Notebookcheck
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Vivo Y21s smartphone review - Slim and light with fast charging

Full fix. Despite the low price, the Vivo Y21s does not have to do without fast charging and a high-resolution camera. That sounds good, but can the phone also convince in our in-depth test?
Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Anton Avdyushkin (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), 🇩🇪 🇨🇳 ...
Vivo Y21s

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! English native speakers welcome!

News Writer (AUS/NZL based) - Details here

Vivo Y21s (Y Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G80 8 x 2 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
4096 MB 
Display
6.51 inch 20:9, 1600 x 720 pixel 270 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB 
, 102 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5mm, Card Reader: microSD up to 128 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity, compass
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41/​B66) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 164.3 x 76.1 ( = 0.31 x 6.47 x 3 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 11
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix f/​1.8, phase comparison-AF, LED-flash, Videos @1080p/​30fps (Camera 1); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, macro lens (Camera 2); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, depth of field (Camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/​2.0, Videos @1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, charger, cable, headset, 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.83 W/kg (head), 1.09 W/kg (body), fanless
Weight
182 g ( = 6.42 oz / 0.4 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
189 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Possible competitors in comparison

Bewertung
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
76.5 %
01/2022
Vivo Y21s
Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2
182 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.51"1600x720
74.9 %
12/2021
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2
205 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.50"1600x720
78.4 %
12/2021
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2
190 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.30"2340x1080
77 %
11/2021
Oppo A16s
Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320
190 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.52"1600x720

Case and features - Vivo Y21s with the NFC

The price of Vivo Y21s is low - buyers do not even have to pay 200 Euros for this model. The Chinese manufacturer offers a plastic casing that is available in a subtle dark blue or a dazzling light blue with pink reflections.

The chassis is quite slim with just 8 millimeters, but the camera module sticks out quite a bit. The weight of just 182 grams is also very low, especially since the Vivo Y21s also has a fairly large screen with 6.51 inches. The build quality is good and the case hardly yields under pressure.

The inexpensive Vivo phone offers 128 GB of mass storage, which is more than many other smartphones in the price range can provide. 4 GB of RAM on the other hand are on par with the class, although an additional 1 GB of the mass storage can be used as RAM thanks to Extended RAM feature.

There is also NFC and a dedicated microSD card slot, which allows to use 2 SIM cards at the same time. The reader is quite slow in data transfer in our tests with the reference microSD Angelbird V60. It only achieves decent speeds in sequential reading.

Vivo Y21s
Vivo Y21s
Vivo Y21s
Vivo Y21s
Vivo Y21s
Vivo Y21s

Size comparison

164 mm / 6.46 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 205 g0.4519 lbs164.3 mm / 6.47 inch 76.1 mm / 3 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 182 g0.4012 lbs163.8 mm / 6.45 inch 75.6 mm / 2.98 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs158.3 mm / 6.23 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs
SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
  (Angelbird V60)
47.8 MB/s ∼100% +186%
Oppo A16s
  (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
45.73 MB/s ∼96% +174%
Average of class Smartphone
  (11.8 - 55.3, n=55, last 2 years)
25.6 MB/s ∼54% +53%
Vivo Y21s
  (Angelbird V60)
16.7 MB/s ∼35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro)
15.71 MB/s ∼33% -6%
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

051015202530354045505560657075808590Tooltip
Vivo Y21s Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential write: Ø28.9 (16.5-38.1)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Mali-G52 MP2, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential write; Angelbird V60: Ø32.3 (23.2-38.8)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential write; Toshiba Exceria Pro: Ø41.7 (32.2-56.9)
Oppo A16s PowerVR GE8320, Helio G35, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential write; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø37 (21.6-44.6)
Vivo Y21s Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G80, 128 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential read: Ø75.4 (14.3-79.1)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Mali-G52 MP2, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential read; Angelbird V60: Ø50.2 (31.6-54.4)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential read; Toshiba Exceria Pro: Ø84 (59.8-90.4)
Oppo A16s PowerVR GE8320, Helio G35, 64 GB eMMC Flash; Sequential read; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø68.2 (16.6-76)

Communication, software and operation - Fast and up-to-date

Our tets unit supports WiFi 5, and the speeds achieved in our tests with the Netgear Nighthawk AX12 router are fast. the smartphone does not support 5G, but the most necessary 4G frequencies are available. Users who often travel abroad should check which LTE frequencies are important in the host country. For example, the European version of the Vivo Y21s lacks some important LTE bands for the US or Japan.

Vivo calls its software interface Funtouch OS, it is based on Android 11. The security patches are from December 2021 on our test unit and are thus quite up-to-date at the time of this review, which is unusual for such a cheap smartphone. There are some preloaded ad apps, but they can be uninstalled easily.

A fingerprint sensor is installed on the right and integrated in the slightly recessed standby button - it responds very quickly and reliably. Face recognition can also be used to unlock the smartphone. The touchscreen works reliably.

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Vivo Y21s
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
348 (337min - 353max) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
347 (338min - 353max) MBit/s ∼100% 0%
Oppo A16s
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
294 (151min - 315max) MBit/s ∼84% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
802.11 b/g/n
42.9 (21min - 65max) MBit/s ∼12% -88%
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
320 (290min - 330max) MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Vivo Y21s
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
316 (234min - 329max) MBit/s ∼99%
Oppo A16s
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
299 (200min - 346max) MBit/s ∼93% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
802.11 b/g/n
50.4 (41min - 57max) MBit/s ∼16% -84%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø315 (234-329)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø348 (337-353)

Cameras - No wide-angle in the Vivo Phone

Recording front camera
Recording front camera

Three camera lenses are located on the smartphone's back, but only two of them can really be used for taking pictures: The main camera with 50 megapixels and a macro lens with 2 megapixels. The third camera is only used to support bokeh effects. However, the lack of a wide-angle camera is a significant cut for the flexibility of the camera system even for under 200 Euros.

The camera equipment is, at least on the back, identical with the more expensive Vivo Y33s and the image quality of the main camera also reminds us of the sister phone: An overall decent image sharpness and very solid image quality in good light, which only has a bit of dynamic range issues in very bright areas. In low light and high contrasts, the image sharpness is also decent for this price range and brightness is acceptable. Videos can be recorded in 1080p with 30 fps at most.

In the lab, the smartphone shows somewhat flat colors and slight sharpness deficits in good lighting, and there are still details that remain recognizable in low light.

The front-facing camera has a resolution of 8 megapixels and takes decent selfies that can be enlarged a bit.

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.

Hauptkamera PflanzeHauptkamera UmgebungHauptkamera Low Light
click to load images
ColorChecker
24.9 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
22.4 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
21.5 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
21.9 ∆E
15.3 ∆E
22.8 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
16.1 ∆E
19 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
18.2 ∆E
21.9 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
21.8 ∆E
15.4 ∆E
16.6 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
17.7 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Vivo Y21s: 16.7 ∆E min: 4.18 - max: 24.86 ∆E
ColorChecker
28.6 ∆E
52.9 ∆E
39.4 ∆E
36.3 ∆E
44.7 ∆E
63.3 ∆E
52.6 ∆E
35.1 ∆E
40.3 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
65 ∆E
63.9 ∆E
30.9 ∆E
49.8 ∆E
35.2 ∆E
76.2 ∆E
42.2 ∆E
45.5 ∆E
84.1 ∆E
69.1 ∆E
51.1 ∆E
36.6 ∆E
24 ∆E
13.7 ∆E
ColorChecker Vivo Y21s: 46.17 ∆E min: 13.67 - max: 84.07 ∆E

Display - Only 720p and not very bright

Subpixel recording
Subpixel recording

The Vivo Y21s only offers a 720p screen, and the screen's brightness is rather mediocre. This is not so bad outdoors on dark days, but owners will probably have problems with reflections and barely recognizable screen content when it is very sunny.

At least the black value is on a decent level, so the contrast and thus the color reproduction are decent. The accuracy of the colors on the display is also on the usual level. For those who care about color accuracy, the deviations in bright blues and oranges in particular are probably too high.

We did not notice PWM, so people who are sensitive to it can also use this smartphone.

386
cd/m²
388
cd/m²
354
cd/m²
394
cd/m²
407
cd/m²
380
cd/m²
356
cd/m²
417
cd/m²
390
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 417 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 385.8 cd/m² Minimum: 2.57 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 407 cd/m²
Contrast: 1100:1 (Black: 0.37 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.87 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.5
ΔE Greyscale 5.4 | 0.64-98 Ø5.7
94% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.103
Vivo Y21s
IPS, 1600x720, 6.51
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
IPS LCD, 1600x720, 6.50
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
IPS LCD, 2340x1080, 6.30
Oppo A16s
LCD, 1600x720, 6.52
Response Times
-32%
-14%
-2%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
42 ?(19, 23)
58 ?(31, 27)
-38%
52 ?(27, 25)
-24%
48 ?(22, 26)
-14%
Response Time Black / White *
27 ?(14, 13)
34 ?(17, 17)
-26%
28 ?(13, 15)
-4%
24 ?(10.8, 13.2)
11%
PWM Frequency
178.6 ?(7)
352.1 ?(5)
Screen
12%
26%
25%
Brightness middle
407
446
10%
496
22%
607
49%
Brightness
386
423
10%
491
27%
586
52%
Brightness Distribution
85
88
4%
91
7%
90
6%
Black Level *
0.37
0.29
22%
0.19
49%
0.52
-41%
Contrast
1100
1538
40%
2611
137%
1167
6%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.87
4.94
-1%
5.5
-13%
3.1
36%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
9.28
8.81
5%
8.88
4%
6.7
28%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.4
5.1
6%
6.6
-22%
2
63%
Gamma
2.103 105%
2.145 103%
2.36 93%
2.17 101%
CCT
7511 87%
7890 82%
8432 77%
6806 96%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-10% / 3%
6% / 18%
12% / 20%

* ... smaller is better

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
27 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14 ms rise
↘ 13 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 56 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (23.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19 ms rise
↘ 23 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 56 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (37.5 ms).

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 not detected

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 20903 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Color accuracy
CalMAN Color accuracy
CalMAN Color space
CalMAN Color space
CalMAN Saturation
CalMAN Saturation

Performance, emissions and battery life - Great fast charging technology

The Helio G80 from MediaTek is used as the SoC. This chip offers eight cores and a maximum clock of 2 GHz. Thus, the Vivo Y21s can definitely convince in terms of performance for its price range. Owners will have to reckon with noticeable performance losses and stutters in more complex tasks or several apps that run simultaneously, but there are enough power for basic tasks like messenger services.

The eMMC storage in the smartphone is not exactly fast, but values in our tests is quite good for the price range. Vivo's Y21s is also on the usual level in terms of heat dissipation. It could only get uncomfortable in very hot environments 

The small mono speaker is rather moderately loud and shows sound characteristics that deviate significantly from the median. Trebles are very strongly overemphasized even at lower volumes, while there are hardly anything on the lower frequencies. It sounds better when you connect a speaker or headphones via Bluetooth or 3.5 mm jack. Pleasing: all current aptX codecs for higher audio quality via Bluetooth are supported.

You can surf the Internet via WLAN for over 16 hours with the Vivo Y21s before the battery runs out of power. That is a good, but not outstanding value for the class. Thanks to the fast charging with up to 18 watts and the included charger, owners will quickly have enough power for a few hours of use, and the battery can also be completely charged in 90 minutes.

Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
384 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
178 Points ∼29% -54%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
355 Points ∼58% -8%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
176 Points ∼29% -54%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (345 - 387, n=7)
370 Points ∼61% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1755, n=265, last 2 years)
611 Points ∼100% +59%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1341 Points ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1087 Points ∼52% -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1336 Points ∼64% 0%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
965 Points ∼47% -28%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1281 - 1370, n=7)
1335 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4914, n=265, last 2 years)
2072 Points ∼100% +55%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5801 Points ∼58%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5739 Points ∼58% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
7090 Points ∼71% +22%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
5272 Points ∼53% -9%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (5766 - 8120, n=5)
6486 Points ∼65% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 17085, n=92, last 2 years)
9941 Points ∼100% +71%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1736 Points ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1273 Points ∼28% -27%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1897 Points ∼42% +9%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
928 Points ∼21% -47%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1736 - 2054, n=6)
1810 Points ∼40% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (149 - 11895, n=254, last 2 years)
4490 Points ∼100% +159%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1581 Points ∼27%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1142 Points ∼20% -28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1765 Points ∼30% +12%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
853 Points ∼15% -46%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1578 - 1903, n=6)
1658 Points ∼28% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (122 - 31940, n=254, last 2 years)
5843 Points ∼100% +270%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2642 Points ∼84%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2032 Points ∼65% -23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
2778 Points ∼88% +5%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1343 Points ∼43% -49%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (2552 - 2846, n=6)
2669 Points ∼85% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (651 - 6394, n=252, last 2 years)
3144 Points ∼100% +19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1361 Points ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
863 Points ∼31% -37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1463 Points ∼53% +7%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
486 Points ∼17% -64%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1342 - 1361, n=6)
1354 Points ∼49% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (78 - 9138, n=222, last 2 years)
2780 Points ∼100% +104%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1202 Points ∼41%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
738 Points ∼25% -39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1264 Points ∼43% +5%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
412 Points ∼14% -66%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1179 - 1202, n=6)
1193 Points ∼41% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (62 - 11573, n=222, last 2 years)
2940 Points ∼100% +145%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2539 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2031 Points ∼70% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
2654 Points ∼91% +5%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1301 Points ∼45% -49%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (2487 - 2669, n=6)
2571 Points ∼88% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (688 - 5318, n=222, last 2 years)
2920 Points ∼100% +15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1368 Points ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
867 Points ∼23% -37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1453 Points ∼39% +6%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
539 Points ∼15% -61%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1347 - 1387, n=6)
1369 Points ∼37% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (91 - 9839, n=256, last 2 years)
3699 Points ∼100% +170%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1198 Points ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
736 Points ∼17% -39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1253 Points ∼29% +5%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
462 Points ∼11% -61%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (1179 - 1211, n=6)
1199 Points ∼28% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (73 - 16221, n=256, last 2 years)
4349 Points ∼100% +263%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2712 Points ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2109 Points ∼66% -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
2811 Points ∼89% +4%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1304 Points ∼41% -52%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (2644 - 2830, n=6)
2707 Points ∼85% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (635 - 5793, n=256, last 2 years)
3172 Points ∼100% +17%
Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
688 Points ∼24%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
428 Points ∼15% -38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
721 Points ∼25% +5%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (679 - 691, n=5)
687 Points ∼24% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (153 - 9680, n=136, last 2 years)
2922 Points ∼100% +325%
Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
683 Points ∼23%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
426 Points ∼14% -38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
717 Points ∼24% +5%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (174 - 686, n=5)
582 Points ∼19% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (174 - 11700, n=133, last 2 years)
3023 Points ∼100% +343%
Wild Life Extreme (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
174 Points ∼19%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
116 Points ∼13% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
186 Points ∼21% +7%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (174 - 686, n=5)
277 Points ∼31% +59%
Average of class Smartphone
  (102 - 3080, n=84, last 2 years)
900 Points ∼100% +417%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
172 Points ∼19%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
117 Points ∼13% -32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
181 Points ∼20% +5%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (172 - 686, n=5)
275 Points ∼30% +60%
Average of class Smartphone
  (101 - 4236, n=83, last 2 years)
918 Points ∼100% +434%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
17 fps ∼66%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
11 fps ∼43% -35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
8.5 fps ∼33% -50%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
7.8 fps ∼30% -54%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (8 - 18, n=6)
14.2 fps ∼55% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.5 - 73, n=266, last 2 years)
25.8 fps ∼100% +52%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
9 fps ∼30%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
6.2 fps ∼20% -31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
9.7 fps ∼32% +8%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
4.2 fps ∼14% -53%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (8.9 - 9.2, n=6)
9.12 fps ∼30% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.9 - 257, n=266, last 2 years)
30.4 fps ∼100% +238%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
9.5 fps ∼55%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
7 fps ∼40% -26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
5.5 fps ∼32% -42%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
5 fps ∼29% -47%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (5.1 - 11, n=6)
8.38 fps ∼48% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.1 - 60, n=267, last 2 years)
17.3 fps ∼100% +82%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Vivo Y21s
Mediatek Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
3.3 fps ∼28%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2.2 fps ∼19% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
3.5 fps ∼30% +6%
Oppo A16s
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1.5 fps ∼13% -55%
Average Mediatek Helio G80
  (3.2 - 3.3, n=6)
3.28 fps ∼28% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.7 - 101, n=267, last 2 years)
11.7 fps ∼100% +255%
Vivo Y21sSamsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127FXiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021Oppo A16sAverage 128 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-47%
-33%
-48%
-37%
52%
Sequential Read 256KB
316.1
302.32
-4%
309.42
-2%
289.19
-9%
282 ?(107 - 501, n=48)
-11%
843 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=269, last 2 years)
167%
Sequential Write 256KB
260.6
74.54
-71%
159.67
-39%
168.36
-35%
192 ?(90 - 314, n=48)
-26%
386 ?(11.9 - 1321, n=269, last 2 years)
48%
Random Read 4KB
139.7
77.75
-44%
73.64
-47%
45.32
-68%
81 ?(10.1 - 247, n=48)
-42%
148 ?(13.5 - 325, n=269, last 2 years)
6%
Random Write 4KB
159.9
47.21
-70%
88.89
-44%
35.23
-78%
47.4 ?(5.3 - 160, n=48)
-70%
139 ?(5.5 - 330, n=269, last 2 years)
-13%

Temperature

Max. Load
 42.6 °C
109 F
37.4 °C
99 F
34.5 °C
94 F
 
 42.6 °C
109 F
37.4 °C
99 F
35 °C
95 F
 
 41.5 °C
107 F
36.8 °C
98 F
34.8 °C
95 F
 
Maximum: 42.6 °C = 109 F
Average: 38.1 °C = 101 F
34.1 °C
93 F
37 °C
99 F
38 °C
100 F
34.9 °C
95 F
37.8 °C
100 F
40.3 °C
105 F
35 °C
95 F
37.7 °C
100 F
40.6 °C
105 F
Maximum: 40.6 °C = 105 F
Average: 37.3 °C = 99 F
Power Supply (max.)  40.6 °C = 105 F | Room Temperature 21 °C = 70 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.1 °C / 101 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 42.6 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.6 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 22.3 °C / 72 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.


Heatmap Front
Heatmap Front
Heatmap back side
Heatmap back side

Loudspeaker

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204038.72532.432.73127.631.94029.935.75034.937.2632729.98017.820.410014.217.612513.319.316010.228.42008.835.32509.641.73157.3454007.349.95009.256.363012.958.980017.358.6100012.967.4125010.970.616009.771.3200010.271.5250011.671.231501369.1400013.961.2500015.266.3630015.768.4800015.863.71000017.158.51250016.156.81600016.645.7SPL25.880.1N0.742.4median 12.9median 58.6Delta2.812.338.945.344.745.33436.736.836.742.640.637.333.826.225.928.327.622.422.218.933.41640.514.546.313.253.81359.116.565.119.566.219.66617.468.515.374.415.378.515.778.416.576.317.977.520.870.32267.220.974.121.772.722.870.32263.122.558.531.586.41.462.6median 18.9median 66.2311.7hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseVivo Y21sSamsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Vivo Y21s audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 75% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 84% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 12% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.4% 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 (25.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 62% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 27% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 77% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery life

Vivo Y21s
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
4000 mAh
Oppo A16s
5000 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
973
879
-10%
748
-23%
1053
8%
909 ?(442 - 1953, n=276, last 2 years)
-7%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
16h 13min

Pros

+ light and slim
+ NFC
+ lots of mass storage
+ wide support for aptX codecs
+ long endurance
+ Fast charging function
+ current security patches
+ no PWM

Cons

- no wide-angle camera
- only 720p screen
- mediocre speaker
- low screen brightness

Verdict - Good, affordable and lightweight overall package

In review: Vivo Y21s. Test device provided by:
In review: Vivo Y21s. Test device provided by:
cyberport.com

The Vivo Y21s is a cheaper variant of the Y33s and this price difference puts the aspects that both smartphones have in common in an even better light: in terms of memory configuration, the Vivo Y21s is a role model, plus there is a very light chassis with a large battery that offers good runtimes. NFC is not yet installed on all smartphones with price less than 200 Euros (~$200), so the Vivo Y21s can score here as well.

Sure, a wide-angle camera would have been a nice addition, but the smartphone's main camera takes decent pictures. Users who want a Full HD screen will have to look elsewhere. In return, the Vivo Y21s offers fast charging with 18 watts, so it is quickly ready for use again when the battery is empty.

Users looking for an inexpensive, lightweight and enduring smartphone should definitely consider the Vivo Y21s

Overall, the smartphone offers good features for a low price and can convince in many areas. With a Vivo Y33s buyers paying a considerable surcharge, but they also get a Full HD display and more working memory. The Redmi Note 8 2021 comes without NFC, but also have a higher-resolution screen and a wide-angle camera.

Price and availability

At the time of testing, the Vivo Y21s is available from around 180 Euros (~$180), among others at our loaner and partner cyberport.de.

Vivo Y21s - 01/05/2022 v7
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
83%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
86%
Connectivity
44 / 70 → 62%
Weight
90%
Battery
91%
Display
82%
Games Performance
16 / 64 → 25%
Application Performance
77 / 86 → 89%
Temperature
90%
Noise
100%
Audio
50 / 90 → 56%
Camera
50%
Average
71%
77%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Florian Schmitt
Editor of the original article: Florian Schmitt - Managing Editor Mobile - 901 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2009
I initially wrote about gaming laptops when I joined Notebookcheck in 2009. I was then involved with the setup of the comparison portal Notebookinfo and worked with social media concepts for large companies like BMW and Adidas, while also returning to work for Notebookcheck in 2012. Nowadays, I focus on smartphones, tablets, and future technologies. Since 2018 I have been Managing Editor for mobile device reviews, working alongside my colleague Daniel Schmidt.
contact me via: @FloSchmi26, LinkedIn, Xing
Ninh Duy
Translator: Ninh Duy - Editorial Assistant - 215460 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008
My main responsibility as an editorial assistant is maintaining the Library section, which aggregates reviews from other publications and channels. In addition, my daily breakfast is Notebookcheck's long list of new content, which I comb through to select the most interesting topics for translation from English to French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch."
contact me via: Facebook
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Vivo Y21s smartphone review - Slim and light with fast charging
Florian Schmitt, 2022-01-12 (Update: 2022-01-12)