Notebookcheck Logo

Xiaomi Poco X5 smartphone review - Everything you need?

Complete package. The Poco X5 has a bright 120-Hz screen, a 48-MPix camera, 5G and even a fast-charging power supply. NFC, the ability to expand storage via a microSD card and a headphone jack complete the setup. Our review will show whether or not the Poco X5 is a perfectly-happy device.

The Poco X5 is a mid-range device from Poco. It is above Poco's M series but below the F series. Next to the X5 5G, there is also a better-equipped X5 Pro 5G. Poco offers the X5 in different versions, either with 128 GB memory and 6 GB RAM or with 256 GB memory and 8 GB RAM.

The smaller model currently costs $226 and for more memory, you will be paying just under $50 extra. The X5 is available in three colors: black, blue and green. All the colors are relatively understated and matte. Our test model is the one with the smaller memory. 

Xiaomi Poco X5 (Poco X5 Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G 8 x 1.7 - 2.2 GHz, Kryo 660 Gold (2x Cortex-A78) / Silver (6x Cortex-A55)
Graphics adapter
Memory
6 GB 
, LPDDR4X
Display
6.67 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 395 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash, 128 GB 
, 101 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: 3.5 mm, Card Reader: microSD up to 1TB (FAT, FAT32, exFAT), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Proximity Sensor, Accelerometer, Electronic Compass, Gyroscope, IR-Blaster
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.1, GSM (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), UMTS ( Band 1/2/4/5/8), LTE (Band 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/20/28/66; UL 1710-1780, DL: 2110-2180; 38/40/41), 5G (Sub6G n1/3/5/7/8/20/28/38/40/41/77/78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.98 x 165.88 x 76.21 ( = 0.31 x 6.53 x 3 in)
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.8) + 8 MPix (f/2.2, 1/4", 1.12 µm) + 2 MPix (f/2.4)
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix (f/2.5)
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: OnScreen, Keyboard Light: yes, Charging cable, power supply, SIM-eject-Tool, case, MIUI 14, 24 Months Warranty, GNSS: GPS (L1) / Glonass (G1) / Galileo (E1) / Baidou (E1); Widevine L1; Camera2API Level 3; SAR-Head: 0.521 W/kg, SAR-Body: 0,769 W/kg, fanless
Weight
190 g ( = 6.7 oz / 0.42 pounds), Power Supply: 110 g ( = 3.88 oz / 0.24 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 compared

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
81.4 %
05/2023
Xiaomi Poco X5
SD 695 5G, Adreno 619
190 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"2400x1080
80.3 %
10/2022
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
SD 695 5G, Adreno 619
197 g64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.60"2408x1080
79.1 %
03/2023
Motorola Moto G53
SD 480+, Adreno 619
183 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"1600x720
82 %
05/2023
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
SD 695 5G, Adreno 619
175 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"2400x1080
80.1 %
05/2023
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
SD 685, Adreno 610
188 g128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash6.67"2400x1080
78.2 %
04/2023
Telekom T Phone Pro
Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2
215 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.82"1640x720

Case - The X5 is built well


The back of the Poco X5 is made of plastic. The camera module extrudes a little - if you type while the phone is on the table, it wobbles ever so slightly. Its build is good - the buttons have a clear pressure point. The phone is IP53 certified, meaning it is at least water-repellent. The frame and back are both matte and don't have a tendency to show fingerprints. The device makes noises when you try to twist it. 

size comparison

173.9 mm / 6.85 inch 77.4 mm / 3.05 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 215 g0.474 lbs165.9 mm / 6.53 inch 76.2 mm / 3 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 188 g0.4145 lbs165.88 mm / 6.53 inch 76.21 mm / 3 inch 7.98 mm / 0.3142 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs165.4 mm / 6.51 inch 76.9 mm / 3.03 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 197 g0.4343 lbs162.7 mm / 6.41 inch 74.7 mm / 2.94 inch 8.2 mm / 0.3228 inch 183 g0.4034 lbs161.6 mm / 6.36 inch 73.9 mm / 2.91 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 175 g0.3858 lbs148 mm / 5.83 inch 105 mm / 4.13 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 1.5 g0.00331 lbs

Features - The Poco X5 has NFC and a microSD

The Poco X5 relies on solid hardware. Its installed Snapdragon 695 5G isn't totally up-to-date, but this isn't any reason to shy away in this price category. A positive aspect is that the phone has an audio jack and that you can expand the storage via a microSD card. The device even has an infrared port and NFC.

The phone also has a dual SIM feature - but only when there is no microSD card installed, as it is a hybrid port. Its USB-C connection only has a USB 2.0 transmission standard.

Left: Hybrid SIM slot
Left: Hybrid SIM slot
Right: Power button with fingerprint scanner and volume rocker
Right: Power button with fingerprint scanner and volume rocker
Bottom: Microphone, USB-C port, speakers
Bottom: Microphone, USB-C port, speakers
Top: Microphone, infrared blaster, headphone jack
Top: Microphone, infrared blaster, headphone jack

microSD card reader

The Xiaomi Poco X5 has a built-in microSD card reader which accepts a capacity of up to 1 TB. The device is also exFAT capable. In our test using an Angelbird AV Pro V60 as a reference card, the phone's transfer rates were decent.

The X5 is a little faster than the Redmi Note 12 and considerably faster than the Telekom T-Phone Pro. However, the Samsung Galaxy A23 is about twice as fast when it comes to transferring data.

SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
45.7 MB/s +68%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
27.13 MB/s
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash (Angelbird V60)
23.6 MB/s -13%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
17.72 MB/s -35%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco X5 Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø40 (29.3-50.7)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø39.3 (27.4-50)
Xiaomi Poco X5 Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird AV Pro V60: Ø73.4 (32.4-80)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø75.5 (28-82.5)

Software - The X5 runs Android 13

The Poco X5 comes delivered with Android 12 installed - but directly after setting the phone up, it offers you the option to update it to Android 13. The manufacturer relies on MIUI 14 as an overlay. After first setting up the 128-GB version of the phone, there were 101 GB available to use. At the time of testing, the safety patch is from 1st March 2023.

Ex works, the phone comes with quite a few apps preinstalled - ranging from Poco apps and Xiaomi and Google software, all the way through to third-party apps such as TikTok, AliExpress, Booking, Amazon, Bing and Agoda. There are quite a few games already installed, too. Thankfully, all of these apps can easily be deleted.

Information regarding how long the Poco X5 will be supplied with software and security updates is not available at present.

Communication and GNSS - The X5 has stable transfer rates

The Poco phone uses Wifi-5 for its WLAN connection. Using the Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 as our reference router, transmission worked fine and the rates in our test remained stable. In terms of speed, the X5 is average for this price range. All the other phones in this comparison delivered similar speeds.

When it comes to cellular connection, the phone behaves just as unremarkably. It is capable of 5G, its coverage is good and all the most important frequency bands are covered. 

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
Average of class Smartphone
  (34.8 - 1875, n=208, last 2 years)
657 MBit/s +91%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
370 (362min - 371max) MBit/s +8%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
357 (172min - 378max) MBit/s +4%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
345 (317min - 350max) MBit/s 0%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
344 (173min - 351max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
330 (304min - 343max) MBit/s -4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
286 (267min - 310max) MBit/s -17%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Average of class Smartphone
  (40.5 - 1810, n=209, last 2 years)
694 MBit/s +91%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
373 (364min - 385max) MBit/s +2%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
369 (337min - 380max) MBit/s +1%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
364 (183min - 386max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
358 (334min - 374max) MBit/s -2%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
358 (319min - 374max) MBit/s -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
325 (290min - 347max) MBit/s -11%
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco X5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 619; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø338 (173-351)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø286 (267-310)
Xiaomi Poco X5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 619; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø358 (183-386)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Qualcomm Adreno 610; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø325 (290-347)

Outside, the Poco X5 establishes a connection via satellite quickly and reliably. Indoors, the connection is a little less stable and its positioning is quite inaccurate. The Poco has a mono GNSS connection, but it supports SBAS.

We tested the satellite connection's accuracy on a bike trip using the Garmin Venus 2 as a reference device. The Poco X5 did a good job of localizing and it displayed radii well. In everyday use, navigation using services such as Google Maps should work without a problem. 

GNSS measurement: Trip around a lake
GNSS measurement: Trip around a lake
GNSS measurement: Turning point
GNSS measurement: Turning point
GNSS measurement: Summary
GNSS measurement: Summary

Phoning and call quality - The Poco allows for clear conversations

There are no surprises when it comes to phoning on the Poco X5. The tone coming out of the earpiece is clear and loud enough. Your voice is transmitted reliably - although it could filter out background noise a little better. Phoning using the loudspeaker is fine, too. The maximum volume is sufficient - although the loudspeaker has a tendency to rattle a little bit.

Poco don't use their own telephone app - instead, they rely on Google software. The app is structured well and doesn't cause any confusion. 

Cameras - The X5's main camera does the job

A triple camera can be found on the back of the Poco X5. Its main camera has a maximum resolution of 48 MPix - although, generally it uses a pixel binning method and the actual resolution is 12 MPix. You can use a separate mode to take photos using the full 48 MPix.

In good lighting conditions, the photos are nice. Its color depiction is natural - although, the photos could be a little sharper. There is a steep decline in sharpness in darker lighting conditions and the photos start to appear a little washed-out.

The ultra-wide angle lens yields much less sharp and detailed results. Upon closer inspection, the images are quite grainy and simply can't keep up with those taken using the main camera. The macro camera has a resolution of 2 MPix - photos taken with this lens are decent if there is enough light.

The X5 can record video on all lenses at a maximum of 1080p and 30 FPS. Video stabilization works fine - although, the images are sometimes quite washed-out and smudged.

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 camera rabbitLakeUltra-wide angle lens5x ZoomLow-light
click to load images

In controlled lighting conditions, the X5 delivers sharp photos - in the middle as well as the edges. With less light (1 lux), you can still see some detail, but the images suffer from quite a bit of noise.

Color depiction is fine in controlled lighting conditions - but photos have a tendency to be depicted a little too light. This is most noticeable with darker green tones. 

ColorChecker
13.3 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
12.4 ∆E
15.9 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
4.4 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
7.2 ∆E
4 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
1.4 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
2.9 ∆E
6.8 ∆E
11.4 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
2.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco X5: 7.63 ∆E min: 1.39 - max: 15.9 ∆E
ColorChecker
28.1 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
38.1 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
42.8 ∆E
63.3 ∆E
52.3 ∆E
33.9 ∆E
39.6 ∆E
25.7 ∆E
64.6 ∆E
63.9 ∆E
29.2 ∆E
47.5 ∆E
34.7 ∆E
75.5 ∆E
40.8 ∆E
43.7 ∆E
87 ∆E
69.6 ∆E
50.7 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
23.2 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Poco X5: 45.52 ∆E min: 12.64 - max: 87.03 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - Poco have included a 33-watt power supply

The Poco X5 5G comes with a 33-watt power supply
The Poco X5 5G comes with a 33-watt power supply

Not only does the Poco X5 come with a USB cable (USB-A to USB-C), but it also comes with a fitting 33-watt power supply. The package also includes an instruction manual, a SIM eject tool as well as a transparent case. Ex works, the phone's screen is also fitted with a screen protector.

In Germany (where this review was conducted), the Poco X5 comes with a two-year warranty. 

Input devices & operation - The X5 unlocks at lightning speed

Poco have gone for Google's GBoard keyboard for this phone, which means that typing feels smooth and you don't have to worry about many wrong inputs. Even with the screen protector, the screen has a nice gliding feel to it. Touch inputs are reliably recognized - even toward the corners of the screen.

The X5 can be unlocked using its fingerprint scanner in the power button, but you can also do this via 2D facial recognition. Both methods work really quickly and reliably - the X5 can be unlocked at lightning speed every time.

A one-handed mode is integrated into the MIUI, which also works every time and makes using the phone with one hand an enjoyable experience.

Display - A brightness of over 1,000 nits and 120 Hz

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

The X5's display is 6.67 inches in size and has a ratio of 20:9. Its AMOLED panel allows for a refresh rate of up to 120 Hz. Poco advertize the phone as having a maximum brightness of 1,200 nits. In our realistic APL 18 test, we weren't quite able to reach these numbers - but at 1,035 cd/m², the screen is still nice and bright. This number was achieved with activated ambient light sensor - without this sensor, we achieved a maximum of 432 cd/m².

Compared to other devices in this class, the Poco X5 sure wins some points. Only the new Honor Magic5 Lite managed higher brightness levels and had slightly more accurate colors. Compared its other competitors, the Poco is miles ahead. 

However, at 120 Hz, our measurements also showed a constant PWM from a brightness of 54 per cent - presumably this is an OLED flicker. At lower brightness levels, this flickering fluctuated between 151 and 486 Hz. 

The X5's settings do offer an option for an always-on display, but it isn't a true AOD. The display can be customized, but it isn't always on - instead, it shows this for a few minutes before the screen completely switches off. 

681
cd/m²
683
cd/m²
691
cd/m²
679
cd/m²
674
cd/m²
689
cd/m²
679
cd/m²
677
cd/m²
690
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 691 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 682.6 cd/m² Minimum: 2.47 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 98 %
Center on Battery: 674 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 2.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
99.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.21
Xiaomi Poco X5
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
PLS, 2408x1080, 6.60
Motorola Moto G53
IPS, 1600x720, 6.50
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67
Telekom T Phone Pro
IPS, 1640x720, 6.82
Screen
-102%
-23%
24%
12%
-96%
Brightness middle
674
447
-34%
587
-13%
846
26%
650
-4%
436
-35%
Brightness
683
428
-37%
559
-18%
853
25%
658
-4%
392
-43%
Brightness Distribution
98
86
-12%
91
-7%
88
-10%
97
-1%
85
-13%
Black Level *
0.31
0.4
0.28
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.6
5.54
-246%
2.6
-63%
1.3
19%
1.55
3%
5.2
-225%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
5.3
10.04
-89%
5.62
-6%
2.7
49%
2.59
51%
9.5
-79%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.5
7.3
-192%
3.3
-32%
1.7
32%
1.8
28%
7
-180%
Gamma
2.21 100%
2.03 108%
2.463 89%
2.19 100%
2.194 100%
2.29 96%
CCT
6346 102%
8853 73%
6288 103%
6570 99%
6316 103%
8585 76%
Contrast
1442
1468
1557

* ... 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 486 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 486 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 486 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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17933 (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 with fixed zoom level and differing brightness levels

Due to the type of screen, it is sure to impress with its perfect black values and great contrast. Its color balance is good all-in-all and deviations mostly lie within an unnoticeable area. Using ColorChecker, we only saw bigger deviations in some of the gray tones - still nothing too dramatic, though.

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
1.18 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.5735 ms rise
↘ 0.6055 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 2 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
1.51 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.7165 ms rise
↘ 0.791 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.8 ms).

The Poco X5's display is bright enough for outdoor use. The phone is indeed much lighter when the ambient light sensor is activated than when it is deactivated - as was determined in our measurements. 

The Poco X5 benefits from great viewing angle stability. Colors remain unchanged and you can read content from virtually any angle without any issues.

Performance - The X5 masters everyday tasks

Poco have gone for a Snapdragon 695 5G as the X5's SoC. This means the phone is well-positioned in our test field. Taking a look at the benchmarks makes it obvious how well Poco did when deciding on an SoC - for the most part, the X5 achieved more points than the average for smartphones using this processor. 

In everyday use, the device performs smoothly. The UI doesn't struggle with any loading times or dropped frames - switching between apps also proves to be no problem for the phone. It does, however, become apparent that the Poco X5 manages its RAM very strictly - background processes are closed quite quickly. An example: If you are navigating using the X5 while listening to music and then decide you'd like to take a photo, Spotify is shut in the background as soon as you open the camera app. 

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 2138, n=216, last 2 years)
914 Points +36%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
680 Points +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (659 - 697, n=24)
676 Points 0%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
674 Points
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
666 Points -1%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
558 Points -17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
442 Points -34%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 6681, n=216, last 2 years)
2997 Points +53%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
1997 Points +2%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1963 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (1663 - 2038, n=24)
1904 Points -3%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1891 Points -4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1787 Points -9%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1632 Points -17%
Geekbench 6.0
Single-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (188 - 2531, n=44, last 2 years)
1279 Points +44%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
898 Points +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (888 - 898, n=2)
893 Points +1%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
888 Points
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
734 Points -17%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
664 Points -25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
477 Points -46%
Multi-Core
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 6460, n=44, last 2 years)
3412 Points +78%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
2067 Points +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (1918 - 2067, n=2)
1993 Points +4%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1918 Points
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
1756 Points -8%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1690 Points -12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1498 Points -22%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone
  (102602 - 1650926, n=153, last 2 years)
738503 Points +85%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
398336 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (344344 - 416086, n=18)
389461 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
344344 Points -14%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
334015 Points -16%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
317725 Points -20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
289659 Points -27%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Average of class Smartphone
  (4761 - 21385, n=211, last 2 years)
11762 Points +11%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
10634 Points
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
10093 Points -5%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
10071 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
9742 Points -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (6897 - 11732, n=23)
9629 Points -9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
9421 Points -11%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
7854 Points -26%
CrossMark - Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (200 - 1474, n=164, last 2 years)
835 Points +41%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
597 Points +1%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
591 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (521 - 606, n=18)
583 Points -1%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
546 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
521 Points -12%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
520 Points -12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
454 Points -23%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
Average of class Smartphone
  (411 - 11438, n=165, last 2 years)
5745 Points +72%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (3171 - 3848, n=19)
3648 Points +9%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3333 Points
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3236 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
3171 Points -5%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
2779 Points -17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2737 Points -18%
System
Average of class Smartphone
  (2376 - 16475, n=165, last 2 years)
9678 Points +39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (6789 - 8231, n=19)
7725 Points +11%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
6958 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
6789 Points -2%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
6157 Points -12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
6155 Points -12%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
4888 Points -30%
Memory
Average of class Smartphone
  (670 - 12716, n=165, last 2 years)
6250 Points +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (3167 - 4836, n=19)
4227 Points +17%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3782 Points +4%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
3685 Points +2%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3623 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
3254 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
3167 Points -13%
Graphics
Average of class Smartphone
  (697 - 58651, n=165, last 2 years)
14101 Points +255%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (3975 - 4426, n=19)
4340 Points +9%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
4166 Points +5%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
3975 Points
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
2876 Points -28%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
2599 Points -35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
2334 Points -41%
Web
Average of class Smartphone
  (10 - 2145, n=165, last 2 years)
1494 Points +21%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
1274 Points +3%
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1263 Points +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (1078 - 1434, n=19)
1253 Points +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
1232 Points 0%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
1232 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 4096
1128 Points -8%
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Average of class Smartphone
  (207 - 84787, n=149, last 2 years)
21860 Points +278%
Telekom T Phone Pro
MediaTek Dimensity 700, Mali-G57 MP2, 6144
9243 Points +60%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
  (5442 - 9348, n=15)
6775 Points +17%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
5785 Points
Motorola Moto G53
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus 5G, Adreno 619, 6144
5242 Points -9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G, Adreno 610, 4096
4445 Points -23%

The Poco X5's Snapdragon is fitted with an Adreno 619 graphics unit - with this, the phone fares well compared to its competitors. Unfortunately, it wasn't possible to get all of our benchmarks to run on the X5. 

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3537 Points +4%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
3532 Points +4%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3392 Points
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
3387 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3383 Points 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2676 Points -21%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3001 Points 0%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2988 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2899 Points -3%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2412 Points -19%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2329 Points -22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1436 Points -52%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3106 Points +1%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3069 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
2994 Points -2%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2638 Points -14%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2520 Points -18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1558 Points -49%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
103 fps +30%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
81 fps +3%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
79 fps
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
59 fps -25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
39 fps -51%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
94 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
91 fps -3%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
81 fps -14%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
62 fps -34%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
45 fps -52%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
68 fps +62%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
56 fps +33%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
42 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
41 fps -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
21 fps -50%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
47 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
46 fps -2%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
41 fps -13%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
38 fps -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
24 fps -49%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
55 fps +83%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
45 fps +50%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
30 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
29 fps -3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
14 fps -53%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
34 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
34 fps
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
29 fps -15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps -53%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
13 fps -62%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
29 fps +71%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
23 fps +35%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
17 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
16 fps -6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
7.6 fps -55%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
20 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
19 fps -5%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
17 fps -15%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
15 fps -25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.9 fps -55%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
20 fps +67%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
17 fps +42%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
12 fps 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
5.4 fps -55%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
8.9 fps +11%
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8.2 fps +3%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
8 fps
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
7.7 fps -4%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
6 fps -25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3.6 fps -55%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
31 fps +63%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
26 fps +37%
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
19 fps
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
19 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
18 fps -5%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
9.2 fps -52%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
22 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
21 fps -5%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
18 fps -18%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
15 fps -32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
10.1 fps -54%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi Poco X5
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
4 fps
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3.6 fps -10%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
3.5 fps -12%
Motorola Moto G53
Adreno 619, SD 480+, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
2.9 fps -27%
Telekom T Phone Pro
Mali-G57 MP2, Dimensity 700, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2 fps -50%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash
1.5 fps -62%

Our browser benchmarks showed similar results to those of the other benchmarks. The X5 performed well compared to the average of all the devices we tested and didn't suffer any mishaps. Deviations between the individual benchmarks are normal and to be expected. 

Surfing on the smartphone doesn't flag up any issues in everyday use. Pages are loaded quickly and you can scroll through them smoothly. 

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=172, last 2 years)
105.8 Points +55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (48.6 - 105.3, n=19)
71.2 Points +4%
Motorola Moto G53 (Chrome 111)
69.475 Points +2%
Xiaomi Poco X5 (Chrome 113)
68.36 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G (Chrome 106)
67.19 Points -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
58.945 Points -14%
Telekom T Phone Pro (Chrome 112)
52.47 Points -23%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=157, last 2 years)
107.1 runs/min +142%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (38.7 - 80.1, n=16)
54 runs/min +22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
50.9 runs/min +15%
Motorola Moto G53 (Chrome 111)
47.78 runs/min +8%
Xiaomi Poco X5 (chrome 113)
44.3 runs/min
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G (Chome 106)
40.6 runs/min -8%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 202, n=159, last 2 years)
99.9 Points +37%
Motorola Moto G53 (Chrome 111)
77 Points +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (58 - 111, n=18)
74.3 Points +2%
Xiaomi Poco X5 (Chrome 113)
73 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G (Chrome 106)
60 Points -18%
Telekom T Phone Pro (Chrome 112)
59 Points -19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
58 Points -21%
WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years)
133.1 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (75 - 156, n=12)
101 Points
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G (Chrome 106)
87 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
74 Points
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=210, last 2 years)
33573 Points +47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (17849 - 31647, n=21)
24051 Points +5%
Xiaomi Poco X5 (Chrome 113)
22881 Points
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G (Chrome 112)
22847 Points 0%
Motorola Moto G53 (Chrome 111)
20938 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G (Chrome 106)
20787 Points -9%
Telekom T Phone Pro (Chrome 112)
17266 Points -25%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
15695 Points -31%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G (Chrome 113)
2534.5 ms * -36%
Telekom T Phone Pro (Chrome 112)
2349 ms * -26%
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G (Chrome 106)
1948.1 ms * -5%
Xiaomi Poco X5 (Chrome 113)
1860 ms *
Motorola Moto G53 (Chrome 111)
1829.3 ms * +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (1298 - 2501, n=18)
1769 ms * +5%
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=172, last 2 years)
1599 ms * +14%

* ... smaller is better

A UFS 2.2 storage device is built into the Poco X5. It delivers average data transmission speeds - only the Redmi Note 12 is considerably faster in all categories. 

Xiaomi Poco X5Samsung Galaxy A23 5GMotorola Moto G53Honor Magic5 Lite 5GXiaomi Redmi Note 12 4GTelekom T Phone ProAverage 128 GB UFS 2.2 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-3%
-22%
-10%
51%
13%
12%
102%
Sequential Read 256KB
522.64
485.1
-7%
474.6
-9%
486.17
-7%
954.87
83%
948
81%
Sequential Write 256KB
497.38
487.4
-2%
243.87
-51%
420.44
-15%
709.51
43%
455
-9%
Random Read 4KB
185.09
188.2
2%
166.24
-10%
171.13
-8%
261.09
41%
141
-24%
Random Write 4KB
168.49
163.1
-3%
139.83
-17%
149.12
-11%
231.57
37%
173
3%

Games - You can play up-to-date games on the X5

While the SoC and graphics unit aren't exactly high-end components, the Poco X5 still manages to run up-to-date games such as PUBG Mobile smoothly. Unfortunately, you can't get any better resolutions than HD, and the X5 only manages to reach 30 FPS. In turn, its image refresh rate is stable - which the GameBench measurements show. 

Less intense games such as Dead Trigger 2 are easy for the X5 - here, it manages to achieve frame rates of over 100. The phone's screen and mono speakers both left a good impression and make for a fun gaming experience.

Dead Trigger 2
Dead Trigger 2
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
0102030405060708090100110Tooltip
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Armajet: Ø86.5 (26-119)
Xiaomi Poco X5 Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Dead Trigger 2; 1.8.25: Ø113.9 (102-119)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; Dead Trigger 2: Ø65.9 (58-116)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø29.6 (22-31)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Adreno 610, SD 685, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; PUBG Mobile; Balanced: Ø25 (24-26)
Xiaomi Poco X5 Adreno 619, SD 695 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.2 Flash; PUBG Mobile; HD; 2.6.0: Ø29.9 (27-31)

Emissions - The Poco keeps its cool

Temperature

The Poco X5 generally remained cool at all times. Even at full load, we only measured a maximum temperature of 31.7 degrees Celsius on the front of the device - the back actually only measured 30.6 degrees Celsius. Even while gaming, the phone never got hotter than simply being warm to the touch.

Unfortunately, we were not able to run the 3DMark Wild Life stress test on this phone.

Max. Load
 31.7 °C
89 F
30.6 °C
87 F
28.9 °C
84 F
 
 31.1 °C
88 F
31.6 °C
89 F
29.1 °C
84 F
 
 30.5 °C
87 F
30.3 °C
87 F
28.9 °C
84 F
 
Maximum: 31.7 °C = 89 F
Average: 30.3 °C = 87 F
28.3 °C
83 F
30.2 °C
86 F
30.2 °C
86 F
28.4 °C
83 F
29.7 °C
85 F
30.6 °C
87 F
28.3 °C
83 F
30.1 °C
86 F
30.1 °C
86 F
Maximum: 30.6 °C = 87 F
Average: 29.5 °C = 85 F
Power Supply (max.)  32.4 °C = 90 F | Room Temperature 20.5 °C = 69 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.3 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °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 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.6 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.4 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.

Speakers - The X5 is loud and clear

A mono speaker can be found on the bottom of the Poco X5. At around 93 dB, it sure can get loud. Even at full volume, the device doesn't vibrate at all. In the mids and highs, the X5 has a balanced and linear tone. Admittedly, the phone lacks in bass and even in lower middle frequencies.

In turn, the Poco phone does have a 3.5-millimetre jack with a good signal-to-noise ratio of 76.91 dBFS. You can also easily connect Bluetooth headphones to the device. Its range of supported codecs is wide: SBC, AAC, aptX/HD, aptX Adaptive, aptX TWS+ LDAC, LHDC (1-5).

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2029.642.9253043.83124.537.74025.840.85037.543.36325.240.38020.247.510020.445.912517.547.816014.450.820014.351.225015.251.831511.956.940013.561.650012.166.163012.466.380011.771100011.876.6125011.478.1160012.377.1200012.279.3250012.180.6315012.283.9400012.985.7500013.484630013.282.5800012.979.61000013.678.91250013.476.91600013.265.3SPL24.893N0.691.7median 12.9median 76.9Delta0.99.636.434.428.230.326.624.926.627.132.43122.521.71717.325.526.721.228.419.136.11541.514.746.513.752.111.359.914.760.816.269.516.574.114.374.112.167.411.654.411.159.913.666.721.469.524.872.82868.623.466.123.165.120.870.723.470.82258.733.581.31.549.7median 16.5median 65.14.49.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Poco X5Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Poco X5 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (93 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.2% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 30% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 44% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 62% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Battery life - The X5's surprising weakness

Power consumption

Our power consumption measurements revealed how expertly Poco balanced the X5. In idle mode as well as at load, the X5 delivered good results and came in just over the class average. The Redmi Note 12 may be a little more frugal in idle mode, but it uses considerably more power at load. 

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.96 / 1.49 / 1.53 Watt
Load midlight 3.52 / 4.32 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 X5
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G53
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
5000 mAh
Telekom T Phone Pro
5000 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-12%
-18%
-8%
-13%
-14%
-29%
Idle Minimum *
0.96
1
-4%
0.8
17%
0.8
17%
0.61
36%
Idle Average *
1.49
1.5
-1%
1.5
-1%
1
33%
2.05
-38%
1.76 ?(0.91 - 4.76, n=18)
-18%
Idle Maximum *
1.53
2
-31%
2
-31%
1.5
2%
2.15
-41%
1.92 ?(0.98 - 4.79, n=18)
-25%
Load Average *
3.52
3.6
-2%
4.6
-31%
4.8
-36%
3.34
5%
3.86 ?(2.4 - 9.52, n=18)
-10%
Load Maximum *
4.32
5.3
-23%
6.3
-46%
6.7
-55%
5.4
-25%
5.45 ?(4.32 - 9.92, n=18)
-26%

* ... smaller is better

power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

0123456Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco X5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø3.03 (1.085-5.3)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø2.51 (0.839-6.72)
Xiaomi Poco X5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.183 (1.111-1.285)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.289 (0.996-1.847)

power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

00.20.40.60.91.11.31.51.71.92.12.32.62.833.23.43.63.84Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco X5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø3.13 (2.92-3.86)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø2.82 (2.47-4.26)
Xiaomi Poco X5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.183 (1.111-1.285)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 4G; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.289 (0.996-1.847)

Runtimes

After measuring such good power consumption values, we were surprised to see the runtime results. Compared to all the other devices we tested, the Poco has no chance. Only at full load did the X5 achieve similar runtimes as its competitors. In all other disciplines, the Poco lay well behind the Samsung Galaxy A23 and the Motorola Moto G53.

Thanks to its 5,000 mAh battery, the phone does still easily manage to last a full day - even if it is used a lot.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
24h 42min
WiFi Websurfing
11h 02min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
14h 56min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 04min
Xiaomi Poco X5
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
5000 mAh
Motorola Moto G53
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 4G
5000 mAh
Telekom T Phone Pro
5000 mAh
Battery Runtime
46%
35%
19%
29%
Reader / Idle
1482
2586
74%
2301
55%
1512
2%
H.264
896
1289
44%
1165
30%
1402
56%
WiFi v1.3
662
1099
66%
1035
56%
719
9%
851
29%
Load
304
305
0%
297
-2%
327
8%

Pros

+ good main camera in good lighting conditions
+ fast, bright display
+ option to expand storage via microSD
+ 33-watt power supply included

Cons

- mediocre battery life in comparison
- ultra-wide angle lens photos are grainy
- unclear update policies

Verdict - Only the X5's runtimes show room for improvement

Poco X5 5G review. Test device provided by Notebooksbilliger.de
Poco X5 5G review. Test device provided by Notebooksbilliger.de

The Poco X5 5G is a good mid-range device. It impressed in our test thanks to its immaculate build and complete features including NFC, infrared blaster, expandable storage via microSD and a headphone jack. 

Furthermore, the smartphone has a bright, well-calibrated 120 Hz OLED screen as well as good enough performance for everyday use and for playing a game or two. 

The Poco X5 offers a great total package for a mid-range device.

Its main camera left a good impression on us, too. In good lighting conditions, you can take crisp, detailed photos. In darker conditions, the phone nears its limits - but for the price, this is to be expected. Its ultra-wide angle lens can also be seen as rather something to be used when there is no other option.

The X5 may still come with Android 12, but Android 13 is available to download. The software runs smoothly and you can delete the pre-installed bloatware. The phone never has any issues with overheating.

Our only issue with the phone at the moment is its battery life - at least in comparison with its competitors. Other devices such as the Samsung Galaxy A23 or the Motorola Moto G53 deliver much better runtimes from a 5,000 mAh battery. At this stage, Poco could surely rectify this with an update.

Price and availability

The Poco X5 5G with 6 GB RAM and 128 GB storage can be purchased on Amazon for $226.

The version with 8 GB RAM and 256 GB storage can be purchased for $272.99.

Xiaomi Poco X5 - 05/19/2023 v7
Benedikt Winkel

Chassis
78%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
91%
Connectivity
51 / 70 → 73%
Weight
89%
Battery
89%
Display
91%
Games Performance
33 / 64 → 52%
Application Performance
72 / 86 → 84%
Temperature
95%
Noise
100%
Audio
76 / 90 → 84%
Camera
58%
Average
76%
81%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Transparency

The present review sample was made available to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or a shop for the purposes of review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review.

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!