Vivo X51 5G
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix (f/2.5, 26 mm, 1/2.8", 0.8 µm)
Price comparison
Average of 37 scores (from 57 reviews)
Reviews for the Vivo X51 5G
Vivo launches the X51 5G in Europe, which is nominally the X50 Pro already known from Asia. Besides software modifications and an optimized camera, the review reveals further positive improvements and enriches the market with an exciting alternative.
Source: DxOMark Archive.org version
The Vivo X51 5G turned in a generally disappointing performance in terms of autonomy, providing fewer hours of active use than its competitors in this review and across the database as a whole. That said, it did quite well in our gaming use case; further, it did better in terms of daytime efficiency, although its high power consumption at night is a bit concerning. Its charging performance was above average, and gamers will be pleased with its 21-second speed for achieving a 1% power boost — one of the very best times among all tested devices.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 05/10/2021
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: Talk Android Archive.org version
In short, the X51 5G promises a lot and mostly delivers, it’s just the price tag that weighs it down somewhat and restrains me from recommending it as a must-buy. This is unfortunate because Vivo almost had a winning formula with the X51 5G that offers something different from its fellow BKK stablemates only to be undone by its RRP of £749/€799 and the looming presence of the more powerful OnePlus 8T and Google’s £599 Pixel 5.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 04/19/2021
Source: DxOMark Archive.org version
The Vivo X51 5G can produce satisfying selfies when used with an awareness of its limitations. With the phone fairly close to the subject, it captures detailed, nicely exposed photos with pleasant color and wide dynamic range. However, selfie-stick users will be disappointed to find themselves in soft focus, as the focus distance and narrow depth of field makes for a relatively tight sweet spot in terms of sharpness. Video performance is let down by poor stabilization and narrow dynamic range, so serious vloggers will likely be better served by other options.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 02/04/2021
Source: DxOMark Archive.org version
Although positioned towards the top end of the mid-range price bracket, the inclusion of a quad camera makes the Vivo’s X51 5G a good value proposition. Its photography performance is more than competent, too, with no major weaknesses identified in our tests. Dual tele-lenses makes it a good option for portraits at 50 mm and longer-range zoom shots, too. Pleasant skin tones and wide depth of field also make it easy to recommend for those shooting lots of people pictures, but serious portrait photographers would appreciate better bokeh simulation.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/20/2021
Source: T3 Archive.org version
The Vivo X51 5G is worth investigating if you're after a phone that gives you premium-level specs, performance and camera quality without costing you a huge amount of money. It's still relatively expensive, but this is a phone that has plenty listed in the positives column.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/04/2021
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: DxOMark Archive.org version
The Vivo X51 holds up well overall, even against some devices that are more expensive. The screen displays appropriate brightness under most conditions, though it could be a little brighter indoors and outdoors in the shade. The color rendering is fairly accurate across many uses, even with the blue light filter on. Its biggest drawbacks are for video; HDR10 content is much too dark, which has a big impact on the viewing experience. It also showed weaknesses in the touch attribute, where a lack of smoothness impaired the experiences of browsing and gaming.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/21/2020
Source: Cool Smartphone Archive.org version
Beautiful to look at, the X51 has a fantastic camera arrangement and is a joy to hold and use. It marks highly for everything, but the price is quite high when compared to the competition.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/26/2020
Rating: Total score: 91% price: 64% display: 90% workmanship: 100%
Source: Pocket Lint Archive.org version
As Vivo's first push into wider markets, we think the X51 - which was called the X50 Pro at its eastern launch - is a bit of a revelation. It delivers an impressive gimbal stabilisation system, a decent overall camera setup, and solid build. The battery isn't class-leading, but at this price and with these features - plus the software has been improved for this launch - it looks like a future success for Vivo. Well, if the name wasn't so uninspired.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Tech Advisor Archive.org version
Is the Vivo X51 a good phone? Most certainly, with a solid camera, beautiful display, and phenomenal design. But at this price the X51 doesn't feel competitive. It's a great phone, but it's bad value.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/29/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Techradar Archive.org version
Vivo loves to push advanced features out there before the competition. The Vivo X51 5G is a vehicle for its ‘gimbal’ camera, which offers superb low-light performance and super-stable video. It’s a great advancement, but the price may seem a little high for a phone with a mid-tier CPU, even if it is a great one.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/22/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Tech Advisor Archive.org version
Is the Vivo X51 a good phone? Most certainly, with a solid camera, beautiful display, and phenomenal design. But at this price the X51 doesn't feel competitive. It's a great phone, but it's bad value.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Trusted Reviews Archive.org version
The Vivo X51 5G is a device packed with high-end features. The quad camera setup is made even more impressive by the built-in gimbal, while the addition of a 90Hz refresh rate and 5G makes this phone feel modern and future proof. The biggest downside here is the £749 price tag, elevating the phone beyond more recognisable household names, such as OnePlus and the Google Pixel. That said, it's difficult to complain of a lack of features with the Vivo X51 5G.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Foreign Reviews
Source: Tech Stage DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/17/2021
Source: Chinahandys.net DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/30/2021
Rating: Total score: 78% performance: 60% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90%
Source: Go2 Mobile DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/01/2021
Rating: Total score: 79% price: 59% performance: 79% mobility: 81% workmanship: 83%
Source: Allround-PC.com DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/22/2020
Source: Computerbild DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/16/2020
Rating: Total score: 89%
Source: Basic Tutorials DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/05/2020
Rating: Total score: 82% price: 70% performance: 90% mobility: 80% workmanship: 100%
Source: Inside Handy DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/08/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Nextpit Germany DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/25/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Stadt-bremerhaven DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/24/2020
Source: n-tv DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/20/2020
Source: Computerbild DE→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 89%
Source: Movil Zona ES→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 80% performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 80%
Source: Xataka ES→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 86% performance: 88% display: 85% mobility: 85% workmanship: 90%
Source: Andro 4 All ES→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 90%
Source: Tuexperto ES→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Excellent cameras; powerful processor; nice connectivity; good price; support 5G.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/30/2020
Source: El Androide Libre ES→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice design; solid workmanship; great display; long battery life; decent cameras; support 5G.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Source: Tech Different IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/11/2021
Rating: Total score: 90% features: 85% display: 90% mobility: 90%
Source: Andrea Galeazzi IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 12/13/2020
Rating: Total score: 84% price: 79% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 86%
Source: Notebook Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/12/2020
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 65% performance: 85% workmanship: 80%
Source: Techzilla.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/02/2020
Rating: Total score: 81% price: 80% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90%
Source: Chimera Revo IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/25/2020
Rating: Total score: 85%
Source: Tutto Android IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 84% performance: 88% mobility: 75% workmanship: 88%
Source: AndroidWorld.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 84% price: 60% features: 75% display: 90% mobility: 75% workmanship: 90% ergonomy: 90%
Source: HDblog.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 78% features: 77%
Source: Everyeye.it IT→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Androidiani IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Stylish design; great built quality; nice performance. Negative: Relatively high price.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/18/2021
Source: Pianeta Cellulare IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Support 5G; elegant design; good price.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/20/2021
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Support 5G; excellent cameras; decent hardware; quick charging. Negative: Relatively high price.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/14/2020
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Big screen; nice display; decent hardware; excellent cameras; support 5G.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/10/2020
Source: Batista70Phone IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice display; excellent cameras; powerful processor; high performance; support 5G.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/03/2020
Source: Quotidiano Hardware Upgrade IT→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Impressive cameras; top level display; light weight; nice design; great speakers. Negative: No headphone jack.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Source: Meilleurmobile FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 04/02/2021
Rating: Total score: 75%
Source: Fredzone FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 01/31/2021
Rating: Total score: 89% display: 90% mobility: 85% workmanship: 90%
Source: 01Net FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/31/2020
Rating: Total score: 88% performance: 80% mobility: 100%
Source: Les Mobiles FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 12/02/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Frandroid FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/07/2020
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 70% display: 90% mobility: 90% workmanship: 80%
Source: Journal du Geek FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 90%
Source: Phonandroid FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Nextpit France FR→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Top for Phone FR→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Elegant design; great built quality; nice display; high performance; good connectivity; support 5G; long battery life. Negative: Mediocre speakers; unsupported wireless charging.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 04/15/2021
Source: Tabletowo PL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/29/2020
Rating: Total score: 89%
Source: Android.com.pl PL→EN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Rating: Total score: 88% performance: 90% display: 90% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90%
Source: Komputerswiat PL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice cameras; long battery life; stylish design; support 5G.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 12/22/2020
Source: Komputerswiat PL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice cameras; good price; compact size; light weight; support 5G.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/29/2020
Source: Antyweb PL→EN Archive.org version
Positive: Nice design; solid workmanship; decent hardware. Negative: High price.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2020
Comment
Qualcomm Adreno 620: Integrated (in the Snapdragon 765 and 765G) graphics card based on the Adreno 600 architecture. Supports DirectX11_1, Vulkan 1.0, OpenCL 2.0, OpenGL ES 3.2. The 765G variant is 10% faster than the one integrated in the 765 and 20% faster than the Adreno 618 predecessor.
Non demanding games should be playable with these graphics cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
SD 765G: Fast mid-range ARM SoC with 8 CPU Kryo 475 cores (one fast ARM Cortex-A76 prime core at up to 2.4 GHz, one A76 gold core at 2.2 GHz and 6 small ARM Cortex-A55 cores at up to 1.8 GHz). As one of the first SoCs it also integrates a 5G modem (Snapdragon X52 up to 3,7 / 1,6 Mbps down- and upload, mmWave and Sub-6 support). The processor is manufactured in the modern and energy efficient 7nm EUV process at Samsung. » Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
6.56":
It is a small display format for smartphones. You shouldn't be severely defective in vision, and you won't see much detail on the screen and only have a small resolution available. For that, the device should be small and handy, easy to transport.
» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.82.62%: This rating is slightly above average, there are somewhat more devices with worse ratings. However, clear purchase recommendations look different.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.