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

Xiaomi Poco F3 review: Power smartphone for little money

Price-performance success! With the Poco F3, Xiaomi once again has a powerful smartphone in its portfolio that features a fast Snapdragon SoC, a bright AMOLED display, a powerful battery, 5G, and a triple-camera setup. Nevertheless, the starting price of 350 Euros (~$426) is very low.
Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Stephanie Chamberlain), 🇩🇪 🇳🇱 ...

The Poco F3 is the successor to the Poco F2 Pro and is based on the Redmi K40 this year, although the latter remains exclusive to the Chinese market. Therefore, the Pro model is no longer the reference, which is, however, also noticeably reflected in terms of pricing.

The Poco F3 still looks like a real bargain at a starting price of 350 Euros (~$426) for the lower storage configuration with 6 GB of RAM and 128 GB of internal storage and 400 Euros (~$487) for the model with 8/256 GB of storage. Mid-range smartphones are usually found in this price range, and even 5G support isn't always a given.

The Xiaomi smartphone also has a lot to offer when it comes to the remaining specifications and features a 120 Hz AMOLED display that promises up to 1300 cd/m² and an accurate color reproduction. In addition, there are dual speakers, a triple-camera setup, Wi-Fi 6, 5G, and much more.

, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Poco F Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G 8 x 2.4 - 3.2 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Graphics adapter
Memory
6144 MB 
, LPDDR5
Display
6.67 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 395 PPI, capacitive, AMOLED, 360 Hz touch sampling rate, 10 multitouch points, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 107.35 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, electronic compass, OTG
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G (quad-band), 3G (band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8), 4G (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66), 5G (band 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 41, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.8 x 163.7 x 76.4 ( = 0.31 x 6.44 x 3.01 in)
Battery
4520 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 11
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.8, 26 mm, 1/2", 0.8 µm); 8 MP (ultra wide, 119°, f/2.2); 5 MP (tele-macro, f/2.4, 50 mm, 1/5.0", 1.12 µm); Camera2 API level: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix (f/2.45, 1/3.4", 0.8 µm)
Additional features
Speakers: dual, Keyboard: on-screen, Power adapter (33 watts) | USB Type-C cable | Type-C to 3.5 mm headphone adapter, protective case, SIM eject tool, User Guide, warranty card, MIUI 12.0, 12 Months Warranty, Body SAR: 0.843 W/kg, Head SAR: 0.599 W/kg; GNSS: GPS (dual-band), GLONASS (dual-band), Galileo (triple-band), BeiDou (triple-band), IRNSS, DRM Widevine L1, fanless
Weight
196 g ( = 6.91 oz / 0.43 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
350 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible contenders in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
86 %
05/2021
Xiaomi Poco F3
SD 870, Adreno 650
196 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.67"2400x1080
88 %
04/2021
Oppo Find X3 Neo
SD 865, Adreno 650
184 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.55"2400x1080
86 %
07/2020
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
219 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.67"2400x1080
83 %
04/2021
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
SD 750G 5G, Adreno 619
189 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
85 %
05/2021
Motorola Moto G100
SD 870, Adreno 650
207 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.70"2520x1080

Case - With Gorilla Glass 5 on both sides

Despite its size, the Xiaomi Poco F3 is not too heavy, and it fits well in the hand thanks to the rounded back. We measure a height of 8.2 millimeters, which is slightly more than the manufacturer's specified 7.8 millimeters. This is increased by another 1.75 millimeters if the camera module is included, which is why the smartphone wobbles a lot on flat surfaces without a case on.

We like the build quality and are impressed by the even and tight gap dimensions. Twisting attempts produce a clearly audible creaking noise. Although the Poco F3 doesn't have an IP certification, Xiaomi has equipped the SIM tray with a rubber seal.

Xiaomi uses Corning Gorilla Glass 5 for both the front and the back. Unfortunately, the metal frame doesn't connect directly with the display glass, but the latter is surrounded by an additional plastic frame instead. Similarly, the physical buttons and the card slot's cover are made of plastic.

The smartphone's battery is firmly built into the device, and it can't be replaced by the user. The F3 is available in Deep Ocean Blue, Arctic White, and Night Black.

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

Size comparison

168.4 mm / 6.63 inch 74 mm / 2.91 inch 9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch 207 g0.4564 lbs163.3 mm / 6.43 inch 75.4 mm / 2.97 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 219 g0.4828 lbs163.7 mm / 6.44 inch 76.4 mm / 3.01 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 196 g0.4321 lbs159.9 mm / 6.3 inch 75.1 mm / 2.96 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs159.9 mm / 6.3 inch 72.5 mm / 2.85 inch 7.99 mm / 0.3146 inch 184 g0.4057 lbs

Connectivity - Poco F3 without an audio jack or microSD slot

Xiaomi's Poco F3 doesn't offer the option to expand storage via a microSD card, which should be taken into account when deciding on the storage configuration. There is no audio jack either, but at least a corresponding adapter for the USB-C port is included in the box. This operates according to the 2.0 standard and supports OTG.

Otherwise, the Poco phone is pretty comprehensive with Bluetooth 5.2, NFC, and an IR blaster. A notification LED is not available either but an always-on display is.

Top: Speaker, microphone, infrared
Top: Speaker, microphone, infrared
Left side
Left side
Right: Volume rocker, power button
Right: Volume rocker, power button
Bottom: Speaker, microphone, USB, SIM slot
Bottom: Speaker, microphone, USB, SIM slot

Software - Poco phone with Android 11 and MIUI 12.0

The Poco F3 ships with Android 11 and MIUI 12.0 for Poco smartphones. However, we can't identify any special modifications to the interface compared with the one for Xiaomi smartphones.

Besides Google services, the manufacturer also preinstalls numerous third-party apps like Facebook, Amazon, Tik Tok, and some games. Nevertheless, these can all be uninstalled. The display of advertisements after the installation process of an app or within the utility apps, such as when cleaning the system, is a bit more annoying.

The system's rigorous energy management, which sometimes kills background apps or prevents push notifications, is more likely to cause occasional frustration. You have to go into the settings and optimize this behavior manually in those cases.

Xiaomi doesn't provide specific information on its update intervals. However, an update to the upcoming Android 12 seems to be certain. The security patches are from April 1, 2021, and consequently up to date at the time of our review.

Communication and GNSS - Poco F3 with good positioning, Wi-Fi 6, and 5G

The Poco F3 supports all current mobile standards including 5G for mobile Internet access. The available frequencies are sufficient in Germany, and there are even a few more bands than necessary, but the Xiaomi phone is still far from being a globetrotter. The F3's connection stability didn't show any issues in the test.

The Wi-Fi module supports Wi-Fi 6 with MIMO antenna technology. This should enable high data rates, but the F3 falls short of expectations when receiving data from our reference Netgear Nighthawk AX 12 router. However, since Wi-Fi stability is excellent, this is hardly ever noticed in everyday use.

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
884 (444min - 914max) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
859 (755min - 907max) MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
724 (352min - 779max) MBit/s ∼82% -18%
Motorola Moto G100
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
692 (643min - 704max) MBit/s ∼78% -22%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.59 - 1599, n=303, last 2 years)
415 MBit/s ∼47% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Adreno 619, SD 750G 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
282 (275min - 287max) MBit/s ∼32% -68%
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Motorola Moto G100
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
788 (733min - 833max) MBit/s ∼100% +20%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
770 (741min - 794max) MBit/s ∼98% +18%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
743 (382min - 808max) MBit/s ∼94% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
654 (311min - 702max) MBit/s ∼83%
Average of class Smartphone
  (15.5 - 1414, n=303, last 2 years)
419 MBit/s ∼53% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Adreno 619, SD 750G 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
331 (322min - 337max) MBit/s ∼42% -49%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900311613629662645657605643631636640680640633654669676650647645668696702693680641683668671649311613629662645657605643631636640680640633654669676650647645668696702693680641683668671649444902897886890878890891885873869901848873905888887889914884872882899855855887863883901887Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø644 (311-702)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø869 (444-914)
Supported GNSS
GNSS
GPS Test outdoors
Outdoors
GPS Test indoors
Indoors

Xiaomi is significantly superior in terms of positioning features, and it supports the major satellite navigation systems at least with dual-band connectivity. Outdoor positioning is very fast and accurate, and the smartphone can also determine its location well indoors.

The Poco F3 has to face a comparison with the Garmin Edge 500 on a short bike ride. Although a few deviations are still noticeable here and there on the smartphone, it's much more accurate than the bike computer.

GNSS test ride - Lake
GNSS test ride - Lake
GNSS test ride - Turning point
GNSS test ride - Turning point
GNSS test ride - Summary
GNSS test ride - Summary

Telephone and call quality

The Poco F3's phone app hardly differs from that of other Android smartphones, and it has a well-arranged design. The integration of SIP accounts is available, and it worked flawlessly in the test.

The call quality is characterized by a very natural voice transmission when held to the ear. Over the speaker, the user's voice sounds a bit more muffled and reverberates slightly, but the F3 also shows a satisfactory performance in this regard. Even when the speaker is about two meters away from the smartphone, they can still be understood quite well. Noise suppression works very well for minor sources of interference, but if it's a really loud environment, the noises come through every now and then, or the voice of the F3 user will even only be reproduced with small interruptions.

The Poco smartphone supports dual SIM (2x nano), VoLTE, and Wi-Fi calling, but eSIMs are not supported.

Cameras - Decent triple-camera setup

Selfie taken with the Poco F3 in Photo mode
Selfie taken with the Poco F3 in Photo mode
Selfie taken with the Poco F3 in Portrait mode
Selfie taken with the Poco F3 in Portrait mode

The 20 MP front-facing camera is now integrated into the display, but it's comparatively small with a diameter of 2.65 millimeters. The lens uses the full resolution and doesn't support pixel-binning. In daylight, the selfies are good, but lens flare can be seen when there is background light. The pictures become noisy quite quickly once light decreases, and the portrait effect also shows significant transitions in this case. Videos are recorded in Full HD at 60 fps at best.

The centerpiece of the main camera is a 48 MP sensor, which is likely the slightly older Sony IMX582. Good-looking pictures can be taken in daylight, but they are heavily sharpened and could use a bit more dynamism despite pixel-binning. In addition, Xiaomi provides an ultra wide-angle lens with 8 MP that captures details well in the center of the image, but it shows some fuzziness towards the edges and is prone to chromatic aberrations. A so-called tele-macro lens is also available on the spec sheet, which also takes up a lot of space on the back. However, we can't find an actual use for it, because both the macro functionality as well as zooming are managed by the main sensor; at least no difference can be noticed when the tele-macro lens is covered. A digital zoom of up to 10x is possible.

Videos are recorded in Ultra HD (30 fps) at best and don't have access to optical image stabilization. The electronic one is present and also makes itself noticed, but it also provides for more image noise. The autofocus works quite reliably, but audio is accompanied by a slight noise.

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 angleWide angleZoom (5x)Ultra wide-angleLow light

The main camera of the Poco F3 shows good color reproduction without too many deviations under controlled lighting conditions. Our test chart is captured rather mediocrely using the 48 MP mode, and it already shows minor blurring in the picture's center.

ColorChecker
8.7 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
11 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
10.9 ∆E
9 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
4 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco F3: 7.16 ∆E min: 2.73 - max: 10.99 ∆E
ColorChecker
27 ∆E
38.6 ∆E
31.7 ∆E
32.2 ∆E
34 ∆E
47.3 ∆E
38.7 ∆E
27.2 ∆E
27.9 ∆E
24.4 ∆E
45.9 ∆E
49.1 ∆E
28 ∆E
38.2 ∆E
22.9 ∆E
44.8 ∆E
30.7 ∆E
37.7 ∆E
45.9 ∆E
48.1 ∆E
42.3 ∆E
34 ∆E
23.4 ∆E
13.6 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco F3: 34.73 ∆E min: 13.55 - max: 49.11 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - Only a one-year warranty

The Poco F3 comes with a modular power adapter (max. 33 watts), a USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), a USB-C to audio jack adapter, a SIM tool, and a transparent silicone protective case.

Xiaomi only provides a 12-month warranty for its smartphone, which doesn't affect the retailer's warranty.

Input devices and handling - Fingerprint sensor in the frame of the Poco F3

The capacitive touchscreen is covered with a protective film out of the box, and it has good gliding properties. However, we like the Gorilla Glass 5 surface even more. Inputs are generally implemented very quickly and precisely.

Google's GBoard is preinstalled as the standard keyboard, but it can also be replaced with any other layout from the Play Store. A one-hand mode that reduces the display to between 3.5 and 4.5 inches is also implemented. In addition, various gesture shortcuts are supported, but double-tap to wake isn't available for the display. In return, the fingerprint scanner can be assigned actions that are triggered by a double tap, such as controlling the flashlight, taking a screenshot, or opening the notification panel. This also works pretty well in most cases.

The fingerprint sensor works reliably and with a pleasing speed in the test. Additionally, 2D facial recognition is possible via the front-facing camera, and although it's faster and more convenient, it's also less secure.

Display - Poco F3 with super bright AMOLED display and 120 Hz

Subpixel structure
Subpixel structure

The Poco F3 has a 6.67-inch (16.94 cm) AMOLED display that has a resolution of 2400x1080 pixels and alternatively supports a fixed refresh rate of 60 or 120 Hz, with the former being the default. However, this isn't quite as fixed, because the panel automatically switches back to 60 Hz after a few seconds of showing a static image in 120 Hz mode.

The Xiaomi smartphone doesn't disappoint in terms of brightness, and it achieves an average of 902 cd/m² with a fully white background and the ambient light sensor enabled. In the APL50 measurement with evenly distributed bright and dark areas, it even reaches 1,175 cd/m² in the center of the screen. This makes the panel ideally suited for playing HDR content, and it also supports HLG, HDR10, and HDR10+. Those who prefer to adjust the display brightness manually can use a maximum of 497 cd/m².

Due to its OLED technology, the F3 isn't immune to screen flickering. The amplitude curve is very irregular below a display brightness of 27%, and the frequency fluctuates between 163.2 and 490.2 Hz, which can be quite problematic for sensitive users, especially since there's no optional DC-dimming mode. If brightness is further increased, the amplitude curve is more even (454.2-520.8 Hz), and above 64%, the panel switches to a constant 120 Hz mode.

OLED flickering at minimum display brightness
OLED flickering at minimum display brightness
OLED flickering at brightness levels between 27%-64%
OLED flickering at brightness levels between 27%-64%
OLED flickering > 64% brightness
OLED flickering > 64% brightness
889
cd/m²
887
cd/m²
920
cd/m²
897
cd/m²
889
cd/m²
930
cd/m²
888
cd/m²
896
cd/m²
922
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 930 cd/m² Average: 902 cd/m² Minimum: 2.52 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 889 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.6
ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.64-98 Ø5.8
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
Xiaomi Poco F3
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Oppo Find X3 Neo
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Super AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50
Motorola Moto G100
IPS/LTPS, 2520x1080, 6.70
Screen
-57%
-41%
-84%
-207%
Brightness middle
889
758
-15%
799
-10%
744
-16%
562
-37%
Brightness
902
753
-17%
801
-11%
749
-17%
535
-41%
Brightness Distribution
95
98
3%
97
2%
98
3%
90
-5%
Black Level *
0.57
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
0.9
1.7
-89%
1.46
-62%
2.2
-144%
3.99
-343%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
1.9
5
-163%
2.92
-54%
7
-268%
9.74
-413%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.3
2.1
-62%
2.7
-108%
2.1
-62%
6.5
-400%
Gamma
2.26 97%
2.27 97%
2.237 98%
2.06 107%
2.174 101%
CCT
6614 98%
6370 102%
6003 108%
6516 100%
6882 94%
Contrast
986

* ... 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 490.2 Hz ≤ 26 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 490.2 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 26 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 490.2 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 14793 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Adjusted settings
Adjusted settings

The black level of the AMOLED display is absolute, so that there is a perfect contrast ratio.

We examine the color calibration with the CalMAN analysis software. In the factory settings, reproduction is a bit too cool, and the rather large DCI-P3 color space is targeted. If you go through the trouble of adjusting it again (see screenshot), you get a more natural reproduction with very good Delta E values.

The Original mode uses the smaller sRGB color space, and it's often the better choice for Xiaomi smartphones when you want a natural color reproduction. However, this is not the case with the Poco F3, because the white balance has too much green, so the content looks sickly.

Grayscales (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Grayscales (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Mixed colors (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Mixed colors (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Color space (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Color space (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Saturation (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)
Saturation (adjusted settings, target color space: DCI-P3)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (38.1 ms).

The Poco F3 can convince outdoors, and it benefits from its immense brightness reserves in particular. The reflections on the display are also kept within limits, so that legibility should also be assured on bright summer days.

The viewing-angle stability of the Xiaomi smartphone is very good. Although brightness decreases a bit at flat viewing angles, this isn't a problem in everyday use. The typical greenish shimmer of the OLED panel is also only discreetly visible.

Viewing-angle stability of the Xiaomi Poco F3
Viewing-angle stability of the Xiaomi Poco F3

A lot of performance with the Snapdragon 870

Our test device is powered by a Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 with 6 GB of LPDDR5 RAM, but the Poco F3 is also available in a variant with 8 GB of RAM. The 7 nm chipset is a refresh of the Snapdragon 865/865+. The Prime Core's peak clock speed has only been increased by 100 MHz to 3.2 GHz, and the Adreno 650 now also reaches clock rates of up to 670 MHz (SD865/+: 587/646 MHz).

This only results in a minimal increase in CPU performance, but GPU performance can certainly achieve a gain of 9%. The latter doesn't apply to the Poco F3, though, since the increase is lower, but the Moto G100 with the same SoC manages to squeeze a bit more out from it.

Either way, the Poco smartphone demonstrates a strong system speed and has enough performance reserves for all tasks.

Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
998 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
911 Points ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
923 Points ∼92% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
636 Points ∼63% -36%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
972 Points ∼97% -3%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
921 Points ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (972 - 1046, n=4)
1005 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1604, n=235, last 2 years)
565 Points ∼56% -43%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3368 Points ∼96%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3141 Points ∼89% -7%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
3399 Points ∼97% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1878 Points ∼53% -44%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
2870 Points ∼81% -15%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3329 Points ∼95% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (2870 - 4455, n=4)
3522 Points ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 4455, n=235, last 2 years)
1939 Points ∼55% -42%
Vulkan Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3587 Points ∼76%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4737 Points ∼100% +32%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
3059 Points ∼65% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1272 Points ∼27% -65%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
3369 Points ∼71% -6%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3665 Points ∼77% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (3369 - 4324, n=4)
3788 Points ∼80% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (72 - 6524, n=125, last 2 years)
2045 Points ∼43% -43%
OpenCL Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3606 Points ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4464 Points ∼100% +24%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
3158 Points ∼71% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1304 Points ∼29% -64%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
3555 Points ∼80% -1%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3259 Points ∼73% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (3555 - 3724, n=4)
3640 Points ∼82% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (255 - 7514, n=129, last 2 years)
2133 Points ∼48% -41%
PCMark for Android
Work 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
13610 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (10896 - 16054, n=3)
13520 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 16564, n=45, last 2 years)
9536 Points ∼70% -30%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12440 Points ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10743 Points ∼70% -14%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
10347 Points ∼68% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
9573 Points ∼63% -23%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
11166 Points ∼73% -10%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
15299 Points ∼100% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (11166 - 14315, n=3)
12640 Points ∼83% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (82 - 15299, n=267, last 2 years)
7878 Points ∼51% -37%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
7970 Points ∼69%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11492 Points ∼100% +44%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
8652 Points ∼75% +9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
4040 Points ∼35% -49%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
8035 Points ∼70% +1%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9821 Points ∼85% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (7970 - 11064, n=3)
9023 Points ∼79% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (149 - 11895, n=277, last 2 years)
3947 Points ∼34% -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12033 Points ∼72%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
16809 Points ∼100% +40%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
12547 Points ∼75% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
4239 Points ∼25% -65%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
13531 Points ∼80% +12%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12625 Points ∼75% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (12033 - 14968, n=3)
13511 Points ∼80% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (122 - 22052, n=277, last 2 years)
4982 Points ∼30% -59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3653 Points ∼66%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5454 Points ∼99% +49%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
3956 Points ∼72% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3469 Points ∼63% -5%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
3318 Points ∼60% -9%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5525 Points ∼100% +51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (3318 - 5784, n=3)
4252 Points ∼77% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (620 - 5784, n=275, last 2 years)
2908 Points ∼53% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
7377 Points ∼82%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8947 Points ∼100% +21%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
8145 Points ∼91% +10%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
2927 Points ∼33% -60%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
6960 Points ∼78% -6%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8119 Points ∼91% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (6960 - 8975, n=3)
7771 Points ∼87% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (91 - 9839, n=275, last 2 years)
3191 Points ∼36% -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
9498 Points ∼79%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11999 Points ∼100% +26%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
9466 Points ∼79% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
2802 Points ∼23% -70%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
10199 Points ∼85% +7%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9382 Points ∼78% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (9498 - 10646, n=3)
10114 Points ∼84% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (73 - 12914, n=275, last 2 years)
3565 Points ∼30% -62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
4140 Points ∼75%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4733 Points ∼86% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
5466 Points ∼99% +32%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3466 Points ∼63% -16%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
3296 Points ∼60% -20%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5518 Points ∼100% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (3296 - 5793, n=3)
4410 Points ∼80% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (620 - 5793, n=275, last 2 years)
2959 Points ∼54% -29%
Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
4288 Points ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5038 Points ∼100% +17%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1103 Points ∼22% -74%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
4166 Points ∼83% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (4166 - 4351, n=4)
4260 Points ∼85% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (153 - 7275, n=91, last 2 years)
2735 Points ∼54% -36%
Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
4271 Points ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5039 Points ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1097 Points ∼22% -74%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
4152 Points ∼82% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (4152 - 4352, n=4)
4251 Points ∼84% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (205 - 8672, n=88, last 2 years)
2941 Points ∼58% -31%
Wild Life Extreme (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
1223 Points ∼99%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (1223 - 1243, n=3)
1233 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (83 - 2288, n=39, last 2 years)
856 Points ∼69% -30%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
1222 Points ∼99%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (1222 - 1246, n=3)
1230 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (117 - 1982, n=37, last 2 years)
873 Points ∼71% -29%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
71 fps ∼51%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼43% -15%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
60 fps ∼43% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
53 fps ∼38% -25%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼65% +27%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
138 fps ∼100% +94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (71 - 120, n=3)
93.7 fps ∼68% +32%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8.2 - 143, n=216, last 2 years)
57 fps ∼41% -20%
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
200 fps ∼75%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
266 fps ∼100% +33%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
205 fps ∼77% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
56 fps ∼21% -72%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
224 fps ∼84% +12%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
203 fps ∼76% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (200 - 231, n=3)
218 fps ∼82% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.3 - 322, n=216, last 2 years)
106 fps ∼40% -47%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
60 fps ∼55%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼55% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
60 fps ∼55% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
33 fps ∼30% -45%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
89 fps ∼82% +48%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
109 fps ∼100% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (60 - 113, n=3)
87.3 fps ∼80% +46%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.5 - 120, n=214, last 2 years)
44.9 fps ∼41% -25%
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
119 fps ∼79%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
151 fps ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
125 fps ∼83% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
33 fps ∼22% -72%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
131 fps ∼87% +10%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
123 fps ∼81% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (119 - 136, n=3)
129 fps ∼85% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 180, n=215, last 2 years)
61.9 fps ∼41% -48%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
59 fps ∼75%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼76% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
59 fps ∼75% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
25 fps ∼32% -58%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
79 fps ∼100% +34%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
75 fps ∼95% +27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (59 - 95, n=3)
77.7 fps ∼98% +32%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.1 - 106, n=213, last 2 years)
35.4 fps ∼45% -40%
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
81 fps ∼79%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
103 fps ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
88 fps ∼85% +9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
26 fps ∼25% -68%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
92 fps ∼89% +14%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼83% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (81 - 92, n=3)
85.7 fps ∼83% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 121, n=213, last 2 years)
42.4 fps ∼41% -48%
GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
44 fps ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
54 fps ∼100% +23%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
44 fps ∼81% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
16 fps ∼30% -64%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼87% +7%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
43 fps ∼80% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (44 - 50, n=3)
47 fps ∼87% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.5 - 61, n=212, last 2 years)
22.1 fps ∼41% -50%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
48 fps ∼77%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
62 fps ∼100% +29%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
51 fps ∼82% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
16 fps ∼26% -67%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
57 fps ∼92% +19%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
51 fps ∼82% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (48 - 58, n=3)
54.3 fps ∼88% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 75, n=212, last 2 years)
25.4 fps ∼41% -47%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
49 fps ∼86%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
57 fps ∼100% +16%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
46 fps ∼81% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
18 fps ∼32% -63%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
49 fps ∼86% 0%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45 fps ∼79% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (49 - 53, n=4)
50.8 fps ∼89% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.5 - 73, n=281, last 2 years)
22.2 fps ∼39% -55%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
57 fps ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
67 fps ∼100% +18%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
54 fps ∼81% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
20 fps ∼30% -65%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
57 fps ∼85% 0%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
53 fps ∼79% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (57 - 61, n=4)
58.5 fps ∼87% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.95 - 257, n=280, last 2 years)
25.5 fps ∼38% -55%
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
33 fps ∼83%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
40 fps ∼100% +21%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
29 fps ∼73% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
11 fps ∼28% -67%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
31 fps ∼78% -6%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼75% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (31 - 34, n=4)
32.8 fps ∼82% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 60, n=281, last 2 years)
14.7 fps ∼37% -55%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
22 fps ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
27 fps ∼100% +23%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
20 fps ∼74% -9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
7.6 fps ∼28% -65%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
22 fps ∼81% 0%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼74% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (22 - 23, n=4)
22.3 fps ∼83% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.35 - 101, n=280, last 2 years)
10.1 fps ∼37% -54%
Antutu v9 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
680139 Points ∼95%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
714632 Points ∼100% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
393060 Points ∼55% -42%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
678958 Points ∼95% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (678958 - 716502, n=3)
691866 Points ∼97% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (121238 - 815441, n=37, last 2 years)
465139 Points ∼65% -32%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
595585 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
631025 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
569967 Points ∼90% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
334292 Points ∼53% -44%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
588115 Points ∼93% -1%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
602626 Points ∼95% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (588115 - 595585, n=2)
591850 Points ∼94% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 727247, n=187, last 2 years)
331119 Points ∼52% -44%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
5042 Score ∼68%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
7402 Score ∼100% +47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (5042 - 7402, n=2)
6222 Score ∼84% +23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 7649, n=57, last 2 years)
3256 Score ∼44% -35%
UL Procyon AI Inference - Overall Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12855 Points ∼76%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
17021 Points ∼100% +32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (12855 - 17021, n=3)
14432 Points ∼85% +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1555 - 19592, n=28, last 2 years)
8084 Points ∼47% -37%
AImark - Score v2.x (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
111838 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
42629 Points ∼37% -62%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (111838 - 117345, n=2)
114592 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4293 - 264766, n=65, last 2 years)
58160 Points ∼51% -48%
Basemark GPU 1.2
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
83 (42.14min - 271.19max) fps ∼100%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
80.6 fps ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (80.6 - 83, n=2)
81.8 fps ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4.7 - 1902, n=43, last 2 years)
79.9 fps ∼96% -4%
OpenGL Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
74.07 (41.02min - 105.16max) fps ∼100%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
68.5 fps ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (68.5 - 74.1, n=2)
71.3 fps ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5 - 1736, n=42, last 2 years)
71.8 fps ∼97% -3%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
77.84 (40.81min - 128.99max) fps ∼96%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
74.19 fps ∼92% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (74.2 - 77.8, n=2)
76 fps ∼94% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8.79 - 1962, n=42, last 2 years)
80.9 fps ∼100% +4%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
68.66 (35.88min - 142.67max) fps ∼98%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
63.85 fps ∼91% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (63.9 - 68.7, n=2)
66.3 fps ∼94% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10.5 - 1746, n=42, last 2 years)
70.3 fps ∼100% +2%
BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
6356 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6182 Points ∼97% -3%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
6273 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3459 Points ∼54% -46%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
5916 Points ∼93% -7%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5993 Points ∼94% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (5916 - 6356, n=3)
6172 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (323 - 6959, n=199, last 2 years)
3623 Points ∼57% -43%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
9997 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8412 Points ∼83% -16%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
10075 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
6242 Points ∼62% -38%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
8852 Points ∼88% -11%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10059 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (8852 - 9997, n=3)
9536 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1160 - 14189, n=199, last 2 years)
6633 Points ∼66% -34%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
7692 Points ∼87%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8144 Points ∼92% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
8874 Points ∼100% +15%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
4211 Points ∼47% -45%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
6757 Points ∼76% -12%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6681 Points ∼75% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (6757 - 7785, n=3)
7411 Points ∼84% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (522 - 9044, n=199, last 2 years)
4238 Points ∼48% -45%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12801 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13833 Points ∼100% +8%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
11736 Points ∼85% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3989 Points ∼29% -69%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
11431 Points ∼83% -11%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11637 Points ∼84% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (11431 - 12801, n=3)
11995 Points ∼87% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (349 - 16996, n=199, last 2 years)
5605 Points ∼41% -56%
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
1658 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1542 Points ∼86% -7%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144
1456 Points ∼81% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1365 Points ∼76% -18%
Motorola Moto G100
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
1791 Points ∼100% +8%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix Edition
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1650 Points ∼92% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (1658 - 1791, n=3)
1709 Points ∼95% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2169, n=199, last 2 years)
1272 Points ∼71% -23%

Web browsing feels fast, but the Poco F3 is much slower compared to the Moto G100. Especially in Java environments, this translates into a performance drop of up to 35%.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)
91.208 Points ∼100% +21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (60.7 - 91.2, n=3)
75.7 Points ∼83% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
75.089 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)
67.698 Points ∼74% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)
56.483 Points ∼62% -25%
Average of class Smartphone (12.4 - 161, n=185, last 2 years)
50 Points ∼55% -33%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)
160.92 Points ∼100% +53%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)
145.11 Points ∼90% +38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (105 - 161, n=3)
124 Points ∼77% +18%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)
119.9 Points ∼75% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
105.4 Points ∼65%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)
92.34 Points ∼57% -12%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 375, n=193, last 2 years)
89.7 Points ∼56% -15%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
74.8 runs/min ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)
74.5 runs/min ∼100% 0%
Motorola Moto G100 (Chome 90)
73.6 runs/min ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (51.4 - 74.8, n=3)
66.6 runs/min ∼89% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (9 - 196, n=166, last 2 years)
50.7 runs/min ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)
45.44 runs/min ∼61% -39%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)
147 Points ∼100% +18%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
125 Points ∼85%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (99 - 147, n=3)
124 Points ∼84% -1%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)
118 Points ∼80% -6%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)
103 Points ∼70% -18%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)
82 Points ∼56% -34%
Average of class Smartphone (20 - 194, n=203, last 2 years)
77.9 Points ∼53% -38%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)
34161 Points ∼100% +29%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)
31224 Points ∼91% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (20543 - 34161, n=3)
27094 Points ∼79% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
26577 Points ∼78%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)
24369 Points ∼71% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)
17730 Points ∼52% -33%
Average of class Smartphone (1986 - 58632, n=210, last 2 years)
17317 Points ∼51% -35%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (460 - 29635, n=212, last 2 years)
3993 ms * ∼100% -129%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)
2393.3 ms * ∼60% -37%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)
1993.1 ms * ∼50% -14%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
1743.8 ms * ∼44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (1589 - 1744, n=3)
1689 ms * ∼42% +3%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)
1623.2 ms * ∼41% +7%
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)
1589.3 ms * ∼40% +9%

* ... smaller is better

The fast UFS 3.1 storage delivers a fast performance in the test, but it falls a bit short of expectations.

Xiaomi Poco F3Oppo Find X3 NeoXiaomi Poco F2 ProSamsung Galaxy A52 5GMotorola Moto G100Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
28%
17%
-18%
25%
19%
-41%
Sequential Read 256KB
1378.12
1737.64
26%
1634.45
19%
926.67
-33%
1729.8
26%
1566 (1330 - 1730, n=18)
14%
750 (41.9 - 2037, n=287, last 2 years)
-46%
Sequential Write 256KB
684.13
768.59
12%
721.95
6%
484.62
-29%
716.8
5%
754 (527 - 1095, n=18)
10%
327 (11.9 - 1321, n=287, last 2 years)
-52%
Random Read 4KB
208.02
260.89
25%
229.74
10%
176.05
-15%
253.6
22%
236 (133 - 317, n=18)
13%
134 (13.5 - 325, n=287, last 2 years)
-36%
Random Write 4KB
170.57
250.97
47%
226.45
33%
179.23
5%
252.9
48%
235 (121 - 306, n=18)
38%
120 (4.97 - 330, n=287, last 2 years)
-30%

Games - Strong hardware with software brake

We put the gaming capabilities of the Poco F3 to the test with GameBench. The Adreno 650 in the smartphone promises unrestricted gaming fun just like the 120 Hz display and the dual speakers.

In fact, the F3 also includes a small promo kit for PUBG Mobile, but it had already expired before the market launch, and it can no longer be claimed. However, the game runs very smoothly on the smartphone and even at 60 fps in the HD setting. Those who want to enjoy the game in its full glory will have to settle for 40 fps.

We're a bit disappointed with Armajet, because the F3 only achieves 30 fps here, although more should be possible both technically and in terms of the app. This is due to poor optimization and communication with the publishers, and experience shows that it will also affect other titles that support high frame rates.

Although the demanding Genshin Impact also runs smoothly at the highest details, it sometimes exhibits minor frame drops and other times greater ones.

Armajet
Armajet
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Genshin Impact
Genshin Impact
0510152025303540455055603030313029312930293031302930303030293129303030293030303030303031293030302931293029312930303030293129303030303030303029312931303030303030312931303030303130303130303030303030312930303030313030313030303030313029312930293031302930303030293129303030293030303030303031293030302931293029312930303030293129303030303030303029312931303030303030312931303030303130303130303030303030312930303030313030313030306161606060615461606157605757615961615361606156616060605861605660616160616061596161586160616061616061556060616157616061606161606160615261606160606160616061616061606157505861616059536161585459616060606152516160616061606061606160616061615860596160615860616060456161606157616061606061606160616061615161586160616160614961605961606160616061606161606160616037536161606160615860606061606060596059595958606161565060615760603030313029312930293031302930303030293129303030293030303030303031293030302931293029312930303030293129303030303030303029312931303030303030312931303030303130303130303030303030312930303030313030313030306161606060615461606157605757615961615361606156616060605861605660616160616061596161586160616061616061556060616157616061606161606160615261606160606160616061616061606157505861616059536161585459616060606152516160616061606061606160616061615860596160615860616060456161606157616061606061606160616061615161586160616160614961605961606160616061606161606160616037536161606160615860606061606060596059595958606161565060615760606159606060615961595958596060606060606059616060596060606060615961596159606061596059615960615861596060606060606159605961605961596159615961596060606060606060606060606060606060596159606060605961596159606159615961596060606159606060606060606059606060596159606159615960606159606159615961596060606060606061586060605961605961596159615961605961596159615960596160606060595961606060605960615960606159303031302931293029303130293030303029312930303029303030303030303129303030293129302931293030303029312930303030303030302931293130303030303031293130303030313030313030303030303031293030303031303031303030616160606061546160615760575761596161536160615661606060586160566061616061606159616158616061606161606155606061615761606160616160616061526160616060616061606161606160615750586161605953616158545961606060615251616061606160606160616061606161586059616061586061606045616160615761606160606160616061606161516158616061616061496160596160616061606160616160616061603753616160616061586060606160606059605959595860616156506061576060615960606061596159595859606060606060605961606059606060606061596159615960606159605961596061586159606060606060615960596160596159615961596159606060606060606060606060606060606059615960606060596159615960615961596159606060615960606060606060605960606059615960615961596060615960615961596159606060606060606158606060596160596159615961596160596159615961596059616060606059596160606060596061596060615941394139404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040403941404040394139414039413941394140394139413941394140394139413941404040394139413940413941394040404139413940404040404139404040404041394040404040413940404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404039413941394140394139413941403941394139404139413941394140394139404040413941394040404040413940Tooltip
; Armajet; 1.59.8: Ø30 (29-31)
; Genshin Impact; 1.5.0_2574575_2578841: Ø59.4 (37-61)
; PUBG Mobile; HD; 1.4.0: Ø59.9 (58-61)
; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 1.4.0: Ø40 (39-41)

Emissions - Good dual speakers

Temperature

GFXBench battery test: T-Rex (OpenGL ES 2.0)
T-Rex
GFXBench battery test: Manhattan (OpenGL ES 3.1)
Manhattan

The Poco F3 only barely exceeds the 30 °C (~86 °F) mark in idle usage. Under sustained load, temperatures increase over the entire surface, and the smartphone gets lukewarm, which is absolutely harmless.

The stress test immediately reveals the reason for the somewhat weaker performance in some benchmarks, since the SoC's performance can't be maintained consistently in either 3DMark stress test. Only minimal losses are visible in GFXBench. In everyday use, however, the performance losses shouldn't be noticeable, since there are more than enough performance reserves.

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
Adreno 619, SD 750G 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.7 (1097min - 1100max) % ∼100% +21%
Motorola Moto G100
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
99.2 (4109min - 4141max) % ∼99% +21%
Oppo Find X3 Neo
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
83.2 (4216min - 5068max) % ∼83% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82.2 (3521min - 4286max) % ∼82%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82.2 (1002min - 1219max) % ∼100%
Max. Load
 35.9 °C
97 F
36 °C
97 F
33.3 °C
92 F
 
 35.9 °C
97 F
35.3 °C
96 F
33 °C
91 F
 
 36 °C
97 F
34.9 °C
95 F
32 °C
90 F
 
Maximum: 36 °C = 97 F
Average: 34.7 °C = 94 F
32.6 °C
91 F
33.9 °C
93 F
35.9 °C
97 F
30.9 °C
88 F
33.9 °C
93 F
35.7 °C
96 F
31.1 °C
88 F
32.9 °C
91 F
34.8 °C
95 F
Maximum: 35.9 °C = 97 F
Average: 33.5 °C = 92 F
Power Supply (max.)  27.5 °C = 82 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.7 °C / 94 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 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22.4 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 35.9 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.5 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

The two speakers have a comparatively pleasing sound as long as they aren't turned up too loud. The higher mids and lower trebles in particular are reproduced appealingly, but distortion sets in quite quickly with higher frequencies. The support for Dolby Atmos should be added via an update.

There's no audio jack, but the adapter enables a low-noise output with a very good sound quality (SNR: 93.39 dBFS) via the USB-C port. All common audio codecs (SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, aptX TWS+, LDAC, and LHDC) are available for Bluetooth.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.323.92523.320.53120.324401926.55029.835.76317.225.78012.926.210019.426.112512.139.51601149.92009.548.825012.655.331513.660.240010.562.35001167.96309.768.480011.174.8100011.576.8125012.778.9160013.479.1200012.775.8250013.676.3315014.180.440001380.1500013.276.8630013.978.6800013.475.21000013.773.21250014.467.81600016.765SPL25.189.4N0.679.5median 13median 73.2Delta0.99.842.343.336.539.731.731.132.437.43935.531.730.622.123.721.221.215.830.217.541.714.547.113.349.512.455.712.557.514.363.11764.322.169.720.274.414.974.114.672.814.574.31572.816.865.318.365.51969.519.675.720.17720.879.420.271.321.158.364.130.385.116.51.260.8median 17median 65.52.610.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Poco F3Motorola Moto G100
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Poco F3 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 29% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Motorola Moto G100 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 44% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 27% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Battery life - Strong but not excellent

Energy consumption

Power consumption can be described as good for the most part. Only the activated communication modules draw a bit too much power from the battery.

The 4,520 mAh battery can be quickly recharged with the included power adapter. A full charge only takes 53 minutes, the 50% mark is already reached after 19 minutes, and the 80% mark after 33 minutes.

Unfortunately, wireless charging is not supported.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.15 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.76 / 1.29 / 1.45 Watt
Load midlight 4.6 / 8.87 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 Poco F3
4520 mAh
Oppo Find X3 Neo
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro
4700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
4500 mAh
Motorola Moto G100
5000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-30%
-110%
-7%
-24%
-11%
-18%
Idle Minimum *
0.76
0.92
-21%
2
-163%
0.92
-21%
0.9
-18%
0.863 (0.76 - 0.93, n=3)
-14%
0.934 (0.37 - 2.5, n=234, last 2 years)
-23%
Idle Average *
1.29
2.38
-84%
3.1
-140%