Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Mi 10 Smartphone Review: More Megapixels

Chinese high-end. Manufacturers like to advertise their devices with big numbers, and Xiaomi is no exception here. So by just mentioning a 108-MP sensor, the camera is guaranteed to draw some attention. In our test, it finally has to prove whether more megapixels really make a better image.
Mike Wobker, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Stefanie Voigt (translated by Mark Riege),
Xiaomi Mi 10

In our test of the Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro, the manufacturer was already able to prove that it is quite able to build smartphones in the top-end segment. However, at a price of almost 1000 Euros (~$1090), the costs were also elevated to new dimensions. Now, the Xiaomi Mi 10 wants to bring most of the qualities of the flagship model into a slightly more affordable sphere for "only" 800 Euros (~$872; currently around $690 in the US).

The SoC, the amount of RAM, and the display diagonal remain the same, and the design has hardly changed either. However, users of the Mi 10 have to make do with slightly less internal storage, and except for the 108-MP main sensor, the camera equipment is also slimmed down. We compare the Mi 10 with the competing devices listed below, and you can also add more models from our database underneath each of the segments.

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
German-English-Translator - Details here

Xiaomi Mi 10 (Mi 10 Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 8 x 2.4 - 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
Display
6.67 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 386 PPI, capacitive, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR, 90 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 128 GB 
, 109 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: USB Type-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: acceleration sensor, gyroscope, proximity sensor, e-compass, barometer, USB-C, IR blaster
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G GSM (B2/B3/B5/B8), 3G WCDMA (B1/B2/B4/B5/B8), 4G LTE FDD/TDD (1/2/3/4/5/7/8/20/28/32/38/40), 5G Sub6G (n1/n3/n7/n28/n77/n78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.96 x 162.6 x 74.8 ( = 0.35 x 6.4 x 2.94 in)
Battery
4780 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 108 MPix 108 MP (f/1.7, 1/1.33", 0.8µm) + 13 MP (ultra wide-angle, f/2.4, 12mm) + 2 MP (depth, f/2.4) + 2MP (macro, f/2.4)
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix f/2.0, 1/3", 0.9µm
Additional features
Speakers: 2 speakers, earphones, Keyboard: onscreen, Keyboard Light: yes, USB charger plug, USB Type-C cable, protective case, MIUI 11.0.24, 12 Months Warranty, SAR value (head): 0.69 W/kg, SAR value (body): 0.99 W/kg, fanless
Weight
208 g ( = 7.34 oz / 0.46 pounds), Power Supply: 121 g ( = 4.27 oz / 0.27 pounds)
Price
799 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
88 %
05/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
86 %
03/2020
Oppo Find X2 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
202 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"3168x1440
88 %
06/2020
OnePlus 8 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
199 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.78"3168x1440
88 %
03/2020
Samsung Galaxy S20
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
163 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.2"3200x1440
87 %
05/2020
Huawei P40
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
175 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.1"2340x1080

Case - A high-quality smartphone from Xiaomi

The front of the Mi 10 is dominated by the dual-edge display. It is curved on both sides, transitioning into a metal frame that goes around the whole smartphone. On the left top, the front camera is positioned behind a punch hole in the display, and the slim earpiece is above the top edge. On the glass back, the raised frame of the camera sensors - four in total - appears very hefty. The Mi 10 does not offer an IP certification or anything similar.

At a weight of 208 grams (~7.3 oz), the Xiaomi smartphone is the heaviest device in our test field. As for its measurements, it does not quite reach the height of the OnePlus 8 Pro and the Oppo Find X2 Pro.

Size Comparison

165.2 mm / 6.5 inch 74.4 mm / 2.93 inch 9.5 mm / 0.374 inch 202 g0.4453 lbs165.3 mm / 6.51 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 199 g0.4387 lbs162.6 mm / 6.4 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.96 mm / 0.3528 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs151.7 mm / 5.97 inch 69.1 mm / 2.72 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 163 g0.3594 lbs148.9 mm / 5.86 inch 71.1 mm / 2.8 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs

Equipment - Mi 10 without a notification LED

The Xiaomi Mi 10 is run by a Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 and 8 GB of RAM. Those are accompanied by a Qualcomm Adreno 650 graphics unit and 128 GB of UFS-3.0 storage. While the smartphone does not offer a storage card slot, you can insert two LTE capable nanoSIM cards. 5G is also supported, but we were unable to test this, due to a lack of the corresponding network coverage.

There is a USB Type-C port for wired data transfer, which is connected internally with the USB-2.0 standard. There is neither a 3.5-mm audio port nor a notification LED. Instead, the Mi 10 offers an infrared sensor and DRM Widevine L1. The Camera2 API is available with Level 3 support.

Software - Chinese MIUI version

Xiaomi delivers the Mi 10 with Android 10 and the in-house MIUI 10.0.24 stable version. Those who are familiar with Android will get along well with the latter. However, there are quite a lot of apps for the Chinese market on our test unit, which need to be uninstalled by the user if they don't want them and replaced by the corresponding localized app.

Google's frameworks are supported by default, so that you can for example manually download and install the Play Store fairly easily. However, users need to plan on spending some time and researching if they have purchased a version of the Xiaomi Mi 10 that is meant for the Chinese market.

Xiaomi also sells the Mi 10 in Germany with a global software version that directly includes all the Google Services.

Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10
Software Xiaomi Mi 10

Communication and GPS - Well suited for navigation

The Xiaomi Mi 10 is able to connect to the GSM, 3G, LTE, and 5G mobile networks. In addition, there are Bluetooth 5.0 and NFC for close range communication.

In wireless networks, the Android smartphone is able to support Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax). With our Netgear Nighthawk AX12 reference router, the smartphone reaches 903 Mb/s on average when receiving and 867 Mb/s when transferring data. These results are sufficient for a place in the upper middle of the field of our selected comparison devices.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1368 (min: 1104, max: 1442) MBit/s ∼100% +51%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
903 (min: 881, max: 916) MBit/s ∼66%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
831 (min: 745, max: 872) MBit/s ∼61% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
827 (min: 791, max: 846) MBit/s ∼60% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
754 (min: 346, max: 881) MBit/s ∼55% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=553)
264 MBit/s ∼19% -71%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1296 (min: 1095, max: 1376) MBit/s ∼100% +49%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
882 (min: 847, max: 902) MBit/s ∼68% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
876 (min: 767, max: 904) MBit/s ∼68% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
867 (min: 440, max: 907) MBit/s ∼67%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
509 (min: 264, max: 571) MBit/s ∼39% -41%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=553)
250 MBit/s ∼19% -71%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø902 (881-916)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø853 (440-907)
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test indoors
GPS Test outdoors
GPS Test outdoors

With the GPS Test app, we evaluate how well the Mi 10 is able to determine its location. To do this, the Xiaomi smartphone can use GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, and Galileo, and we were able to reach an accuracy of up to four meters outdoors. However, we were unable to determine our location indoors.

In our mandatory bike tour, the route recording of the Mi 10 is even slightly more accurate than that of our Garmin Edge 500 reference device. The Android smartphone is therefore well-suited for navigation tasks.

GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500

Telephone Functions and Voice Quality - A clear connection with the Xiaomi Mi 10

Xiaomi uses its own Phone app in the Mi 10, which offers everything users would expect from such an app. After starting the app, it displays a dial pad and the numbers that were dialed last. There is also a tab with the stored contacts. During a call, the conversation partners can be heard loudly and clearly, and background noises are filtered out reliably.

Cameras - More megapixels do not make better pictures

Picture taken with front camera
Picture taken with front camera

The Xiaomi Mi 10 comes with the same 108-MP main sensor that is also offered in the Mi 10 Pro. However, the rest of the camera elements have a lower resolution, so that buyers of the "regular" Mi 10 have to make do with 13 MP for ultra wide-angle recordings and 2 MP each for macro recordings and depth information. On the other hand, with 20 MP, an f/2.0 aperture, and 0.9 µm pixel width, the front camera offers the same features as that of the Mi 10 Pro. Portrait recordings succeed correspondingly well, being able to convince with vibrant colors and many details. Aside from various beautification modes and filter options, as well as an HDR mode you can activate, users cannot manually influence the recordings.

Photos taken with the main camera succeed with an attractive quality. However, the blurring effect for the background sometimes looks too strong, and higher zoom levels produce some very clear graininess in the whole recording. The ultra wide-angle lens is able to capture the selected objects with pleasing colors. Details can still be recognized easily, but blurry edges become noticeable at low zoom levels. The same quality is also achieved by the 5x zoom of the Xiaomi Mi 10, which is able to deliver acceptable recordings with this. In bad light conditions, the Mi 10 is able fully reproduce our test object and with only slightly distorted colors. While you can still clearly see some coarse graininess, the image quality increases dramatically as soon as there is a better light source. For recordings with the front camera, there is also a Pro mode, which allows you to adjust the white balance and offers settings for focus, exposure, ISO value, and brightness. 

Video recordings are created with a similarly good quality as also demonstrated by our test photos. The camera also handles fast movements and changes between light and dark areas well. In addition, the image stabilizer ensures a stable recording. For resolutions of 1080p and 4K, you can also adjust the frame rate to 60 fps. In slow-motion mode, videos are recorded in 720p and 1080p resolution and at 120 fps. The camera app also allows you to select an 8K resolution. However, when you select that, the AI of the smartphone determines the rest of the settings.

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3Scene 4

Using the ColorChecker Passport, we evaluate the color reproduction of the camera of the Xiaomi Mi 10. It shows that the colors are brighter than they should be. On the other hand, in extremely low light conditions of 1 Lux, they turn out too dark, but still remain recognizable.

Under controlled light conditions, the Mi 10 is able to reproduce our test chart well. However, we can again see the slight graininess in the zoom detail. At only 1 Lux, this effect becomes even more pronounced, but compared to other smartphones the Mi 10 still offers a very good reproduction performance in bad light conditions.

ColorChecker
13.1 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
17.8 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
19.8 ∆E
18.7 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
15 ∆E
22.5 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
20.8 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
22.7 ∆E
16.2 ∆E
18.8 ∆E
15.4 ∆E
15.9 ∆E
19.2 ∆E
21.1 ∆E
18.5 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10: 17.14 ∆E min: 8.38 - max: 23.75 ∆E
ColorChecker
19 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
20.6 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
6 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
6 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
14.1 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10: 9.65 ∆E min: 2.75 - max: 20.57 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - Protective cover included

The box of the Xiaomi Mi 10 includes a USB charging plug with the corresponding USB Type-C cable and a protective silicon case. Since our test unit came from TradingShenzen, a charger with a US plug was included. However, the vendor will also include the corresponding plug and USB Type-C to Type-A cable at no additional charge. 

Buyers of the Mi 10 receive a warranty of 12 months on their device.

Input Devices and Operation - A great touchscreen feedback

The keyboard app of the Chinese Mi 10 version offers a multitude of adjustment options that we are unable to describe because of our lack of knowledge of the Chinese characters. We therefore recommend installing a locally adjustable keyboard app after buying the smartphone. The touchscreen accepts inputs very well and also responds with an extremely pleasant vibration. Drag-and-drop as well as swipe movements work very well. The position sensor also responds to movements of the smartphone very directly.

To unlock the phone, you can either use the fingerprint sensor integrated into the display or FaceID. While the fingerprint sensor needs a bit of time to get used to, in order to learn the correct placement of the finger for it to be recognized directly. Face recognition worked slightly better, but the standby screen still has to be swiped up after unlocking, in order to show the start screen. 

Xiamo Mi 10 - keyboard
Xiamo Mi 10 - keyboard
Xiamo Mi 10 - keyboard
Xiamo Mi 10 - keyboard

Display - A bright OLED screen in the Mi 10

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid
DC dimming
DC dimming

The screen of the Xiaomi Mi 10 consists of a 6.67-inch AMOLED display with a 90-Hz refresh rate that is protected by Corning Gorilla Glass 5. With an average brightness of 791 cd/m² it is able to lead our test field. While the brightness distribution is good at 96%, it is not quite as good as those of the competitors. Without the active brightness sensor, the maximum brightness drops to 491 cd/m², and the lowest brightness that you can adjust it to is 2.07 cd/m². The APL50 test shows a small surprise with the Mi 10 achieving an outstanding brightness value of 1003 cd/m².

As customary for OLED displays, the Xiaomi Mi 10 display also flickers. In the 90-Hz mode, the frequency is slightly higher at 362.3 Hz, and at 60 Hz it drops to the usual 250 Hz. Via an anti-flicker mode, you can also add DC dimming, which might ensure a more comfortable image for users with sensitive eyes.

775
cd/m²
784
cd/m²
810
cd/m²
777
cd/m²
786
cd/m²
810
cd/m²
782
cd/m²
786
cd/m²
811
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 811 cd/m² Average: 791.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2.07 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 786 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.9
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
98.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
Xiaomi Mi 10
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
Oppo Find X2 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.7
OnePlus 8 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.78
Samsung Galaxy S20
AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.2
Huawei P40
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.1
Screen
-134%
17%
-45%
-64%
Brightness middle
786
778
-1%
796
1%
745
-5%
583
-26%
Brightness
791
775
-2%
779
-2%
740
-6%
593
-25%
Brightness Distribution
96
99
3%
94
-2%
97
1%
94
-2%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.1
4.4
-300%
0.68
38%
2.67
-143%
3.03
-175%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.2
8.7
-295%
1.55
30%
4.52
-105%
5.33
-142%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.8
5.6
-211%
1.1
39%
2
-11%
2
-11%
Gamma
2.26 97%
2.26 97%
2.237 98%
2.092 105%
2.301 96%
CCT
6315 103%
7250 90%
6310 103%
6240 104%
6621 98%

* ... 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 362.3 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 362.3 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 362.3 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 50 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18068 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

The infinite contrast ratio and black value of 0 cd/m² are also typical for OLED displays. This causes colors to appear very well delimited and black image content to appear very deep and saturated.

The settings menu offers various adjustment options for the color reproduction of the screen to the user. In the original color configuration with the "Standard" option, all the colors are very balanced in the sRGB color space and the DeltaE deviation is very low at 1.1. In the "Auto" profile with the "Standard" option, the blue portion is elevated in the P3 color space, causing the image to appear slightly cooler. This causes the DeltaE deviation to increase to 2.6.

CalMAN - Color Accuracy (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Color Accuracy (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Color Accuracy (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Color Accuracy (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Color Space (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Color Space (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Color Space (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Color Space (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Grayscale (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Grayscale (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Grayscale (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Grayscale (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Saturation (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Saturation (original, Standard, sRGB)
CalMAN - Saturation (Auto, Standard, P3)
CalMAN - Saturation (Auto, Standard, 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
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.2 ms).

The Xiaomi Mi 10 can be used very well outdoors, allowing you to clearly see the image contents despite its reflective display surface. If you turn off automatic brightness adjustment, you can also use the Sunlight mode, which allows a higher brightness adjustment than would normally be possible with the brightness sensor deactivated. 

Xiaomi Mi 10 - outdoors
Xiaomi Mi 10 - outdoors
Xiaomi Mi 10 - outdoors
Xiaomi Mi 10 - outdoors

The viewing angles of the Xiaomi Mi 10 display are very stable. However from very steep viewing angles, it shows the green tint that is typical for OLED displays.

Xiaomi Mi 10 - viewing-angle stability
Xiaomi Mi 10 - viewing-angle stability

Performance - The Xiaomi smartphone offers a good performance

The Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 used in the Xiaomi Mi 10 is a high-end SoC that is used in many modern smartphones of the top range. In combination with 8 GB of RAM and the large 128 GB UFS-3.0 storage, the Mi 10 offers a decent system performance that places it in the middle of our test field. Despite the hardware being almost identical, the Mi 10 Pro fares slightly better in some disciplines than the Mi 10, but often the differences are only small.

Overall, the Mi 10 offers a very good performance and smooth system operation throughout.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
Vulkan Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2549 Points ∼69%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2641 Points ∼72% +4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2659 Points ∼72% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3670 Points ∼100% +44%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2693 Points ∼73% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2519 Points ∼69% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2487 - 3259, n=8)
2723 Points ∼74% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=64)
1663 Points ∼45% -35%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2829 Points ∼78%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2960 Points ∼82% +5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3027 Points ∼84% +7%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3606 Points ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2932 Points ∼81% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2829 - 3080, n=8)
2981 Points ∼83% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=59)
1794 Points ∼50% -37%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3309 Points ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3360 Points ∼100% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3318 Points ∼99% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
2731 Points ∼81% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2988 Points ∼89% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3338 Points ∼99% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3076 - 3427, n=8)
3285 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (445 - 3531, n=80)
1987 Points ∼59% -40%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
910 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
911 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
909 Points ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
903 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
755 Points ∼83% -17%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
906 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (903 - 919, n=8)
910 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=80)
567 Points ∼62% -38%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10613 Points ∼92%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11387 Points ∼98% +7%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11153 Points ∼96% +5%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10431 Points ∼90% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8736 Points ∼75% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10952 Points ∼95% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10613 - 13202, n=9)
11585 Points ∼100% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 13202, n=481)
5778 Points ∼50% -46%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11850 Points ∼81%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13360 Points ∼91% +13%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13471 Points ∼92% +14%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
14708 Points ∼100% +24%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11268 Points ∼77% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13142 Points ∼89% +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11839 - 19711, n=8)
13801 Points ∼94% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19711, n=639)
6320 Points ∼43% -47%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3336 Points ∼86%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3843 Points ∼99% +15%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3888 Points ∼100% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3112 Points ∼80% -7%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3684 Points ∼95% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3830 Points ∼99% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3336 - 3947, n=7)
3771 Points ∼97% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=141)
2641 Points ∼68% -21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8175 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8076 Points ∼98% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8279 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6315 Points ∼76% -23%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6326 Points ∼76% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8173 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8076 - 8321, n=7)
8226 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=141)
2919 Points ∼35% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6182 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6444 Points ∼97% +4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6618 Points ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5139 Points ∼78% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5456 Points ∼82% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6578 Points ∼99% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6182 - 6644, n=8)
6526 Points ∼99% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6644, n=141)
2627 Points ∼40% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5187 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5187 Points ∼94% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5506 Points ∼100% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4063 Points ∼74% -22%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4924 Points ∼89% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5277 Points ∼96% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5187 - 5532, n=7)
5373 Points ∼98% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5766, n=487)
2155 Points ∼39% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9389 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9345 Points ∼99% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9379 Points ∼99% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8106 Points ∼86% -14%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6606 Points ∼70% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9356 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9345 - 9567, n=7)
9435 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=487)
2041 Points ∼22% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7957 Points ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7982 Points ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8111 Points ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6638 Points ∼82% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6140 Points ∼76% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7986 Points ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7957 - 8204, n=8)
8076 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8204, n=488)
1895 Points ∼23% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3973 Points ∼73%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5209 Points ∼95% +31%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5480 Points ∼100% +38%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3935 Points ∼72% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4998 Points ∼91% +26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4283 Points ∼78% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3973 - 5532, n=7)
5052 Points ∼92% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5721, n=517)
2065 Points ∼38% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12601 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12573 Points ∼99% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12665 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
11301 Points ∼89% -10%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4293 Points ∼34% -66%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12694 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (12573 - 12895, n=7)
12722 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=517)
2713 Points ∼21% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8499 Points ∼87%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9616 Points ∼98% +13%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9807 Points ∼100% +15%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
7981 Points ∼81% -6%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4432 Points ∼45% -48%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8823 Points ∼90% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8499 - 9910, n=7)
9483 Points ∼97% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=517)
2282 Points ∼23% -73%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4813 Points ∼97%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4582 Points ∼92% -5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4987 Points ∼100% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3963 Points ∼79% -18%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4242 Points ∼85% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4895 Points ∼98% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 5209, n=7)
4919 Points ∼99% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=567)
2040 Points ∼41% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8371 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8045 Points ∼96% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8106 Points ∼96% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8411 Points ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6244 Points ∼74% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8299 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8045 - 8432, n=7)
8269 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=567)
1706 Points ∼20% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7190 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7012 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7117 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6732 Points ∼94% -6%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5651 Points ∼79% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7157 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7012 - 7305, n=8)
7174 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7305, n=568)
1630 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4196 Points ∼83%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5054 Points ∼100% +20%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4928 Points ∼98% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4015 Points ∼79% -4%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4279 Points ∼85% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4729 Points ∼94% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4196 - 5054, n=7)
4830 Points ∼96% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5054, n=609)
1906 Points ∼38% -55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12234 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11458 Points ∼92% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11371 Points ∼92% -7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6388 Points ∼52% -48%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3894 Points ∼31% -68%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12394 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11371 - 12494, n=7)
11861 Points ∼96% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=608)
2232 Points ∼18% -82%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8581 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8866 Points ∼97% +3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8811 Points ∼97% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5646 Points ∼62% -34%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3973 Points ∼44% -54%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9123 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8581 - 9492, n=7)
8947 Points ∼98% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=611)
1926 Points ∼21% -78%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
202 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
202 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
206 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
199 fps ∼97% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
151 fps ∼73% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
203 fps ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (202 - 207, n=8)
204 fps ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=763)
43.2 fps ∼21% -79%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67% -33%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (60 - 90, n=8)
75 fps ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=772)
30.2 fps ∼34% -66%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
123 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
123 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
126 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
108 fps ∼86% -12%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
100 fps ∼79% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
122 fps ∼97% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (122 - 126, n=8)
124 fps ∼98% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=668)
25.4 fps ∼20% -79%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
58 fps ∼66% -34%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (58 - 88, n=8)
71.3 fps ∼81% -19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=676)
21.5 fps ∼24% -76%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
86 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
88 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
85 fps ∼97% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
33 fps ∼38% -62%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (74 - 88, n=9)
85.3 fps ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=531)
20.5 fps ∼23% -76%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
75 fps ∼97%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼58% -40%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼78% -20%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
59 fps ∼77% -21%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
57 fps ∼74% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
77 fps ∼100% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (43 - 77, n=9)
57.8 fps ∼75% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=533)
18.7 fps ∼24% -75%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
29 fps ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
18 fps ∼58% -38%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
31 fps ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
22 fps ∼71% -24%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
27 fps ∼87% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼97% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (18 - 31, n=9)
27 fps ∼87% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=279)
11.1 fps ∼36% -62%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼69%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
29 fps ∼100% +45%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (20 - 20, n=9)
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=277)
8.02 fps ∼28% -60%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
46 fps ∼92%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
28 fps ∼56% -39%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
48 fps ∼96% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼100% +9%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
42 fps ∼84% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼94% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28 - 53, n=9)
43.2 fps ∼86% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=283)
16.5 fps ∼33% -64%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
53 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
53 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
54 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
54 fps ∼100% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
49 fps ∼91% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
54 (min: 20) fps ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (27 - 54, n=9)
50.6 fps ∼94% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=282)
19.1 fps ∼35% -64%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼100% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼98% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
43 fps ∼84% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (50 - 52, n=9)
50.8 fps ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=456)
13.9 fps ∼27% -72%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
42 fps ∼93%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
26 fps ∼58% -38%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
43 fps ∼96% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
36 fps ∼80% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45 fps ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (25 - 46, n=9)
38.1 fps ∼85% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=460)
12.3 fps ∼27% -71%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
566256 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
599843 Points ∼100% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
585231 Points ∼98% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
504192 Points ∼84% -11%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
450373 Points ∼75% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
595466 Points ∼99% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (557310 - 607937, n=9)
582472 Points ∼97% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=85)
314485 Points ∼52% -44%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1276 Points ∼84%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1351 Points ∼89% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1496 Points ∼99% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
1274 Points ∼84% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1260 Points ∼83% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1514 Points ∼100% +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1276 - 1576, n=8)
1456 Points ∼96% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=700)
801 Points ∼53% -37%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11730 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11496 Points ∼97% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11842 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10703 Points ∼90% -9%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8634 Points ∼73% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11567 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11445 - 11842, n=8)
11634 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=700)
2390 Points ∼20% -80%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7450 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6350 Points ∼80% -15%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7240 Points ∼91% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4271 Points ∼54% -43%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6942 Points ∼87% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7945 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5688 - 8398, n=8)
7273 Points ∼92% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8398, n=700)
1769 Points ∼22% -76%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9810 Points ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9555 Points ∼95% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10058 Points ∼100% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8843 Points ∼88% -10%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8992 Points ∼89% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10002 Points ∼99% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8622 - 10147, n=8)
9742 Points ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=700)
3334 Points ∼33% -66%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5752 Points ∼95%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5540 Points ∼91% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5993 Points ∼99% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4764 Points ∼78% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5105 Points ∼84% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6072 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5302 - 6205, n=8)
5864 Points ∼97% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6205, n=700)
1690 Points ∼28% -71%

The browser performance of the Mi 10 also corresponds to the middle range of our test field. Only in the WebXPRT 3 does the Android smartphone achieve an above average result. In everyday operation, websites are rendered quickly, and media content also loads fast. Scrolling and navigation was always working smoothly at any time in our test unit. 

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
64.958 Points ∼100% +28%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
64.567 Points ∼99% +27%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
63.374 Points ∼98% +25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (50.9 - 69.5, n=8)
59.9 Points ∼92% +18%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
55.572 Points ∼86% +9%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
53.863 Points ∼83% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
50.878 Points ∼78%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=163)
39.7 Points ∼61% -22%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
115.43 Points ∼100% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.78 Points ∼99% +5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.65 Points ∼99% +5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
109.2 Points ∼95%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (79.1 - 117, n=7)
108 Points ∼94% -1%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
103.24 Points ∼89% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
93.499 Points ∼81% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=593)
45.9 Points ∼40% -58%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
71 runs/min ∼100% +26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
68.6 runs/min ∼97% +22%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chome 80)
67.7 runs/min ∼95% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (50.8 - 71, n=8)
63.6 runs/min ∼90% +13%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
63 runs/min ∼89% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
56.2 runs/min ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chome 80)
50.8 runs/min ∼72% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=147)
42.7 runs/min ∼60% -24%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
118 Points ∼100%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
104 Points ∼88% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (99 - 118, n=8)
103 Points ∼87% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
101 Points ∼86% -14%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼85% -15%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
97 Points ∼82% -18%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
95 Points ∼81% -19%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=227)
69.6 Points ∼59% -41%
Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
23678 Points ∼100% +8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
22976 Points ∼97% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
22834 Points ∼96% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
22016 Points ∼93%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (15745 - 23768, n=8)
21630 Points ∼91% -2%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
21348 Points ∼90% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
18162 Points ∼77% -18%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=758)
7596 Points ∼32% -65%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=784)
9968 ms * ∼100% -374%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
2511.2 ms * ∼25% -19%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
2287 ms * ∼23% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
2103.5 ms * ∼21%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
2043.6 ms * ∼21% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
2021.2 ms * ∼20% +4%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
1944.7 ms * ∼20% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (2000 - 2538, n=9)
1901 ms * ∼19% +10%

* ... smaller is better

The internal storage of the Mi 10 offers 128 GB, about 20 GB of which is occupied by the operating system and preinstalled apps. The read and write rates are at the level of other UFS-3.0 storage modules we tested.

The Mi 10 does not offer a microSD card reader for storage expansion.

Xiaomi Mi 10Oppo Find X2 ProOnePlus 8 ProSamsung Galaxy S20Huawei P40Xiaomi Mi 10 ProAverage 128 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
2%
2%
2%
-20%
19%
-11%
-80%
Random Write 4KB
215.95
204.98
-5%
197.7
-8%
228.1
6%
197
-9%
258.54
20%
182 (29.9 - 230, n=9)
-16%
32 (0.14 - 319, n=846)
-85%
Random Read 4KB
207.04
202.63
-2%
208.3
1%
205.3
-1%
189.4
-9%
264.9
28%
194 (170 - 207, n=9)
-6%
56.1 (1.59 - 324, n=846)
-73%
Sequential Write 256KB
679.51
728.72
7%
730.4
7%
669.9
-1%
212.9
-69%
750.44
10%
527 (213 - 697, n=9)
-22%
119 (2.99 - 911, n=846)
-82%
Sequential Read 256KB
1498.15
1605.6
7%
1627.3
9%
1541.7
3%
1591.6
6%
1738.65
16%
1511 (1406 - 1632, n=9)
1%
323 (12.1 - 1802, n=846)
-78%

Games - Well suited for gaming

In the Mi 10, a Qualcomm Adreno 650 handles the display of image content. The performance of the graphics unit is also suited for demanding applications and is able to display current games at high graphics levels smoothly. The games we tested using Gamebench all ran at frame rates around 60 fps. However, in the beginning of the active game, there were frame rate drops to about 50 fps, but those stabilized again afterwards.

The control via touchscreen worked without a hitch. Longer swipe movements were also possible without putting too much demand on the fingertips.

Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
010203040506070Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min: Ø61.4 (55-62)
; Arena of Valor; high HD: Ø61.1 (50-62)
; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø59.8 (57-60)
; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø59.8 (50-60)

Emissions - The Mi 10 has good speakers

Temperature

Manhattan 3.1
Manhattan 3.1
ES 2.0
ES 2.0

Under load, we measure temperatures of up to 39.2 °C (102.6 °F) on the surface of the Xiaomi Mi 10. While the Android smartphone warms up noticeably with this, it will never get too hot to hold in the hand, for example.

The GFXBench constant load tests also show that the performance of the Mi 10 can be maintained constantly. Users therefore don't have to expect any limitations of the performance.

Max. Load
 36.8 °C
98 F
38.2 °C
101 F
38.7 °C
102 F
 
 36.1 °C
97 F
37.4 °C
99 F
39.3 °C
103 F
 
 36.5 °C
98 F
37.9 °C
100 F
38.9 °C
102 F
 
Maximum: 39.3 °C = 103 F
Average: 37.8 °C = 100 F
35.2 °C
95 F
35.7 °C
96 F
36.2 °C
97 F
35 °C
95 F
36.2 °C
97 F
35.3 °C
96 F
34.8 °C
95 F
35.6 °C
96 F
35.6 °C
96 F
Maximum: 36.2 °C = 97 F
Average: 35.5 °C = 96 F
Power Supply (max.)  27.1 °C = 81 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.8 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.2 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.4 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
Heat map - front
Heat map - front
Heat map - back
Heat map - back

Speakers

Speaker characteristics
Speaker characteristics

The speakers of the Mi 10 produce a high volume and fairly wide sound spectrum. This makes them well-suited for the reproduction of media contents, and the occasional listening to music is also possible without any problems. However, in the long run external speakers are still recommended. They can be connected with the Xiaomi smartphone via USB Type-C or Bluetooth 5.1. The latter also supports Qualcomm's TrueWireless technology.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.828.82526.228.13123.3254021.925.5502831.16319.924.48019.122.510019.926.112516.531.616019.644.520017.544.325017.55131513.956.740013.961.450015.865.263015.265.68001466.310001467125013.970.3160013.473.1200013.874.5250014.374.931501473.4400014.572.7500014.670.9630014.569.4800014.768.41000015.165.4125001561.91600014.849.3SPL26.583.5N0.854.8median 14.6median 65.6Delta19.933.431.629.623.929.829.825.525.433.232.926.825.925.529.723.727.419.12918.948.717.247.317.553.81757.315.162.11562.514.767.515.571.315.572.714.773.114.574.814.674.614.576.913.776.714.776.814.574.614.570.714.565.214.864.914.955.915.550.126.985.90.962.7median 14.9median 65.21.311.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi 10Oppo Find X2 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi 10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 57% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Oppo Find X2 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 27% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery Life - An average runtime

Power Consumption

Our measurements attest the Mi 10 with a very low power consumption of a minimum of 0.53 watts during idle operation and a maximum of 8.89 watts under load.

The included USB charger is rated at 35 watts, so it is powerful enough to always be able to supply the Xiaomi Mi 10 with a sufficient amount of power.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.14 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.53 / 1.46 / 1.52 Watt
Load midlight 3.83 / 8.89 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi 10
4780 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Huawei P40
3800 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-105%
-126%
-32%
-29%
-53%
-19%
Idle Minimum *
0.53
1.47
-177%
2.2
-315%
0.9
-70%
1
-89%
1.168 (0.53 - 2.2, n=9)
-120%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=859)
-66%
Idle Average *
1.46
3.43
-135%
3.3
-126%
1.5
-3%
1.9
-30%
2.15 (1.19 - 3.43, n=9)
-47%
1.751 (0.6 - 6.2, n=858)
-20%
Idle Maximum *
1.52
3.52
-132%
3.7
-143%
2
-32%
2.4
-58%
2.39 (1.23 - 3.7, n=9)
-57%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=859)
-34%
Load Average *
3.83
6.2
-62%
5.9
-54%
4.8
-25%
3.5
9%
5.15 (3.5 - 7.4, n=9)
-34%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=853)
-7%
Load Maximum *
8.89
10.63
-20%
8.3
7%
11.5
-29%
6.9
22%
9.62 (7.68 - 12.3, n=9)
-8%
6.03 (1.2 - 14.2, n=853)
32%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

In our realistic WLAN test, the Xiaomi Mi 10 achieves a good runtime of about 11 hours. However, this also means that it is unable to make use of its battery as well as the OnePlus 8 Pro or the Huawei P40, for example, which achieve a significantly longer battery life with lower battery capacities.

Using the included quick charger, the smartphone can be fully recharged within about 2 hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
29h 49min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 02min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
18h 46min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 46min
Xiaomi Mi 10
4780 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Huawei P40
3800 mAh
Battery Runtime
-1%
20%
6%
9%
Reader / Idle
1789
2103
18%
2105
18%
2063
15%
H.264
1126
1023
-9%
809
-28%
1052
-7%
WiFi v1.3
662
654
-1%
923
39%
726
10%
806
22%
Load
226
296
31%
279
23%
236
4%

Pros

+ high-quality workmanship
+ bright display
+ good WLAN performance
+ 5G and dual SIM
+ infrared sensor

Cons

- slightly disappointing camera performance
- no storage card reader
- no IP certification

Verdict - The high price makes its faults appear worse

In review: Xiaomi Mi 10. Test unit provided by TradingShenzen.
In review: Xiaomi Mi 10. Test unit provided by TradingShenzen.

The Xiaomi Mi 10 leaves us with mixed feelings. On one hand, it offers outstanding performance in everyday operation, feels great, and it shows a high quality of workmanship everywhere. On the other hand, the 108 MP camera delivers recordings that are a bit disappointing in the end. Here the amount of influence of good software on the image quality shows again. Other manufacturers are able to get much more from their cameras with significantly less megapixels - so we would have liked to get exactly that from the Xiaomi device as well.

The Xiaomi Mi 10 convinces with good workmanship and smooth performance in everyday operation. We only would have expected more from the camera.

Beyond the camera performance, there are only minor complaints, such as the lack of a storage card reader in the Xiaomi, for example. It is also possible to live without a 3.5-mm audio connection, and most users should be able to make do with the average amount of battery life. But in the end, the Xiaomi Mi 10 is quite expensive, causing the pressure of the competitors, some of which are significantly more powerful, to turn out much higher.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Xiaomi Mi 10 - 05/25/2020 v7
Mike Wobker

Chassis
88%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
54 / 70 → 77%
Weight
88%
Battery
90%
Display
91%
Games Performance
62 / 64 → 97%
Application Performance
82 / 86 → 95%
Temperature
90%
Noise
100%
Audio
77 / 90 → 86%
Camera
73%
Average
82%
88%
Smartphone - Weighted Average
Read all 3 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 > Xiaomi Mi 10 Smartphone Review: More Megapixels
Mike Wobker, 2020-05-27 (Update: 2020-05-27)
Mike Wobker
Editor of the original article: Mike Wobker - Editor
I made my first IT walking attempts on a 386 with 4 MB of RAM. After that followed various PCs and notebooks, which I looked after and repaired in my circle of friends and acquaintances. After an apprenticeship as a telecommunications systems engineer and several years of professional experience, I graduated with a bachelor's degree in industrial engineering. Today I live out my fascination for IT, technology and mobile devices by writing test reports. In my free time I like to devote myself to vegan cooking and spend time with my family, which includes a whole range of animal roommates.