Notebookcheck

Vivo Nex Ultimate Smartphone Review

Florian Wimmer, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Moritz Jordan), 07/24/2018

The full broadside. The display of the Vivo Nex Ultimate covers 91% of the front. Thanks to all sorts of innovative ideas, this works even without a notch. This review will tell you, if the Chinese high-end smartphone is suitable for everyday life, or if it is just a showpiece.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Vivo Nex Ultimate

Everyone knows these full-bodied promises about smartphones with bezel-less displays: Lenovo for example, failed badly with its Z5. The compromise solution - a notch in the display, which houses the camera, sensors, and earphone - was not very well received by the customers. The Chinese manufacturer Vivo however, does not make only promises. In fact, they sent us a smartphone (via tradingshenzhen.com), whose display covers almost its entire front: no notch, very small bezels, and a front-facing camera extending from the top of the case if necessary. The Vivo Nex Ultimate appeals at first glance and is surprisingly well tailored to western users.

Vivo asks a high-end price of 699 Euros (~$820). However, the smartphone features plenty of the latest technology and up-to-date high-end components. With the Samsung Galaxy Note 8, the OnePlus 6, the LG G7 ThinQ, and the Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S, there is already a strong competition on the market.

Vivo Nex Ultimate (Nex Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.59 inch 2.14:1, 2316 x 1080 pixel 388 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, Super AMOLED, glossy: yes
Storage
256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 235 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3,5mm-Audioport, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: super sonic, compass, acceleration, gyroscope
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM 900/1800/1900 MHz;3G 850/900/1900/2100MHz; LTE (B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B12/B17/B18/B19/B20/B25/B26/B28A/B28B), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.98 x 162 x 77 ( = 0.31 x 6.38 x 3.03 in)
Battery
15.2 Wh, 4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Quick Charge 4
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix F/1.8, OIS, Dual-LED flash 5 MP F/2.4
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix F/2.0, extendable
Additional features
Keyboard: virtual keyboard, quick charger, charging cable, headset, SIM tool, Funtouch OS, designs, , fingerprint reader behind the display, USB OTG, piezo-electric earphone, LTE Cat. 16 (1 GBit/s download, 150 MBit/s upload), fanless
Weight
199 g ( = 7.02 oz / 0.44 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
699 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case - Stylish chassis

The Vivo Nex Ultimate is hard to get in western countries, you have to import it from China. Currently, you can order the device in red or black. In the future, there will be a blue option as well. Our review unit has a black case. The back looks very stylish with its dot pattern, breaking the light and shimmering in different colors. Apart from that, the back is made from glass, which is not very scratch resistant, and even feels like simple plastic. Our review unit has a protective foil on the back, which certainly protects the surface, but does not look very good: a mediocre quality impression for a smartphone in this price range.

The Vivo Nex Ultimate is relatively heavy and large. The dimensions are similar to those of the Samsung Galaxy Note 8. At nearly 8 mm (~0.3 in), the thickness is within the usual range. The extendable camera does not seem to require additional room. You can hardly warp the device, but you can push in the back significantly, which also reduces the quality impression.

Size comparison

Connectivity - The Vivo Nex Ultimate features plenty of storage

The Vivo Nex Ultimate device is equipped with 8 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage. Vivo offers a version with 6 GB of RAM and 128 GB of storage as well. The storage cannot be extended by a microSD card.

The USB-C port is located at the bottom of the device. It transfers data with only USB 2.0 speed, but features USB OTG. The 3.5 mm headphone jack is located at the top.

Left side: button for Jovi
Left side: button for Jovi
Right side: standby button, volume control
Right side: standby button, volume control
Bottom: SIM slot, microphone, USB-C, speaker
Bottom: SIM slot, microphone, USB-C, speaker
Top: 3.5 mm headphone jack, microphone, extendable front camera
Top: 3.5 mm headphone jack, microphone, extendable front camera

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

Software - Independent Android version on the Vivo Nex Ultimate

The operating system of the Vivo Nex Ultimate is based on the current Android 8.1, which is almost not recognizable. In fact, the operation system is oriented towards another famous mobile operating system: Apple’s iOS. It has a different name, of course: Vivo calls it Funtouch OS. Operation, design, and even the settings menu feel very much like on iOS. This means that Android veterans have to adjust to it. The quick settings menu, for example, is located at the bottom of the screen, while you can still find the notifications at the top. The preinstalled keyboard app seems to be inspired by Apple as well. There is even a Siri, sort of: The Vivo smartphone features Jovi, a voice assistant software. However, it only speaks Chinese.

By the way, a common problem with imports from China is the software, which is often not properly translated. At best, there is an English version of the operating system. Some parts of the software are often still in Mandarin. But as a matter of fact, the Funtouch OS is different: It is available in every important language. The range of languages is similar to that of the stock Android. The translations are consistently on a high level. Of course, some apps are still only available in Mandarin, but these are always apps, that you do not necessarily need. The Google services are not preinstalled, as on every smartphone from China. However, if you connect with your Google account in the settings, the phone offers download and installation of Google services automatically. The process is snappy and works perfectly. After that, you can download every app you need from the Google Play Store. 

Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate
Software Vivo Nex Ultimate

Communication & GPS - Usable without any restriction, slow Wi-Fi

With 16 LTE bands, the Vivo Nex Ultimate is not a real world phone, but you can use it in Europe quite well. Nevertheless, you should check if the phone supports the bands you need, before traveling to more distant countries. The maximum LTE speed is slightly lower than the absolute top range, but with 1 GBit/s of download speed still very high. The reception in the German D2 network is quite good in urban areas. The display never shows less than half of the signal bars, even in buildings.

The smartphone supports every current Wi-Fi standard. The speed is rather fast, but not as fast as on other high-end devices, according to our test in conjunction with a Linksys ES8500 router. Close to the router, the Nex Ultimate has full signal strength, but the loading of websites is noticeably slow. Sometimes, you have to wait quite a while for images to be loaded. 10 meters (~33 ft) away from the router with three walls in between, there are still three quarters of the full signal strength available. Page loading times are similar to those close to the router. 

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
LG G7 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
656 MBit/s ∼100% +25%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
654 MBit/s ∼100% +25%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
609 MBit/s ∼93% +16%
Vivo Nex Ultimate
Adreno 630, 845, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
523 MBit/s ∼80%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
503 MBit/s ∼77% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=306)
211 MBit/s ∼32% -60%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
668 MBit/s ∼100% +27%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
653 MBit/s ∼98% +25%
LG G7 ThinQ
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
651 MBit/s ∼97% +24%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
612 MBit/s ∼92% +17%
Vivo Nex Ultimate
Adreno 630, 845, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
524 MBit/s ∼78%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=306)
206 MBit/s ∼31% -61%
GPS test indoors
GPS test indoors
GPS test indoors at the window
GPS test indoors at the window
GPS test outdoors
GPS test outdoors

In buildings, the GPS is only able to locate our position at the windows. Outdoors, the precision ranges within five meters (~16 ft), which is a good value. The compass is very reliable. The location services in Google Maps are snappy, if you are standing still.

To find out how the smartphone performs as a navigation device, we go on a bike trip with both the smartphone and a professional navigation device (Garmin Edge 520). The measured distances sometimes vary by 190 meters (~208 yd), which is a considerable difference for a total distance of 6 kilometers (~3.7 mi). Even the Garmin does not show the driven distance perfectly, but it still is significantly more accurate than the Vivo Nex Ultimate. Turns, for example, are not straightened as often. The side of the street we used is far better identified as well.

The Vivo smartphone is sufficient for occasional navigation tasks. If you need to navigate more often, you should consider buying a different smartphone.

GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Forest
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Forest
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
GPS Vivo Nex Ultimate – Overview
GPS Vivo Nex Ultimate – Overview
GPS Vivo Nex Ultimate – Forest
GPS Vivo Nex Ultimate – Forest
GPS Vivo Nex Ultimate – Bridge
GPS Vivo Nex Ultimate – Bridge

Telephone features & call quality - Hidden earphone in the Vivo Nex Ultimate

Telephone app
Telephone app

Customers, who are used to Android’s standard phone app, have to adapt a little to the Vivo Nex Ultimate. The app only has a keypad with the recent calls shown above it. You can search for contacts using the number keys. There is also a separate key for the contacts tab.

To let the display cover the entire front of the phone, Vivo had to find a solution for the earphone. It usually sits above the display and needs an opening for letting the sound out. The manufacturer uses a piezoelectric speaker, located behind the display. This may sound futuristic, but it is working very well. Although you cannot see any earphone, the call partner is easy to understand and the sound is very clear. The maximum volume is satisfactory, but could be slightly louder. The microphone is good, no matter if our voice is loud or quiet. However, there is a slight overdrive at high sound pressure. The quality of the speaker is good as well. But here again, at high volume the the call partner sounds distorted and slightly rough. You have to speak loudly and directly into the microphone, so your call partner is able to understand you. 

Cameras - Colorful images & an extendable front-facing camera

The front camera extends automatically if necessary
The front camera extends automatically if necessary
Front-facing camera
Front-facing camera
You can even use AR effects
You can even use AR effects

The 12 MP resolution of the rear-facing camera is not extraordinary for a high-end device. However, the camera is supported by a second 5 MP camera, used for blur calculation. The advantage of lower resolutions is larger pixels, which are able to absorb more light. This results in a very good low light performance: Images are very detailed and sharp. At normal light, images appear slightly oversaturated. Colors are almost unnatural. Of course, this is a matter of taste. The dynamics and the details are certainly appealing. The optical image stabilization helps preventing blur quite well.

You can record videos in 4K and 30 FPS. The quality is good: The exposure reacts quickly to changes in brightness, but the adjustment does not work continuously. Details and colors are reproduced well and the sound recording is loud and clear.

The front-facing camera is special: it extends from the top of the case if necessary, accompanied by a futuristic sound effect. This is not just a gimmick. It creates room for the almost bezel-less display and is also interesting for security reasons: No app can activate the front-facing camera without the user noticing it, because the camera has to extend first. We found out that GFXBench activates the front-facing camera every time we launched the app. The reason for that remains a mystery. With 8 MP, the front-facing camera offers a decent resolution. Images show clear details, but bright areas bloom quickly and the color reproduction is strong as well. 

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images

We take a picture of our test image in the laboratory under controlled lighting conditions. We are able to notice a significant blur in the image. However, the image is exposed appropriately and even larger areas of color are pictured correctly and without artifacts. Text on colored backgrounds does not cause any problems, however, the contrast between black text and dark blue background could be higher.

The color reproduction of our color chart is relatively bold and a little too bright.

Test picture
Test picture
Test picture detail
Test picture detail
Screenshot of ColorChecker colors. Original colors are displayed in the lower half of each patch.
Screenshot of ColorChecker colors. Original colors are displayed in the lower half of each patch.

Accessories and warranty - Plenty of accessories and Quick Charge

The Vivo Nex Ultimate comes with a quick charger, a USB-C cable, a SIM tool, a protective cover, and a headset. Of course, the charger has a Chinese plug, so you might need an adapter. Many Chinese dealers, however, enclose a suitable adapter. You can guess, how the charger and headset are designed: very similar to Apple’s accessories.

There is no warranty for the Vivo Nex Ultimate, because officially, the manufacturer offers products only for the Asian market. There are currently very few dealers in Europe who offer the smartphone, so you will not get a 2-year European warranty either. 

Input devices and operation - Slow fingerprint reader

There are some special features on the Vivo Nex Ultimate in terms of the input devices. There is no visible fingerprint reader, which does not mean that it does not exist. The fingerprint reader is hidden behind the display. It activates, as soon as you approach or move the smartphone. This is shown by a symbol appearing on the screen. You will quickly notice, that the technology is working well but not perfectly: While you have to wait not even a second to unlock other devices with your finger, it takes the Vivo smartphone quite a moment to recognize your finger. The accuracy is also lower than on other devices. Furthermore, the fingerprint reader is sleeping as long as you do not see the symbol. It does not help to touch the spot, even if you know where it is. You first have to activate the phone.

Vivo developed an own keyboard app similar to Apple’s iOS keyboard, but it is not useful for European customers. First, there is only an English layout available. Second, it often switches to a Chinese input mode for password entry. However, the installation of other keyboard apps from the Play Store is hassle-free.

There is a distinct button on the left side of the case for activating the voice assistant, which is not useful for western users, because it only speaks Chinese. You can set up an action that happens, if you are pressing the volume down button for a longer time, while the phone is in standby mode: There are a single-hand mode, a split screen mode (only working with preinstalled apps), and some motion gestures available.

The Android navigation controls can be displayed on the screen, however, Vivo usually uses swipe gestures from the bottom of the display for menu control. It works quite intuitively, once you get used to it. 

Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in landscape mode
Keyboard in portrait mode
Keyboard in portrait mode

Display - Vivo smartphone with dark display

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

The large, almost bezel-less display is obviously the highlight of the Vivo Nex Ultimate. Its resolution is 2,316 x 1,080 pixels, which is technically a significantly widened Full HD resolution. Especially the strange aspect ratio of 2.14:1 and the uncommon screen size of 6.59 inches make the Vivo smartphone special. Other high-end devices offer more pixels, but the AMOLED display is sharp and 388 PPI is absolutely sufficient.

With 352 cd/m² however, the average brightness is too low. The LG G7 ThinQ offers almost three times the brightness and all the other competing devices are significantly brighter as well. With 95%, the distribution of brightness is quite consistent. Large colored areas are evenly illuminated.

349.1
cd/m²
359
cd/m²
354
cd/m²
348
cd/m²
356
cd/m²
353
cd/m²
342
cd/m²
353
cd/m²
350
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 359 cd/m² Average: 351.6 cd/m² Minimum: 1.52 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 356 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7.08 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 4.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
95.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.096
Vivo Nex Ultimate
Super AMOLED, 2316x1080, 6.59
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.3
LG G7 ThinQ
IPS, 3120x1440, 6.1
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
IPS, 2160x1080, 5.99
OnePlus 6
Optic AMOLED, 2280x1080, 6.28
Screen
45%
63%
32%
37%
Brightness middle
356
530
49%
974
174%
492
38%
430
21%
Brightness
352
536
52%
975
177%
463
32%
437
24%
Brightness Distribution
95
93
-2%
96
1%
90
-5%
87
-8%
Black Level *
0.49
0.59
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
7.08
2.6
63%
5.4
24%
2.4
66%
2.3
68%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
14.1
5.1
64%
13.1
7%
6.2
56%
4.6
67%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.7
2.7
43%
5
-6%
4.5
4%
2.4
49%
Gamma
2.096 105%
2.04 108%
2.31 95%
2.25 98%
2.28 96%
CCT
7297 89%
6206 105%
7480 87%
6395 102%
6160 106%
Contrast
1988
834

* ... 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 117.9 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 117.9 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 117.9 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8931 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We noticed a significant screen flickering at a brightness level below 15%. The frequency of 117.9 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users should test the screen first, before buying the smartphone.

It is not possible to change the white balance or other settings. There is only a blue light filter called Global Eye Protection. A test with the software CalMAN and the spectrophotometer reveals a considerable orange color cast. We notice a slight blue color cast with the default settings. With the blue light filter activated, the divergence from the reference color space is significantly higher. If set to normal, the overall divergences are slightly higher than on other smartphones in this price range. Although the measurements with CalMAN offer only an indication for coverage of the color gamut, sRGB seems to be covered pretty well. However, AdobeRGB is not reached. 

CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color accuracy
CalMAN color space sRGB
CalMAN color space sRGB
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN saturation
CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN grayscale
CalMAN grayscale with Global Eye Protection activated
CalMAN grayscale with Global Eye Protection activated
CalMAN color space AdobeRGB
CalMAN color space AdobeRGB
CalMAN color space DCI P3
CalMAN color space DCI P3
 

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

The Vivo Nex Ultimate struggles during outdoor use, because the peak brightness is relatively low. The brightness sensor is not able to change that. At least, the sensor reacts quickly and reliably to changing light conditions.

The viewing angle stability of the screen is pretty good. The screen is always well readable and there is no brightness decrease when looking at the screen from the side.

Outdoors – Ambient light sensor
Outdoors – Ambient light sensor
Outdoors – Maximum brightness
Outdoors – Maximum brightness
Outdoors – Medium brightness
Outdoors – Medium brightness
Outdoors - Minimum brightness
Outdoors - Minimum brightness
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance - High performance, slow web browsing

As a real high-end smartphone, the Vivo Nex Ultimate features the Snapdragon 845, which, as of now, is the fastest SoC from Qualcomm. This is why the device can keep up with current smartphones and even outperform last year’s Samsung Galaxy Note 8. In day-to-day use, you can notice the high performance during scrolling through menus and in fast reacting apps.

The SoC also contains the graphics unit Adreno 630, which is one of the fastest mobile graphics chips at the moment. Therefore, the Vivo smartphone does not have any problems to keep up with the graphics performance of other current high-end devices.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
229991 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
173997 Points ∼76% -24%
LG G7 ThinQ
223464 Points ∼97% -3%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
162183 Points ∼70% -29%
OnePlus 6
230421 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (162183 - 242953, n=18)
223967 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 254229, n=389)
76442 Points ∼33% -67%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
286241 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
201210 Points ∼70% -30%
LG G7 ThinQ
256276 Points ∼90% -10%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
266601 Points ∼93% -7%
OnePlus 6
266686 Points ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (246366 - 299878, n=22)
275958 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=170)
118332 Points ∼41% -59%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
7580 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5096 Points ∼62% -33%
LG G7 ThinQ
7717 Points ∼93% +2%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
8078 Points ∼98% +7%
OnePlus 6
8282 Points ∼100% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (8326 - 9868, n=22)
8018 Points ∼97% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=255)
4555 Points ∼55% -40%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
7998 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6084 Points ∼60% -24%
LG G7 ThinQ
9503 Points ∼94% +19%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
9179 Points ∼91% +15%
OnePlus 6
9630 Points ∼95% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7998 - 13211, n=20)
10123 Points ∼100% +27%
Average of class Smartphone (6412 - 13531, n=423)
4958 Points ∼49% -38%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
1009 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1235 Points ∼89% +22%
LG G7 ThinQ
1374 Points ∼99% +36%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
1234 Points ∼89% +22%
OnePlus 6
1386 Points ∼100% +37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (1009 - 1613, n=20)
1348 Points ∼97% +34%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=499)
698 Points ∼50% -31%
Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
7887 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6121 Points ∼77% -22%
LG G7 ThinQ
7906 Points ∼99% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
7918 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 6
7949 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (5846 - 8001, n=20)
7816 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=499)
1737 Points ∼22% -78%
Memory (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
4798 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3095 Points ∼65% -35%
LG G7 ThinQ
3744 Points ∼78% -22%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
3012 Points ∼63% -37%
OnePlus 6
3799 Points ∼79% -21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2193 - 5296, n=20)
3594 Points ∼75% -25%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=499)
1244 Points ∼26% -74%
System (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
8252 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5308 Points ∼64% -36%
LG G7 ThinQ
8070 Points ∼98% -2%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
5792 Points ∼70% -30%
OnePlus 6
8228 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (4417 - 8613, n=20)
7657 Points ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=499)
2512 Points ∼30% -70%
Overall (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
4213 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3338 Points ∼77% -21%
LG G7 ThinQ
4257 Points ∼99% +1%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
3614 Points ∼84% -14%
OnePlus 6
4308 Points ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3291 - 4693, n=20)
4099 Points ∼95% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=503)
1255 Points ∼29% -70%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
13666 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
8310 Points ∼61% -39%
LG G7 ThinQ
13497 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (10876 - 14489, n=19)
13635 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 21070, n=197)
4524 Points ∼33% -67%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
9136 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6744 Points ∼74% -26%
LG G7 ThinQ
9029 Points ∼99% -1%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
8937 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7754 - 9231, n=21)
8655 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 11598, n=247)
4308 Points ∼47% -53%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
2464 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2028 Points ∼82% -18%
LG G7 ThinQ
2448 Points ∼99% -1%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
2456 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2272 - 2500, n=21)
2417 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4824, n=248)
1270 Points ∼52% -48%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
3271 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2346 Points ∼68% -28%
LG G7 ThinQ
3255 Points ∼95% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
2606 Points ∼76% -20%
OnePlus 6
3432 Points ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2118 - 3703, n=21)
3268 Points ∼95% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2281 - 4216, n=352)
1642 Points ∼48% -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
5171 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2661 Points ∼51% -49%
LG G7 ThinQ
5006 Points ∼96% -3%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
5181 Points ∼99% 0%
OnePlus 6
5212 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3488 - 5241, n=21)
4944 Points ∼95% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (815 - 5241, n=352)
1186 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
4580 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2584 Points ∼55% -44%
LG G7 ThinQ
4471 Points ∼96% -2%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
4248 Points ∼91% -7%
OnePlus 6
4673 Points ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3197 - 4734, n=21)
4424 Points ∼95% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (951 - 4734, n=360)
1134 Points ∼24% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
2806 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2342 Points ∼68% -17%
LG G7 ThinQ
3150 Points ∼91% +12%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
2159 Points ∼63% -23%
OnePlus 6
3452 Points ∼100% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2159 - 3668, n=21)
3129 Points ∼91% +12%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=384)
1540 Points ∼45% -45%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
8203 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3928 Points ∼48% -52%
LG G7 ThinQ
7633 Points ∼92% -7%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
6630 Points ∼80% -19%
OnePlus 6
8252 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (5637 - 8312, n=21)
7818 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=384)
1632 Points ∼20% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
5747 Points ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3414 Points ∼54% -41%
LG G7 ThinQ
5799 Points ∼92% +1%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
4540 Points ∼72% -21%
OnePlus 6
6304 Points ∼100% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (4529 - 6454, n=21)
5843 Points ∼93% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=392)
1387 Points ∼22% -76%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
34800 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
22829 Points ∼66% -34%
LG G7 ThinQ
27817 Points ∼80% -20%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
30245 Points ∼87% -13%
OnePlus 6
34191 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (15614 - 37475, n=21)
33400 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=539)
12880 Points ∼37% -63%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
80183 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
36807 Points ∼45% -54%
LG G7 ThinQ
80534 Points ∼99% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
76078 Points ∼94% -5%
OnePlus 6
81269 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (53794 - 84998, n=21)
80111 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 162695, n=539)
17994 Points ∼22% -78%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
62167 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
32399 Points ∼52% -48%
LG G7 ThinQ
56669 Points ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
56913 Points ∼91% -8%
OnePlus 6
62241 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (34855 - 65330, n=21)
60990 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=540)
15114 Points ∼24% -76%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
151 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
105 fps ∼70% -30%
LG G7 ThinQ
144 fps ∼95% -5%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
150 fps ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 6
150 fps ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (98 - 152, n=22)
144 fps ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=564)
31.4 fps ∼21% -79%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
60 fps ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
59 fps ∼94% -2%
LG G7 ThinQ
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
60 fps ∼96% 0%
OnePlus 6
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (58 - 89, n=21)
62.7 fps ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=567)
25 fps ∼40% -58%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
83 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
51 fps ∼61% -39%
LG G7 ThinQ
63 fps ∼76% -24%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
74 fps ∼89% -11%
OnePlus 6
66 fps ∼80% -20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (54 - 83, n=21)
73 fps ∼88% -12%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=486)
16.8 fps ∼20% -80%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
59 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
38 fps ∼64% -36%
LG G7 ThinQ
41 fps ∼69% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
59 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 6
58 fps ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (35 - 75, n=21)
55 fps ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=489)
16 fps ∼27% -73%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
60 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
42 fps ∼70% -30%
LG G7 ThinQ
51 fps ∼85% -15%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
60 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 6
56 fps ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (32 - 61, n=22)
54.4 fps ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 88, n=349)
14.3 fps ∼24% -76%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
55 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
23 fps ∼42% -58%
LG G7 ThinQ
26 fps ∼47% -53%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
55 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 6
54 fps ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (25 - 59, n=21)
46.5 fps ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 110, n=352)
13.9 fps ∼25% -75%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
35 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
25 fps ∼71% -29%
LG G7 ThinQ
33 fps ∼94% -6%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
35 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 6
35 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (25 - 35, n=21)
34 fps ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 54, n=280)
9.86 fps ∼28% -72%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Nex Ultimate
33 fps ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
13 fps ∼38% -61%
LG G7 ThinQ
17 fps ∼50% -48%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
34 fps ∼100% +3%
OnePlus 6
32 fps ∼94% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (17 - 37, n=21)
28.3 fps ∼83% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 58, n=283)
8.89 fps ∼26% -73%

Legend

 
Vivo Nex Ultimate Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
LG G7 ThinQ Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

However, web browsing on the Vivo Nex Ultimate feels like someone has activated the handbrake. You have to wait much too long for loading images on websites and the overall loading times are also quite long. Benchmarks show only a low performance at rendering web contents. Complex HTML-5 sites such as Google’s Interland however, are rendered quite quickly, which shows that the Vivo device is acting strangely. It might be possible for Vivo to improve the web performance by delivering a patch.

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
88.081 Points ∼100% +291%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
87.695 Points ∼100% +290%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=22)
76.9 Points ∼87% +242%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
69.765 Points ∼79% +210%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
69.57 Points ∼79% +209%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=422)
36.7 Points ∼42% +63%
Vivo Nex Ultimate (Chrome 67)
22.509 Points ∼26%
Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
17026 Points ∼100% +327%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
16720 Points ∼98% +319%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=22)
15431 Points ∼91% +287%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
14491 Points ∼85% +263%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
13265 Points ∼78% +232%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=558)
5562 Points ∼33% +39%
Vivo Nex Ultimate (Chrome 67)
3991 Points ∼23%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=578)
11474 ms * ∼100% -2%
Vivo Nex Ultimate (Chrome 67)
11203.6 ms * ∼98%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=22)
2874 ms * ∼25% +74%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
2868 ms * ∼25% +74%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
2484.1 ms * ∼22% +78%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
2445 ms * ∼21% +78%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
1876.8 ms * ∼16% +83%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼100% +163%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼100% +163%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (260 - 291, n=21)
233 Points ∼92% +143%
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158)
228 Points ∼90% +138%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
159 Points ∼63% +66%
Average of class Smartphone (91 - 362, n=284)
111 Points ∼44% +16%
Vivo Nex Ultimate (Chrome 67)
96 Points ∼38%

* ... smaller is better

The 256 GB UFS-2.1 storage is read out and written very fast, although it does not reach the extremely fast Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S. Nevertheless, apps are launched very quickly on the Vivo Nex Ultimate.

Vivo Nex UltimateSamsung Galaxy Note 8LG G7 ThinQXiaomi Mi Mix 2SOnePlus 6Average 256 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-8%
-8%
122%
0%
84%
-57%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
59.27 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62.67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
45.5 (3.4 - 87.1, n=318)
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
67.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
84.72 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
63.8 (8.2 - 96.5, n=318)
Random Write 4KB
22.1
14.55
-34%
23.26
5%
128.36
481%
21.8
-1%
91.2 (22.1 - 160, n=2)
313%
16.1 (0.14 - 164, n=607)
-27%
Random Read 4KB
126.7
122.48
-3%
110.46
-13%
135.14
7%
137
8%
136 (127 - 144, n=2)
7%
38.3 (1.59 - 173, n=607)
-70%
Sequential Write 256KB
228.4
205.85
-10%
176.45
-23%
208.1
-9%
201.4
-12%
235 (228 - 242, n=2)
3%
79.9 (2.99 - 246, n=607)
-65%
Sequential Read 256KB
687.2
796.96
16%
695.15
1%
756.07
10%
725.6
6%
780 (687 - 873, n=2)
14%
230 (12.1 - 895, n=607)
-67%

Games - The Vivo Nex Ultimate is suitable for games

We test the games “Arena of Valor” and “Asphalt 8: Airborne”. The frame rates are measured reliably by the app GameBench. We really wanted to test the demanding Battle-Royale-Game “PUBG Mobile” as well as “Shadow Fight 3”, but the installation process was interrupted repeatedly. The games that we are able to test run smoothly. “Arena of Valor” even runs with 60 FPS without any problems.

Apart from installation problems with some games, we can recommend the Vivo Nex Ultimate for gaming because the control via touchscreen or acceleration sensor works smoothly and without any delay.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 8: Airborne
Asphalt 8: Airborne
Arena of Valor
 SettingsValue
 min60 fps
 high HD60 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 SettingsValue
 high30 fps
 very low29 fps
  Your browser does not support the canvas element!

Emissions - Throttled SoC and decent speaker

Temperature

GFXBench battery test
GFXBench battery test

During the GFXBench battery test, we were able to notice a throttling of the CPU and GPU after some time. After only a few runs of the benchmark, the frame rate dropped significantly. Eventually, only 85% of the performance was available.

The surface temperatures of the case, at the same time, are not dramatically high: 45.9 °C (~115 °F) is quite noticeable and a bit uncomfortable for high ambient temperatures, but not critical. At least, it is not the whole smartphone that becomes that warm. During longer idle times, the warming is hardly noticeable.

Max. Load
 44.8 °C
113 F
41 °C
106 F
39 °C
102 F
 
 45.9 °C
115 F
40.8 °C
105 F
40.1 °C
104 F
 
 45.2 °C
113 F
41.1 °C
106 F
39 °C
102 F
 
Maximum: 45.9 °C = 115 F
Average: 41.9 °C = 107 F
39.8 °C
104 F
41.1 °C
106 F
42.1 °C
108 F
40.2 °C
104 F
41.2 °C
106 F
43.6 °C
110 F
39.8 °C
104 F
41.5 °C
107 F
42.8 °C
109 F
Maximum: 43.6 °C = 110 F
Average: 41.3 °C = 106 F
Power Supply (max.)  41.2 °C = 106 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41.9 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 45.9 °C / 115 F, compared to the average of 35.7 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 43.6 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 34.2 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.8 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
Heatmap back
Heatmap back
Heatmap front
Heatmap front

Speaker

Speaker test pink noise
Speaker test pink noise

The mono speaker sits on the bottom edge of the device and can be quite loud: We measure up to 82.5 dB(A) using our test microphone and the software ARTA. At peak volume, the music playback is really loud, however, there is a very slight hum and high frequencies sound unpleasant. At three quarters of the peak volume, the sound becomes more balanced and is still quite audible in every spot of a medium sized room. The speaker can certainly keep up with other high-end smartphones, but does not break any records in terms of sound quality.

The included headset or other headsets can be connected via a 3.5 mm headphone jack. The sound reproduction is clean and you can activate a DSD mode with hardware decoding for the headphones output, and a Hi-Fi mode. The latter however, is only supported by some preinstalled apps.

All current standards up to Bluetooth 5.0 are usable and the sound reproduction over Bluetooth is clean as well.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2025.625.72527.128.13125.428.84025.225.35031.733.76322.823.4802122.910019.524.512517.729.616016.842.220016.751.825015.252.431514.253.540013.660.150013.457.763012.762.780012.364.5100011.866.5125011.963.1160011.368.7200011.374.2250011.376.4315011.275.1400011.465.3500011.162.2630011.363.5800011.468.71000011.466.51250011.448.61600011.536.2SPL68.759.950.12482.5N20.312.96.60.548.5median 11.8median 62.7Delta1.68.531.631.325.427.225.326.132.925.133.624.531.62628.4242728.220.828.22234.521.348.320.852.321.257.619.460.119.563.917.767.117.965.517.868.617.372.117.474.616.776.217.278.418.281.117.977.417.672.817.775.417.877.917.970.918.167.118.258.13086.91.369.1median 17.9median 67.11.310.7hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseVivo Nex UltimateSamsung Galaxy Note 8
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Vivo Nex Ultimate audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 41% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy Note 8 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 61% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Battery life - Vivo’s smartphone features a very long battery life

Power consumption

The overall power consumption of the Vivo smartphone is low compared to other high-end devices. However, if switched off, there is still some energy consumption, which is not really good. As soon as you turn on the device, the energy consumption is pleasantly low. Even under high load, the power consumption is moderate, it reaches a maximum of 7.2 W.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.4 / 0.6 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.9 / 1.5 / 1.7 Watt
Load midlight 3.7 / 7.2 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Vivo Nex Ultimate
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3300 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
3400 mAh
OnePlus 6
3300 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
8%
-24%
-26%
7%
-17%
-4%
Idle Minimum *
0.9
0.73
19%
1.16
-29%
0.75
17%
0.6
33%
0.802 (0.42 - 1.8, n=19)
11%
0.88 (0.2 - 3.4, n=636)
2%
Idle Average *
1.5
1.44
4%
1.98
-32%
2.25
-50%
1
33%
1.722 (0.67 - 2.9, n=19)
-15%
1.719 (0.6 - 6.2, n=635)
-15%
Idle Maximum *
1.7
1.53
10%
2.07
-22%
2.26
-33%
1.6
6%
2.1 (0.87 - 3.5, n=19)
-24%
1.998 (0.74 - 6.6, n=636)
-18%
Load Average *
3.7
4.56
-23%
4.51
-22%
4.89
-32%
4.3
-16%
4.79 (3.64 - 7.2, n=19)
-29%
4.04 (0.8 - 10.8, n=630)
-9%
Load Maximum *
7.2
5.09
29%
8.3
-15%
9.6
-33%
8.6
-19%
9.2 (6.2 - 12.3, n=19)
-28%
5.75 (1.2 - 14.2, n=630)
20%

* ... smaller is better

Battery life

The very high battery capacity of 4,000 mAh is reflected in a battery life, which is one of the best in the high-end field: The smartphone endures over 17 hours in our Wi-Fi test. This is an excellent value. Thus, the Vivo Nex Ultimate easily survives a full day of work or school. Even if you do not charge the device for several days, you do not have to be afraid of running out of power when you are on the go.

The charger features the up-to-date QuickCharge 4+ standard, which is claimed to be more secure and even faster. In fact, the battery will be charged completely within one hour using the included 22.5-W charger. 

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
32h 05min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
17h 06min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
18h 53min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 23min
Vivo Nex Ultimate
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3300 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S
3400 mAh
OnePlus 6
3300 mAh
Battery Runtime
-29%
-12%
-16%
-10%
Reader / Idle
1925
1134
-41%
1662
-14%
1678
-13%
1806
-6%
H.264
1133
662
-42%
908
-20%
718
-37%
791
-30%
WiFi v1.3
1026
474
-54%
591
-42%
716
-30%
762
-26%
Load
203
246
21%
260
28%
239
18%
246
21%

Pros

+ Plenty of storage
+ Amazing battery life
+ Neatly translated software
+ Hassle-free installation of Google apps
+ Real full-screen display
+ Innovative technology of fingerprint reader and front-facing camera
+ Camera performs well in low light
+ High performance

Cons

- No microSD slot
- Relatively slow Wi-Fi
- SoC throttled under load
- Dark screen
- Relatively heavy
- No top quality case
- Keyboard app partially in Chinese
- Virtual voice assistant only in Chinese
- Fingerprint reader somewhat slow and inaccurate

Verdict - The smartphone for technology enthusiasts

In review: Vivo Nex Ultimate. Review device courtesy of:
In review: Vivo Nex Ultimate. Review device courtesy of:
tradingshenzhen.com

The Vivo Nex Ultimate is a fascinating smartphone: First, it shows the technology of the coming years. Second, it shows that Chinese manufacturers can deliver a neatly translated operating system and adaptions to the western market. And there are so many things to gaze at: the extending front-facing camera, sliding out with a futuristic sound, the fingerprint reader and the speaker, both hidden behind the display, and the case, shimmering in every color of the rainbow. Additionally, the device offers high performance and good cameras.

With all fascination for the device, you should not ignore that you will not get a perfect smartphone for a price of 699 Euros (~$820): The case looks stylish, but is made from ordinary feeling material, the Wi-Fi is slower than on other high-end devices, and the GPS could work more precisely. The speaker is not the best one. The SoC offers high performance, however, it will be throttled considerably under load. The screen is somewhat dark and shows some flickering at low brightness levels. The fingerprint reader takes a while to detect a finger, if it is able to recognize it at all.

Bezel-less, packed with the latest technology and very stylish: This is the Vivo Nex Ultimate. It is not perfect, but a true recommendation for technology enthusiasts, and those who want to become one.

However, the battery life is simply amazing: After 17 hours of continuous Wi-Fi web browsing without any power outlet in reach, you may forgive the smartphone quite some things. Therefore, we can recommend the Vivo Nex Ultimate to anyone, who can live with some minor shortcomings, and is looking for a smartphone standing out from the crowd and having innovative features. 

Vivo Nex Ultimate - 07/23/2018 v6
Florian Wimmer

Chassis
79%
Keyboard
66 / 75 → 88%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
41 / 60 → 68%
Weight
88%
Battery
100%
Display
81%
Games Performance
62 / 63 → 98%
Application Performance
63 / 70 → 90%
Temperature
85%
Noise
100%
Audio
62 / 91 → 68%
Camera
84%
Average
77%
87%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Vivo Nex Ultimate Smartphone Review
Florian Wimmer, 2018-07-24 (Update: 2018-07-26)