Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite Smartphone Review – Price-performance Hit

Understated. Since the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite is almost as powerful and equipped with nearly the same features as its high-end sibling Mi Note 10, the "Lite" moniker is more confusing than it is informative. Xiaomi has only touched the camera module, which still offers a respectable resolution at 64 MP instead of 108 MP. However, the Mi Note 10 Lite is also significantly cheaper - in this regard, the "Lite" addendum fits.
Manuel Masiero, 👁 Florian Schmitt, Andrea Grüblinger (translated by Marius S.),

Usually, when the name of a smartphone contains the word "Lite", it indicates that there may be a lot of missing features compared to the non-Lite or standard model. However, this is certainly not the case with the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite.

Surprisingly, the mid-range smartphone barely differs from its high-end sibling Xiaomi Mi Note 10. The former comes with the same 6.47-inch AMOLED display, an equally as large 5260-mAh battery, and the same octa-core Snapdragon 730G SoC.

There really is just one difference: While the Mi Note 10 uses a 108-MP main camera with 5 lenses, the Mi Note 10 Lite only has 64 MP and 4 lenses. This does not look too bad, either.

All things considered, the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite appears to be a clear winner in terms of the price-performance ratio. In this review, we will determine how well the smartphone fares in practice. Of course, we are particularly interested in how well the "Lite" camera performs.

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Mi Note Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G 8 x 2.2 GHz, Kryo 470 Gold / Silver
Graphics adapter
Memory
6144 MB 
, LPDDR4X
Display
6.47 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 398 PPI, capacitive, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, FHD+, 3D curved, HDR10, glossy: yes, HDR, 60 Hz
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 64 GB 
, 108.6 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm headphone jack, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Fingerprint sensor, vibration motor, IR blaster, ambient light sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, electronic compass, aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, USB OTB, Wi-Fi Direct, Wi-Fi display, DRM Widevine L1
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM (band 2, 3, 5, 8), UMTS (band 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19), LTE (band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41), head SAR 1,011 W/kg, body SAR 1,385 W/kg, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9.67 x 157.8 x 74.2 ( = 0.38 x 6.21 x 2.92 in)
Battery
5260 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 64 MPix Quad-camera: 64-MP main camera (Sony IMX686, f/1.89, 1/1.73", 0.8 µm) + 8-MP ultra-wide camera (f/2.2, 1/4.0", 1.12 µm) + 5-MP depth sensor (f/2.4, 1/1.5", 1.12 µm) + 2-MP macro camera (f/2.4, 1/1.4", 1.75 µm), videos at up to [email protected]
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix f/2.48, 1/3.06" 1.0 µm, Videos at up to [email protected]
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speaker on the bottom, Keyboard: virtual, modular 30-watt charger, USB cable (Type-C to Type-A), headphones, SIM tool, protective case, user guide, warranty card, MIUI 11, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
204 g ( = 7.2 oz / 0.45 pounds), Power Supply: 85 g ( = 3 oz / 0.19 pounds)
Price
400 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
83 %
08/2020
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
SD 730G, Adreno 618
204 g64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.47"2340x1080
82 %
07/2020
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6
189 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
81 %
03/2020
Oppo Reno2
SD 730G, Adreno 618
189 g256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.50"2400x1080
80 %
01/2020
Samsung Galaxy A51
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
172 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.50"2400x1080
83 %
12/2019
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
SD 730G, Adreno 618
208 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.47"2340x1080

The premium case of the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite is worthy of a higher-end device. While the curved glass on the front and back, which combined with the slim metal frame forms a case that not only looks very sleek, but also feels great and makes for a very solid unit overall, is a highlight, there is no IP certification. Due to its glass exterior, the Xiaomi phone is also quite slippery. For better handling, we recommend using the included transparent protective case.

The curved display of the Mi Note 10 Lite is protected by Gorilla Glass 5. Like the front, the glass back cover is also glossy. It diffuses incoming light, which creates beautiful color gradients. Buyers can choose between black, white and purple variants of the Mi Note 10 Lite - our test device is a purple model.

With 157.8 x 74.2 x 9.7 mm (~6.2 x 2.9 x 0.38 in), the dimensions of the Mi Note 10 Lite are identical to those of the Mi Note 10. Although it is slightly lighter at 204 g (~7.2 oz), it is still slightly heavier than other smartphones of its size. That being said, it does not feel heavy in the hand.

Size Comparison

162.31 mm / 6.39 inch 75 mm / 2.95 inch 8.58 mm / 0.3378 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs160 mm / 6.3 inch 74.3 mm / 2.93 inch 9 mm / 0.3543 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs157.8 mm / 6.21 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 208 g0.4586 lbs157.8 mm / 6.21 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 9.67 mm / 0.3807 inch 204 g0.4497 lbs158.5 mm / 6.24 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs

Features - NFC, Dual SIM and Up to 128 GB RAM for the Mi Note 10 Lite

Like the Mi Note 10, the Mi Note 10 Lite is also equipped with 6 GB of LPDDR4X RAM. However, there are more storage configurations available: Apart from a 128-GB version, Xiaomi also offers a 64-GB version of its Lite smartphone. Since the price difference is negligible, we recommend skipping the smaller version.

At the time of writing, the 128-GB Mi Note 10 Lite can be purchased for around 370 Euros (~$435) from Xiaomi's online shop, while the 64-GB model costs 340 Euros (~$400). Although the internal storage cannot be expanded due to the lack of a microSD card slot, this option is not available on the Mi Note 10, either.

The otherwise solid features include a USB Type-C port working at 2.0 speeds, which is acceptable for this price class, a 3.5-mm headphone jack, two SIM slots, and an infrared transmitter, which has become a rarity on recent smartphones. NFC is supported as well.

Left: No connectivity
Left: No connectivity
Right: Volume rocker, power button, dual SIM tray
Right: Volume rocker, power button, dual SIM tray
Top: Microphone, IR blaster
Top: Microphone, IR blaster
Bottom: 3.5-mm headphone jack, USB-C, microphone, speaker
Bottom: 3.5-mm headphone jack, USB-C, microphone, speaker

Software - Android 10 and MIUI 11

The Mi Note 10 Lite ships with Android 10 and Xiaomi's own user interface MIUI 11. During our test (beginning of August), the Android security patches from July 1st 2020 were installed, which means they are still quite up-to-date.

Aside from the Google apps and a few of Xiaomi's own tools, the manufacturer has also preinstalled Facebook, Netflix, LinkedIn, eBay, and Aliexpress as well as a few advertisement apps, which can fortunately all be uninstalled. The Mi Note 10 Lite supports DRM Widevine L1, allowing users to stream HD quality video content.

Communication and GPS - Fast and Very Consistent Wi-Fi Transfer Speeds

While the Mi Note 10 Lite does not support the latest wireless standard Wi-Fi 6/Wi-Fi 802.11ax, its Wi-Fi 5/Wi-Fi 802.11ac module still achieves very solid transfer speeds.

In conjunction with our reference router Netgear Nighthawk AX12, the Xiaomi smartphone reaches average download and upload speeds of 324 Mb/s and 341 Mb/s, respectively. Since the Mi Note 10 relies on the same Wi-Fi module, both smartphones achieve identical data transfer rates that are very consistent. However, neither they nor the other devices in our comparison can hold a candle to the Oppo Reno2.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno2
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
618 (532min - 671max) MBit/s ∼100% +81%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
341 (334min - 349max) MBit/s ∼55%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
Mali-G57 MP6, Kirin 820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
333 (319min - 345max) MBit/s ∼54% -2%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
331 (317min - 341max) MBit/s ∼54% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
298 (185min - 350max) MBit/s ∼48% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=623)
288 MBit/s ∼47% -16%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Oppo Reno2
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
355 (187min - 387max) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
327 (321min - 333max) MBit/s ∼92% +1%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Adreno 618, SD 730G, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
324 (310min - 330max) MBit/s ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
297 (189min - 335max) MBit/s ∼84% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=623)
274 MBit/s ∼77% -15%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
Mali-G57 MP6, Kirin 820, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
255 (234min - 277max) MBit/s ∼72% -21%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø341 (334-349)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø324 (310-330)
GPS signal indoors
GPS signal indoors
GPS signal outdoors
GPS signal outdoors

The Mi Note 10 Lite takes its time to locate us indoors via GPS and reaches an accuracy of within 4 meters (~13 ft). Outdoors, it determines our position significantly faster and the precision increases to be within 3 meters (~10 ft).

On our small bike ride, the Mi Note 10 Lite has to prove its GPS capabilities in a real-world scenario. Relative to the professional navi Garmin Edge 520, which we also brought along for the ride, it does fairly well, the route occasionally takes a shortcut through a building when it comes to tracking our position in the narrow alleys in the old town. However, the deviations from the actual route tend to be small. As a result, the Mi Note 10 Lite can supply apps with relatively precise location data.

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Overview
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Overview
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Bridge
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Bridge
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Turn
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Turn
Garmin Edge 520: Overview
Garmin Edge 520: Overview
Garmin Edge 520: Bridge
Garmin Edge 520: Bridge
Garmin Edge 520: Turn
Garmin Edge 520: Turn

Telephony and Call Quality - Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite with VoLTE and Wi-Fi Calling

The Mi Note 10 Lite accepts two nano-SIM cards, both of which can be used to connect to 4G cellular networks. Wi-Fi calling and VoLTE is supported. Similar to the Mi Note 10, the call quality is decent overall: Both loud voices and quiet voices are transmitted distinctly and the microphone rarely distorts. In hands-free mode, the voice our conversational partner becomes less acoustically present, although it can still be clearly understood.

Cameras - Up to 64-MP Photos that Look Great In Daylight

Main camera pictures
Main camera pictures
Mi Note 10 Lite selfie
Mi Note 10 Lite selfie

While the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 has a 108-MP camera with five lenses, the Mi Note 10 Lite does not have as much to work with. Being equipped with a quad-camera that is not quite as impressive on paper, still has a lot to offer.

The Mi Note 10 Lite uses a 64-MP camera based on the Sony IMX686 sensor (f/1.89, 1/1.73", 0.8 µm). Due to pixel-binning, it captures pictures with a resolution of 16 MP. Users who wish to make use of the full resolution will not have to overcome any artificial restrictions. Instead, the camera simply offers a "64M" mode.

Unlike the Mi Note 10, the Mi Note 10 Lite comes without an optical image stabilizer and the ultra-wide-angle camera has a resolution of only 8 MP instead of 20 MP. Additionally, lenses three and four are depth sensors with a resolution of 5 MP and a 2-MP macro camera, respectively. Meanwhile, the selfie camera has 16 MP (Mi Note 10: 32 MP).

The Mi Note 10 Lite's image quality is convincing despite the lower-end camera setup. Under good lighting conditions, the smartphone captures sharp and detailed pictures that manage to look very vivid thanks to their high dynamic range without oversaturating the scene. An even higher sharpness and a higher level of detail are possible with the 64-MP mode.

Compared to more expensive smartphones, the shortcomings of the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite's main camera in terms of the quality only become apparent when taking pictures in poorly-lit environments. Here, the sharpness of the pictures decreases slightly and image noise becomes somewhat noticeable, although the camera is still suitable for snapshots.

The Mi Note 10 Lite can record videos at up to 4K with 30 frames per second and the quality of the recordings also looks good. However, unlike with the Mi Note 10, a steady hand is required due to the lack of an optical image stabilizer. At 30 FPS, this is still fairly manageable, whereas at higher frame rates such as at Full HD with 60 FPS, the recordings tend to look rather shaky.

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.

Tageslicht-Szene 1Tageslicht-Szene 2WeitwinkelLowlight

Testing the Mi Note 10 Lite under controlled lighting conditions yields results that are very similar to those out in the wild.

Under poor lighting conditions, simulated by the top test chart being captured at a light intensity of 1 lux, the smartphone noticeably struggles to capture the colors. The test chart captured under ideal lighting (bottom test chart) paints an entirely different picture. Here, the color deviations are generally very small with white tones being represented most accurately.

Similarly, the test chart captured under ideal illumination looks sharp as well. While the images lose sharpness towards the edges, the effect is not too pronounced.

ColorChecker
28.1 ∆E
48.1 ∆E
36.5 ∆E
35.4 ∆E
40.5 ∆E
55.6 ∆E
48.2 ∆E
31.8 ∆E
33.9 ∆E
25.4 ∆E
56.5 ∆E
58.7 ∆E
29.1 ∆E
45 ∆E
30.7 ∆E
64.2 ∆E
36.7 ∆E
41.9 ∆E
64.7 ∆E
64.6 ∆E
48.6 ∆E
35.7 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
13.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: 41.52 ∆E min: 13.2 - max: 64.74 ∆E
ColorChecker
13.8 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
16 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
4.4 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
11 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
2 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
10.7 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
1.2 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
2.1 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: 7.38 ∆E min: 1.19 - max: 16.03 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - 30-watt Quick Charger and a Protective Case

The Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite's scope of delivery includes a modular 30-watt charger, a USB cable (Type-C to Type-A), headphones, a SIM tool, a transparent protective case, a user guide, and a warranty card. The manufacturer currently offers no specific accessories for the smartphone.

The Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite comes with a 24-month warranty.

Input Devices & Handling - Precise Touchscreen, In-Display Fingerprint Sensor

Powered by the octa-core Snapdragon 730G SoC, the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite achieves a fast system performance and shines with great responsiveness. It registers inputs very quickly, regardless of whether they are made via the accurate touchscreen or the physical buttons.

The fingerprint sensor that has been integrated into the display quickly and reliably unlocks the smartphone. The same holds true for the slightly less secure facial recognition.

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

Display - Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite with a Bright AMOLED Screen

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

A big selling point of the Mi Note 10 Lite is its 2340x1080-pixel AMOLED panel, which offers great colors thanks to its theoretically infinite contrast ratio. Combined with a display size of 6.47 inches, the Xiaomi phone reaches a pixel density of 399 PPI, which guarantees a clear picture.

With an average brightness of 608.3 cd/m², the Mi Note 10 Lite has a very high luminance. In a test with an even distribution of bright and dark areas (APL50), the maximum luminance increases to an even higher value of 683 cd/m². Without the ambient light sensor, the maximum brightness drops to 434 cd/m².

However, the AMOLED display has one disadvantage: It uses PWM to control the brightness, which sensitive users may perceive as bothersome flickering.

598
cd/m²
596
cd/m²
615
cd/m²
595
cd/m²
605
cd/m²
623
cd/m²
605
cd/m²
612
cd/m²
626
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 626 cd/m² Average: 608.3 cd/m² Minimum: 2.81 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 605 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.84 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.7
ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.64-98 Ø5.9
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.211
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.50
Oppo Reno2
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50
Samsung Galaxy A51
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.47
Screen
-80%
-132%
-105%
-153%
Brightness middle
605
466
-23%
679
12%
589
-3%
625
3%
Brightness
608
457
-25%
683
12%
589
-3%
607
0%
Brightness Distribution
95
91
-4%
98
3%
94
-1%
89
-6%
Black Level *
0.61
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
0.84
2.2
-162%
3.5
-317%
2.22
-164%
4.38
-421%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
1.8
4.6
-156%
6.8
-278%
8.24
-358%
6.83
-279%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.3
2.7
-108%
4.2
-223%
2.6
-100%
4.1
-215%
Gamma
2.211 100%
2.24 98%
2.27 97%
2.111 104%
2.251 98%
CCT
6310 103%
6633 98%
6532 100%
6508 100%
7251 90%
Contrast
764

* ... 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 176.1 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 176.1 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 176.1 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9653 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The high luminance of the AMOLED panel is accompanied by other good display characteristics. For optimal colors, users should switch the color mode from "automatic" to "standard". As our CalMAN measurements show, the color deviations are then very close to ideal at a DeltaE of 1.3 and almost overkill for a smartphone. At a DeltaE of 3 or below, the difference between a color and its reference color becomes almost too subtle to notice.

Color accuracy
Color accuracy
Color accuracy (color mode standard)
Color accuracy (color mode standard)
Grayscale
Grayscale
Grayscale (color mode standard)
Grayscale (color mode standard)
Color space (target color space AdobeRGB)
Color space (target color space AdobeRGB)
Color space (target color space DCI-P3)
Color space (target color space DCI-P3)
Color space (target color space sRGB)
Color space (target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps
Saturation sweeps

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
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 8 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.6 ms).

Due to its high brightness, the Mi Note 10 Lite does very well when it comes to outdoor use as long as the phone is not used under direct sunlight. Similarly, the viewing angles warrant no criticism. The screen content remains discernible even when viewed from a very steep angle.

Outdoor use (shade)
Outdoor use (shade)
Outdoor use (open shade)
Outdoor use (open shade)
Outdoor use (direct sunlight)
Outdoor use (direct sunlight)
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance - Fast Mid-range SoC

The Mi Note 10 Lite features the Snapdragon 730G, an octa-core SoC from the upper mid-range segment with more than enough performance for day-to-day app use. However, its limitations become apparent when running more demanding applications or while multitasking.

Since unlike the normal Snapdragon 730,  the Snapdragon 730G's "G" suffix indicates that has been specifically optimized for games, it is a good choice for gamers. More specifically, Qualcomm has adapted a few of the Wi-Fi features and increased the clock speed of the GPU Adreno 618. Graphics-intensive benchmarks such as GFXBench and 3DMark still show the Huawei P40 Lite 5G to be an even more interesting device for gamers.

Geekbench 5.1 - 5.3
Vulkan Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
903 Points ∼42%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
2137 Points ∼100% +137%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
812 Points ∼38% -10%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
920 Points ∼43% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (812 - 920, n=3)
878 Points ∼41% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=67)
1648 Points ∼77% +83%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
1090 Points ∼61%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
1080 Points ∼61% -1%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
1127 Points ∼63% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (1080 - 1127, n=3)
1099 Points ∼62% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=62)
1778 Points ∼100% +63%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
1690 Points ∼69%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
2434 Points ∼100% +44%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
1762 Points ∼72% +4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
1727 Points ∼71% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (1646 - 1786, n=5)
1722 Points ∼71% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 4160, n=151)
1959 Points ∼80% +16%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
547 Points ∼85%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
642 Points ∼100% +17%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
547 Points ∼85% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
543 Points ∼85% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (543 - 551, n=5)
547 Points ∼85% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1604, n=151)
567 Points ∼88% +4%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
7628 Points ∼80%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
9527 Points ∼100% +25%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
7134 Points ∼75% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5649 Points ∼59% -26%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
7558 Points ∼79% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (7134 - 8683, n=6)
7715 Points ∼81% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=549)
6067 Points ∼64% -20%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
8941 Points ∼68%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
13099 Points ∼100% +47%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
9145 Points ∼70% +2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6416 Points ∼49% -28%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
9052 Points ∼69% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (8941 - 10200, n=6)
9422 Points ∼72% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=703)
6654 Points ∼51% -26%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2686 Points ∼81%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
3331 Points ∼100% +24%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2621 Points ∼79% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2161 Points ∼65% -20%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2768 Points ∼83% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2621 - 2775, n=6)
2720 Points ∼82% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4061, n=203)
2656 Points ∼80% -1%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2143 Points ∼47%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4544 Points ∼100% +112%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2155 Points ∼47% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1438 Points ∼32% -33%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2153 Points ∼47% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2143 - 2199, n=6)
2158 Points ∼47% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 11259, n=203)
3067 Points ∼67% +43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2244 Points ∼53%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4204 Points ∼100% +87%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2244 Points ∼53% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1554 Points ∼37% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2265 Points ∼54% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2244 - 2310, n=6)
2262 Points ∼54% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6977, n=203)
2710 Points ∼64% +21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3058 Points ∼66%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4642 Points ∼100% +52%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3162 Points ∼68% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2311 Points ∼50% -24%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3188 Points ∼69% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3058 - 3391, n=6)
3218 Points ∼69% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=558)
2276 Points ∼49% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2466 Points ∼50%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4906 Points ∼100% +99%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2434 Points ∼50% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1530 Points ∼31% -38%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2425 Points ∼49% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2425 - 2492, n=6)
2459 Points ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 12146, n=558)
2271 Points ∼46% -8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2577 Points ∼53%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4845 Points ∼100% +88%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2565 Points ∼53% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1654 Points ∼34% -36%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2561 Points ∼53% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2561 - 2701, n=6)
2598 Points ∼54% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 9643, n=559)
2099 Points ∼43% -19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3134 Points ∼68%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4637 Points ∼100% +48%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3112 Points ∼67% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2336 Points ∼50% -25%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3193 Points ∼69% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3112 - 3352, n=6)
3213 Points ∼69% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=590)
2193 Points ∼47% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3751 Points ∼59%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
6327 Points ∼100% +69%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3647 Points ∼58% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1993 Points ∼31% -47%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3646 Points ∼58% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3646 - 3773, n=6)
3703 Points ∼59% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 22052, n=590)
3096 Points ∼49% -17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3594 Points ∼61%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
5853 Points ∼100% +63%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3513 Points ∼60% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2060 Points ∼35% -43%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3535 Points ∼60% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3513 - 3704, n=6)
3586 Points ∼61% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 11895, n=590)
2550 Points ∼44% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3257 Points ∼81%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4031 Points ∼100% +24%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3088 Points ∼77% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2217 Points ∼55% -32%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3171 Points ∼79% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3088 - 3328, n=6)
3216 Points ∼80% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5318, n=638)
2149 Points ∼53% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2298 Points ∼48%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4804 Points ∼100% +109%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2243 Points ∼47% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1473 Points ∼31% -36%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2237 Points ∼47% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2237 - 2310, n=6)
2271 Points ∼47% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 11573, n=638)
1894 Points ∼39% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2459 Points ∼53%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4608 Points ∼100% +87%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2388 Points ∼52% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1592 Points ∼35% -35%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
2394 Points ∼52% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (2388 - 2489, n=6)
2434 Points ∼53% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 9138, n=639)
1795 Points ∼39% -27%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3294 Points ∼81%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
4042 Points ∼100% +23%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3075 Points ∼76% -7%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2225 Points ∼55% -32%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3191 Points ∼79% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3075 - 3349, n=6)
3235 Points ∼80% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5301, n=680)
2020 Points ∼50% -39%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3610 Points ∼59%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
6158 Points ∼100% +71%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3504 Points ∼57% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2027 Points ∼33% -44%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3498 Points ∼57% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3485 - 3678, n=6)
3567 Points ∼58% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 16670, n=679)
2514 Points ∼41% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3594 Points ∼65%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
5516 Points ∼100% +53%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3399 Points ∼62% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2068 Points ∼37% -42%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
3425 Points ∼62% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (3399 - 3594, n=6)
3490 Points ∼63% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 11256, n=682)
2148 Points ∼39% -40%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
20767 Points ∼50%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
41610 Points ∼100% +100%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
14820 Points ∼36% -29%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
20393 Points ∼49% -2%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
22054 Points ∼53% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (14820 - 22054, n=5)
18710 Points ∼45% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 59268, n=824)
15851 Points ∼38% -24%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
53194 Points ∼93%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
57067 Points ∼100% +7%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
50829 Points ∼89% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
25086 Points ∼44% -53%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
51267 Points ∼90% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (50829 - 53548, n=5)
52404 Points ∼92% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 224130, n=822)
28668 Points ∼50% -46%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
39491 Points ∼75%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
52715 Points ∼100% +33%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
33007 Points ∼63% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23866 Points ∼45% -40%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
39608 Points ∼75% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (33007 - 39608, n=5)
37271 Points ∼71% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 117606, n=822)
21990 Points ∼42% -44%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
83 fps ∼74%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
112 fps ∼100% +35%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
85 fps ∼76% +2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
46 fps ∼41% -45%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
84 fps ∼75% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (83 - 86, n=5)
84.4 fps ∼75% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=822)
47.9 fps ∼43% -42%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
60 fps ∼100%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
40 fps ∼67% -33%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (57 - 60, n=5)
59.2 fps ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 142, n=831)
32.2 fps ∼54% -46%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
41 fps ∼59%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
69 fps ∼100% +68%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
42 fps ∼61% +2%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
24 fps ∼35% -41%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
41 fps ∼59% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (41 - 42, n=5)
41.4 fps ∼60% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 180, n=727)
28.5 fps ∼41% -30%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
39 fps ∼71%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
55 fps ∼100% +41%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
36 fps ∼65% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23 fps ∼42% -41%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
38 fps ∼69% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (36 - 39, n=5)
37.8 fps ∼69% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 117, n=735)
23.4 fps ∼43% -40%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
30 fps ∼64%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
47 fps ∼100% +57%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
30 fps ∼64% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
15 fps ∼32% -50%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
30 fps ∼64% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (30 - 30, n=5)
30 fps ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=590)
22.8 fps ∼49% -24%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
29 fps ∼73%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
40 fps ∼100% +38%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
26 fps ∼65% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼35% -52%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
27 fps ∼68% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (26 - 29, n=5)
27.4 fps ∼69% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=592)
20.3 fps ∼51% -30%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
11 fps ∼65%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
17 fps ∼100% +55%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼59% -9%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5.5 fps ∼32% -50%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
10 fps ∼59% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (10 - 11, n=6)
10.3 fps ∼61% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=350)
11.7 fps ∼69% +6%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
6.7 fps ∼56%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
12 fps ∼100% +79%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6.7 fps ∼56% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.5 fps ∼29% -48%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
10 fps ∼83% +49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (6.3 - 10, n=6)
7.17 fps ∼60% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=348)
8.25 fps ∼69% +23%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼65%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
26 fps ∼100% +53%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼62% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.1 fps ∼35% -46%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼62% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (16 - 17, n=6)
16.3 fps ∼63% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=354)
17.5 fps ∼67% +3%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
18 fps ∼58%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
31 fps ∼100% +72%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼58% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼32% -44%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
18 fps ∼58% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (18 - 18, n=6)
18 fps ∼58% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=353)
20.1 fps ∼65% +12%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼63%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
27 fps ∼100% +59%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
17 fps ∼63% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼37% -41%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼63% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (17 - 17, n=5)
17 fps ∼63% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 75, n=515)
15.2 fps ∼56% -11%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼74%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
23 fps ∼100% +35%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
15 fps ∼65% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.6 fps ∼37% -49%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
15 fps ∼65% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (15 - 17, n=5)
15.8 fps ∼69% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=519)
13.4 fps ∼58% -21%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
273255 Points ∼74%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
HiSilicon Kirin 820, Mali-G57 MP6, 6144
369207 Points ∼100% +35%
Oppo Reno2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
260154 Points ∼70% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
181295 Points ∼49% -34%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 6144
266417 Points ∼72% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
  (251673 - 273255, n=5)
264147 Points ∼72% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 622888, n=139)
326530 Points ∼88% +19%

The Mi Note 10 Lite quickly loads web pages, which makes for smooth web browsing. Since both the Oppo Reno2 and particularly the Huawei P40 Lite 5G perform even better in this discipline, our test device does not manage to secure one of the top spots in our browser benchmarks.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Lite 5G (Huawei Browser 10.0.2.331)
54.792 Points ∼100% +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (45.8 - 50.6, n=5)
47.3 Points ∼86% +2%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Chrome 83.0.4103.106)
46.148 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
46.038 Points ∼84% 0%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
45.819 Points ∼84% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 161, n=213)
42.5 Points ∼78% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
27.681 Points ∼51% -40%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Lite 5G (Huawei Browser 10.0.2.331)
96.293 Points ∼100% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (79.2 - 87.7, n=5)
84 Points ∼87% +2%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
83.953 Points ∼87% +2%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Chrome 83.0.4103.106)
82.347 Points ∼86%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
79.228 Points ∼82% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
51.257 Points ∼53% -38%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 375, n=647)
49.6 Points ∼52% -40%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Huawei P40 Lite 5G (Huawei Browser 10.0.2.331)
49.5 runs/min ∼100% +23%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 196, n=194)
44.9 runs/min ∼91% +11%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
43.6 runs/min ∼88% +8%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
43.3 runs/min ∼87% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (40.4 - 44.2, n=5)
43 runs/min ∼87% +6%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Chrome 83.0.4103.106)
40.4 runs/min ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
29.1 runs/min ∼59% -28%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Huawei P40 Lite 5G (Huawei Browser 10.0.2.331)
115 Points ∼100% +64%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
77 Points ∼67% +10%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 194, n=284)
71 Points ∼62% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (66 - 77, n=5)
70.4 Points ∼61% +1%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Chrome 83.0.4103.106)
70 Points ∼61%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
66 Points ∼57% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
57 Points ∼50% -19%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Lite 5G (Huawei Browser 10.0.2.331)
19727 Points ∼100% +22%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
17345 Points ∼88% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (16197 - 17768, n=5)
16856 Points ∼85% +4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
16241 Points ∼82% 0%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Chrome 83.0.4103.106)
16197 Points ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
10194 Points ∼52% -37%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 58632, n=816)
8273 Points ∼42% -49%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (460 - 59466, n=842)
9571 ms * ∼100% -225%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
4375.1 ms * ∼46% -49%
Oppo Reno2 (Chrome 80)
3054.3 ms * ∼32% -4%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite (Chrome 83.0.4103.106)
2940.5 ms * ∼31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G (2770 - 3054, n=5)
2900 ms * ∼30% +1%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78)
2769.8 ms * ∼29% +6%
Huawei P40 Lite 5G (Huawei Browser 10.0.2.331)
2254.1 ms * ∼24% +23%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi equips the Mi Note 10 Lite with 64-GB or 128-GB of UFS storage, depending on the model. While the specifications suggest the use of UFS 2.1 storage, the measured speeds, which are incidentally almost identical to those of the higher-end Mi Note 10, indicate that in fact, only UFS 2.0 storage has been installed. Overall, the Mi Note 10 Lite is the runner-up in our memory benchmarks, where the Huawei P40 Lite 5G is once again able to claim first place.

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 LiteHuawei P40 Lite 5GOppo Reno2Samsung Galaxy A51Xiaomi Mi Note 10Average 64 GB UFS 2.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
44%
-22%
-12%
-4%
-18%
-47%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
67.67 (NM Card)
53.54 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
60.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
55.4 (33.3 - 65.3, n=10)
51.4 (1.7 - 87.1, n=552)
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.35 (NM Card)
74.52 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
73 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
73.4 (36.8 - 85.4, n=10)
69.2 (8.1 - 96.5, n=552)
Random Write 4KB
125.75
249.66
99%
22
-83%
104.4
-17%
118.9
-5%
78.1 (13.6 - 196, n=15)
-38%
39 (0.14 - 319, n=916)
-69%
Random Read 4KB
134.57
146.07
9%
144.24
7%
110.8
-18%
106.2
-21%
115 (60.6 - 157, n=15)
-15%
62.1 (1.59 - 325, n=916)
-54%
Sequential Write 256KB
213.22
188.01
-12%
201.78
-5%
184.9
-13%
243.6
14%
182 (135 - 222, n=15)
-15%
136 (2.99 - 1321, n=916)
-36%
Sequential Read 256KB
501.29
905.47
81%
469.31
-6%
496.1
-1%
480.5
-4%
491 (272 - 687, n=15)
-2%
358 (12.1 - 2037, n=916)
-29%

Gaming - 60-Hz Panel and an SoC Optimized for Games

Thanks to its Snapdragon 730G, which has been optimized for gaming performance, the Mi Note 10 Lite is able to run the latest games smoothly. As our tests with the tool Gamebench show, the smartphone holds its own even in demanding titles such as "Asphalt 9: Legends" and "PUBG Mobile".

The AMOLED display has a refresh rate of up to 60 Hz, although not every game is able to deliver frames at this rate. While for example the games we tested ran smoothly, they were limited to a maximum of 30 frames per second.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends
010203040Tooltip
; PUBG Mobile; 0.19.0: Ø29.6 (10-31)
; Asphalt 9: Legends; 2.3.4a: Ø29.8 (24-31)

Emissions - Xiaomi with No Throttling Under Load

Temperature

GFXBench battery test T-Rex
GFXBench battery test T-Rex
GFXBench battery test Manhattan
GFXBench battery test Manhattan

While idling, the Mi Note 10 Lite remains inconspicuously cool at just above 30 °C (~86 °F) and even under load, it does not heat up significantly. On average, we measured a temperature of 37.4 °C (~99 °F) on the front and back, which is very far from critical levels.

Internally, there are no issues, either, and as GFXBench's battery test shows, the SoC is able to access its full performance potential at any time. Both in the graphically less intensive T-Rex scenario and the more demanding Manhattan scenario, the initial frame rates do not drop even after rendering the same scene 30 times in succession, which illustrates that there is no throttling.

Max. Load
 37.3 °C
99 F
40.1 °C
104 F
39.4 °C
103 F
 
 37.6 °C
100 F
39.3 °C
103 F
39.8 °C
104 F
 
 37.6 °C
100 F
38.5 °C
101 F
39.1 °C
102 F
 
Maximum: 40.1 °C = 104 F
Average: 38.7 °C = 102 F
35.1 °C
95 F
36.8 °C
98 F
36.6 °C
98 F
35.3 °C
96 F
36 °C
97 F
35.6 °C
96 F
36.6 °C
98 F
36.9 °C
98 F
35.1 °C
95 F
Maximum: 36.9 °C = 98 F
Average: 36 °C = 97 F
Power Supply (max.)  37.6 °C = 100 F | Room Temperature 21.9 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.7 °C / 102 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 40.1 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.9 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.4 °C / 90 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.

Speaker

Speaker test: Pink noise
Speaker test: Pink noise

The Mi Note 10 Lite houses a single speaker that is able to play without distortions at volume levels of up to a relatively high maximum of 83 dB(A). While its capabilities are sufficient for occasional music and video playback as well as hands-free mode, the sound is relatively thin due to a lack of bass.

Meanwhile, external speakers or a headset connected to the headphone jack or paired Bluetooth devices are able to offer a significantly improved audio experience. Aside from aptx and aptX HD, the Mi Note 10 Lite also supports aptX Adaptive.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2036.839.42539.941.63131.935.44038.937.25043.737.96329.829.98025.924.910026.325.912524.927.816021.636.3200194325018.949.131518.154.940016.658.950016.261.463014.963.38001564.2100015.672.6125014.974.5160014.973.3200015.675.7250014.671.7315014.269.5400014.164.2500014.465.8630014.669.9800014.970.31000015.269.21250015.463.61600015.750SPL6666.36470.627.583N18.319.715.825.3152.5median 15.4median 64.2Delta2.11042.946.342.343.934.834.63939.140.842.634.43528.127.125.125.123.627.822.137.120.244.919.650.218.456.418.960.520.163.62065.217.566.316.17515.576.217.874.3167315.971.416.172.316.363.416.564.816.572.116.970.916.663.91764.516.55567.866.429.383.620.818.51.255.5median 17median 64.51.710.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi Note 10 LiteXiaomi Mi Note 10
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 28% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 54% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 26% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 61% 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 - XXL Battery Does Not Quit

Energy Consumption

With 1.1 watts while idling and 3.7 watts under load, the Mi Note 10 Lite is the most energy-efficient device in our comparison. Only the Oppo Reno2 even comes close to its level of efficiency.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0 / 0.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 1.1 / 1.8 Watt
Load midlight 3.7 / 6.1 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
5260 mAh
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
4000 mAh
Oppo Reno2
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
5260 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-24%
-7%
-23%
-28%
-7%
-19%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
0.65
19%
0.7
12%
0.9
-13%
0.7
12%
0.698 (0.49 - 0.8, n=5)
13%
0.892 (0.2 - 3.4, n=911)
-12%
Idle Average *
1.1
2.25
-105%
1.25
-14%
1.7
-55%
1.8
-64%
1.362 (0.96 - 1.8, n=5)
-24%
1.758 (0.6 - 6.2, n=910)
-60%
Idle Maximum *
1.8
2.29
-27%
1.36
24%
1.8
-0%
2.2
-22%
1.712 (1 - 2.2, n=5)
5%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=911)
-13%
Load Average *
3.7
3.7
-0%
5.38
-45%
5.2
-41%
5.2
-41%
4.54 (3.11 - 5.38, n=5)
-23%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=905)
-11%
Load Maximum *
6.1
6.46
-6%
6.71
-10%
6.6
-8%
7.5
-23%
6.59 (5.23 - 7.5, n=5)
-8%
6.12 (1.2 - 14.2, n=905)
-0%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Thanks to its 5260-mAh battery, the Mi Note 10 Lite achieves outstanding runtimes. It lasts almost 19 hours while under a simulated web-browsing load and just under 24 hours while playing an H.264 video.

Even with intensive use, the smartphone will likely last for at least one or even two days without having to be recharged. In this discipline, only the Mi Note 10 can compete with ever-so-slightly better runtimes despite a higher energy consumption. That being said, its advantage is very small.

The Mi Note 10 Lite can be recharged via its massive 30-watt charger, which recharges the battery very quickly. In our test, we were able to fully recharge the empty battery within 80 minutes.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
37h 29min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
18h 15min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
22h 50min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 37min
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
5260 mAh
Huawei P40 Lite 5G
4000 mAh
Oppo Reno2
4000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Note 10
5260 mAh
Battery Runtime
-4%
-24%
-28%
4%
Reader / Idle
2249
2533
13%
1689
-25%
2134
-5%
H.264
1370
1125
-18%
846
-38%
1423
4%
WiFi v1.3
1095
1047
-4%
616
-44%
698
-36%
1127
3%
Load
337
185
-45%
289
-14%
387
15%

Pros

+ premium build quality
+ curved display
+ bright AMOLED screen
+ good daylight shots
+ no throttling
+ good gaming performance
+ very long battery life
+ fast charging

Cons

- slippery glass case
- mediocre low-light pictures
- no microSD slot
- no IP certification

Verdict - Above-average Features for a Small Price

In review: Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Test devices courtesy of
In review: Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite: Test devices courtesy of

"Great camera, small compromises", this summarizes our verdict on the Xiaomi Mi Note 10. When taking this as a reference point, the verdict on the Mi Note 10 Lite has to be: Still a good camera and no further compromises compared to the Mi Note 10.

The Lite version offers everything that made the high-end alternative great: A great build quality, a bright AMOLED screen, extremely long battery life, fast charging, a fast octa-core SoC, and last but not least a very good price-performance ratio.

For a mid-range smartphone, the Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite is above average and only its camera cannot quite match that of its high-end sibling Mi Note 10.

Mi Note 10 Lite or Mi Note 10? Although there is no doubt that the Mi Note 10's 108-MP camera can take slightly better pictures, the quality of the Mi Note 10's pictures is almost as good, at least in well-lit scenarios. However, the Lite version is significantly cheaper, which in our opinion makes it an overall better choice for price-conscious buyers.

The Mi Note 10 Lite does not have a lot of disadvantages. Since the internal storage is not expandable with a microSD card, however, prospective buyers should carefully consider whether they choose the 64-GB or the 128-GB model. Furthermore, the Xiaomi smartphone is not waterproof, there is no wireless charging, and due to its smooth surfaces, it feels quite slippery.

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite - 08/06/2020 v7
Manuel Masiero

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
69 / 75 → 92%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
48 / 70 → 69%
Weight
88%
Battery
92%
Display
87%
Games Performance
28 / 64 → 44%
Application Performance
68 / 86 → 79%
Temperature
89%
Noise
100%
Audio
76 / 90 → 84%
Camera
68%
Average
77%
83%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 5 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 Note 10 Lite Smartphone Review – Price-performance Hit
Manuel Masiero, 2020-08- 9 (Update: 2020-08-10)
Manuel Masiero
Editor of the original article: Manuel Masiero - Review Editor
In 1986, when I had annoyed my parents long enough, they finally bought me a C64 that I had seen at a friend's place - and immediately knew that this was what I wanted. Since then, the fascination for computers has never left me and basically I tinker with everything I can get my hands on. From the C64 to the Amiga 500 and a hugely uncool IBM computer with 8088 CPU (and green IBM monochrome monitor!) in the early 90s, the list grew longer and longer. The current projects are called PC, Tablet and Smartphone.