Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Smartphone Review

Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Alex Alderson), 10/01/2018

Price Cruncher – The Xiaomi Pocophone F1 is a smartphone with flagship hardware, which has a good camera and long battery life but costs less than €350 (~$404). Find out in this review whether Xiaomi’s concept of an affordable flagship works and what cuts have been made to keep the cost down.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Current flagship smartphones from renowned manufacturers usually cost at least €700 (~$808), while even budget smartphones are starting to increase in price too. There are exceptions to this, like the €399 (~$461) Honor 10 or the €519 (~$599) OnePlus 6, but Xiaomi has gone one better. Its Pocophone F1 costs €349 (~$403), but still packs in some high-end hardware.

The Pocophone has a large 6.18-inch IPS display, a Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SoC, 6 GB of RAM and 64 GB of UFS 2.1 storage. There is a 128 GB variant too, which costs an additional €40 (~$46). Moreover, the Pocophone has expandable storage, dual rear-facing cameras and a 4,000-mAh battery. Xiaomi has Honor and OnePlus in their sights with the Pocophone as its specifications suggest.

Hence, we have chosen to compare the Pocophone against the Honor 10 and the OnePlus 6. Additionally, we have pitted our test device against other ambitious mid-range smartphones like the Nokia 7 Plus and even flagship devices like the Samsung Galaxy S9+, the Apple iPhone XS, the Huawei P20 Pro and the LG G7 ThinQ.

Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Graphics adapter
Memory
6144 MB 
Display
6.18 inch 18.7:9, 2246 x 1080 pixel 403 PPI, Ten-point capacitive multi-touch display, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 52 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, Electronic Compass, G-sensor, Hall sensor, Proximity sensor, IR facial recognition, BeiDou
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/EDGE: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS/HSPA+: Bands 1, 2, 5, 8. LTE Cat. 16: Bands 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 38, 40, 41., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.8 x 155.5 x 75.2 ( = 0.35 x 6.12 x 2.96 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual camera: 12 MP – f/1.9, 1/2.55”, 1.4 μm; 5 MP – f/2.0, 1.12 μm
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix
Additional features
Keyboard: Virtual keyboard, Charger, USB Type-A to USB Type-C cable, SIM tool, Silicon case, Quick Start Guide, MIUI 9.5, 12 Months Warranty, SAR values: Body – 1.582 W/kg; Head – 0.537 W/kg, fanless
Weight
182 g ( = 6.42 oz / 0.4 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
349 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The Pocophone has a simple case design. The back is made of plastic and the frame of an aluminum alloy. The device comes in a choice of four colors: blue, gray, red and one with a Kevlar back. The Kevlar edition is slightly longer, thicker and five grams (<0.2 oz) heavier than the other variants too.

Our test device is well constructed and there is a plastic frame separating the display from the metal frame for added drop protection. Gaps between materials are precise and tight fitting, albeit it creaks quietly when we apply pressure to the case. Equally, we could create waves on the display by applying firm pressure to the panel.

The card slot sits flush with the frame on the left-hand side of the device and matches its coloring. The Pocophone supports either two nano-SIMs or one SIM and a microSD card. The device has no IP rating so has no certified protection against dust and liquids.

Size Comparison

Connectivity

The Pocophone has decent connectivity with Bluetooth 5.0, Wi-Fi Direct, a 3.5 mm jack, a USB Type-C port and an FM Radio. Unfortunately, the device lacks an NFC chip, so you cannot use the Pocophone with Google Pay among other NFC-related services.

The USB Type-C port supports USB 2.0 speeds and USB On-The-Go (OTG) for connecting peripherals. The Pocophone cannot output video to an external monitor over a wired connection though.

Xiaomi does not state a limit to the maximum size microSD card that the Pocophone supports, but we presume that all modern cards will work as our test device recognized our reference SDXC microSD card. The device will only format microSD cards as external memory though and will only store apps on the internal memory by default. This can be changed by activating a setting under Developer Options. The Pocophone also supports microSD cards formatted in exFAT.

The Pocophone also has a notification LED that Xiaomi has placed in the rather unusual location of directly above the USB Type-C port at the bottom of the display. The LED can either flash or light up for new notifications and comes on when the device is charging. The LED can be disabled too.

Topside: Microphone, 3.5 mm jack
Topside: Microphone, 3.5 mm jack
Left-hand side: Card slot
Left-hand side: Card slot
Right-hand side: Volume rocker, Power button
Right-hand side: Volume rocker, Power button
Underside: Speaker, USB Type-C port, Microphone
Underside: Speaker, USB Type-C port, Microphone

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

Software

The Pocophone ships with Android Oreo 8.1, on top of which Xiaomi adds its MIUI skin. MIUI is a highly customized version of Android, of which we have seen plenty in our other Xiaomi reviews like the Mi 8 Explorer Edition or the Mi Pad 4. An update to Android 9.0 Pie is probably currently in development and may be released later this year.

Our test device frequently displays annoying adverts from the numerous Mi-Apps that are pre-installed. You must also create a Mi account and give Xiaomi your mobile phone number to use the device’s Developer Options.

There are other frustrating aspects about the Pocophone’s software too. The device lacks DRM support, so it cannot play HD content on either Amazon Prime Video or Netflix. This cannot be rectified with an update.

Default home screen
Default home screen
Quick Settings and Notification panel
Quick Settings and Notification panel
Default app drawer
Default app drawer
MIUI welcome menu
MIUI welcome menu

Communication & GPS

The Pocophone supports LTE Cat. 16, which allows for up to 1 GBit/s LTE download speeds. Xiaomi has scrimped on frequencies though and uses regional variants. Our test device, for instance, supports all current frequency bands for using the device within Europe, but little outside of that. Likewise, our test device maintained good mobile network coverage throughout testing, but typically one or two reception bars less than the iPhone XS or the Mate 10 Pro.

The device has a MIMO Wi-Fi antenna though, which is a rarity for a device at this price. The MIMO antenna delivers fast, albeit slightly fluctuating, Wi-Fi performance and helped our test device finish on par with our best comparison device in iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests.

The Pocophone supports all current IEEE 802.11 standards and can connect to either 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi networks. Our test device maintains good range on either network type.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
677 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
675 (min: 630, max: 704) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
652 MBit/s ∼96% -3%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
609 MBit/s ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=307)
211 MBit/s ∼31% -69%
Honor 10
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
210 MBit/s ∼31% -69%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
647 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
647 (min: 598, max: 665) MBit/s ∼100%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
612 MBit/s ∼95% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
519 MBit/s ∼80% -20%
Honor 10
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
236 MBit/s ∼36% -64%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=307)
207 MBit/s ∼32% -68%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø674 (630-704)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø647 (598-665)
GPS test: Outdoors
GPS test: Outdoors
GPS test: Indoors
GPS test: Indoors
GPS test: GNSS
GPS test: GNSS

The Pocophone uses BeiDou, GLONASS and GPS for location services. Our test device achieves a satellite fix quickly with up to three meters (~9.8 feet) accuracy outdoors and up to four meters (~13 feet) accuracy indoors.

Before taking the Pocophone out on our compulsory bike ride, we had to adjust our test device’s power-saving settings so that our tracking app would record data when running in the background. We compared the Pocophone’s location accuracy against a professional navigation device, the Garmin Edge 500. Our test device recorded the course comparatively well and only deviated by twenty meters (~66 feet) over the 9.5 km (~ 5.9 miles) total distance that the Garmin recorded. Overall, the Pocophone proves a reliable companion that handles navigation tasks well.

GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Around a lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Around a lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 – Loop
GPS test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 - Overview
GPS test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 - Overview
GPS test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 – Around a lake
GPS test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 – Around a lake
GPS test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 – Loop
GPS test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 – Loop

Telephone Function & Call Quality

Xiaomi bases its contacts and phone apps on Google’s, but the former lacks the extensive features of the latter. The phone app, for instance, only has options for your contacts and call history with no way to set favorite contacts.

Our test device’s call quality is unconvincing too. Call partners sound clear when making a call with the earpiece, but our voice sounded scratchy and with plenty of unwanted noise. These issues worsen when using the loudspeaker as the microphone fails to pick up our voice if we are further than a foot away from our test device.

We could not determine whether the Pocophone supports Wi-Fi calling, but an update should fix this. The device supports VoLTE, although our test device would only make calls over 3G.

Cameras

Photo taken with the front-facing camera
Photo taken with the front-facing camera

The Pocophone has a huge 20 MP front-facing camera that takes good selfies. The default camera app has a multi-level beauty mode and a portrait mode, although the latter struggles in bright ambient light and often illuminates the background too. The front-facing camera can record in up to 1080p; the electronic image stabilization (EIS) is rather weak though.

Xiaomi has also equipped the Pocophone with dual 12 MP and 5 MP rear-facing cameras. The device uses the secondary sensor for depth of field information, but it cannot solely be used to take pictures. The main camera has good technical foundations for taking good photos and delivers, particularly in daylight. Our test device captures objects in a good amount of detail and the backgrounds in bokeh effect shots are pleasingly smooth.

Our test device does well in low light too, as scene 3 demonstrates. The main camera captures plenty of light and image information in dark conditions, but the level of detail predictably reduces compared to photos taken in good light. Overall, low-light shots look better than the Honor 10 and are just short of those that the OnePlus 6 takes. We took our sample photos without AI support as photos have better depth and dynamics to them in our opinion, albeit at the expense of some finer details.

The rear-facing cameras can record video in up to 2,160p at 30 FPS. The Pocophone records videos in stereo sound, but recordings sound comparatively quiet. The rear-facing cameras use EIS for image stabilization, which works well.

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.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images
ColorChecker: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour
ColorChecker: The lower half of each area of colour displays the reference colour

We also subjected the Pocophone to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions. Our test device does a good job at photographing our test chart and captures details well. The degree of detail marginally reduces towards the edge of the image, while dark text against dark backgrounds has only minor fraying and artifacts.

Our test device accurately reproduces colors too, despite being slightly oversaturated compared to the reference color. The white balance is warmer than we would like too.

Photo of our test chart
Photo of our test chart
Test chart in detail

Accessories & Warranty

Our test device comes with a modular charger, a USB Type-A to Type-C cable, a transparent cover, a SIM tool and a Quick Start Guide. Xiaomi does not currently sell any Pocophone specific accessories, but third-party suppliers do.

The Pocophone comes with twelve months manufacturer’s warranty, which does not affect any third-party supplier warranty.

Input Devices & Operation

The Pocophone has a ten-point multi-touch display that feels good to the touch. Our test device accurately and quickly reacted to inputs throughout testing. Xiaomi pre-installs Google GBoard as the default keyboard, which you could easily replace with others downloadable from the Google Play Store.

The fingerprint sensor is on the back of the device and unlocks our test device quickly. Unlocking the device with the fingerprint sensor takes you straight to the home screen or to the last used app. Additionally, apps can use the fingerprint sensor for biometric authentication or for authorizing payments.

The Pocophone has IR facial recognition technology that is not yet active in all regions at the time of writing. We activated the feature on our test device by changing our device’s region to Spain; you could change the region to any country where Xiaomi has made the system available. The IR scanner works well in the dark, but it is not as reliable as Apple’s Face ID.

Using the pre-installed keyboard in portrait mode
Using the pre-installed keyboard in portrait mode
Using the pre-installed keyboard in landscape mode
Using the pre-installed keyboard in landscape mode

Display

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

The Pocophone has a 6.18-inch IPS display that runs at a 2,226 x 1,080 native resolution in an 18.7:9 aspect ratio. Our test device achieved an average maximum brightness of 486 cd/m² according to X-Rite i1Pro 2, which puts the Pocophone in the middle of our comparison table. Few devices can compete with the LG G7 ThinQ’s insanely bright maximum luminosity, but the Pocophone gets brighter than the OnePlus 6 and the Nokia 7 Plus. By contrast, the Honor 10 and the Galaxy S9+ reach 10% and 17% higher luminosity values respectively. The Pocophone has a 93% uniformly lit display too, which is on par with our best comparison devices.

Our test device uses pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate luminosity at and below 20% brightness, which can cause some people to experience dizziness and headaches. We measure the PWM frequency at 2,315 Hz, which is relatively high. However, those who are PWM sensitive may notice the display flickering when using the device at low brightness at night. This is a pity since Xiaomi’s integrated night mode is particularly good and the display reaches a minimum of 1.09 cd/m², a value that is dark enough for comfortably using the device at night.

The Pocophone has a good contrast ratio thanks to its low black value, but it cannot compete with our IPS-equipped comparison devices in this regard. By contrast, the Nokia 7 Plus and the LG G7 ThinQ achieve contrast ratios of 2,082:1 and 1,988:1 respectively, while the Pocophone only has a contrast ratio of 1,438:1.

483
cd/m²
468
cd/m²
477
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
489
cd/m²
483
cd/m²
498
cd/m²
483
cd/m²
494
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 502 cd/m² Average: 486.3 cd/m² Minimum: 1.09 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 489 cd/m²
Contrast: 1438:1 (Black: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.8 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 4.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
99.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.18
Honor 10
IPS, 2280x1080, 5.84
OnePlus 6
Optic AMOLED, 2280x1080, 6.28
Nokia 7 Plus
IPS, 2160x1080, 6
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2
LG G7 ThinQ
IPS, 3120x1440, 6.1
Screen
9%
15%
7%
27%
7%
Brightness middle
489
555
13%
430
-12%
458
-6%
565
16%
974
99%
Brightness
486
537
10%
437
-10%
463
-5%
571
17%
975
101%
Brightness Distribution
93
94
1%
87
-6%
92
-1%
96
3%
96
3%
Black Level *
0.34
0.39
-15%
0.22
35%
0.49
-44%
Contrast
1438
1423
-1%
2082
45%
1988
38%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.8
2.3
39%
2.3
39%
4
-5%
2.3
39%
5.4
-42%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
7.1
6
15%
4.6
35%
7.4
-4%
4.8
32%
13.1
-85%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.4
3.9
11%
2.4
45%
4.7
-7%
1.9
57%
5
-14%
Gamma
2.22 99%
2.19 100%
2.28 96%
2.19 100%
2.16 102%
2.31 95%
CCT
7213 90%
6212 105%
6160 106%
7425 88%
6332 103%
7480 87%

* ... 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 2315 Hz ≤ 20 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2315 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 20 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2315 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8933 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We also subjected the Pocophone’s display to analysis with a photo spectrometer and CalMAN software. Our test device uses an extended sRGB color space that struggles with accurately reproducing gray tones. Even the “Warm” profile displays gray tones with a noticeable blue tint to them. The calibration of our test device’s display is passable, but there are visible differences in color and gray tones from the reference color. Cyan and Red tones are poorly calibrated at dE 7 and dE 6.4 respectively, which are considerably higher than the ideal value of 3. In short, our test device has a display that is good enough for daily use, but not one that is noteworthy.

CalMAN: Grayscale – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Grayscale – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Mixed Colours – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Colour Space – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Colour Saturation – Profile: Standard, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Grayscale – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Grayscale – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Mixed Colors – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Mixed Colors – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Color Space – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Color Space – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Color Saturation – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space
CalMAN: Color Saturation – Profile: Warm, sRGB target color space

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
24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.2 ms rise
↘ 14.8 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 32 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21.6 ms rise
↘ 22.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

The Pocophone is usable outdoors but in limited circumstances. Our test device is bright enough in cloudy weather, but the display becomes difficult to read in direct sunlight because of its relatively low maximum luminosity and glossy finish.

Using the Xiaomi Pocophone F1 outdoors
Using the Xiaomi Pocophone F1 outdoors
Using the Xiaomi Pocophone F1 outdoors
Using the Xiaomi Pocophone F1 outdoors

The Pocophone has strong viewing angles thanks to its IPS display. We noticed no color distortions or ghosting even at acute viewing angles; the typical IPS glow is minor too. Only reflections hinder looking at the display from tight angles.

Viewing Angles
Viewing Angles

Performance

A Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SoC powers the Pocophone, which integrates a Qualcomm Adreno 630 GPU. Xiaomi complements the SoC with a generous 6 GB RAM.

Our test device performs slightly above the average of Snapdragon 845 powered devices that we have currently tested in CPU benchmarks and is on par with our comparison devices. The Pocophone performed well in system performance benchmarks too and proved the perfect companion in daily life.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
227026 Points ∼99%
Honor 10
174272 Points ∼76% -23%
OnePlus 6
230421 Points ∼100% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
117165 Points ∼51% -48%
LG G7 ThinQ
223464 Points ∼97% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
222290 Points ∼96% -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
179709 Points ∼78% -21%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
226124 Points ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (162183 - 242953, n=18)
223967 Points ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 254229, n=390)
76481 Points ∼33% -66%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
263165 Points ∼95%
Honor 10
205297 Points ∼74% -22%
OnePlus 6
266686 Points ∼97% +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
141701 Points ∼51% -46%
LG G7 ThinQ
256276 Points ∼93% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
250577 Points ∼91% -5%
Huawei P20 Pro
207959 Points ∼75% -21%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
246366 Points ∼89% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (246366 - 299878, n=22)
275958 Points ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=170)
118332 Points ∼43% -55%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
8101 Points ∼98%
Honor 10
7046 Points ∼85% -13%
OnePlus 6
8282 Points ∼100% +2%
Nokia 7 Plus
6077 Points ∼73% -25%
LG G7 ThinQ
7717 Points ∼93% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
5319 Points ∼64% -34%
Huawei P20 Pro
6982 Points ∼84% -14%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8178 Points ∼99% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (8326 - 9868, n=22)
8018 Points ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=256)
4551 Points ∼55% -44%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
9664 Points ∼95%
Honor 10
8530 Points ∼84% -12%
OnePlus 6
9630 Points ∼95% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
6825 Points ∼67% -29%
LG G7 ThinQ
9503 Points ∼94% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
5822 Points ∼58% -40%
Huawei P20 Pro
8115 Points ∼80% -16%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
9858 Points ∼97% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7998 - 13211, n=20)
10123 Points ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (6412 - 13531, n=423)
4958 Points ∼49% -49%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
1296 Points ∼93%
Honor 10
1316 Points ∼94% +2%
OnePlus 6
1386 Points ∼99% +7%
Nokia 7 Plus
1101 Points ∼79% -15%
LG G7 ThinQ
1374 Points ∼98% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
1109 Points ∼79% -14%
Huawei P20 Pro
1273 Points ∼91% -2%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
1400 Points ∼100% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (1009 - 1613, n=20)
1348 Points ∼96% +4%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=499)
698 Points ∼50% -46%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
7945 Points ∼100%
Honor 10
4397 Points ∼55% -45%
OnePlus 6
7949 Points ∼100% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
2298 Points ∼29% -71%
LG G7 ThinQ
7906 Points ∼99% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6370 Points ∼80% -20%
Huawei P20 Pro
3725 Points ∼47% -53%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
7743 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (5846 - 8001, n=20)
7816 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=499)
1737 Points ∼22% -78%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3239 Points ∼80%
Honor 10
3808 Points ∼94% +18%
OnePlus 6
3799 Points ∼94% +17%
Nokia 7 Plus
2503 Points ∼62% -23%
LG G7 ThinQ
3744 Points ∼92% +16%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2625 Points ∼65% -19%
Huawei P20 Pro
4050 Points ∼100% +25%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
3704 Points ∼91% +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2193 - 5296, n=20)
3594 Points ∼89% +11%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=499)
1244 Points ∼31% -62%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
6506 Points ∼77%
Honor 10
5882 Points ∼70% -10%
OnePlus 6
8228 Points ∼98% +26%
Nokia 7 Plus
4976 Points ∼59% -24%
LG G7 ThinQ
8070 Points ∼96% +24%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6413 Points ∼76% -1%
Huawei P20 Pro
5965 Points ∼71% -8%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8418 Points ∼100% +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (4417 - 8613, n=20)
7657 Points ∼91% +18%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=499)
2512 Points ∼30% -61%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3838 Points ∼89%
Honor 10
3374 Points ∼78% -12%
OnePlus 6
4308 Points ∼100% +12%
Nokia 7 Plus
2369 Points ∼55% -38%
LG G7 ThinQ
4257 Points ∼99% +11%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3302 Points ∼77% -14%
Huawei P20 Pro
3271 Points ∼76% -15%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
4288 Points ∼100% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3291 - 4693, n=20)
4099 Points ∼95% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=503)
1255 Points ∼29% -67%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
14369 Points ∼100%
Honor 10
8634 Points ∼60% -40%
LG G7 ThinQ
13497 Points ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6202 Points ∼43% -57%
Huawei P20 Pro
8025 Points ∼56% -44%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
14417 Points ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (10876 - 14489, n=19)
13635 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 21070, n=197)
4524 Points ∼31% -69%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
9182 Points ∼100%
Honor 10
6610 Points ∼72% -28%
Nokia 7 Plus
5867 Points ∼64% -36%
LG G7 ThinQ
9029 Points ∼98% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
8963 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
6756 Points ∼74% -26%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8522 Points ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7754 - 9231, n=21)
8655 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 11598, n=247)
4308 Points ∼47% -53%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2468 Points ∼65%
Honor 10
1890 Points ∼50% -23%
Nokia 7 Plus
1646 Points ∼44% -33%
LG G7 ThinQ
2448 Points ∼65% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3776 Points ∼100% +53%
Huawei P20 Pro
1922 Points ∼51% -22%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
2457 Points ∼65% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2272 - 2500, n=21)
2417 Points ∼64% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4824, n=248)
1270 Points ∼34% -49%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2528 Points ∼70%
Honor 10
2582 Points ∼71% +2%
OnePlus 6
3432 Points ∼95% +36%
Nokia 7 Plus
2749 Points ∼76% +9%
LG G7 ThinQ
3255 Points ∼90% +29%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2469 Points ∼68% -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
2926 Points ∼81% +16%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
3620 Points ∼100% +43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2118 - 3703, n=21)
3268 Points ∼90% +29%
Average of class Smartphone (2281 - 4216, n=352)
1642 Points ∼45% -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4746 Points ∼91%
Honor 10
2993 Points ∼57% -37%
OnePlus 6
5212 Points ∼100% +10%
Nokia 7 Plus
1161 Points ∼22% -76%
LG G7 ThinQ
5006 Points ∼96% +5%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3582 Points ∼69% -25%
Huawei P20 Pro
3017 Points ∼58% -36%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
5190 Points ∼100% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3488 - 5241, n=21)
4944 Points ∼95% +4%
Average of class Smartphone (815 - 5241, n=352)
1186 Points ∼23% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3972 Points ∼84%
Honor 10
2891 Points ∼61% -27%
OnePlus 6
4673 Points ∼99% +18%
Nokia 7 Plus
1332 Points ∼28% -66%
LG G7 ThinQ
4471 Points ∼94% +13%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3256 Points ∼69% -18%
Huawei P20 Pro
2996 Points ∼63% -25%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
4734 Points ∼100% +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3197 - 4734, n=21)
4424 Points ∼93% +11%
Average of class Smartphone (951 - 4734, n=360)
1134 Points ∼24% -71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2720 Points ∼79%
Honor 10
2773 Points ∼80% +2%
OnePlus 6
3452 Points ∼100% +27%
Nokia 7 Plus
2734 Points ∼79% +1%
LG G7 ThinQ
3150 Points ∼91% +16%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2496 Points ∼72% -8%
Huawei P20 Pro
2885 Points ∼84% +6%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
2541 Points ∼74% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2159 - 3668, n=21)
3129 Points ∼91% +15%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=384)
1540 Points ∼45% -43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
8261 Points ∼100%
Honor 10
3573 Points ∼43% -57%
OnePlus 6
8252 Points ∼100% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
1895 Points ∼23% -77%
LG G7 ThinQ
7633 Points ∼92% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
4637 Points ∼56% -44%
Huawei P20 Pro
3335 Points ∼40% -60%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8219 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (5637 - 8312, n=21)
7818 Points ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=384)
1632 Points ∼20% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
5687 Points ∼90%
Honor 10
3358 Points ∼53% -41%
OnePlus 6
6304 Points ∼100% +11%
Nokia 7 Plus
2035 Points ∼32% -64%
LG G7 ThinQ
5799 Points ∼92% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3895 Points ∼62% -32%
Huawei P20 Pro
3223 Points ∼51% -43%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
5492 Points ∼87% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (4529 - 6454, n=21)
5843 Points ∼93% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=392)
1387 Points ∼22% -76%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
34928 Points ∼95%
Honor 10
21070 Points ∼57% -40%
OnePlus 6
34191 Points ∼93% -2%
Nokia 7 Plus
20085 Points ∼55% -42%
LG G7 ThinQ
27817 Points ∼76% -20%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
26226 Points ∼71% -25%
Huawei P20 Pro
22441 Points ∼61% -36%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
36762 Points ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (15614 - 37475, n=21)
33400 Points ∼91% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=539)
12880 Points ∼35% -63%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
82125 Points ∼100%
Honor 10
32674 Points ∼40% -60%
OnePlus 6
81269 Points ∼99% -1%
Nokia 7 Plus
29333 Points ∼36% -64%
LG G7 ThinQ
80534 Points ∼98% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
46610 Points ∼57% -43%
Huawei P20 Pro
33472 Points ∼41% -59%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
81502 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (53794 - 84998, n=21)
80111 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 162695, n=539)
17994 Points ∼22% -78%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
63159 Points ∼98%
Honor 10
29111 Points ∼45% -54%
OnePlus 6
62241 Points ∼97% -1%
Nokia 7 Plus
26610 Points ∼41% -58%
LG G7 ThinQ
56669 Points ∼88% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
39745 Points ∼62% -37%
Huawei P20 Pro
30176 Points ∼47% -52%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
64152 Points ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (34855 - 65330, n=21)
60990 Points ∼95% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=540)
15114 Points ∼24% -76%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
150 fps ∼100%
Honor 10
124 fps ∼83% -17%
OnePlus 6
150 fps ∼100% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
50 fps ∼33% -67%
LG G7 ThinQ
144 fps ∼96% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
147 fps ∼98% -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
121 fps ∼81% -19%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
150 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (98 - 152, n=22)
144 fps ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=564)
31.4 fps ∼21% -79%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
60 fps ∼96%
Honor 10
59 fps ∼94% -2%
OnePlus 6
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
48 fps ∼77% -20%
LG G7 ThinQ
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Huawei P20 Pro
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
60 fps ∼96% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (58 - 89, n=21)
62.7 fps ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=567)
25 fps ∼40% -58%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
71 fps ∼96%
Honor 10
59 fps ∼80% -17%
OnePlus 6
66 fps ∼89% -7%
Nokia 7 Plus
23 fps ∼31% -68%
LG G7 ThinQ
63 fps ∼85% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
74 fps ∼100% +4%
Huawei P20 Pro
61 fps ∼82% -14%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
71 fps ∼96% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (54 - 83, n=21)
73 fps ∼99% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=486)
16.8 fps ∼23% -76%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
58 fps ∼100%
Honor 10
50 fps ∼86% -14%
OnePlus 6
58 fps ∼100% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
22 fps ∼38% -62%
LG G7 ThinQ
41 fps ∼71% -29%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
45 fps ∼78% -22%
Huawei P20 Pro
54 fps ∼93% -7%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
58 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (35 - 75, n=21)
55 fps ∼95% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=489)
16 fps ∼28% -72%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
35 fps ∼60%
Honor 10
39 fps ∼67% +11%
OnePlus 6
56 fps ∼97% +60%
Nokia 7 Plus
14 fps ∼24% -60%
LG G7 ThinQ
51 fps ∼88% +46%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
47 fps ∼81% +34%
Huawei P20 Pro
39 fps ∼67% +11%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
58 fps ∼100% +66%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (32 - 61, n=22)
54.4 fps ∼94% +55%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 88, n=349)
14.3 fps ∼25% -59%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
54 fps ∼96%
Honor 10
34 fps ∼61% -37%
OnePlus 6
54 fps ∼96% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
15 fps ∼27% -72%
LG G7 ThinQ
26 fps ∼46% -52%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
24 fps ∼43% -56%
Huawei P20 Pro
36 fps ∼64% -33%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
56 fps ∼100% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (25 - 59, n=21)
46.5 fps ∼83% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 110, n=352)
13.9 fps ∼25% -74%
GFXBench
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
35 fps ∼100%
Honor 10
23 fps ∼66% -34%
OnePlus 6
35 fps ∼100% 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
8.3 fps ∼24% -76%
LG G7 ThinQ
33 fps ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
28 fps ∼80% -20%
Huawei P20 Pro
23 fps ∼66% -34%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
35 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (25 - 35, n=21)
34 fps ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 54, n=280)
9.86 fps ∼28% -72%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
33 fps ∼89%
Honor 10
20 fps ∼54% -39%
OnePlus 6
32 fps ∼86% -3%
Nokia 7 Plus
9.1 fps ∼25% -72%
LG G7 ThinQ
17 fps ∼46% -48%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
14 fps ∼38% -58%
Huawei P20 Pro
22 fps ∼59% -33%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
37 fps ∼100% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (17 - 37, n=21)
28.3 fps ∼76% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 58, n=283)
8.89 fps ∼24% -73%
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Nokia 7 Plus
15.07 fps ∼42%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
35.83 fps ∼100%
Huawei P20 Pro
25.93 fps ∼72%
Average of class Smartphone (1.06 - 38.7, n=72)
12.1 fps ∼34%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
OnePlus 6
1169 Points ∼79%
Nokia 7 Plus
349 Points ∼24%
LG G7 ThinQ
1176 Points ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
1481 Points ∼100%
Huawei P20 Pro
887 Points ∼60%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (1169 - 1201, n=5)
1179 Points ∼80%
Average of class Smartphone (36.3 - 2754, n=76)
693 Points ∼47%

Legend

 
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Honor 10 HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Nokia 7 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG G7 ThinQ Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei P20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

We conducted our browser benchmarking with the pre-installed version 68 of Chrome. Our test device performed admirably, consistently finishing behind only the LG G7 ThinQ and the OnePlus 6. These two devices scored around eight to ten per cent higher than the Pocophone in browser benchmarks, but the difference is not noticeable in daily web browsing.

JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
88.081 Points ∼100% +16%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
87.695 Points ∼100% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=22)
76.9 Points ∼87% +1%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
75.959 Points ∼86%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
71.172 Points ∼81% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
69.59 Points ∼79% -8%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
58.255 Points ∼66% -23%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
56.506 Points ∼64% -26%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
53.89 Points ∼61% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=422)
36.7 Points ∼42% -52%
Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
17026 Points ∼100% +17%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
16720 Points ∼98% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=22)
15431 Points ∼91% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
14760 Points ∼87% +2%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
14514 Points ∼85%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
13360 Points ∼78% -8%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
11584 Points ∼68% -20%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
10965 Points ∼64% -24%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
10945 Points ∼64% -25%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=558)
5562 Points ∼33% -62%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=578)
11474 ms * ∼100% -323%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
3937.3 ms * ∼34% -45%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
3899 ms * ∼34% -44%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
3852.2 ms * ∼34% -42%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
3179 ms * ∼28% -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=22)
2874 ms * ∼25% -6%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
2713.6 ms * ∼24%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
2484.1 ms * ∼22% +8%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
2445 ms * ∼21% +10%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
2059.7 ms * ∼18% +24%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼100% +13%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
252 Points ∼100% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (260 - 291, n=21)
233 Points ∼92% +4%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
223 Points ∼88%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
211 Points ∼84% -5%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
182 Points ∼72% -18%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
182 Points ∼72% -18%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
168 Points ∼67% -25%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
164 Points ∼65% -26%
Average of class Smartphone (91 - 362, n=284)
111 Points ∼44% -50%

* ... smaller is better

The Pocophone comes with either 64 GB or 128 GB of UFS 2.1 storage. Most of our comparison devices also have UFS 2.1, despite the often vastly different AndroBench 3-5 scores. We attribute these variations to each device’s memory controller among other things. In short, our test device has good internal storage speeds that are a way off our fastest comparison devices.

The microSD card reader is comparatively quick too, which we tested with our Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 reference card. Our test device achieves similar values to that of our fast comparison devices and notably is much faster than the pricier Xperia XZ2 Premium. It is good to see that Xiaomi includes exFAT support too.

Xiaomi Pocophone F1Nokia 7 PlusLG G7 ThinQSamsung Galaxy S9 PlusSony Xperia XZ2 PremiumHonor 10OnePlus 6Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-12%
8%
17%
-7%
225%
23%
33%
-41%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
65.58 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62.31
-5%
62.67 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
67.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
30.23 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-54%
50.2 (17.1 - 71.9, n=25)
-23%
45.6 (3.4 - 87.1, n=319)
-30%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
85.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
82.21
-4%
84.72 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
79.22 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
34.18 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-60%
66.4 (18 - 86.6, n=25)
-22%
63.8 (8.2 - 96.5, n=319)
-25%
Random Write 4KB
17.81
19.62
10%
23.26
31%
22.74
28%
21.75
22%
163
815%
21.8
22%
50.5 (8.77 - 156, n=34)
184%
16.1 (0.14 - 164, n=607)
-10%
Random Read 4KB
101.01
54.65
-46%
110.46
9%
129.68
28%
135.99
35%
145.88
44%
137
36%
134 (78.2 - 173, n=34)
33%
38.3 (1.59 - 173, n=607)
-62%
Sequential Write 256KB
155.57
211.6
36%
176.45
13%
204.94
32%
170.98
10%
192.12
23%
201.4
29%
193 (133 - 229, n=34)
24%
79.9 (2.99 - 246, n=607)
-49%
Sequential Read 256KB
705.38
283.12
-60%
695.15
-1%
818.69
16%
748.59
6%
827.69
17%
725.6
3%
727 (529 - 895, n=34)
3%
230 (12.1 - 895, n=607)
-67%

Games

The Qualcomm Adreno 630 GPU handles graphics, but the Pocophone cannot match its equivalently equipped competitors. Our test device plays Arena of Valor at a stable 60 FPS even at maximum graphics, just like other Qualcomm Adreno 630 equipped devices. However, PUBG only runs at a maximum of FPS at both maximum and medium graphics, a restriction that has only previously occurred at maximum graphics for other flagship smartphones. Perhaps Xiaomi does not completely trust the Pocophone’s cooling system to run PUBG Mobile at 60 FPS at maximum graphics.

The sensors and touchscreen worked well throughout testing, although we would have liked the speakers to get louder.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Arena of Valor
Arena of Valor
PUBG Mobile
01020304050Tooltip
; Balanced; 0.8.0: Ø38.6 (11-41)
; HD; 0.8.0: Ø39.6 (18-41)
Arena of Valor
0102030405060