AC adapter that is rated for 65 watts, the package includes a USB cable and a silicone case.

The BBK Electronics subsidiary offers a 24-month warranty period.

Input Devices & Handling - Realme X50 Pro with an In-display Fingerprint Sensor

Both the refresh rate of 90 Hz and the touch-sampling rate of the touchscreen (180 Hz) exceed the 60-Hz mark by a large margin, making the 6.44-inch OLED panel feel particularly responsive.

Below the display, there is an optical fingerprint sensor that responds fast as well. Biometrically authenticating yourself via facial recognition with the front camera also works quickly and reliably, although this is not the most secure method (2D). Furthermore, the fingerprint sensor is disabled while facial recognition is in progress.

As soon as the user has been identified by the front camera, an additional swipe is necessary to wake the Realme phone up from standby, which can definitely be an annoyance during daily use. This is made worse by the fact that the fingerprint sensor is too far at the bottom of the display, which often makes it hard to reach.

The vibration motor of the X50 Pro produces a good haptic feedback and creates a high-quality impression overall. Although it is not as precise as the in-house competition OnePlus 8 Pro or the rival Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro, typing on the Realme phone is still a very comfortable experience.

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

Display - X50 Pro with 90-Hz OLED Panel

Subpixel array
Subpixel array
DC dimming mode
DC dimming mode

The 6.44-inch 90-Hz OLED display has an HDR 10 certification and a native resolution of 2340x1080 pixels for a pixel density of just above 400 PPI. As a result, the Realme smartphone is on par with its competitors. With a 1440p resolution, the Samsung Galaxy S20 is the only device with a noticeably clearer display.

While the luminance of the OLED panel within the X50 Pro is excellent for its price class, a direct comparison with the competition shows that there is room for improvement. When displaying an all-white image while the ambient light sensor is enabled, the screen reaches an average brightness of 690 cd/m². This value rises substantially when displaying an even distribution of bright and dark areas for an APL50 value of 840 cd/m², which is still suboptimal for HDR10+ content. That being said, it is possible that an APL10 test could produce even better results than our APL50 test. After disabling the ambient light sensor, the screen's maximum brightness drops to 486 cd/m².

At a refresh rate of 90 Hz, the X50 Pro uses PWM that ranges from a fairly high frequency of 368 Hz to a relatively low frequency of 119.6 Hz to control the brightness of its display. A DC dimming mode is available as well.

686
cd/m²
688
cd/m²
700
cd/m²
689
cd/m²
679
cd/m²
695
cd/m²
689
cd/m²
683
cd/m²
703
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 703 cd/m² Average: 690.2 cd/m² Minimum: 3.85 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 679 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.2 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.7
ΔE Greyscale 4.1 | 0.64-98 Ø5.9
92.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.28
realme X50 Pro
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.44
Xiaomi Mi 10
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
OnePlus 8
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Huawei P40
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.10
Motorola Edge
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.70
Samsung Galaxy S20
AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.20
Screen
36%
37%
7%
-32%
19%
Brightness middle
679
786
16%
778
15%
583
-14%
427
-37%
745
10%
Brightness
690
791
15%
783
13%
593
-14%
438
-37%
740
7%
Brightness Distribution
97
96
-1%
95
-2%
94
-3%
94
-3%
97
0%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.2
1.1
66%
0.9
72%
3.03
5%
5.34
-67%
2.67
17%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
6.2
2.2
65%
2.2
65%
5.33
14%
9.33
-50%
4.52
27%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.1
1.8
56%
1.7
59%
2
51%
4
2%
2
51%
Gamma
2.28 96%
2.26 97%
2.25 98%
2.301 96%
2.315 95%
2.092 105%
CCT
6604 98%
6315 103%
6481 100%
6621 98%
7221 90%
6240 104%

* ... 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 9604 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Due to the OLED screen type, the black value of the Realme phone is outstanding and the contrast ratio is excellent (theoretically infinite). Aside from a great contrast ratio, the X50 Pro also has a good color-space coverage. While the panel is quite accurate ex-factory, it falls short of the panels of a OnePlus 8 or Xiaomi Mi 10. According to the analysis of our spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software, the average DeltaE deviations from the P3 color space amount to 3.2 and 4.1 for the colors and grayscale, respectively (profile: warm).

CalMAN color accuracy (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN color accuracy (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN color space (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN color space (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN grayscale (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN grayscale (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN saturation sweeps (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN saturation sweeps (target color space sRGB), color profile: Gentle, warm
CalMAN color accuracy (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN color accuracy (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN color space (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN color space (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN grayscale (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN grayscale (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN color saturation (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN color saturation (target color space P3), color profile: Default, vivid
CalMAN color accuracy (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN color accuracy (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN color space (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN color space (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN grayscale (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN grayscale (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN saturation sweeps (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm
CalMAN saturation sweeps (target color space P3), color profile: Vivid, warm

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
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 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 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % 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 its high contrast ratio and good brightness, the X50 Pro is well-suited for outdoor use even in sunny weather.

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

The viewing angles of the OLED panel are good. Even when viewing the display from a steep angle, the apparent brightness barely decreases.

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

Performance - Realme Smartphone with a Snapdragon 865

Realme has opted to use a Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 as the SoC of its flagship smartphone. The high-end chipset comes with one fast "prime core" that reaches up to 2.84 GHz and three additional Cortex A77-based performance cores with clock speeds of up to 2.42 GHz. For energy conservation purposes, there are also four ARM Cortex-A55 cores (1.8 GHz). The powerful Adreno 650 is the graphics unit within the Qualcomm SoC.

The X50 Pro owes its great performance results in our benchmarks not just to its Snapdragon 865 SoC and the use of a vapor chamber cooling solution but also to the fast quad-channel LPDDR5 RAM and UFS 3.0 flash storage. Some of the CPU benchmark scores are very high. Particularly the X50 Pro's work performance score in PCMark for Android is in a league of its own. By contrast, the Geekbench 5.1 results are somewhat underwhelming.

Thanks to the excellent system performance during daily use, the experience is smooth for the most part. With UFS storage and the responsive panel, applications can be launched almost instantly. However, system benchmarks have their limits in terms of representing real-world scenarios, since unlike what their results might suggest, the Realme phone occasionally freezes and there is stuttering in apps, which is rather unusual for a Snapdragon 865 device. This impression is cemented by FPS drops in games with CPU-heavy demands (more on that in the gaming section).

Browsing the web with the X50 Pro is a very enjoyable experience. Navigating complex web pages with the Chrome browser feels fast and responsive. Similarly, the Realme smartphone achieves exceptional results in the browser benchmarks.

Geekbench 5.1 - 5.3
Vulkan Score 5.1 (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3259 Points ∼89%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2549 Points ∼69% -22%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2663 Points ∼73% -18%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2693 Points ∼73% -17%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
977 Points ∼27% -70%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3670 Points ∼100% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2487 - 3259, n=9)
2713 Points ∼74% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=67)
1648 Points ∼45% -49%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3067 Points ∼85%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2829 Points ∼78% -8%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3001 Points ∼83% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3606 Points ∼100% +18%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
1054 Points ∼29% -66%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2829 - 3080, n=9)
2972 Points ∼82% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=62)
1778 Points ∼49% -42%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3087 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3309 Points ∼97% +7%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3427 Points ∼100% +11%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2988 Points ∼87% -3%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
1869 Points ∼55% -39%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
2731 Points ∼80% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2687 - 3449, n=19)
3262 Points ∼95% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 4160, n=142)
1973 Points ∼58% -36%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
915 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
910 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
919 Points ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
755 Points ∼82% -17%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
589 Points ∼64% -36%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
903 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (764 - 924, n=19)
902 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1604, n=142)
570 Points ∼62% -38%
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9576 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9443 - 9739, n=5)
9559 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=361)
4905 Points ∼51% -49%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13589 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (13186 - 13589, n=5)
13396 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 13589, n=425)
5018 Points ∼37% -63%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4304 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4261 - 4304, n=5)
4281 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4965, n=425)
1533 Points ∼36% -64%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13202 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10613 Points ∼80% -20%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10800 Points ∼82% -18%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8736 Points ∼66% -34%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
8336 Points ∼63% -37%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10431 Points ∼79% -21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9202 - 15299, n=20)
11252 Points ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=542)
6032 Points ∼46% -54%
Work performance score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
19711 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11850 Points ∼60% -40%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13079 Points ∼66% -34%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11268 Points ∼57% -43%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
10045 Points ∼51% -49%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
14708 Points ∼75% -25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10990 - 19989, n=19)
13591 Points ∼69% -31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=699)
6631 Points ∼34% -66%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3947 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3336 Points ∼85% -15%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3763 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3684 Points ∼93% -7%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
2810 Points ∼71% -29%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3112 Points ∼79% -21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1788 - 4061, n=17)
3560 Points ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4061, n=194)
2667 Points ∼68% -32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8263 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8175 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8294 Points ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6326 Points ∼76% -23%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
2786 Points ∼34% -66%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6315 Points ∼76% -24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7618 - 9104, n=17)
8246 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 11259, n=194)
3096 Points ∼37% -63%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6644 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6182 Points ∼93% -7%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6543 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5456 Points ∼82% -18%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
2791 Points ∼42% -58%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5139 Points ∼77% -23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4604 - 6961, n=18)
6335 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6977, n=194)
2741 Points ∼41% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5523 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5187 Points ∼94% -6%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5401 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4924 Points ∼89% -11%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3442 Points ∼62% -38%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4063 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5028 - 5780, n=18)
5384 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=548)
2261 Points ∼41% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9567 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9389 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9542 Points ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6606 Points ∼69% -31%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3165 Points ∼33% -67%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8106 Points ∼85% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8633 - 9567, n=18)
9386 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 12146, n=548)
2247 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8204 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7957 Points ∼97% -3%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8153 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6140 Points ∼75% -25%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3223 Points ∼39% -61%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6638 Points ∼81% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7517 - 8269, n=19)
8053 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 9643, n=549)
2081 Points ∼25% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5478 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3973 Points ∼73% -27%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5406 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4998 Points ∼91% -9%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3449 Points ∼63% -37%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3935 Points ∼72% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3956 - 5765, n=18)
5101 Points ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=580)
2177 Points ∼40% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12895 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12601 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12873 Points ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4293 Points ∼33% -67%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
4829 Points ∼37% -63%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
11301 Points ∼88% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11956 - 13044, n=18)
12718 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 21465, n=580)
3052 Points ∼24% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9910 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8499 Points ∼86% -14%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9850 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4432 Points ∼45% -55%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
4435 Points ∼45% -55%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
7981 Points ∼81% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8499 - 10090, n=18)
9531 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 11895, n=580)
2526 Points ∼25% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5068 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4813 Points ∼95% -5%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4879 Points ∼96% -4%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4242 Points ∼84% -16%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3435 Points ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3963 Points ∼78% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 5209, n=18)
4951 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5262, n=629)
2137 Points ∼42% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8345 Points ∼99%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8371 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8288 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6244 Points ∼74% -25%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
2897 Points ∼34% -65%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8411 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6511 - 9167, n=18)
8212 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 11573, n=629)
1886 Points ∼22% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7293 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7190 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7174 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5651 Points ∼77% -23%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3001 Points ∼41% -59%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6732 Points ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5996 - 7653, n=19)
7156 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 9138, n=630)
1786 Points ∼24% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5034 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4196 Points ∼83% -17%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4819 Points ∼96% -4%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4279 Points ∼85% -15%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3435 Points ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4015 Points ∼80% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3965 - 5274, n=18)
4841 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=671)
2008 Points ∼40% -60%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11533 Points ∼94%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12234 Points ∼100% +6%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11540 Points ∼94% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3894 Points ∼32% -66%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
4671 Points ∼38% -59%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6388 Points ∼52% -45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10665 - 13305, n=18)
11773 Points ∼96% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 16670, n=670)
2498 Points ∼20% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8947 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8581 Points ∼96% -4%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8810 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3973 Points ∼44% -56%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
4325 Points ∼48% -52%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5646 Points ∼63% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8215 - 9611, n=18)
8923 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 11256, n=673)
2132 Points ∼24% -76%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
33793 Points ∼99%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
Points ∼0% -100%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
27026 Points ∼80% -20%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
22857 Points ∼67% -32%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
20185 Points ∼59% -40%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (17817 - 58293, n=17)
33986 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 59268, n=815)
15783 Points ∼46% -53%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
145603 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
Points ∼0% -100%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
144611 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
66142 Points ∼45% -55%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
62819 Points ∼43% -57%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (110875 - 154375, n=17)
145570 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 221179, n=813)
28213 Points ∼19% -81%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
83917 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
Points ∼0% -100%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
72524 Points ∼86% -14%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46552 Points ∼55% -45%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
42752 Points ∼51% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (56045 - 112989, n=17)
82107 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=813)
21752 Points ∼26% -74%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
204 fps ∼99%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
202 fps ∼98% -1%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
207 fps ∼100% +1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
151 fps ∼73% -26%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
87 fps ∼42% -57%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
199 fps ∼96% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (168 - 209, n=19)
203 fps ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=813)
47.3 fps ∼23% -77%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼100% +50%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼67% 0%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
78 fps ∼87% +30%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼67% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (50 - 138, n=19)
76.1 fps ∼85% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 138, n=822)
31.9 fps ∼35% -47%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
124 fps ∼99%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
123 fps ∼98% -1%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
125 fps ∼100% +1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
100 fps ∼80% -19%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
50 fps ∼40% -60%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
108 fps ∼86% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (96 - 130, n=19)
122 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 180, n=718)
28.1 fps ∼22% -77%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼68%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100% +47%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼68% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46 fps ∼52% -23%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
48 fps ∼55% -20%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼68% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (50 - 111, n=19)
72.2 fps ∼82% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=726)
23.2 fps ∼26% -61%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
86 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
88 fps ∼100% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
33 fps ∼38% -62%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
33 fps ∼38% -62%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
85 fps ∼97% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (67 - 90, n=20)
85 fps ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=581)
22.5 fps ∼26% -74%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼80%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
75 fps ∼100% +25%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼80% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
57 fps ∼76% -5%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
32 fps ∼43% -47%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
59 fps ∼79% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (43 - 83, n=20)
60.5 fps ∼81% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=583)
20.1 fps ∼27% -66%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
30 fps ∼97%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
29 fps ∼94% -3%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
31 fps ∼100% +3%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
27 fps ∼87% -10%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
12 fps ∼39% -60%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
22 fps ∼71% -27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (18 - 32, n=21)
27.5 fps ∼89% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=340)
11.7 fps ∼38% -61%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
29 fps ∼100% +45%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
7.5 fps ∼26% -62%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (20 - 21, n=21)
20.1 fps ∼69% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=338)
8.23 fps ∼28% -59%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
46 fps ∼92%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
46 fps ∼92% 0%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
48 fps ∼96% +4%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
42 fps ∼84% -9%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
20 fps ∼40% -57%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼100% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28 - 53, n=21)
42.9 fps ∼86% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=344)
17.4 fps ∼35% -62%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
53 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
53 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
54 fps ∼100% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
49 fps ∼91% -8%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
21 fps ∼39% -60%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
54 fps ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (27 - 56, n=21)
51.9 fps ∼96% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=343)
20 fps ∼37% -62%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼96% -2%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
52 fps ∼100% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
43 fps ∼83% -16%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
19 fps ∼37% -63%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼96% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (39 - 54, n=20)
50.5 fps ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 75, n=506)
15.1 fps ∼29% -70%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
44 fps ∼96%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
42 fps ∼91% -5%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
46 fps ∼100% +5%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
36 fps ∼78% -18%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
18 fps ∼39% -59%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
43 fps ∼93% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (25 - 48, n=20)
40.1 fps ∼87% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=510)
13.3 fps ∼29% -70%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
593933 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
566256 Points ∼95% -5%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
563466 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
450373 Points ∼76% -24%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
304120 Points ∼51% -49%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
504192 Points ∼85% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (527301 - 607937, n=20)
577591 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 622888, n=136)
325471 Points ∼55% -45%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1576 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1276 Points ∼81% -19%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1498 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1260 Points ∼80% -20%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
1399 Points ∼89% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
1274 Points ∼81% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1276 - 1650, n=19)
1467 Points ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=750)
834 Points ∼53% -47%
Graphics (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11688 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11730 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11654 Points ∼99% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8634 Points ∼74% -26%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
4681 Points ∼40% -60%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10703 Points ∼91% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11399 - 12073, n=19)
11701 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=750)
2592 Points ∼22% -78%
Memory (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8204 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7450 Points ∼91% -9%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6912 Points ∼84% -16%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6942 Points ∼85% -15%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
4528 Points ∼55% -45%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4271 Points ∼52% -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5304 - 8874, n=19)
7136 Points ∼87% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=750)
1939 Points ∼24% -76%
System (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10147 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9810 Points ∼97% -3%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10021 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8992 Points ∼89% -11%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
6612 Points ∼65% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8843 Points ∼87% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8421 - 10147, n=19)
9736 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=750)
3543 Points ∼35% -65%
Overall (sort by value)
realme X50 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6205 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5752 Points ∼93% -7%
OnePlus 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5897 Points ∼95% -5%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5105 Points ∼82% -18%
Motorola Edge
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765, Adreno 620, 6144
3742 Points ∼60% -40%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4764 Points ∼77% -23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5264 - 6273, n=19)
5861 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=750)
1818 Points ∼29% -71%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
realme X50 Pro (Chrome 83)
69.54 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (45.2 - 77, n=17)
63.9 Points ∼92% -8%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
55.572 Points ∼80% -20%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
53.863 Points ∼77% -23%
OnePlus 8 (Chrome 83)
51.341 Points ∼74% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
50.878 Points ∼73% -27%
Motorola Edge (Chrome 81)
48.341 Points ∼70% -30%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 161, n=209)
42.2 Points ∼61% -39%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
realme X50 Pro (Chrome 83)
116.67 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (74.2 - 126, n=18)
111 Points ∼95% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
109.2 Points ∼94% -6%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
103.24 Points ∼88% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
93.499 Points ∼80% -20%
Motorola Edge (Chrome 81)
87.81 Points ∼75% -25%
OnePlus 8 (Chrome 83)
79.083 Points ∼68% -32%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 343, n=642)
49.1 Points ∼42% -58%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
realme X50 Pro (Chrome 83)
67.3 runs/min ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (30.6 - 74.5, n=17)
63.4 runs/min ∼94% -6%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
63 runs/min ∼94% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
56.2 runs/min ∼84% -16%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chome 80)
50.8 runs/min ∼75% -25%
OnePlus 8 (Chrome 83)
50.8 runs/min ∼75% -25%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 196, n=190)
44.5 runs/min ∼66% -34%
Motorola Edge (Chome 81)
26.8 runs/min ∼40% -60%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
118 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (97 - 127, n=19)
106 Points ∼90% +4%
realme X50 Pro (Chrome 83)
102 Points ∼86%
OnePlus 8 (Chrome 83)
99 Points ∼84% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
97 Points ∼82% -5%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
95 Points ∼81% -7%
Motorola Edge (Chrome 81)
72 Points ∼61% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 194, n=279)
70.9 Points ∼60% -30%
Octane V2 - Total Score
realme X50 Pro
23768 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
22016 Points ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (14606 - 24467, n=19)
21838 Points ∼92% -8%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
21348 Points ∼90% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
18162 Points ∼76% -24%
Motorola Edge (Chrome 81)
17700 Points ∼74% -26%
OnePlus 8 (Chrome 83)
15745 Points ∼66% -34%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 58488, n=811)
8209 Points ∼35% -65%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (460 - 59466, n=837)
9596 ms * ∼100% -380%
Motorola Edge (Chrome 81)
2753.6 ms * ∼29% -38%
OnePlus 8 (Chrome 83)
2538.1 ms * ∼26% -27%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
2511.2 ms * ∼26% -26%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
2287 ms * ∼24% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
2103.5 ms * ∼22% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (1839 - 2911, n=20)
2032 ms * ∼21% -2%
realme X50 Pro (Chrome 83)
1999.7 ms * ∼21%
realme X50 Pro
0 ms * ∼0% +100%

* ... smaller is better

realme X50 ProXiaomi Mi 10OnePlus 8Huawei P40Motorola EdgeSamsung Galaxy S20Average 256 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-12%
-7%
-30%
-41%
-11%
-18%
-80%
Random Write 4KB
251.98
215.95
-14%
203.85
-19%
197
-22%
145.2
-42%
228.1
-9%
184 (24.8 - 272, n=20)
-27%
38.4 (0.14 - 319, n=911)
-85%
Random Read 4KB
229.38
207.04
-10%
215
-6%
189.4
-17%
150.5
-34%
205.3
-10%
208 (169 - 265, n=20)
-9%
61.6 (1.59 - 325, n=911)
-73%
Sequential Write 256KB
756.21
679.51
-10%
747.87
-1%
212.9
-72%
451.7
-40%
669.9
-11%
546 (387 - 756, n=20)
-28%
135 (2.99 - 1321, n=911)
-82%
Sequential Read 256KB
1756.1
1498.15
-15%
1706.7
-3%
1591.6
-9%
940.9
-46%
1541.7
-12%
1603 (1398 - 1789, n=20)
-9%
355 (12.1 - 2037, n=911)
-80%

Gaming - Realme X50 Pro Contains a Powerful GPU

The integrated gyroscope works well during gaming and the touchscreen accurately detects inputs.

The graphics performance of the Adreno 650 is sufficient for running demanding games such as the shooter PUBG Mobile smoothly at the highest quality settings.

However, the full 90 Hz rate is not available in the games we tested, even though some of them should in theory be compatible with it. Meanwhile, the 30-FPS mark currently cannot be surpassed in the CPU-intensive racing simulator Asphalt 9. Here, the results also show visible frame-rate dips despite the low frame rates that do not typically occur on other Snapdragon 865 devices. We used the app Gamebench to record the frame rates.

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
PUBG mobile
0102030405060Tooltip
; Balanced: Ø59.8 (53-60)
; HD: Ø59.8 (57-60)
Asphalt 9 Legends
010203040Tooltip
: Ø29.5 (17-31)

Emissions - Realme Phone with Stereo Speakers

Temperature

Even under continuous load, the case temperature of the X50 Pro barely increases and instead remains comfortably cool. On the inside, the VC liquid cooling solution keeps the temperatures in check. Here, the vapor chamber (VC) cooling solution dissipates heat over an area of 18 cm² - for comparison the Mi 10 Pro uses an area of 30 cm² - and allows for consistent performance during the GFXBench battery test. During the demanding Manhattan test (OpenGL ES 3.1), the Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 within the Realme phone barely throttles even under continuous load. Thus, performance dips caused by excessively high temperatures are very unlikely to occur during day-to-day use, for example while gaming.

Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Max. Load
 31 °C
88 F
30.8 °C
87 F
29 °C
84 F
 
 31.5 °C
89 F
31 °C
88 F
28.9 °C
84 F
 
 30.8 °C
87 F
31.8 °C
89 F
29 °C
84 F
 
Maximum: 31.8 °C = 89 F
Average: 30.4 °C = 87 F
27.9 °C
82 F
28.9 °C
84 F
29.3 °C
85 F
27.5 °C
82 F
28.5 °C
83 F
29.9 °C
86 F
27.5 °C
82 F
29.1 °C
84 F
29.9 °C
86 F
Maximum: 29.9 °C = 86 F
Average: 28.7 °C = 84 F
Power Supply (max.)  23.2 °C = 74 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.4 °C / 87 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 31.8 °C / 89 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 29.9 °C / 86 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.3 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review
Realme X50 Pro smartphone review

Speakers

Speaker test: Pink noise
Speaker test: Pink noise

Thanks to hi-res audio support and a Dolby Atmos certification, the stereo speakers of the X50 Pro produce decent sound at medium volume levels. The sound is defined by medium and high frequencies. While our measurements show the audible range to be relatively linear, the pink noise diagram of the Xiaomi Mi 10 is even more balanced.

Headphones can be connected via USB Type-C or Bluetooth 5.1 for a better audio experience, whereas a 3.5-mm headphone jack is not available. Bluetooth codec support includes APTX, APTX HD, and LDAC.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.539.22529.426.93122.826.24025.325.85030.236.46323.324.48021.924.5100192212519.632.41601946.120016.146.825018.954.631516.659.540014.361.5500156563015.269.480014.371.2100014.372.1125014.273.1160014.874.9200014.875.1250014.475.6315014.377.8400014.680.7500014.779.4630014.974800014.970.51000014.668.31250014.855.61600015.448.3SPL26.887.7N0.969.3median 14.8median 69.4Delta1.41132.828.826.228.123.32521.925.52831.119.924.419.122.519.926.116.531.619.644.517.544.317.55113.956.713.961.415.865.215.265.61466.3146713.970.313.473.113.874.514.374.91473.414.572.714.670.914.569.414.768.415.165.41561.914.849.326.583.50.854.8median 14.6median 65.619.9hearing rangehide median Pink Noiserealme X50 ProXiaomi Mi 10
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
realme X50 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 23% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% 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%

Xiaomi Mi 10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 38% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 55% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Energy Management - X50 Pro with Good Runtimes

Energy Consumption

The 4200 mAh battery of the X50 Pro can be fully recharged within 45 minutes thanks to the "SuperDart" quick-charging technology, which promises a charge rate of 65 watts. Wireless charging is not supported by the Realme smartphone.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.03 / 0.49 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1 / 1.77 / 1.86 Watt
Load midlight 4.23 / 9.13 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
realme X50 Pro
4200 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 10
4780 mAh
OnePlus 8
4300 mAh
Huawei P40
3800 mAh
Motorola Edge
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
19%
-2%
1%
4%
-4%
-19%
8%
Idle Minimum *
1
0.53
47%
0.9
10%
1
-0%
1
-0%
0.9
10%
1.175 (0.52 - 2.2, n=18)
-18%
0.89 (0.2 - 3.4, n=907)
11%
Idle Average *
1.77
1.46
18%
2.3
-30%
1.9
-7%
1.4
21%
1.5
15%
2.08 (1.19 - 3.43, n=18)
-18%
1.756 (0.6 - 6.2, n=906)
1%
Idle Maximum *
1.86
1.52
18%
2.33
-25%
2.4
-29%
2
-8%
2
-8%
2.34 (1.23 - 4, n=18)
-26%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=907)
-10%
Load Average *
4.23
3.83
9%
3.5
17%
3.5
17%
4.8
-13%
4.8
-13%
5.28 (3.5 - 7.4, n=18)
-25%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=901)
3%
Load Maximum *
9.13
8.89
3%
7.68
16%
6.9
24%
7.3
20%
11.5
-26%
9.73 (7.67 - 12.3, n=18)
-7%
6.12 (1.2 - 14.2, n=901)
33%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

In our Wi-Fi test, for which we set the display's brightness to 150 cd/m², the X50 Pro achieves good results. Despite the 90-Hz panel, the Chinese manufacturer has managed to squeeze almost 13 hours of battery life out of the 6.44-inch smartphone. Under load, the runtimes are similar to those of the Mi 10, even though the X50 Pro comes with a significantly smaller battery. That being said, Realme did not manage to match the runtimes of its in-house competitor, the OnePlus 8.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
25h 07min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
12h 55min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
17h 9min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 14min
realme X50 Pro
4200 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 10
4780 mAh
OnePlus 8
4300 mAh
Huawei P40
3800 mAh
Motorola Edge
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
7%
5%
16%
31%
14%
Reader / Idle
1507
1789
19%
1374
-9%
2063
37%
2515
67%
2105
40%
H.264
1029
1126
9%
1096
7%