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

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review - Is the hype around the Xiaomi phone justified?

Ultra good? The Mi 10 Ultra is an exciting high-end smartphone from Xiaomi. But is the hype around the camera features of the Xiaomi phone justified? We clarify this in our review, which reveals both strengths and well-known weaknesses of Xiaomi's high-end phones.
Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Stephanie Chamberlain), 🇩🇪 🇮🇹 ...
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review

With its latest flagship, the Mi 10 Ultra, Xiaomi is once again aiming for the smartphone throne - but, unfortunately, only on the Chinese market. Since the Mi 11 and Mi 11 Pro are already in the works, a delayed release of the Mi 10 Ultra in Europe is unlikely.

The technical specs are at least worthy of an Android champion in 2020. The 6.67-inch HDR OLED panel offers a refresh rate of 120 Hz and is supposed to provide a brightness of over 800 nits. This is accompanied by a Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 with the LiquidCool 2.0 cooling system, an extreme charging speed of up to 120 watts, and a quad camera with 120x zoom.

The Ultra model with 8 GB of RAM and 256 GB of UFS storage costs about 700 Euros (~$855) via importers, and the top model with 16 GB and 512 GB costs about 1,000 Euros (~$1,222).

, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra (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 touchscreen , OLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 107 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity, compass, barometer, OTG, Miracast, 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, 5G: n1 / n3 / n41 / n78 / n79, 4G: FDD-LTE: B1 / B2 / B3 / B4 / B5 / B7 / B8 / B12 / B17, TDD-LTE: B34 / B38 / B39 / B40 / B41, 3G: B1 / B2 / B4 / B5 / B8, 2G: B2 / B3 / B5 / B8, Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9.45 x 162.38 x 75.04 ( = 0.37 x 6.39 x 2.95 in)
Battery
4500 mAh Lithium-Ion, 2x 2,250 mAh
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.9, 25 mm, 1/1.32", 1.2 µm); 48 MP (5x optical zoom, 120x hybrid zoom, f/4.1, 120 mm, 1/2.0", 0.8 µm); 20 MP (f/2.2, 128˚, 12 mm, 1/2.8", 1.0 µm); 12 MP (2x optical zoom, f/2.0, 50 mm, 1/2.55", 1.4 µm); camera2 API: Full
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix (f/2.3, 1/3.4", 0.8 µm)
Additional features
Speakers: stereo, Keyboard: virtual, charger, USB cable, case, MiUI 12, 12 Months Warranty, Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
223 g ( = 7.87 oz / 0.49 pounds), Power Supply: 251 g ( = 8.85 oz / 0.55 pounds)
Price
700 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
88.1 %
12/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
SD 865, Adreno 650
223 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.67"2340x1080
89.3 %
02/2021
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
208 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.90"3088x1440
89.1 %
07/2020
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
226 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.58"2640x1200
88.1 %
04/2020
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
88.3 %
04/2020
OnePlus 8 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
199 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.78"3168x1440

Case - Mi 10 Ultra with hole punch

Color variants of the Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Color variants of the Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

The Mi 10 Ultra is available with a ceramic case in "Obsidian Black" and "Mercury Silver" as well as in a transparent edition. On the back, the quad-camera module immediately catches the eye, and it partially shows a different color. The build quality meets the highest standards as you would expect from a flagship smartphone in 2020.

The hole punch on the front ensures that the Xiaomi phone is still relatively compact in the user's hand despite the pronounced screen diagonal of 6.67 inches, and it enables the Mi 10 phone to have a very efficient screen-to-body ratio of almost 90%.

There's no specified protection against water ingress, but Xiaomi uses a P2i nanocoating, just like in the other Mi 10 models, so that the high-end smartphone should at least be protected in a rain shower.

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Size comparison

165.3 mm / 6.51 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 199 g0.4387 lbs164.8 mm / 6.49 inch 77.2 mm / 3.04 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs162.38 mm / 6.39 inch 75.04 mm / 2.95 inch 9.45 mm / 0.372 inch 223 g0.4916 lbs162.6 mm / 6.4 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.96 mm / 0.3528 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs158.2 mm / 6.23 inch 72.6 mm / 2.86 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 226 g0.4982 lbs

Connectivity - Xiaomi phone with dual SIM

The internal UFS 3.1 storage in our review sample has a capacity of 128 GB, but the user only has 107 GB available out of the box. Users who find the storage space to be insufficient will have to choose the 256 GB or the 512 GB version, since the Mi 10 Ultra doesn't have space for an additional micro SD card.

Peripheral devices can also be connected via the USB-C port using an OTG adapter. However, the USB interface only transfers data according to the 2.0 standard. The Xiaomi phone also has Bluetooth 5.1 and an NFC chip. However, a Play Protect certification is not available, so that payment services, such as Google Pay, probably won't work smoothly.

Software - Xiaomi smartphone with MIUI 12

The operating system of the Xiaomi flagship is based on Android 10, and our test sample, which was flashed with the stable multi-language firmware from Xiaomi.eu that includes the Play Store, has the security patch level of September 2020.

However, the Mi 10 Ultra doesn't support Google services like the Play Store out of the box. Instead, Chinese services and Xiaomi's own services are used. Unlike Huawei's smartphones, you don't have to do without Google services even with the CN version; they can simply be installed later.

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review

Communication and GPS - Mi 10 Ultra with Wi-Fi 6

Thanks to Wi-Fi 6 and MU-MIMO technology, the integrated WLAN module works at very high transfer rates in the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz frequency ranges, whereby the transmission power drops a bit. The signal between the Mi 10 Ultra and our Netgear Nighthawk AX12 reference router is relatively stable.

The dual-SIM smartphone accesses mobile Internet with up to two nano SIM cards and at 5G speeds. For a smartphone in this price range, the number of LTE frequency bands that the Xiaomi phone supports is low. The Mi 10 Ultra can only access 14 LTE bands. Neither band 20 nor band 28 are available for use in Germany.

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1599 (1502min - 1669max) MBit/s ∼100% +146%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
876 (767min - 904max) MBit/s ∼55% +35%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
816 (403min - 832max) MBit/s ∼51% +26%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
772 (691min - 832max) MBit/s ∼48% +19%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
650 (568min - 698max) MBit/s ∼41%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.59 - 1599, n=284, last 2 years)
473 MBit/s ∼30% -27%
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1414 (1369min - 1469max) MBit/s ∼100% +58%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
896 (454min - 921max) MBit/s ∼63%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
883 (834min - 919max) MBit/s ∼62% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
870 (841min - 882max) MBit/s ∼62% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
831 (745min - 872max) MBit/s ∼59% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (15.5 - 1414, n=284, last 2 years)
466 MBit/s ∼33% -48%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900454904896896885921901891906878899868901895887883894884882886915893889887918896893878900913454904896896885921901891906878899868901895887883894884882886915893889887918896893878900913639612647661568620664625638647644633670670631665623624698676680653677670685669650662650656Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø880 (454-921)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø650 (568-698)
GPS outdoors
GPS outdoors
GPS within buildings
GPS within buildings

In order to assess the positioning accuracy of our test device in practice, we log a route with the Garmin Edge 500 GPS bike computer for comparison purposes, as usual. The position is determined via GPS (L1 + L5), Galileo, GLONASS, BeiDou, and SBAS. The satellite fix outdoors is fast with an accuracy of three meters, and the Mi 10 Ultra even manages to determine its position within buildings quite quickly.

Minor inaccuracies are visible in the course of the route, but the positioning level is more than sufficient for navigation.

GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

Telephone and call quality - Xiaomi phone with VoLTE

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review

Call quality is at a good level. We couldn't discover a Wi-Fi calling option in the settings, and the Voice over LTE option, which allows voice calls via the 4G network, isn't supported with our SIM card in the Vodafone network - according to the manufacturer, dual-VoLTE is available in principle, though. There is no optional eSIM function.

Cameras - Xiaomi smartphone with quad-camera setup

Front-facing camera of the Mi 10 Ultra
Front-facing camera of the Mi 10 Ultra

The 20 MP front-facing camera sits in a hole punch in the upper left corner of the display. Selfies taken with the Xiaomi phone have good sharpness and nice colors. However, the front camera only manages videos in 1080p and only at 30 fps. On the other hand, videos can be recorded with the main camera in 8K resolution at 30 frames per second or in UHD resolution at up to 60 fps.

The 48-megapixel sensor of the main camera with an equivalent 25 mm focal length offers an aperture of f/1.85 and OIS. The results are worthy of a 2020 high-end smartphone and are overall very good. However, sharpness could be a bit higher in some situations at the edges of the pictures in particular.

The Mi 10 Ultra also shows its strengths in terms of zoom. The advertised maximum magnification of 120x is only achieved via digital magnification, but the 48 MP periscope zoom lens offers 5x optical magnification, and the 12 MP telephoto camera provides 2x optical magnification, so that the pictures taken with the Mi 10 Ultra are quite impressive up to a zoom range of 10x.

The same applies to the 20 MP ultra wide-angle camera. The photos taken with an equivalent 12 mm focal length offer considerably less details and more image errors than the main camera, but sharpness and color reproduction are at a decent level.

Note: A detailed camera comparison between the Mi 10 Ultra and the high-end competition will soon be available on Notebookcheck.

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.

Wide angleLow lightWide angleUltra wide angle5x zoom
click to load images
ColorChecker
18.2 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
19.1 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
13 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
2.4 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra: 9.06 ∆E min: 2.27 - max: 19.09 ∆E
ColorChecker
11.8 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
14.8 ∆E
17.9 ∆E
16.5 ∆E
17.7 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
15.6 ∆E
11 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
15.7 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
14.8 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
17.1 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra: 13.75 ∆E min: 5.74 - max: 17.91 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - Mi 10 Ultra with 120 watts

Mi 10 Ultra delivery scope
Mi 10 Ultra delivery scope

Xiaomi equips the Mi 10 Ultra with a 120-watt power adapter, a USB cable, and a protective case. Furthermore, our lender TradingShenzhen adds an EU adapter for the sockets used in this country as well as a USB-OTG adapter to the scope of delivery; this is a service provided by the lender.

The warranty is 12 months. In addition to the manufacturer's warranty, TradingShenzhen offers the option of sending the smartphone to a German shipping address in case of a warranty claim.

Input devices and handling - Xiaomi phone with 120 Hz

The capacitive multi-touchscreen with a sampling rate of 240 Hz detects inputs quickly and also precisely. Thanks to the refresh rate of 120 Hz, even fast scrolling movements are displayed very smoothly. As in the Mi 10 Pro, the vibration motor provides a crisp haptic feedback and operates at a high-quality level.

The optical fingerprint scanner underneath the OLED panel is one of the fastest on the market, but the sensor doesn't recognize fingers correctly from time to time. The 2D face-unlock function is also fast but relatively unsafe.

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review

Display - Mi 10 Ultra with HDR OLED

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

Like the Mi 10 Pro, the AMOLED display of the Ultra variant offers a Full HD+ resolution of 2,340x1,080 pixels with a diagonal size of 6.67 inches. The pixel density of slightly below 400 PPI makes content look sharp, although a QHD panel offers visibly better sharpness when compared directly.

The OLED display's maximum brightness of 779 cd/m² is very good, and its distribution is very even at 96%. In our more realistic APL50 measurement, which simulates an even distribution of bright and dark areas on the AMOLED panel, it is an excellent 931 cd/m², so that HDR content should do well with the certified panel.

Since organic LEDs almost never shine at their theoretical maximum brightness, the Mi 10 Ultra's display brightness is also reduced accordingly via pulse width modulation. However, the flickering frequency is relatively high at 223 to 486 Hz, and a DC-dimming mode is also available.

760
cd/m²
782
cd/m²
791
cd/m²
768
cd/m²
779
cd/m²
788
cd/m²
772
cd/m²
788
cd/m²
785
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 791 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 779.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 779 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.8 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.5
ΔE Greyscale 1.4 | 0.64-98 Ø5.7
98% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.25
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
OLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Dynamic AMOLED, 3088x1440, 6.90
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
OLED, 2640x1200, 6.58
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
OnePlus 8 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.78
Screen
-192%
-53%
-7%
4%
Brightness middle
779
860
10%
672
-14%
753
-3%
796
2%
Brightness
779
878
13%
672
-14%
762
-2%
779
0%
Brightness Distribution
96
96
0%
95
-1%
96
0%
94
-2%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
0.8
4.5
-463%
1.5
-88%
0.9
-13%
0.68
15%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
1.4
10.4
-643%
3.2
-129%
1.6
-14%
1.55
-11%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.4
2.4
-71%
2.4
-71%
1.5
-7%
1.1
21%
Gamma
2.25 98%
2 110%
2.25 98%
2.24 98%
2.237 98%
CCT
6250 104%
6466 101%
6250 104%
6415 101%
6310 103%

* ... 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 485.4 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 485.4 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 485.4 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 21033 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

The analysis made with the spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software results in very low average delta E deviations from the sRGB color space of 0.8 (colors) and 1.4 (grayscales) in the "Original" display mode - the ideal range starts at values below 3. The sRGB color space is almost completely covered by the OLED panel.

Color accuracy (target color space: sRGB)
Color accuracy (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Color space (target color space: sRGB)
Grayscales (target color space: sRGB)
Grayscales (target color space: sRGB)
Color saturation (target color space: sRGB)
Color saturation (target color space: sRGB)

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
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 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. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (37.6 ms).

Outdoor readability is possible without problems thanks to the bright and very high-contrast organic display - but only when using automatic brightness control. If the brightness sensor is turned off, the OLED panel only reaches a maximum brightness of 484 cd/m². The display's viewing angles are no cause for criticism either.

Performance - Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra with the Snapdragon 865

With the Snapdragon 865, Xiaomi installs a powerful SoC that integrates a fast "Prime Core" at up to 2.84 GHz and three additional Cortex-A77-based performance cores at a clock frequency of up to 2.42 GHz. Four additional ARM Cortex-A55 cores have also been integrated to save power (1.8 GHz). A powerful Adreno 650 graphics unit is also installed in Qualcomm's SoC.

The high-end processor and the 8 GB of RAM installed in our review sample ensure a very good system performance in everyday use. The loading times of applications are quick thanks to the very fast UFS storage. The Mi 10 Ultra also delivers predictably good results in the benchmarks.

Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
911 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
940 Points ∼100% +3%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
783 Points ∼83% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
906 Points ∼96% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
909 Points ∼97% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (764 - 924, n=23)
903 Points ∼96% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1755, n=258, last 2 years)
611 Points ∼65% -33%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3356 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
2787 Points ∼83% -17%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3183 Points ∼95% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3338 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3318 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2687 - 3449, n=23)
3268 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4914, n=258, last 2 years)
2067 Points ∼62% -38%
Vulkan Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3011 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4789 Points ∼100% +59%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2634 - 4737, n=15)
3203 Points ∼67% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72 - 7701, n=160, last 2 years)
2284 Points ∼48% -24%
OpenCL Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3199 Points ∼58%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
5532 Points ∼100% +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2896 - 4464, n=15)
3239 Points ∼59% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (255 - 7514, n=161, last 2 years)
2322 Points ∼42% -27%
PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
14989 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
14551 Points ∼97% -3%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
14814 Points ∼99% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13142 Points ∼88% -12%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13471 Points ∼90% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10990 - 19989, n=22)
13584 Points ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2689 - 19989, n=177, last 2 years)
10206 Points ∼68% -32%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12596 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
11784 Points ∼94% -6%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11509 Points ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10952 Points ∼87% -13%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11153 Points ∼89% -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9202 - 15299, n=23)
11246 Points ∼89% -11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (82 - 15299, n=223, last 2 years)
8159 Points ∼65% -35%
3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
100182 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
67590 Points ∼67% -33%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
70116 Points ∼70% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
82937 Points ∼83% -17%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
82562 Points ∼82% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (56045 - 112989, n=20)
84555 Points ∼84% -16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2920 - 117606, n=156, last 2 years)
41987 Points ∼42% -58%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
151466 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
84533 Points ∼56% -44%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
81847 Points ∼54% -46%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
150281 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
149017 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (110875 - 180392, n=20)
147707 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2177 - 224130, n=156, last 2 years)
60563 Points ∼40% -60%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45863 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
39724 Points ∼85% -13%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46692 Points ∼100% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
32384 Points ∼69% -29%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
32240 Points ∼69% -30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (17817 - 58293, n=20)
35224 Points ∼75% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8324 - 59268, n=156, last 2 years)
23858 Points ∼51% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9387 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
7152 Points ∼76% -24%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6659 Points ∼71% -29%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9123 Points ∼97% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8811 Points ∼94% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8215 - 9611, n=20)
8915 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 11256, n=226, last 2 years)
3524 Points ∼38% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12473 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9480 Points ∼76% -24%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7372 Points ∼59% -41%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12394 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11371 Points ∼91% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (10599 - 13305, n=20)
11750 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (54 - 16670, n=226, last 2 years)
4110 Points ∼33% -67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5021 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
3846 Points ∼77% -23%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4974 Points ∼99% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4729 Points ∼94% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4928 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3965 - 5274, n=20)
4844 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (607 - 5301, n=226, last 2 years)
2847 Points ∼57% -43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9760 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
7385 Points ∼75% -24%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7240 Points ∼74% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8823 Points ∼90% -10%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9807 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8499 - 11492, n=22)
9645 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (149 - 11895, n=253, last 2 years)
4385 Points ∼45% -55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12779 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9536 Points ∼74% -25%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
7834 Points ∼61% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12694 Points ∼98% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12665 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11956 - 16809, n=22)
12921 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (122 - 31940, n=253, last 2 years)
5669 Points ∼44% -56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5384 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4127 Points ∼72% -23%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5721 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4283 Points ∼75% -20%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5480 Points ∼96% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3956 - 5765, n=22)
5138 Points ∼90% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (640 - 5784, n=251, last 2 years)
3082 Points ∼54% -43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7182 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
6658 Points ∼93% -7%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6069 Points ∼85% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7157 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7117 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5996 - 7653, n=21)
7103 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (78 - 9138, n=223, last 2 years)
2717 Points ∼38% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8237 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
8156 Points ∼98% -1%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6472 Points ∼78% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8299 Points ∼100% +1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8106 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6500 - 9167, n=20)
8128 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (62 - 11573, n=223, last 2 years)
2876 Points ∼35% -65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4987 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4052 Points ∼81% -19%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4983 Points ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4895 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4987 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 5209, n=20)
4941 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5318, n=223, last 2 years)
2868 Points ∼58% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7817 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
6830 Points ∼84% -13%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6508 Points ∼80% -17%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7986 Points ∼98% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8111 Points ∼100% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7517 - 8947, n=23)
8073 Points ∼100% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (91 - 9839, n=255, last 2 years)
3606 Points ∼44% -54%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9302 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
8239 Points ∼87% -11%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6756 Points ∼71% -27%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9356 Points ∼98% +1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9379 Points ∼99% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8633 - 11999, n=22)
9501 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (73 - 16221, n=255, last 2 years)
4221 Points ∼44% -55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5012 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4273 Points ∼74% -15%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5766 Points ∼100% +15%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5277 Points ∼92% +5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5506 Points ∼95% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4733 - 5780, n=22)
5319 Points ∼92% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (626 - 5793, n=255, last 2 years)
3117 Points ∼54% -38%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5434 Points ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
5178 Points ∼78% -5%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5642 Points ∼85% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6578 Points ∼99% +21%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6618 Points ∼100% +22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 6961, n=20)
6202 Points ∼94% +14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (426 - 6977, n=193, last 2 years)
2643 Points ∼40% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8262 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
6378 Points ∼77% -23%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6358 Points ∼77% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8173 Points ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8279 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7618 - 9104, n=19)
8249 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (349 - 11259, n=193, last 2 years)
2970 Points ∼36% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2562 Points ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
3122 Points ∼77% +22%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4047 Points ∼100% +58%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3830 Points ∼95% +49%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3888 Points ∼96% +52%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1786 - 4061, n=19)
3414 Points ∼84% +33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1786 - 4061, n=193, last 2 years)
2642 Points ∼65% +3%
Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3789 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4248 Points ∼100% +12%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3276 Points ∼77% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3789 - 5038, n=7)
3992 Points ∼94% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (153 - 9680, n=126, last 2 years)
3068 Points ∼72% -19%
Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3826 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4162 Points ∼100% +9%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3315 Points ∼80% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3789 - 5039, n=7)
3991 Points ∼96% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (174 - 11700, n=123, last 2 years)
3182 Points ∼76% -17%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
119 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
110 fps ∼92% -8%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼50% -50%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼76% -24%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼50% -50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (50 - 138, n=23)
75.4 fps ∼63% -37%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8.2 - 143, n=202, last 2 years)
64.1 fps ∼54% -46%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
205 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
145 fps ∼70% -29%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
152 fps ∼74% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
203 fps ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
206 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (168 - 266, n=23)
206 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.3 - 417, n=202, last 2 years)
122 fps ∼59% -40%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
109 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
90 fps ∼83% -17%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼55% -45%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼81% -19%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼55% -45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (50 - 111, n=23)
71.7 fps ∼66% -34%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.5 - 121, n=201, last 2 years)
51.4 fps ∼47% -53%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
125 fps ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
96 fps ∼76% -23%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
117 fps ∼93% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
122 fps ∼97% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
126 fps ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (96 - 151, n=23)
124 fps ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 229, n=202, last 2 years)
70.5 fps ∼56% -44%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
78 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
61 fps ∼78% -22%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
55 fps ∼71% -29%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
77 fps ∼99% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼77% -23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (43 - 83, n=24)
60.1 fps ∼77% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.1 - 106, n=200, last 2 years)
40 fps ∼51% -49%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
65 fps ∼74% -24%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
75 fps ∼85% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
88 fps ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (67 - 103, n=24)
86 fps ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 151, n=200, last 2 years)
48.6 fps ∼55% -43%
GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
46 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
34 fps ∼74% -26%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
34 fps ∼74% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45 fps ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (25 - 54, n=24)
40.5 fps ∼88% -12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.3 - 61, n=199, last 2 years)
25.1 fps ∼55% -45%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
52 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
38 fps ∼73% -27%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
43 fps ∼83% -17%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼96% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (39 - 62, n=24)
51.1 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 96.6, n=199, last 2 years)
29.3 fps ∼56% -44%
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
49 fps ∼100% +4%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
40 fps ∼82% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼96% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
48 fps ∼98% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28 - 57, n=25)
43.2 fps ∼88% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.5 - 73, n=266, last 2 years)
25.3 fps ∼52% -46%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
55 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
43 fps ∼78% -22%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
50 fps ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
54 (20min) fps ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
54 fps ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (27 - 67, n=25)
52.7 fps ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.95 - 257, n=266, last 2 years)
29.8 fps ∼54% -46%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
31 fps ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
34 fps ∼100% +10%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
26 fps ∼76% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼88% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
31 fps ∼91% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (18 - 40, n=25)
27.8 fps ∼82% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 60, n=267, last 2 years)
17 fps ∼50% -45%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
21 fps ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
22 fps ∼100% +5%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
19 fps ∼86% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼91% -5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼91% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (20 - 27, n=25)
20.5 fps ∼93% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.35 - 101, n=267, last 2 years)
11.5 fps ∼52% -45%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
577725 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
527820 Points ∼89% -9%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
527856 Points ∼89% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
595466 Points ∼100% +3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
585231 Points ∼98% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (527301 - 631025, n=24)
579049 Points ∼97% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 727247, n=176, last 2 years)
356251 Points ∼60% -38%
BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6402 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
4791 Points ∼75% -25%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5595 Points ∼87% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6072 Points ∼95% -5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5993 Points ∼94% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5264 - 6402, n=23)
5871 Points ∼92% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (615 - 8124, n=189, last 2 years)
3907 Points ∼61% -39%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9545 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
9024 Points ∼90% -5%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
9806 Points ∼97% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10002 Points ∼99% +5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10058 Points ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8412 - 10147, n=23)
9660 Points ∼96% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1160 - 19657, n=189, last 2 years)
7084 Points ∼70% -26%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6894 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
3811 Points ∼48% -45%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6094 Points ∼77% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7945 Points ∼100% +15%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7240 Points ∼91% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5304 - 8874, n=23)
7073 Points ∼89% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (522 - 9044, n=189, last 2 years)
4601 Points ∼58% -33%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11765 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
10646 Points ∼90% -10%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
10056 Points ∼85% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11567 Points ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11842 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11366 - 13833, n=23)
11779 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (349 - 25642, n=189, last 2 years)
6231 Points ∼53% -47%
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2169 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 12288
1439 Points ∼66% -34%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1631 Points ∼75% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1514 Points ∼70% -30%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1496 Points ∼69% -31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1276 - 2169, n=23)
1497 Points ∼69% -31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2392, n=189, last 2 years)
1323 Points ∼61% -39%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Pro Plus (Huawei Browser 10.1.2.322)
69.565 Points ∼100% +48%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
64.958 Points ∼93% +38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (45.2 - 77, n=20)
63.6 Points ∼91% +35%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
63.374 Points ∼91% +34%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra (Chrome 84)
56.788 Points ∼82% +20%
Average of class Smartphone (12.4 - 182, n=180, last 2 years)
54.8 Points ∼79% +16%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra (Mi Browser V12)
47.128 Points ∼68%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra (Mi Browser V12)
23849 Points ∼100%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
23678 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus (Huawei Browser 10.1.2.322)
23338 Points ∼98% -2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
22834 Points ∼96% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (14606 - 31224, n=23)
22518 Points ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra (Chrome 84)
19695 Points ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone (1986 - 64222, n=201, last 2 years)
19503 Points ∼82% -18%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 29635, n=203, last 2 years)
3604 ms * ∼100% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra (Mi Browser V12)
2657.4 ms * ∼74%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra (Chrome 84)
2295.8 ms * ∼64% +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (1623 - 2911, n=24)
2031 ms * ∼56% +24%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
2021.2 ms * ∼56% +24%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
1944.7 ms * ∼54% +27%
Huawei P40 Pro Plus (Huawei Browser 10.1.2.322)
1913.5 ms * ∼53% +28%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Huawei P40 Pro Plus (Huawei Browser 10.1.2.322)
124 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra (Mi Browser V12)
117 Points ∼94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (97 - 127, n=23)
107 Points ∼86% -9%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
104 Points ∼84% -11%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra (Chrome 84)
102 Points ∼82% -13%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
101 Points ∼81% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (20 - 252, n=195, last 2 years)
83.1 Points ∼67% -29%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi Mi 10 UltraSamsung Galaxy Note20 UltraHuawei P40 Pro PlusXiaomi Mi 10 ProOnePlus 8 ProAverage 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
1%
33%
12%
-4%
2%
-41%
Sequential Read 256KB
1674.23
1782.3
6%
1801.94
8%
1738.65
4%
1627.3
-3%
1580 ?(1330 - 1790, n=26)
-6%
841 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=270, last 2 years)
-50%
Sequential Write 256KB
739.74
802.09
8%
911.49
23%
750.44
1%
730.4
-1%
732 ?(233 - 1095, n=26)
-1%
382 ?(11.9 - 1321, n=270, last 2 years)
-48%
Random Read 4KB
209.92
186.67
-11%
324.08
54%
264.9
26%
208.3
-1%
231 ?(126 - 317, n=26)
10%
147 ?(13.5 - 325, n=270, last 2 years)
-30%
Random Write 4KB
219.47
217.74
-1%
318.86
45%
258.54
18%
197.7
-10%
228 ?(121 - 306, n=26)
4%
138 ?(5.5 - 330, n=270, last 2 years)
-37%

Games - The Mi 10 Ultra can game

The Adreno 650 graphics card in Xiaomi's phone makes it possible to render even more complex 3D games smoothly. The Mi 10 Ultra's integrated position sensors and touchscreen also work without problems during gaming.

PUBG mobile
PUBG mobile
Asphalt 9 Legends
Asphalt 9 Legends

Emissions - Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra remains cool

Temperature

The case of the Xiaomi phone only heats up a bit under load. The temperatures that we measured are within a harmless range at a maximum of 34.3 °C (~94 °F).

3DMark - Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
99.8 (3291min - 3296max) % ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
99.3 % ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
26.6 % ∼27% -73%
Max. Load
 31.4 °C
89 F
32.7 °C
91 F
33.3 °C
92 F
 
 31 °C
88 F
32.8 °C
91 F
34.3 °C
94 F
 
 30.5 °C
87 F
31.6 °C
89 F
32.8 °C
91 F
 
Maximum: 34.3 °C = 94 F
Average: 32.3 °C = 90 F
31.6 °C
89 F
31.4 °C
89 F
32 °C
90 F
31.1 °C
88 F
31.5 °C
89 F
31.5 °C
89 F
30.5 °C
87 F
31.1 °C
88 F
30.8 °C
87 F
Maximum: 32 °C = 90 F
Average: 31.3 °C = 88 F
Power Supply (max.)  27.5 °C = 82 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.3 °C / 90 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 34.3 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 32 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.5 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

The Mi 10 Ultra uses two speakers with a maximum volume of over 90 dB. Our measurements show a linear frequency response for the mids in the Xiaomi phone, and the super high tones only drop slightly as well.

Those who want a bass-rich sound output can resort to wired or wireless headphone solutions via USB-C and the Bluetooth 5.1 standard. Music fans can enjoy an extensive codec palette that includes aptX HD, AAC, and LDAC.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs203839.72528.925.43123.8284025.330.3503928.16323.433.88019.333.310016.136.212510.536.416015.344.32001546.22509.653.231512.460.440010.164.750011.467.46301168.680014.572.9100010.974.6125013.578160010.880200011.480.725001282.7315012.582.940001378.4500013.176.5630013.674.1800013.476.51000013.575.61250013.973.41600014.765.7SPL24.890.8N0.681.4median 13median 73.4Delta1.69.542.342.240.741.631.131.634.337.634.738.828.930.823.826.526.229.12233.120.742.62149.418.653.217.757.617.260.61962.41764.615.268.517.371.315.476.418.573.815.973.515.176.114.475.614.871.215.168.715.363.215.665.515.965.416.160.616.654.467.428.384.419.31.156median 16.6median 64.61.68.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi 10 UltraOnePlus 8 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 31% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 61% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

OnePlus 8 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 48% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery life - Mi phone with 120 watts

Energy consumption

When it comes to fast-charging technology, no other phone can beat the Mi 10 Ultra. Xiaomi's flagship comes with a 120-watt power adapter already in the box that charges the two 2,250 mAh batteries within 23 minutes - we can also confirm this manufacturer's claim in the test. Wireless charging is also supported at 50 watts, so a charge should take about 45 minutes. For comparison purposes, an Apple iPhone 12 Pro charges at a maximum of 20 watts using a cable.

Peripherals can be charged at up to 10 watts via Reverse Wireless Charging.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.31 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.82 / 1.67 / 1.69 Watt
Load midlight 4.33 / 9.72 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
4500 mAh
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
4200 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
4500 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
10%
4%
19%
-81%
-28%
-4%
Idle Minimum *
0.82
0.65
21%
0.82
-0%
0.61
26%
2.2
-168%
1.133 ?(0.52 - 2.2, n=22)
-38%
0.933 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=218, last 2 years)
-14%
Idle Average *
1.67
1.06
37%
2.06
-23%
1.19
29%
3.3
-98%
2.23 ?(1.19 - 5.37, n=22)
-34%
1.787 ?(0.65 - 3.94, n=218, last 2 years)
-7%
Idle Maximum *
1.69
1.49
12%
2.07
-22%
1.23
27%
3.7
-119%
2.45 ?(1.23 - 5.41, n=22)
-45%
2.01 ?(0.69 - 4.01, n=218, last 2 years)
-19%
Load Average *
4.33
4.91
-13%
2.99
31%
4.18
3%
5.9
-36%
5.26 ?(3.5 - 7.4, n=22)
-21%
4.45 ?(2.1 - 8.4, n=218, last 2 years)
-3%
Load Maximum *
9.72
10.29
-6%
6.64
32%
8.53
12%
8.3
15%
9.68 ?(7.67 - 12.3, n=22)
-0%
7.32 ?(3.56 - 12.3, n=218, last 2 years)
25%

* ... smaller is better

Battery life

The Mi 10 Ultra lasts a solid 12 hours in our WLAN test with an adjusted display brightness of 150 cd/m².

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
12h 9min
Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra
4500 mAh
Huawei P40 Pro Plus
4200 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
4500 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3
729
644
-12%
750
3%
865
19%
923
27%

Pros

+ bright 120 Hz OLED panel
+ performance
+ 120-watt power adapter included
+ charging speed
+ good speakers
+ cameras
+ UFS 3.1 storage

Cons

- no SD card support
- no IP rating
- only USB 2.0
- limited frequency range
- restrictions of a CN model

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra verdict - One of the best smartphones of the year

In review: Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra. Test device provided by TradingShenzhen.
In review: Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra. Test device provided by TradingShenzhen.

The Mi 10 Ultra, which will probably never be officially released in Germany, offers plenty of reasons for a purchase. However, the 700 to 1,000 Euros (~$855 to ~$1,222) currently required to import the device is a lot of money. First and foremost, the "insane" charging times with and without using a cable are a unique selling point that will probably make it easier for some to invest in a "China phone". However, the Mi 10 Ultra also shows its strengths when it comes to the display and camera as well as the performance and speakers.

Nevertheless, there are also some suggested improvements that Xiaomi should slowly implement in the Mi 11 Ultra. These include a USB 3.1 port, a 1440p panel, and an IP rating, among others. That the 20 MP selfie camera only supports 1080p videos at 30 fps is no longer flagship-worthy either.

You won't go wrong if you buy a Mi 10 Ultra.

Price and availability

The Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra is available in the version that we tested with 8 GB of RAM and 128 GB of fast UFS storage starting at about 700 Euros (~$855) from our lender Trading Shenzhen, among others.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra - 12/18/2020 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
89%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
94%
Connectivity
53 / 70 → 75%
Weight
88%
Battery
89%
Display
92%
Games Performance
62 / 64 → 97%
Application Performance
87 / 86 → 100%
Temperature
94%
Noise
100%
Audio
79 / 90 → 88%
Camera
78%
Average
82%
88%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 3 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Marcus Herbrich
Editor of the original article: Marcus Herbrich - Senior Tech Writer - 271 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2016
I have always been very passionately interested in mobile technologies, especially smartphones. Being a tech enthusiast means the half-life of my devices isn’t exactly long, and being the latest hardware is not enough to suffice as the manufacturer and operating system play a minor role – the most important aspect for me is that the device is state-of-the-art. After posting for Mobi Test I joined Notebookcheck in 2016, where I have been pursuing my enthusiasm for technology by reviewing the latest smartphone, tablet, and accessory trends.
contact me via: @Marcus_Herbrich
Stephanie Chamberlain
Translator: Stephanie Chamberlain - Translator - 464 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2020
I've been fascinated with technology ever since I got my very first Android smartphone, which was quite a while ago. The power packed into such a small footprint still amazes me. Learning to program made my understanding of technology deeper, and at the same time, it expanded my interest to the area of desktop computers and laptops. All this led me to enjoy reading and watching reviews of new devices, and that's how I stumbled upon Notebookcheck. I immediately found their reviews to be very comprehensive, and luckily, I've even had the chance of translating them since 2019. When it comes to the huge field of technology, I'm currently also interested in specializing in Java programming.
contact me via: LinkedIn
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra smartphone review - Is the hype around the Xiaomi phone justified?
Marcus Herbrich, 2020-12-22 (Update: 2020-12-22)