Notebookcheck Logo

Xiaomi Poco F4 review: Great smartphone, but lacking innovation

Subtle upgrade. Poco smartphones stand for a good price-performance ratio. But the new Poco F4 is very similar to its F3 predecessor - even the processor is identical. Moreover, the manufacturer's flagship, the F4 GT, was released earlier this year. Our review clarifies where the F4 ranks.

Poco F4? We've had this already. This is only nearly true, since Poco launched the F4 GT with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 processor in the summer. The F4 without GT, on the other hand, is the successor to last year's F3 model. The device is available in two configuration variants: the smaller one comes with 6 GB of RAM and 128 GB of storage, while the larger one offers 8 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage. There are three colors to choose from: silver, black and green. Our review device is black and has the smaller storage configuration. We clarify whether the F4 achieves a top spot in terms of price-performance in the Poco tradition.

Xiaomi Poco F4 (Poco F Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G 8 x 2.4 - 3.2 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Graphics adapter
Memory
6 GB 
, LPDDR5
Display
6.67 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 395 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 104 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, compass, proximity, OTG, IR-Blaster
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.2, GSM (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), UMTS (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19), LTE FDD (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28), LTE TDD (Band 38, 40, 41), 5G Sub-6G (Band 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.7 x 163.2 x 75.95 ( = 0.3 x 6.43 x 2.99 in)
Battery
4500 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 12
Camera
Primary Camera: 64 MPix (f/1.79) + 8 MPix (f/2.2) Ultrawide + 2 MPix (f/2.4) Macro
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix (f/2.45)
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Onscreen, 67W charger, USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), SIM tool, case, USB-C to 3.5 millimeter jack adapter, MIUI 13, 12 Months Warranty, Dual-band GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Galileo (E1, E5a), QZSS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), Beidou (B1l, B2a), NavIC, fanless
Weight
195 g ( = 6.88 oz / 0.43 pounds), Power Supply: 137 g ( = 4.83 oz / 0.3 pounds)
Price
350 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible Competitors in Comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
86.4 %
09/2022
Xiaomi Poco F4
SD 870, Adreno 650
195 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.67"2400x1080
83.4 %
06/2022
Samsung Galaxy A53
Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4
189 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
88.1 %
03/2022
Xiaomi 12X
SD 870, Adreno 650
176 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.28"2400x1080
86 %
05/2021
Xiaomi Poco F3
SD 870, Adreno 650
196 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.67"2400x1080
86.4 %
07/2022
Motorola Edge 30
SD 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L
155 g128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
85.4 %
06/2022
OnePlus Nord 2T
Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9
190 g256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash6.43"2400x1080
85.5 %
12/2021
Honor 50
SD 778G 5G, Adreno 642L
175 g256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.57"2340x1080

Case - F4 with plastic frame and glass back

The Poco F4 has a glass back, with Xiaomi emphasizing a reduced thickness of 7.7 millimeters, but this does not include the protruding camera module. Although the cameras clearly protrude from the case, the smartphone does not wobble on a flat surface. The frame is made of plastic, but still ensures great rigidity. Edges are straight, making the smartphone look quite angular. The display is reinforced by Corning Gorilla Glass 5.

During the review period, our review sample did not incur any scratches or other signs of wear. The smartphone can be twisted a little under force, but there are no noises. The SIM card slot has a rubber seal, so the smartphone is presumably water resistant, even if IP certification is absent. The workmanship is very good overall, and the gaps very small and even.

Size Comparison

163.7 mm / 6.44 inch 76.4 mm / 3.01 inch 7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch 196 g0.4321 lbs163.2 mm / 6.43 inch 75.95 mm / 2.99 inch 7.7 mm / 0.3031 inch 195 g0.4299 lbs159.96 mm / 6.3 inch 73.76 mm / 2.9 inch 7.78 mm / 0.3063 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs159.6 mm / 6.28 inch 74.8 mm / 2.94 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 189 g0.4167 lbs159.1 mm / 6.26 inch 73.2 mm / 2.88 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs159.4 mm / 6.28 inch 74.2 mm / 2.92 inch 6.8 mm / 0.2677 inch 155 g0.3417 lbs152.7 mm / 6.01 inch 69.9 mm / 2.75 inch 8.16 mm / 0.3213 inch 176 g0.388 lbs

Equipment - Poco with dual SIM and stereo sound

The Poco F4 is dual-SIM capable. It accepts two nano-SIM cards, but eSIM is not supported. The internal storage cannot be expanded with a micro-SD card, so the choice between the two storage variants with 128 and 256 GB should be carefully considered. The F4 also does without a jack, but Poco at least includes a jack to USB-C adapter. In return, the smartphone offers stereo speakers that are Dolby Atmos certified. There is also an infrared transmitter on the top, so the smartphone can be used as a remote control for many devices.

The power button and the volume rocker are installed on the right side of the device. Turning the smartphone on and off is no problem for right-handers, and the reviewer's thumb easily reaches the volume down button. However, the thumb has to be stretched out for the volume up button. The notification LED has been omitted. Instead, the F4 has an always-on display. Lastly, the panel can be activated by lifting it or double-tapping it to check for received messages.

Top: IR blaster, speaker, microphone
Top: IR blaster, speaker, microphone
Right: volume, power with fingerprint sensor
Right: volume, power with fingerprint sensor
Left: no buttons
Left: no buttons
Bottom: SIM, microphone, USB, speaker
Bottom: SIM, microphone, USB, speaker

Software - F4 runs on MIUI 13

Poco's affiliation with Xiaomi is made clear in the software, since the F4 runs MIUI 13, which is based on Android 12. At the time of review, the security patch was from August 2022. The UI has an app launcher and comes with pre-installed third-party apps such as Netflix, Audible, Amazon, Booking, Genshin Impact, Goboo, Joom, Lords Mobile, Spotify, TikTok and WPS Office, but these can all be uninstalled. In addition, a number of Google apps and programs from the Xiaomi universe, such as Mi Video, ShareMe, and Mi Remote, are installed. In total, 24 GB of storage space is already occupied in factory state.

The software supports some gestures and shortcuts for the keys. For example, users can take a screenshot via a three-finger swipe gesture or start the flashlight with a double tap on the power button. Such gestures can be customized in the menu. Poco also includes a one-hand mode that allows you to reach the entire display area with your thumb without having to change your grip.

The software also offers the option of side menus, which can be used to launch either individual programs or special functions in special usage scenarios. For example, the sidebar opens the "Game Turbo" when gaming, which can be used to quickly clean up the RAM or free up storage space. Quick access to screenshots is also possible. Furthermore, there is the option of implementing two user accounts on the device, which can be used in parallel.

The Poco software separates the notifications from the quick settings. A swipe down to the left of the selfie camera shows the current notifications, while a swipe to the right of the camera opens the quick settings. A swipe from bottom to top opens the app launcher, which can also filter the apps by categories such as communication, entertainment, photography etc. Currently, Poco and Xiaomi do not provide any precise information about an update schedule, but have stated their intention to provide the devices with updates in the long term.

 
 
 

Communication and GNSS - F4 comes with 5G and Wi-Fi 6

The Poco F4 supports all frequency bands relevant to Europe, including LTE and 5G mobile. Under testing, the smartphone's reception displayed no abnormalities. The Poco device accepts two nano-SIM cards; eSIM is not supported. The mmWave standard is also not supported

The Poco F4 performs well with Wi-Fi 6 support in the home network: The transfer rates with our Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router are solid. Although the smartphone does not outperform competing devices - with the exception of the Samsung A53 - it still ranks among the top contenders. Similarly to its predecessor, the transfer rates are also very stable and there are no dips.

Networking
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
677 (min: 331) MBit/s ∼92%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
960 (min: 480) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
345 (min: 328) MBit/s ∼47%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
269 (min: 255) MBit/s ∼28%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
736 (min: 644) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
745 (min: 391) MBit/s ∼78%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AX12
884 (min: 444) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AX12
654 (min: 311) MBit/s ∼85%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
946 (min: 876) MBit/s ∼67%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
946 (min: 884) MBit/s ∼73%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000
451 (min: 397) MBit/s ∼61%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
884 (min: 867) MBit/s ∼92%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
iperf3 transmit AX12
852 (min: 384) MBit/s ∼96%
iperf3 receive AX12
769 (min: 725) MBit/s ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
 
iperf3 receive AXE11000
633 (min: 44.3) MBit/s ∼86%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
669 (min: 57.7) MBit/s ∼70%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1418 (min: 853) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1289 (min: 598) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AX12
490 (min: 5.59) MBit/s ∼55%
iperf3 receive AX12
467 (min: 15.5) MBit/s ∼61%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900950Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø665 (331-713)
Xiaomi Poco F3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø644 (311-702)
Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø944 (480-997)
Xiaomi Poco F3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø869 (444-914)
Indoors
Indoors
GNSS
GNSS

Under testing, the Poco F4 proves to be quick in establishing links to satellite systems. The F4 supports GNSS with several bands. After an initial calibration, everyday navigation with Google Maps works well. Satellite positioning succeeds both indoors and outdoors within a few seconds.

In a bicycle ride with our comparison device, the Garmin Venu 2, the Poco F4 performs well with a good recording of the route traveled. The total distance recorded hardly deviates and corresponds to the satellite recording, even with curves and turns.

GNSS test ride: circumnavigation of the lake
GNSS test ride: circumnavigation of the lake
GNSS test ride: loop
GNSS test ride: loop
GNSS test ride: summary
GNSS test ride: summary

Telephony & Voice Quality

The call quality of the Poco F4 is inconspicuous. The other party is rendered clearly and the earpiece is loud enough. The user of the F4 is also well understood, but background noise could be filtered out better. For the phone app, Poco relies on software from Google. The user interface is tidy and clearly arranged.

The Poco F4 supports both VoLTE and calls via WLAN. When making calls via the loudspeaker, the F4 gives clear voice reproduction, especially in the mids and trebles. Voices are reproduced naturally and do not sound tinny, even at high volumes. 

Cameras - Poco with 64 MPix update

The Poco F4 offers three different cameras on the back, two of which we know from the predecessor. The 64 MPix main camera is new and replaces the 48 MPix sensor of the F3. The new sensor impresses with a large dynamic range. Image processing is swift, although the software carries out a lot of post-image sharpening. The camera also offers a manual Pro mode where ISO, white balance, shutter speed, aperture and focus can be manually adjusted. 

The leap in quality from the main to the wide-angle camera is enormous. Color reproduction deviates, the images appear paler, and there is also a lack of sharpness. The macro lens is more of a gimmick; in sufficient light, shots at close range are possible, but they lack sharpness. Video recordings are possible up to a resolution of 4K and 60 FPS, but only 1080p and 30 FPS are enabled ex-factory. The fast autofocus in video recordings is a positive aspect, but the recordings lack good stabilization and quickly become shaky.

A 20 MPix camera is used on the front, as in the predecessor. Poco specifies the camera recess in the display as having a diameter of only 2.67 millimeters. Good selfies are possible in good light conditions, but lens flares occur in backlight. Portrait mode works quickly and reliably, and even hair is not a problem for the camera. Video recordings are possible with a maximum resolution of 1080p and 30 FPS.

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.

Main cameraMain cameraWide angle5x zoomLow light
click to load images

In terms of color fidelity, the Poco F4's camera does not come out unscathed. Most colors are greatly brightened in daylight, but appear vivid on their own. As expected, the differences are significantly larger under controlled lighting conditions at a brightness of just one lux. In a class comparison, the F4's camera performs remarkably well, although the Samsung A53 renders colors more realistically under identical conditions.

The sharpness of the images is good, but decreases noticeably towards the edges in our test chart. In addition, the exposure of the pictures is not uniform; the lower edge of the picture is brighter than the upper one. In low light, objects and details are still recognizable in the Poco pictures, but could be brighter overall.

ColorChecker
15.7 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
17 ∆E
24.8 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
9 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
10 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
8.3 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
13 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco F4: 10.82 ∆E min: 3.2 - max: 24.83 ∆E
ColorChecker
29.3 ∆E
48.3 ∆E
35.8 ∆E
35.6 ∆E
41 ∆E
59.6 ∆E
48.8 ∆E
30.1 ∆E
37.7 ∆E
27.3 ∆E
59.9 ∆E
62.2 ∆E
27.8 ∆E
46.6 ∆E
35 ∆E
64.8 ∆E
40.8 ∆E
43.2 ∆E
57.3 ∆E
58.9 ∆E
47.3 ∆E
35.6 ∆E
24 ∆E
13.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco F4: 42.09 ∆E min: 13.38 - max: 64.8 ∆E

Accessories & Warranty - The F4 comes with a case and fast charger

The Poco F4 comes with a 67-watt fast charger (including a matching USB-A to USB-C cable), a transparent plastic case, a USB-C to jack adapter, a screen protector and a SIM card tool.

Xiaomi offers a 24-month warranty for Poco smartphones in Germany. This may differ in other regions, so be sure to check with your supplier before buying.

The 67-watt fast charger is included in the scope of delivery
The 67-watt fast charger is included in the scope of delivery

Input Devices & Operation - The F4 is quickly unlocked

Poco uses Google's Gboard keyboard ex-works, so inputs in portrait and landscape mode are smooth and usually without error. The capacitive panel supports inputs of up to ten fingers simultaneously. The sampling rate is up to 360 Hz and the screen's gliding properties are very good.

The smartphone can be unlocked via fingerprint and face recognition. The fingerprint sensor is located in the power button, and functions rapidly without erroneous inputs. Most of the time, however, the device is inadvertently unlocked by the more unsecure 2D facial recognition, which works extremely fast.

Display - The OLED panel of the F4 gets really bright

Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid

Poco has installed an OLED display with a refresh rate of up to 120 Hz in the F4. The rate can either be fixed at 60 or 120 Hz, or the software dynamically adjusts the refresh rates to the current content, in which case an average value of 90 Hz is also possible. 

The 6.67-inch (16.94 cm) panel has a high brightness. In testing, we determined a maximum value of 1274 cd/m² with the ambient light sensor enabled, which nearly corresponds to the 1300 nits specified by Poco. The display reaches a maximum of 502 cd/m² with the sensor disabled. The illumination of the panel is also good; the differences between individual areas are small and not perceptible in everyday use.

The display is flat and without any curvature. Display edges are not particularly narrow, but very even. Poco offers an always-on display in the F4. The function can be customized in different styles. In addition, the function can be deactivated in certain periods so that you are not disturbed by an illuminated panel at night, for example.

We also measured the PWN. The frequency at the lowest brightness is 443 Hz. As soon as the brightness exceeds 51%, the frequency is 120 Hz, which corresponds to the refresh rate of the display. No temporal dithering was detected.

910
cd/m²
918
cd/m²
943
cd/m²
901
cd/m²
917
cd/m²
939
cd/m²
917
cd/m²
920
cd/m²
939
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 943 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 922.7 cd/m² Minimum: 2.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 917 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.3
ΔE Greyscale 3.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.5
97.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
Xiaomi Poco F4
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy A53
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50
Xiaomi 12X
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.28
Xiaomi Poco F3
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Motorola Edge 30
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50
OnePlus Nord 2T
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.43
Honor 50
OLED, 2340x1080, 6.57
Screen
6%
31%
29%
4%
-24%
-21%
Brightness middle
917
718
-22%
910
-1%
889
-3%
632
-31%
561
-39%
731
-20%
Brightness
923
730
-21%
908
-2%
902
-2%
630
-32%
573
-38%
722
-22%
Brightness Distribution
96
92
-4%
97
1%
95
-1%
92
-4%
96
0%
97
1%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
2
1.62
19%
0.8
60%
0.9
55%
1.46
27%
2.67
-34%
3.1
-55%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
5.2
4.21
19%
1.8
65%
1.9
63%
3.32
36%
6.15
-18%
5.8
-12%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
3.5
2
43%
1.3
63%
1.3
63%
2.6
26%
4.1
-17%
4.2
-20%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.156 102%
2.25 98%
2.26 97%
2.209 100%
2.245 98%
2.19 100%
CCT
6447 101%
6545 99%
6414 101%
6614 98%
6755 96%
7104 91%
6818 95%

* ... 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 443 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 443 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 443 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 19657 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

minimum display brightness
min.
25% display brightness
25%
50% display brightness
50%
75% display brightness
75%
maximum manual display brightness
100%

Series of measurements at a fixed zoom level and different brightness settings

Thanks to its design, the OLED display of the Poco F4 scores with a perfect black level and correspondingly excellent contrasts. The overall color reproduction is also pleasing; deviations are in the imperceptible range for almost all tones.

Only the grayscale and white values are out of line and show increased deviation. The 2D CalMAN test resulted in a coverage of the sRGB color space of up to 97.3%. In everyday use, the panel convinces with crisp color reproduction.

Grayscale (mode: natural, color temperature: adjusted; target color space: sRGB)
Grayscale (mode: natural, color temperature: adjusted; target color space: sRGB)
Colors (mode: natural, color temperature: adjusted; target color space: sRGB)
Colors (mode: natural, color temperature: adjusted; target color space: sRGB)
Color space (mode: natural, color temperature: adapted; target color space: sRGB)
Color space (mode: natural, color temperature: adapted; target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (mode: natural, color temperature: adapted; target color space: sRGB)
Saturation (mode: natural, color temperature: adapted; target color space: sRGB)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
1.06 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.534 ms rise
↘ 0.523 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 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (22.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
1.01 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.521 ms rise
↘ 0.4865 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 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (36.2 ms).

A "sunlight mode" can be activated in the menu, which further increases the brightness of the panel on sunny days. This means that the device is easy to read at all times and is at the top among comparison devices.

The Poco F4 is easy to read at all times, even in direct sunlight
The Poco F4 is easy to read at all times

The viewing angle stability of the Poco display is very good. Content can be seen very well, even from extreme angles. The smartphone's brightness control works quickly and reliably, which ensures good legibility in all lighting scenarios.

Viewing angle stability of the Xiaomi Poco F4
Viewing angle stability of the Xiaomi Poco F4

Performance - The F4 is slower than its predecessor

Poco uses a combination of a Snapdragon 870 and an Adreno 650 in the F4 - just like the F3 predecessor. Even though newer processors are now on the market, the Poco F4 is still performs well with its built-in SoC. However, it also becomes clear in the CPU benchmarks that the Poco F4 is slightly behind the average smartphone with this processor and also lands behind its F3 predecessor.

Although Poco F4 has to admit defeat to its predecessor and the Xiaomi 12X with the same processor is faster, the other comparison devices don't stand a chance in the benchmarks. The Snapdragon 778G(+) in the Honor 50 and the Motorola Edge 30 are in a different performance class, as is the MediaTek Dimensity 1300 in the OnePlus Nord 2T and the Exynos 1280 in the Samsung Galaxy A53.

In everyday life, the Poco F4 hardly reaches its limits. Apps start quickly and run without jerks. Switching between different apps doesn't make the device sweat, nor does opening several apps in floating windows at the same time. 

Geekbench 5.4
Single-Core
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
1000 Points ∼100% +4%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
998 Points ∼100% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (955 - 1046, n=14)
991 Points ∼99% +3%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
963 Points ∼96%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
826 Points ∼83% -14%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
788 Points ∼79% -18%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
740 Points ∼74% -23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (58 - 1885, n=266, last 2 years)
729 Points ∼73% -24%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
415 Points ∼42% -57%
Multi-Core
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
3377 Points ∼100% +12%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3368 Points ∼100% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (2725 - 4455, n=14)
3231 Points ∼96% +7%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
3007 Points ∼89%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
2889 Points ∼86% -4%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
2872 Points ∼85% -4%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
2700 Points ∼80% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (248 - 5538, n=266, last 2 years)
2349 Points ∼70% -22%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
1878 Points ∼56% -38%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
714406 Points ∼100% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (662980 - 716502, n=11)
692527 Points ∼97% +4%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
680139 Points ∼95% +3%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
662980 Points ∼93%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
600384 Points ∼84% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (111952 - 1119358, n=141, last 2 years)
585756 Points ∼82% -12%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
553328 Points ∼77% -17%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
519177 Points ∼73% -22%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
409976 Points ∼57% -38%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
15194 Points ∼100% +18%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
13610 Points ∼90% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (10829 - 16054, n=13)
13115 Points ∼86% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12866 Points ∼85%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
12076 Points ∼79% -6%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
11778 Points ∼78% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
11470 Points ∼75% -11%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
10678 Points ∼70% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4436 - 19200, n=191, last 2 years)
10457 Points ∼69% -19%
CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (226 - 1332, n=82, last 2 years)
783 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (719 - 844, n=6)
768 Points ∼98% +5%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
734 Points ∼94%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
732 Points ∼93% 0%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
719 Points ∼92% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
579 Points ∼74% -21%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
6356 Points ∼100% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (5448 - 6369, n=11)
5973 Points ∼94% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
5616 Points ∼88%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
5551 Points ∼87% -1%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
5002 Points ∼79% -11%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
4932 Points ∼78% -12%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
4856 Points ∼76% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1223 - 8753, n=175, last 2 years)
4586 Points ∼72% -18%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
3626 Points ∼57% -35%
System
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
10940 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
9997 Points ∼91% +12%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
9996 Points ∼91% +12%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
9880 Points ∼90% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (8563 - 10489, n=11)
9482 Points ∼87% +6%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
9002 Points ∼82% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
8962 Points ∼82%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2083 - 19657, n=175, last 2 years)
8085 Points ∼74% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
7157 Points ∼65% -20%
Memory
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
7692 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (5689 - 8167, n=11)
7213 Points ∼94% +11%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
6683 Points ∼87% +3%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
6506 Points ∼85%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
6307 Points ∼82% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (670 - 9044, n=175, last 2 years)
5170 Points ∼67% -21%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
4762 Points ∼62% -27%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
4699 Points ∼61% -28%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
3855 Points ∼50% -41%
Graphics
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12801 Points ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
12630 Points ∼99%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (10386 - 12801, n=11)
12045 Points ∼94% -5%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
10386 Points ∼81% -18%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
8672 Points ∼68% -31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (697 - 26660, n=175, last 2 years)
8664 Points ∼68% -31%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
7516 Points ∼59% -40%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
6659 Points ∼52% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
5178 Points ∼40% -59%
Web
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
1658 Points ∼100% +26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (1315 - 1791, n=11)
1549 Points ∼93% +18%
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
1519 Points ∼92% +16%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
1511 Points ∼91% +15%
Honor 50
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
1509 Points ∼91% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (718 - 2392, n=175, last 2 years)
1410 Points ∼85% +7%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
1365 Points ∼82% +4%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
1315 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
1210 Points ∼73% -8%
AImark - Score v2.x
Xiaomi 12X
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192
123847 Points ∼100% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
  (111838 - 123847, n=9)
117183 Points ∼95% +3%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
114168 Points ∼92%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144
111838 Points ∼90% -2%
OnePlus Nord 2T
MediaTek Dimensity 1300, Mali-G77 MP9, 12288
58244 Points ∼47% -49%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4293 - 286905, n=159, last 2 years)
53821 Points ∼43% -53%
Motorola Edge 30
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G, Adreno 642L, 8192
5777 Points ∼5% -95%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Samsung Exynos 1280, Mali-G68 MP4, 6144
4714 Points ∼4% -96%

The Poco F4 leaves a mixed impression in the GPU benchmarks. It leads the field of contenders in some GFX measurements, but mostly ranks in the middle. The smartphone is too fast for some onscreen tests, such as the Sling Shot Etreme OpenGL ES 3.1, so no results are displayed. 

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1295 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1232 Points ∼95% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1222 Points ∼94% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1218 Points ∼94%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
768 Points ∼59% -37%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
689 Points ∼53% -43%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
621 Points ∼48% -49%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1324 Points ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1237 Points ∼93% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1223 Points ∼92% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1207 Points ∼91%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
764 Points ∼58% -37%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
694 Points ∼52% -43%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
636 Points ∼48% -47%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4548 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4304 Points ∼95% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4273 Points ∼94%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4271 Points ∼94% 0%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2831 Points ∼62% -34%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2501 Points ∼55% -41%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2275 Points ∼50% -47%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4623 Points ∼100% +8%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4309 Points ∼93% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4288 Points ∼93% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4262 Points ∼92%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2814 Points ∼61% -34%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2492 Points ∼54% -42%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2293 Points ∼50% -46%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5281 Points ∼100% +25%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4677 Points ∼89% +11%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4547 Points ∼86% +8%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4211 Points ∼80%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4140 Points ∼78% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3097 Points ∼59% -26%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10436 Points ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10287 Points ∼99%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9498 Points ∼91% -8%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6240 Points ∼60% -39%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
5614 Points ∼54% -45%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3982 Points ∼38% -61%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8576 Points ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7789 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7377 Points ∼86% -5%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5763 Points ∼67% -26%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
5375 Points ∼63% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3746 Points ∼44% -52%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10277 Points ∼100% +16%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8891 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7970 Points ∼78% -10%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
7281 Points ∼71% -18%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
6638 Points ∼65% -25%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4645 Points ∼45% -48%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
14028 Points ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
13857 Points ∼99%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
12033 Points ∼86% -13%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8605 Points ∼61% -38%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
7536 Points ∼54% -46%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
5510 Points ∼39% -60%
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
5309 Points ∼100% +35%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4732 Points ∼89% +20%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
4684 Points ∼88% +19%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3944 Points ∼74%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3653 Points ∼69% -7%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2997 Points ∼56% -24%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
101 fps ∼100% +66%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99 fps ∼98% +62%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
90 fps ∼89% +48%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
81 fps ∼80% +33%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
71 fps ∼70% +16%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
61 fps ∼60%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼59% -2%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
200 fps ∼100% +10%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
200 fps ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
182 fps ∼91%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
171 fps ∼86% -6%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
148 fps ∼74% -19%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
133 fps ∼67% -27%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
92 fps ∼46% -49%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
102 fps ∼100% +70%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
85 fps ∼83% +42%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
68 fps ∼67% +13%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼59% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps ∼59%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57 fps ∼56% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
56 fps ∼55% -7%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
129 fps ∼100% +34%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps ∼92% +24%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
104 fps ∼81% +8%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
96 fps ∼74%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
89 fps ∼69% -7%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
77 fps ∼60% -20%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
61 fps ∼47% -36%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
74 fps ∼100% +25%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67 fps ∼91% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps ∼80% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps ∼80%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
54 fps ∼73% -8%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
48 fps ∼65% -19%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
35 fps ∼47% -41%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
81 fps ∼100% +5%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
79 fps ∼98% +3%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
77 fps ∼95%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
72 fps ∼89% -6%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
63 fps ∼78% -18%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
56 fps ∼69% -27%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
38 fps ∼47% -51%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
45 fps ∼100% +7%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
44 fps ∼98% +5%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
42 fps ∼93%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
41 fps ∼91% -2%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps ∼87% -7%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
28 fps ∼62% -33%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
20 fps ∼44% -52%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
50 fps ∼100% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
48 fps ∼96% -2%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
43 fps ∼86% -12%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
37 fps ∼74% -24%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
33 fps ∼66% -33%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
23 fps ∼46% -53%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps ∼100% +6%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
31 fps ∼94% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
31 fps ∼94%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
30 fps ∼91% -3%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
26 fps ∼79% -16%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
20 fps ∼61% -35%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
15 fps ∼45% -52%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
22 fps ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
22 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
18 fps ∼82% -18%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
15 fps ∼68% -32%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
14 fps ∼64% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
10 fps ∼45% -55%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9.7 fps ∼44% -56%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
50 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps ∼98% -2%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
49 fps ∼98% -2%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
47 fps ∼94% -6%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
40 fps ∼80% -20%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
32 fps ∼64% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
23 fps ∼46% -54%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
57 fps ∼97% -3%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
56 fps ∼95% -5%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
50 fps ∼85% -15%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps ∼66% -34%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
38 fps ∼64% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
26 fps ∼44% -56%

Classifying the results of the browser benchmarks is difficult because the achieved results vary strongly, depending on the browser selected. In Chrome, the Poco F4 falls in the last or one of the last places in the comparison field in the Octane 2.0 and Jetstream 2 tests. In Edge, on the other hand, the smartphone's scores are in the upper range of competing smartphones. The Poco UI thus does not seem to harmonize particularly well with the current Chrome version when it comes to top performance. Scores for the Speedometer 2.0 benchmark are similar in both browsers and on a low level. In everyday use, no performance issues occur while browsing, no matter which browser is chosen. Pages load smoothly, and even many simultaneously opened browser tabs do not cause the system to jerk or crash.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi 12X (Chrome 98.0.4758.101)
97.5 Points ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F4 (Edge 105)
96.94 Points ∼99%
Motorola Edge 30 (Chrome 102.0.5005.125)
90.283 Points ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (60.7 - 108.3, n=10)
90.1 Points ∼92% -7%
Honor 50 (Chrome 96)
76.1 Points ∼78% -21%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
75.1 Points ∼77% -23%
Average of class Smartphone (14.8 - 282, n=178, last 2 years)
71.9 Points ∼74% -26%
OnePlus Nord 2T (Chrome 102)
66.955 Points ∼69% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A53 (Chrome 101)
63.5 Points ∼65% -34%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
74.8 runs/min ∼100% +38%
Xiaomi 12X (Chrome 98.0.4758.101)
72 runs/min ∼96% +32%
Average of class Smartphone (12.5 - 375, n=166, last 2 years)
69 runs/min ∼92% +27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (51.4 - 77, n=10)
68.4 runs/min ∼91% +26%
Motorola Edge 30 (Chrome 102.0.5005.125)
66.48 runs/min ∼89% +22%
OnePlus Nord 2T (Chome 102)
59.7 runs/min ∼80% +10%
Xiaomi Poco F4 (Edge 105)
54.4 runs/min ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A53 (Chome 101)
51.24 runs/min ∼69% -6%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Xiaomi 12X (Chrome 98.0.4758.101)
151 Points ∼100% +45%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (99 - 155, n=11)
129.9 Points ∼86% +25%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
125 Points ∼83% +20%
Motorola Edge 30 (Chrome 102.0.5005.125)
116 Points ∼77% +12%
Xiaomi Poco F4 (chrome 103)
104 Points ∼69%
Honor 50 (Chrome 96)
102 Points ∼68% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (27 - 292, n=180, last 2 years)
100.8 Points ∼67% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A53 (Chrome 101)
69 Points ∼46% -34%
OnePlus Nord 2T (Chrome 102)
65 Points ∼43% -37%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi 12X (Chrome 98.0.4758.101)
40652 Points ∼100% +17%
Xiaomi Poco F4 (Edge 105)
34767 Points ∼86%
OnePlus Nord 2T (Chrome 102)
33879 Points ∼83% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (20543 - 41256, n=11)
33492 Points ∼82% -4%
Motorola Edge 30 (Chrome 102.0.5005.125)
32109 Points ∼79% -8%
Honor 50 (Chrome 96)
31134 Points ∼77% -10%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
26577 Points ∼65% -24%
Average of class Smartphone (3905 - 74261, n=190, last 2 years)
26483 Points ∼65% -24%
Samsung Galaxy A53 (Chrome 101)
24159 Points ∼59% -31%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 12437, n=187, last 2 years)
2676 ms * ∼100% -49%
Samsung Galaxy A53 (Chrome 101)
1920.3 ms * ∼72% -7%
Xiaomi Poco F4 (chrome 103)
1792.1 ms * ∼67%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)
1744 ms * ∼65% +3%
Honor 50 (Chrome 96)
1427 ms * ∼53% +20%
OnePlus Nord 2T (Chrome 102)
1406.4 ms * ∼53% +22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (1055 - 1792, n=11)
1394 ms * ∼52% +22%
Motorola Edge 30 (Chrome 102.0.5005.125)
1335 ms * ∼50% +26%
Xiaomi 12X (Chrome 98.0.4758.101)
1069 ms * ∼40% +40%

* ... smaller is better

The Poco F4 comes in two storage variants with 128 and 256 GB. Further expansion of the storage via microSD card is not possible. Our review sample is the small version; 104 GB is available in factory state. Poco uses UFS 3.1 storage, which clearly lags behind the results of the Xiaomi 12X and the OnePlus Nord 2T in the test field. The F4 seems to have the same memory as the F3 because the measured values are very similar. In sequential read and write, the Poco F4 is slightly below the device average with UFS 3.1 storage, but is slightly above average in the random values.

Xiaomi Poco F4Samsung Galaxy A53Xiaomi 12XXiaomi Poco F3Motorola Edge 30OnePlus Nord 2THonor 50Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-16%
35%
-1%
26%
46%
8%
19%
-16%
Sequential Read 256KB
1371.56
510.1
-63%
1732
26%
1378
0%
1514.62
10%
1891.3
38%
984
-28%
1570 ?(1030 - 1898, n=40)
14%
992 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=256, last 2 years)
-28%
Sequential Write 256KB
701.06
486.7
-31%
795
13%
684
-2%
965.35
38%
1300.6
86%
609
-13%
783 ?(233 - 1284, n=40)
12%
542 ?(11.9 - 1776, n=256, last 2 years)
-23%
Random Read 4KB
183.61
229.9
25%
291.9
59%
208
13%
241.72
32%
235.8
28%
245.7
34%
240 ?(126.2 - 390, n=40)
31%
179 ?(13.5 - 390, n=256, last 2 years)
-3%
Random Write 4KB
200.41
210.8
5%
279.9
40%
170.6
-15%
249.14
24%
262.2
31%
280.2
40%
241 ?(121.4 - 503, n=40)
20%
178.6 ?(30.3 - 503, n=257, last 2 years)
-11%

Gaming - The F4 offers sufficient performance for current titles

The combination of Snapdragon 870 and Adreno 650 makes the Poco F4 a solid gaming smartphone. Current titles such as PUBG Mobile or League of Legends Wild Rift can be played at the highest or very high settings. The F4 also achieves high frame rates in simpler titles such as Deag Trigger 2, although these sometimes fluctuate strongly in high graphics settings, which is shown by the measurements in Gamebench. Nevertheless, the frame drops do not prove bothersome in-game, and the rate does not drop below 70 FPS. When PUBG Mobile is played at the highest settings, the frame rate is only 40 FPS, but remains very stable and the game is always smooth. The positioning of the stereo speakers, which are not covered during gaming, is good.

Dead Trigger 2
Dead Trigger 2
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
0102030405060708090100110Tooltip
; Dead Trigger 2; 1.8.18: Ø103.4 (76-117)
; League of Legends: Wild Rift; 3.3.0.5735: Ø59.9 (54-61)
; PUBG Mobile; HD; 2.2.0: Ø59.8 (56-61)
; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 2.2.0: Ø39.9 (38-41)

Emissions - Poco has the Snapdragon under control

Temperature - Poco stays cool even under load

The Poco F4 stays pleasantly cool on both the front and back during everyday use. Even under load, such as during gaming or stress tests, only individual areas of the smartphone get a bit warmer, especially in the area next to the camera. Overall, the Poco never gets hot and so can always be held without discomfort. The manufacturer states that a seven-layer graphite structure, in combination with a 3.1 mm² evaporation cooling chamber, is responsible for the chip's temperature management. This system works well in practice and cools the Snapdragon 870 reliably.

Max. Load
 31.4 °C
89 F
31.5 °C
89 F
29.9 °C
86 F
 
 31.4 °C
89 F
31.4 °C
89 F
30.4 °C
87 F
 
 31.3 °C
88 F
31.7 °C
89 F
30.2 °C
86 F
 
Maximum: 31.7 °C = 89 F
Average: 31 °C = 88 F
29.2 °C
85 F
30.6 °C
87 F
30.9 °C
88 F
28.9 °C
84 F
30.2 °C
86 F
31 °C
88 F
29.8 °C
86 F
30.8 °C
87 F
31.6 °C
89 F
Maximum: 31.6 °C = 89 F
Average: 30.3 °C = 87 F
Power Supply (max.)  26.5 °C = 80 F | Room Temperature 21.8 °C = 71 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.7 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.6 % ∼100% +9%
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.4 % ∼100% +9%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
98.8 % ∼99% +8%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
91.5 % ∼92%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82.2 % ∼83% -10%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67.8 % ∼68% -26%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
59.1 % ∼59% -35%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Honor 50
Adreno 642L, SD 778G 5G, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
99.8 % ∼100% +14%
Motorola Edge 30
Adreno 642L, SD 778G+ 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
99.1 % ∼99% +13%
Samsung Galaxy A53
Mali-G68 MP4, Exynos 1280, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
97.8 % ∼98% +11%
Xiaomi Poco F4
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
87.8 % ∼88%
Xiaomi Poco F3
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
82.2 % ∼82% -6%
Xiaomi 12X
Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67.5 % ∼68% -23%
OnePlus Nord 2T
Mali-G77 MP9, Dimensity 1300, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
65.9 % ∼66% -25%
0510152025Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F4 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø6.11 (6-6.84)
Xiaomi 12X Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø6.78 (5-7.42)
Xiaomi Poco F4 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø21.9 (21.2-23.2)
Xiaomi 12X Adreno 650, SD 870, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø23.3 (17.5-25.8)

Speakers

The Poco F4 has stereo speakers that are Dolby Atmos certified and are located on the device's front sides. The smartphone's maximum volume is 86.2 dB, which makes the F4 quite loud and suitable for entertainment in loud surroundings. The sound does not become tinny, even at high volumes, and there is only slight vibration in the bottom third of the device. The speakers reproduce mids and trebles quite linearly, but bass or lower frequencies are lacking.

The F4 does not offer a jack connection, but Poco includes a USB-C to audio jack adapter with the smartphone. The audio output via Bluetooth worked flawlessly with several headphones under testing. The smartphone supports a number of audio codecs such as SBC, AAC, aptX (HD / Adaptive Audio / TWS+), LDAC and LHDC (V1-4).

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204339.62530.434.13123.230.84023.327.55036.439.16324.123.68020.325.410017.625.412515.73316013.84820016.252.225015.157.131512.660.440013.16050013.16563012.768.480014.772.1100013.472.5125012.874.5160012.876.8200012.876250013.277.1315013.775.9400013.976.4500013.173630013.969.4800013.366.1100001471.11250014.263.91600013.652.2SPL25.686.2N0.765.1median 13.6median 68.4Delta0.9928.323.923.320.520.3241926.529.835.717.225.712.926.219.426.112.139.51149.99.548.812.655.313.660.210.562.31167.99.768.411.174.811.576.812.778.913.479.112.775.813.676.314.180.41380.113.276.813.978.613.475.213.773.214.467.816.76525.189.40.679.5median 13median 73.20.99.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Poco F4Xiaomi Poco F3
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Poco F4 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

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
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery Life - F4 does not live up to its potential

Power Consumption

The Poco F4 convinces across the board in terms of power consumption and is one of the best in its class. The smartphone performs well with low rates under load as well as in normal operation. Striking is the fact that the rates under load are significantly lower than those of the F3 predecessor and the Xiaomi 12X, which both use the same SoC.

The Poco smartphone charges from 10 to 100 percent in 45 minutes with the 67-watt power supply. It only takes 10 minutes to charge the device from 10 to 50 percent, and it only gets lukewarm in the process. Wireless charging is not supported.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.12 / 0.17 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.8 / 1.29 / 1.38 Watt
Load midlight 3.78 / 6.71 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 F4
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A53
5000 mAh
Xiaomi 12X
4500 mAh
Xiaomi Poco F3
4520 mAh
Motorola Edge 30
4020 mAh
OnePlus Nord 2T
4500 mAh
Honor 50
4300 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-18%
-28%
-11%
-3%
-9%
-57%
-50%
-17%
Idle Minimum *
0.8
0.9
-13%
0.75
6%
0.76
5%
0.9
-13%
0.9
-13%
1.02
-28%
1.194 ?(0.7 - 3, n=11)
-49%
0.876 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=196, last 2 years)
-10%
Idle Average *
1.29
1.3
-1%
1.88
-46%
1.29
-0%
1.2
7%
1.3
-1%
2.98
-131%
1.919 ?(0.9 - 4.3, n=11)
-49%
1.604 ?(0.65 - 3.6, n=196, last 2 years)
-24%
Idle Maximum *
1.38
1.6
-16%
1.94
-41%
1.45
-5%
1.5
-9%
1.7
-23%
3.11
-125%
2.21 ?(1.2 - 4.31, n=11)
-60%
1.807 ?(0.69 - 3.7, n=196, last 2 years)
-31%
Load Average *
3.78
5.7
-51%
4.99
-32%
4.6
-22%
3.6
5%
4
-6%
3.59
5%
5.82 ?(3.78 - 9.9, n=11)
-54%
4.34 ?(2.1 - 7.74, n=196, last 2 years)
-15%
Load Maximum *
6.71
7.3
-9%
8.66
-29%
8.87
-32%
7.1
-6%
6.8
-1%
7.12
-6%
9.15 ?(5.5 - 13.8, n=11)
-36%
7.17 ?(3.56 - 11.7, n=196, last 2 years)
-7%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G: Ø5.05 (1.054-9.75)
Xiaomi 12X Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G: Ø5.14 (1.004-10.4)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

012345678Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø7.89 (7.01-8.31)
Xiaomi 12X Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø5.18 (4-6.32)
Xiaomi Poco F4 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; Idle 1min: Ø0.987 (0.869-1.276)
Xiaomi 12X Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G; Idle 1min: Ø1.237 (1.126-1.787)