Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Smartphone Review: A display dream for the price-conscious buyer

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Alex Alderson), 11/13/2019

A display surprise. The Redmi Note 8 is another entry-level Xiaomi smartphone, but it's one that redefines the quality of displays we expect from sub-200-Euro (~$220) devices. The panel is bright, contrast-rich and even suitable for those who are PWM sensitive. The Redmi Note 8 is not all good news though, as our review unit will establish.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8

Xiaomi launched the Redmi Note 8 at the end of August in China but has only just brought the Redmi Note 7 to European shores. While our review unit costs around 30 Euros (~$33) more than the Chinese version of the Redmi Note 8, it does come with 2 GB more RAM and an additional 64 GB of storage. The Redmi Note 8 also comes in 32 GB or 64 GB variants, but they all have 6 GB of RAM.

The Redmi Note 8 includes many refinements over its predecessor, with its new quad rear-facing camera array being one of the greatest. The device has a 48 MP primary camera, an ultra-wide-angle sensor, and two identical sensors for macro shots and providing depth-of-field information. Xiaomi has upgraded its Redmi Note series to the Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, which also includes an Adreno 610 GPU.

Please see our table below for an overview of the Redmi Note 8 and the devices against which we will be comparing it.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Redmi Note Series)
Graphics adapter
Memory
6144 MB 
Display
6.3 inch 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 409 PPI, Capacitive touchscreen, IPS, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes
Storage
128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB 
, , 108 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 1 Infrared, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm jack, Card Reader: up to 256 GB microSD cards, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Accelerometer, compass, gyroscope, proximity sensor, USB Type-C, OTG, status LED, Miracast
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2, 2G: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. 3G: B1, B2, B4, B5, B8. 4G: B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B7, B8, B20, B38, B40., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.3 x 158.3 x 75.3 ( = 0.33 x 6.23 x 2.96 in)
Battery
4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix , f/1.8, 1/2", 0.8 μm. 8 MP, f/2.2, 13 mm, 1/4", 1.12 μm. 2 MP, f/2.4, 1/5", 1.75 μm. 2 MP, f/2.4, 1/5", 1.75 μm. Camera2 API: Full
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix , f/2.0
Additional features
Speakers: Mono, Keyboard: Virtual, Charger, USB cable, SIM tool, quick start guide, protective cover, MiUI, 12 Months Warranty, SAR values: Body - 1.089 W/kg, Head - 0.191 W/kg. DRM Widevine: L1 (EU) L3 (China), fanless
Weight
190 g ( = 6.7 oz / 0.42 pounds), Power Supply: 51 g ( = 1.8 oz / 0.11 pounds)
Price
200 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Device overview

RatingDateModelWeightDriveSizeResolutionBest Price
79%11/2019Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
665, Adreno 610
190 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080
78%09/2019Xiaomi Mi A3
665, Adreno 610
173.8 g64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.09"1560x720
81%06/2019Nokia 4.2
439, Adreno 505
161 g32 GB eMMC Flash5.71"1520x720
76%07/2019Samsung Galaxy A20e
7884B, Mali-G71 MP2
141 g32 GB eMMC Flash5.8"1560x720
76%10/2019LG K50
Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320
170 g32 GB eMMC Flash6.26"1520x720
71%10/2019Gigaset GS195
SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322
180 g32 GB eMMC Flash6.18"2246x1080
85%07/2019Honor 20 Lite
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
164 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.21"2340x1080

Case - Glass meets plastic with stylish consequences

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8: Colour variants
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8: Colour variants

Xiaomi covers the front of the Redmi Note 8 with scratch-resistant Corning Gorilla glass, which blends smoothly into the 8.3 mm thick plastic frame of the device. The display has relatively thin bezels for a sub-200-Euro (~$220) handset, which its 82% screen-to-body ratio reflects.

Our review is well-built too. Xiaomi has not IP certified the Redmi Note 8, so we would recommend keeping the handset away from water. Its hardware buttons sit firmly in their housings though and hardly wobble when pressed. Their pressure points offer good feedback too.

While the device is comparatively thin, it feels rather bulky. The flat glass back is the issue here as it sits awkwardly in our hands. Its colour gradient effect is a nice touch and gradually turns from a purple hue in the lower half of the glass to a shade of turquoise at the top. Xiaomi sells the Redmi Note 8 in Moonlight White, Space Black and Neptune Blue; our review unit is the latter for reference.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8

Size Comparison

161.3 mm / 6.35 inch 77 mm / 3.03 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 170 g0.3748 lbs158.3 mm / 6.23 inch 75.3 mm / 2.96 inch 8.3 mm / 0.3268 inch 190 g0.4189 lbs156.1 mm / 6.15 inch 76.1 mm / 3 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 180 g0.3968 lbs154.8 mm / 6.09 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 8 mm / 0.315 inch 164 g0.3616 lbs153.5 mm / 6.04 inch 71.9 mm / 2.83 inch 8.5 mm / 0.3346 inch 173.8 g0.3832 lbs148.95 mm / 5.86 inch 71.3 mm / 2.81 inch 8.39 mm / 0.3303 inch 161 g0.3549 lbs147.4 mm / 5.8 inch 69.7 mm / 2.74 inch 8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch 141 g0.3109 lbs

Connectivity - Dual-SIM and microSD card slots

The Redmi Note 8 includes a notification LED, IR blaster, a 3.5 mm jack and supports Miracast for wirelessly connecting to external monitors. The device supports the USB On-The-Go (OTG) protocol too for connecting external peripherals like keyboards and mice, although the Type-C port only operates on the older USB 2.0 standard.

Our review unit has 128 GB of eMMC flash storage, of which around 108 GB was available when we first booted the handset. If 108 GB is not enough for you, then you can add up to a 256 GB microSD card. The integrated reader supports the SDHC and SDXC standards and can read the exFAT file system too. The device also has dedicated dual-SIM card slots, so you need not compromise between dual-SIM functionality and microSD card expansion.

DRM Widevine certification is an area where the Chinese and Global versions of the Redmi Note 8 differ. While the latter is L1 certified for streaming content from the likes of Amazon Prime and Netflix in HD, our review unit can only stream in SD. Its L3 certification is the source of this limitation and is something that Xiaomi cannot necessarily fix with a software update.

Left-hand side: volume rocker, power button
Left-hand side: volume rocker, power button
Right-hand side: card slot
Right-hand side: card slot
Underside: speaker, USB Type-C port, microphone, headphone jack
Underside: speaker, USB Type-C port, microphone, headphone jack
Top side: microphone, IR port
Top side: microphone, IR port

Software - MIUI 10 but differing DRM Widevine certifications

The Redmi Note 8 ships with MIUI 10, Xiaomi's in-house version of Android 9.0 Pie. Specifically, our review unit arrived running MIUI 10.3, which also has the September 2019 set of security patches preinstalled.

We should point out that while the Global model comes with Google Services and apps, the Chinese version does not. Xiaomi offers in-house alternatives instead, but third-party retailers like Trading Shenzhen, from whom we received our unit, offer guides on how to sideload Google Services and apps. You may still struggle with running the Play Store or other Google apps though, as Google has not certified the device to run them.

Default home screen
Default home screen
Settings
Settings
Quick settings
Quick settings
Shortcuts, Notes and other widgets
Shortcuts, Notes and other widgets

Communication & GPS - Fast Wi-Fi and dual-SIM connectivity

The Redmi Note 8 supports all modern mobile networks and LTE Cat. 12 for up to 600 Mb/s downloads. The global model supports 10 LTE bands and covers all relevant LTE frequencies for Europe except for Band 28, on which carriers will increasingly rely in the coming years. The Chinese version also dispenses with Band 20.

Xiaomi claims that the Redmi Note 8 supports Bluetooth 4.2. Oddly, the diagnostic app AIDA 64 states that our review unit utilises the newer 5.0 protocol, something that the Snapdragon 665 SoC also supports. There is no NFC chip, though.

The Redmi Note 8 supports up to IEEE 802.11ac too, so it can connect to 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz Wi-Fi networks. Our review unit obliterated the competition in our Wi-Fi tests, as the tables below demonstrate. While most of our comparison devices cannot average over 60 Mb/s in either test we ran, the Redmi Note 8 averaged over 300 Mb/s in both. Even the Xiaomi Mi A3 could not reach 200 Mb/s with our Linksys EA8500 reference router. In short, the Redmi Note 8 has excellent Wi-Fi performance for a sub-200-Euro (~$220) handset.

The device supports LTE on both its SIM card slots too. We encountered no mobile signal issues during our tests either.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Adreno 610, 665, 128 GB eMMC Flash
339 (min: 320, max: 349) MBit/s ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=461)
230 MBit/s ∼68% -32%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
158 (min: 18, max: 227) MBit/s ∼47% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
60 (min: 47, max: 67) MBit/s ∼18% -82%
LG K50
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 32 GB eMMC Flash
60 (min: 53, max: 57) MBit/s ∼18% -82%
Honor 20 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB eMMC Flash
53.6 (min: 44, max: 57) MBit/s ∼16% -84%
Nokia 4.2
Adreno 505, 439, 32 GB eMMC Flash
52.6 (min: 35, max: 52) MBit/s ∼16% -84%
Gigaset GS195
GE8322 / IMG8322, SC9863A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
50.5 (min: 43, max: 53) MBit/s ∼15% -85%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Adreno 610, 665, 128 GB eMMC Flash
303 (min: 242, max: 355) MBit/s ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=461)
219 MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Adreno 610, 665, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
172 (min: 2, max: 282) MBit/s ∼57% -43%
LG K50
PowerVR GE8320, Helio P22 MT6762, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.9 (min: 51, max: 59) MBit/s ∼18% -82%
Honor 20 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB eMMC Flash
53.2 (min: 47, max: 58) MBit/s ∼18% -82%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Mali-G71 MP2, 7884B, 32 GB eMMC Flash
39.7 (min: 23, max: 50) MBit/s ∼13% -87%
Nokia 4.2
Adreno 505, 439, 32 GB eMMC Flash
35.2 (min: 24, max: 40) MBit/s ∼12% -88%
Gigaset GS195
GE8322 / IMG8322, SC9863A, 32 GB eMMC Flash
25.7 (min: 18, max: 33) MBit/s ∼8% -92%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø339 (320-349)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø303 (242-355)
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Inside
GPS Test: Outdoors
GPS Test: Outdoors

The Redmi Note 8 uses Beidou, GPS, GLONASS, and SBAS for location services. Our review unit finds a satellite fix relatively quickly and to an accuracy of four metres outside. This drops to five metres indoors, but both are well above the class average.

We also took our review unit on a bike ride to test its location accuracy against a Garmin Edge 500, one of our reference bike computers. Only 70 metres separated the Redmi Note 8 from the Garmin over our nine-kilometre test run, making the former impressively accurate. Our review unit deviated only slightly from the Garmin's route too, so you should have no trouble with using the Redmi Note 8 for general navigation tasks like driving, cycling or walking.

GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 500 - Loop
GPS test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 - Overview
GPS test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 - Overview
GPS test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 - Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 - Cycling around a lake
GPS test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 - Loop
GPS test: Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 - Loop

Telephone Features & Call Quality

MIUI 10 dialler
MIUI 10 dialler

Our review unit has unremarkable call quality when connected to the Vodafone network in Germany. The earpiece reproduces voices clearly, as do the built-in microphones. We had no issues with using the front-facing camera for Skype calls either, although voice quality deteriorates if the speaker is set to maximum volume.

The Redmi Note 8 supports dual voice over LTE (VoLTE), but this will only work if carriers provision the device on their network. Since our review unit is a Chinese model, there is little chance of that happening with network providers in Germany or beyond. You may have more luck with the global variant, though. Neither version supports Wi-Fi calling.

Cameras - Four cameras including a 48 MP sensor

Taking a selfie with the 13 MP front-facing camera
Taking a selfie with the 13 MP front-facing camera

The Redmi Note 8 has four rear-facing cameras, along with a single front-facing one. Xiaomi has equipped the device with a Samsung GM1 as its primary rear-facing camera, a 48 MP sensor that has an f/1.75 aperture and a pixel size of 0.8 µm. There are also two 2 MP depth of field sensors with f/2.4 apertures for taking macro or zoomed-in shots and an 8 MP ultra-wide-angle sensor that has an f/2.2 aperture and a 120° field of view.

The Samsung GM1 can interpolate four adjacent pixels into one to create a more light-sensitive and detailed 12 MP image. Also called pixel binning, this technique works well in our review unit, helping it capture shots that look detailed and vivid. However, the GM1 struggles in low-light conditions just like the Motorola One Zoom that we recently reviewed. We did notice some image noise and artefacts even in sub-optimal daylight, though.

Likewise, the 13 MP front-facing camera takes decent looking selfies in good lighting, although sharpness and exposure levels are not great. The selfies are good enough for posting on social media in our opinion.

Overall, the Redmi Note 8 has an excellent set of cameras for a 200-Euro (~$220) handset. Not only has Xiaomi included good sensors, but the inclusion of an ultra-wide-angle sensor adds to the flexibility of its camera capabilities.

48 MP camera
48 MP camera
Ultra-wide-angle shot
Ultra-wide-angle shot
2x zoom
2x zoom
Default camera app mode filters
Default camera app mode filters
Camera UI
Camera UI
Camera settings
Camera settings
Pro mode
Pro mode

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

We also subjected the Samsung GM1 to further camera tests under controlled lighting conditions, the results of which you can view below. As our initial test shots suggested, the sensor reproduces colours vividly, albeit not always accurately. Brown and dark green are particular issues for the camera for some reason, as is dark orange and red.

Our review unit reproduced our test chart well too, although only in good lighting. As the photo below demonstrates, the Samsung GM1 picks out fine details and structures cleanly, but sharpness and contrast levels drop off towards the bottom edges of the chart. Our attempt at 1 lux looks an absolute mess, though.

ColorChecker Photo
26.8 ∆E
48.9 ∆E
36 ∆E
38 ∆E
39.6 ∆E
59.1 ∆E
49.1 ∆E
30.6 ∆E
35.4 ∆E
22.9 ∆E
59.7 ∆E
60.4 ∆E
27.3 ∆E
45.4 ∆E
31.1 ∆E
70.2 ∆E
36.4 ∆E
42.4 ∆E
74.7 ∆E
66.6 ∆E
48.8 ∆E
34.8 ∆E
22.3 ∆E
13 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Redmi Note 8: 42.48 ∆E min: 12.99 - max: 74.73 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
14.6 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
16.9 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
6 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
5 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
8.2 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
1.3 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
7 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
2.9 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
1.8 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Redmi Note 8: 7.95 ∆E min: 1.33 - max: 16.92 ∆E
A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart at 1 lux
Our test chart in detail

Accessories & Warranty - A silicone case and an 18 W charger in the box

A look at the 18 W charger included with the Redmi Note 8
A look at the 18 W charger included with the Redmi Note 8

The Redmi Note 8 comes with an 18 W modular charger, a USB cable, a protective cover. Trading Shenzhen included an EU adapter in the box and a USB OTG adapter, but neither Xiaomi nor other third-party suppliers will necessarily include these.

Xiaomi also affords the device a 12-month limited manufacturer's warranty from the date of purchase. However, this warranty only applies within Chinese territories, so you must return the device to China for a warranty return or exchange. Third-party suppliers like Trading Shenzhen will include additional warranty coverage with purchases though, meaning that you will not need to fork out on a costly returns service.

Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices & Operation - A classic fingerprint sensor and 2D facial authentication

The capacitive touchscreen in our review unit responds precisely to inputs, while it implements commands without delay. The device has a fingerprint scanner too for biometric authentication, which also worked well during our tests. The fingerprint scanner takes a while to unlock the device for some reason though. There is a face unlock method too, but this is not as secure as using a fingerprint.

Using the default number pad in portrait mode
Using the default number pad in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in landscape mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode
Using the default keyboard in portrait mode

Display - A bright, contrast-rich and colour accurate IPS panel

Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array

One of the highlights of the Redmi Note 8 is its 6.3-inch IPS display, which has a 19.5:9 aspect ratio. The panel resolves at 2340x1080 for a pixel density beyond 400 PPI, which is sharp enough for everyday usage.

The panel gets impressively bright too. X-Rite i1Pro 2 measures peak average luminosity at 643 cd/m² on automatic display mode with the ambient light sensor switched on. Similarly, the more realistic APL50 test determined that the display can reach 638 cd/m². Disabling the brightness sensor drops peak luminosity to 485 cd/m², though.

624
cd/m²
639
cd/m²
636
cd/m²
632
cd/m²
656
cd/m²
647
cd/m²
658
cd/m²
652
cd/m²
639
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 658 cd/m² Average: 642.6 cd/m² Minimum: 1.45 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 656 cd/m²
Contrast: 1215:1 (Black: 0.54 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
99.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.2
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Mi A3
AMOLED, 1560x720, 6.09
Nokia 4.2
IPS, 1520x720, 5.71
Samsung Galaxy A20e
IPS, 1560x720, 5.8
LG K50
IPS, 1520x720, 6.26
Gigaset GS195
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.18
Honor 20 Lite
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.21
Xiaomi Mi 9
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
Screen
-191%
-114%
-160%
-89%
-155%
-92%
8%
Brightness middle
656
348
-47%
445
-32%
475
-28%
489
-25%
487
-26%
455
-31%
593
-10%
Brightness
643
355
-45%
424
-34%
473
-26%
453
-30%
507
-21%
456
-29%
587
-9%
Brightness Distribution
95
91
-4%
91
-4%
93
-2%
85
-11%
84
-12%
94
-1%
94
-1%
Black Level *
0.54
0.26
52%
0.35
35%
0.42
22%
0.55
-2%
0.58
-7%
Contrast
1215
1712
41%
1357
12%
1164
-4%
885
-27%
784
-35%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.1
5.86
-433%
5.9
-436%
6.8
-518%
4.75
-332%
5.67
-415%
4.43
-303%
0.9
18%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.4
15.6
-550%
9.3
-288%
13.4
-458%
7.75
-223%
13.54
-464%
6.81
-184%
2
17%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.2
3.6
-64%
6.8
-209%
8.7
-295%
4.6
-109%
8.2
-273%
5.4
-145%
1.5
32%
Gamma
2.2 100%
2.232 99%
2.2 100%
2.33 94%
2.164 102%
2.27 97%
2.248 98%
2.27 97%
CCT
6263 104%
7051 92%
8443 77%
9385 69%
7510 87%
7569 86%
7336 89%
6548 99%

* ... 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 not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9331 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The Redmi Note 8 also has a respectable black level, which we measured at 0.56 cd/m². This puts the panel on par with many of our IPS-equipped comparison devices and helps yield a respectable 1,215:1 contrast ratio. Photo spectrometer and CalMAN analysis reveal impressively low average Delta-E deviations from the sRGB colour space too. All values are better than the ideal value of three, while its colour temperature of 6,263 K is only just shy of our ideal value of 6,500 K.

CalMAN: Colour accuracy - sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour accuracy - sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour Space - sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour Space - sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Grayscale - sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Grayscale - sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour saturation- sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour saturation- sRGB target colour space, increased contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour accuracy - sRGB target colour space, standard colour profile
CalMAN: Colour accuracy - sRGB target colour space, standard colour profile
CalMAN: Colour Space - sRGB target colour space, standard contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour Space - sRGB target colour space, standard contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Grayscale - sRGB target colour space, standard contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Grayscale - sRGB target colour space, standard contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour saturation- sRGB target colour space, standard contrast colour profile
CalMAN: Colour saturation- sRGB target colour space, standard contrast colour profile

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
23.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.6 ms rise
↘ 14 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. » 34 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (24.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
49.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 23.6 ms rise
↘ 26 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. » 82 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (39.5 ms).

The display also gets bright enough to use the Redmi Note 8 outside without any restrictions. This only applies to when automatic mode and the ambient light sensor are active though, as otherwise the panel will look washed-out. You should encounter no readability issues even on bright sunny days too.

Using the Redmi Note 8 outdoors
Using the Redmi Note 8 outdoors
Using the Redmi Note 8 outdoors
Using the Redmi Note 8 outdoors
Using the Redmi Note 8 outdoors
Using the Redmi Note 8 outdoors

The panel has stable viewing angles, as the photo montage below demonstrates. There is some slight hazing and halo effects at acute viewing angles, but nothing that should affect readability.

Viewing angles
Viewing angles

Performance - A Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 and 6 GB of RAM

Xiaomi has equipped the Redmi Note 8 with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, an SoC that represents a minor performance upgrade over the Snapdragon 660 found in devices like the Redmi Note 7. The 11 nm chip should offer better energy efficiency than its predecessor too. The SoC has eight cores split across two performance and energy-saving clusters, with four Cortex-A73 cores occupying the former and four Cortex-A53 cores in the latter. The Snapdragon 665 has an Adreno 610 on-board too.

The Snapdragon 665 and 6 GB of RAM combination not only matches the Xiaomi Mi A3 in synthetic benchmarks but also proved superior to the HiSilicon Kirin 710. This applied to our experiences in daily use too. The Redmi Note 8 cannot match the Mi 9T and its Snapdragon 710, though.

Conversely, the Adreno 610 in the Redmi Note 8 is closer to the Honor 20 Lite and its Mali-G51 MP4. By contrast, the lower-resolution display in the Xiaomi Mi A3 helps it to outperform our review unit. System performance is usually good in everyday use too, although there are some slight delays while multitasking.

Geekbench 5
OpenCL Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
363 Points ∼18%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
272 Points ∼13% -25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (363 - 370, n=2)
367 Points ∼18% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 4593, n=36)
2015 Points ∼100% +455%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1327 Points ∼67%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
809 Points ∼41% -39%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
832 Points ∼42% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1327 - 1379, n=2)
1353 Points ∼68% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (807 - 3575, n=47)
1995 Points ∼100% +50%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
314 Points ∼55%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
177 Points ∼31% -44%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
155 Points ∼27% -51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (314 - 315, n=2)
315 Points ∼55% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (155 - 1344, n=47)
575 Points ∼100% +83%
Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
5122 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5144 Points ∼66% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3183 Points ∼41% -38%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3271 Points ∼42% -36%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
2680 Points ∼34% -48%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2631 Points ∼34% -49%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
7795 Points ∼100% +52%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
6813 Points ∼87% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (5122 - 5144, n=2)
5133 Points ∼66% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=328)
4681 Points ∼60% -9%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
5366 Points ∼78%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5663 Points ∼82% +6%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3267 Points ∼48% -39%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3714 Points ∼54% -31%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
3480 Points ∼51% -35%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5335 Points ∼78% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6871 Points ∼100% +28%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
5856 Points ∼85% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (5366 - 5663, n=2)
5515 Points ∼80% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=387)
4727 Points ∼69% -12%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1495 Points ∼59%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1536 Points ∼61% +3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
891 Points ∼35% -40%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1212 Points ∼48% -19%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
773 Points ∼31% -48%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1537 Points ∼61% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2527 Points ∼100% +69%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1799 Points ∼71% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1495 - 1536, n=2)
1516 Points ∼60% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=387)
1429 Points ∼57% -4%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6498 Points ∼86%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
6396 Points ∼85% -2%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
4623 Points ∼61% -29%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
5305 Points ∼70% -18%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4052 Points ∼54% -38%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
4644 Points ∼62% -29%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5829 Points ∼77% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
7533 Points ∼100% +16%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
6887 Points ∼91% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (6396 - 6534, n=3)
6476 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=399)
5379 Points ∼71% -17%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7446 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7984 Points ∼88% +7%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6228 Points ∼69% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6902 Points ∼76% -7%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4635 Points ∼51% -38%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
6601 Points ∼73% -11%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7388 Points ∼82% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9049 Points ∼100% +22%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
8309 Points ∼92% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (7446 - 8186, n=3)
7872 Points ∼87% +6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=566)
5844 Points ∼65% -22%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2250 Points ∼81%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2300 Points ∼83% +2%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
2172 Points ∼78% -3%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
2018 Points ∼72% -10%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2336 Points ∼84% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2786 Points ∼100% +24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2250 - 2300, n=3)
2273 Points ∼82% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=76)
2691 Points ∼97% +20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
898 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
908 Points ∼32% +1%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
401 Points ∼14% -55%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
498 Points ∼18% -45%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1220 Points ∼43% +36%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
1917 Points ∼68% +113%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (898 - 908, n=3)
902 Points ∼32% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=76)
2807 Points ∼100% +213%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1036 Points ∼41%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1049 Points ∼41% +1%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
490 Points ∼19% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
598 Points ∼23% -42%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1365 Points ∼54% +32%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2060 Points ∼81% +99%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1036 - 1049, n=3)
1042 Points ∼41% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=76)
2550 Points ∼100% +146%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2298 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2387 Points ∼74% +4%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1500 Points ∼46% -35%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1628 Points ∼50% -29%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
936 Points ∼29% -59%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
1401 Points ∼43% -39%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2109 Points ∼65% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3241 Points ∼100% +41%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2534 Points ∼78% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2298 - 2387, n=3)
2342 Points ∼72% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=406)
2002 Points ∼62% -13%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
980 Points ∼45%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
987 Points ∼45% +1%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
413 Points ∼19% -58%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
440 Points ∼20% -55%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
434 Points ∼20% -56%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
383 Points ∼18% -61%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
829 Points ∼38% -15%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2176 Points ∼100% +122%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1845 Points ∼85% +88%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (980 - 987, n=3)
983 Points ∼45% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=406)
1824 Points ∼84% +86%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1134 Points ∼48%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1135 Points ∼48% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
492 Points ∼21% -57%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
525 Points ∼22% -54%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
493 Points ∼21% -57%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
457 Points ∼19% -60%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
958 Points ∼41% -16%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2347 Points ∼100% +107%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1964 Points ∼84% +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1126 - 1135, n=3)
1132 Points ∼48% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=407)
1693 Points ∼72% +49%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2348 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2343 Points ∼71% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1516 Points ∼46% -35%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1624 Points ∼49% -31%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
936 Points ∼28% -60%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
1407 Points ∼43% -40%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2124 Points ∼64% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3296 Points ∼100% +40%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2516 Points ∼76% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2343 - 2393, n=3)
2361 Points ∼72% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=435)
1910 Points ∼58% -19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1668 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1674 Points ∼50% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
712 Points ∼21% -57%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
659 Points ∼20% -60%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
701 Points ∼21% -58%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
644 Points ∼19% -61%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1233 Points ∼37% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3316 Points ∼100% +99%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2855 Points ∼86% +71%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1668 - 1674, n=3)
1671 Points ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=435)
2432 Points ∼73% +46%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1778 Points ∼54%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1787 Points ∼54% +1%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
807 Points ∼24% -55%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
759 Points ∼23% -57%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
742 Points ∼22% -58%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
732 Points ∼22% -59%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1360 Points ∼41% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3312 Points ∼100% +86%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2772 Points ∼84% +56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1778 - 1790, n=3)
1785 Points ∼54% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=435)
2040 Points ∼62% +15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2408 Points ∼75%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2477 Points ∼77% +3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1575 Points ∼49% -35%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1630 Points ∼51% -32%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
897 Points ∼28% -63%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
1371 Points ∼42% -43%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2378 Points ∼74% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3227 Points ∼100% +34%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2514 Points ∼78% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2408 - 2477, n=3)
2436 Points ∼75% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=486)
1907 Points ∼59% -21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
967 Points ∼48%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
931 Points ∼46% -4%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
366 Points ∼18% -62%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
443 Points ∼22% -54%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
257 Points ∼13% -73%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
288 Points ∼14% -70%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
710 Points ∼35% -27%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2008 Points ∼100% +108%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1702 Points ∼85% +76%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (931 - 979, n=3)
959 Points ∼48% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=486)
1510 Points ∼75% +56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1114 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1081 Points ∼49% -3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
441 Points ∼20% -60%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
526 Points ∼24% -53%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
305 Points ∼14% -73%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
349 Points ∼16% -69%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
841 Points ∼38% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2192 Points ∼100% +97%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1834 Points ∼84% +65%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1081 - 1128, n=3)
1108 Points ∼51% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=487)
1453 Points ∼66% +30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2378 Points ∼73%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2471 Points ∼76% +4%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1568 Points ∼48% -34%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1646 Points ∼51% -31%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
911 Points ∼28% -62%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
1362 Points ∼42% -43%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2441 Points ∼75% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3239 Points ∼100% +36%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2467 Points ∼76% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2378 - 2471, n=3)
2434 Points ∼75% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=527)
1770 Points ∼55% -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1607 Points ∼50%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1651 Points ∼52% +3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
704 Points ∼22% -56%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
637 Points ∼20% -60%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
423 Points ∼13% -74%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
503 Points ∼16% -69%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
667 Points ∼21% -58%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3184 Points ∼100% +98%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2763 Points ∼87% +72%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1607 - 1651, n=3)
1631 Points ∼51% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=526)
1982 Points ∼62% +23%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1728 Points ∼54%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1782 Points ∼56% +3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
802 Points ∼25% -54%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
737 Points ∼23% -57%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
480 Points ∼15% -72%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
585 Points ∼18% -66%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
795 Points ∼25% -54%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3196 Points ∼100% +85%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2691 Points ∼84% +56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1728 - 1782, n=3)
1758 Points ∼55% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=529)
1708 Points ∼53% -1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
20354 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
19552 Points ∼96% -4%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
12390 Points ∼61% -39%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
12075 Points ∼59% -41%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
9674 Points ∼48% -52%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
19433 Points ∼95% -5%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
14820 Points ∼73% -27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (18698 - 20354, n=3)
19535 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=687)
14357 Points ∼71% -29%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
24654 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
25219 Points ∼54% +2%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
13440 Points ∼29% -45%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11427 Points ∼25% -54%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10826 Points ∼23% -56%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
46605 Points ∼100% +89%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
39655 Points ∼85% +61%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (24654 - 25219, n=3)
24955 Points ∼54% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=685)
22559 Points ∼48% -8%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
23534 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
23693 Points ∼67% +1%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
13192 Points ∼37% -44%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11565 Points ∼33% -51%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10547 Points ∼30% -55%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
35557 Points ∼100% +51%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
28895 Points ∼81% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (23253 - 23693, n=3)
23493 Points ∼66% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=685)
18200 Points ∼51% -23%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
36 fps ∼47%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
36 fps ∼47% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
23 fps ∼30% -36%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
20 fps ∼26% -44%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
19 fps ∼25% -47%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
39 fps ∼51% +8%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
77 fps ∼100% +114%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
65 fps ∼84% +81%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (36 - 36, n=3)
36 fps ∼47% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=705)
38.5 fps ∼50% +7%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33 fps ∼57%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
52 fps ∼90% +58%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
34 fps ∼59% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
31 fps ∼53% -6%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
26 fps ∼45% -21%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
36 fps ∼62% +9%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +76%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
57 fps ∼98% +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (33 - 52, n=3)
39.7 fps ∼68% +20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=714)
28.3 fps ∼49% -14%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
19 fps ∼50%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
20 fps ∼53% +5%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
9.8 fps ∼26% -48%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
11 fps ∼29% -42%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
9.8 fps ∼26% -48%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21 fps ∼55% +11%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
38 fps ∼100% +100%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
32 fps ∼84% +68%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (19 - 20, n=3)
19.7 fps ∼52% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=610)
22.3 fps ∼59% +17%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
17 fps ∼50%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
34 fps ∼100% +100%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
18 fps ∼53% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
20 fps ∼59% +18%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
17 fps ∼50% 0%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
19 fps ∼56% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
34 fps ∼100% +100%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
31 fps ∼91% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (17 - 34, n=3)
23 fps ∼68% +35%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=619)
19.6 fps ∼58% +15%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
13 fps ∼48%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼48% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6.4 fps ∼24% -51%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
6.5 fps ∼24% -50%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6 fps ∼22% -54%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
14 fps ∼52% +8%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
27 fps ∼100% +108%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
23 fps ∼85% +77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (13 - 13, n=3)
13 fps ∼48% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=475)
18.2 fps ∼67% +40%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
12 fps ∼46%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
26 fps ∼100% +117%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
13 fps ∼50% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
14 fps ∼54% +17%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10 fps ∼38% -17%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
13 fps ∼50% +8%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
24 fps ∼92% +100%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
22 fps ∼85% +83%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (12 - 26, n=3)
16.7 fps ∼64% +39%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=477)
17 fps ∼65% +42%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2.8 fps ∼27%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
9.1 fps ∼89% +225%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3.9 fps ∼38% +39%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4.8 fps ∼47% +71%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
4.1 fps ∼40% +46%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
1.9 fps ∼19% -32%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.2 fps ∼41% +50%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
9.3 fps ∼91% +232%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
8.2 fps ∼80% +193%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2.8 - 9.1, n=3)
5.47 fps ∼54% +95%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=198)
10.2 fps ∼100% +264%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
4.4 fps ∼62%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2.8 fps ∼40% -36%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1.2 fps ∼17% -73%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1.4 fps ∼20% -68%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
1.4 fps ∼20% -68%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
1.2 fps ∼17% -73%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.6 fps ∼37% -41%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6.1 fps ∼86% +39%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
5 fps ∼71% +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2.8 - 4.4, n=3)
3.33 fps ∼47% -24%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=197)
7.08 fps ∼100% +61%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7.2 fps ∼48%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
15 fps ∼100% +108%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6.6 fps ∼44% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
7.8 fps ∼52% +8%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
6.8 fps ∼45% -6%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
3 fps ∼20% -58%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.4 fps ∼43% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
15 fps ∼100% +108%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
13 fps ∼87% +81%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (7.2 - 15, n=3)
9.93 fps ∼66% +38%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=202)
15 fps ∼100% +108%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
8.1 fps ∼48%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
8.4 fps ∼50% +4%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3.6 fps ∼21% -56%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4 fps ∼24% -51%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
3.7 fps ∼22% -54%
Gigaset GS195
UNISOC SC9863A, GE8322 / IMG8322, 2048
3.2 fps ∼19% -60%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7 fps ∼42% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼95% +98%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
14 fps ∼83% +73%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (8.1 - 8.4, n=3)
8.23 fps ∼49% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=202)
16.8 fps ∼100% +107%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.9 fps ∼43%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
7.1 fps ∼44% +3%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
3.5 fps ∼22% -49%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
4.2 fps ∼26% -39%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
2.8 fps ∼18% -59%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7.7 fps ∼48% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16 fps ∼100% +132%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
13 fps ∼81% +88%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (6.9 - 7.2, n=3)
7.07 fps ∼44% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=400)
12.4 fps ∼78% +80%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.1 fps ∼47%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
13 fps ∼100% +113%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
7 fps ∼54% +15%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
8.6 fps ∼66% +41%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
3.9 fps ∼30% -36%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.8 fps ∼52% +11%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
13 fps ∼100% +113%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
12 fps ∼92% +97%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (6.1 - 13, n=3)
8.57 fps ∼66% +40%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=404)
11.1 fps ∼85% +82%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
8.24 (min: 5.77, max: 20.65) fps ∼10%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
11.99 fps ∼14% +46%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
4.41 fps ∼5% -46%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
16.91 fps ∼20% +105%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
14.3 fps ∼17% +74%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (8.24 - 12, n=2)
10.1 fps ∼12% +23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8.24 - 4528, n=66)
85.4 fps ∼100% +936%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.65 (min: 3.4, max: 18.65) fps ∼11%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
10.74 fps ∼17% +62%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
6.62 fps ∼11% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
13.56 fps ∼22% +104%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
12.1 fps ∼19% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (6.65 - 10.7, n=2)
8.7 fps ∼14% +31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 2850, n=59)
62.8 fps ∼100% +844%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7.44 (min: 3.6, max: 21.99) fps ∼8%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
4.16 fps ∼4% -44%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
15.51 fps ∼16% +108%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
13 fps ∼13% +75%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
 
7.44 fps ∼8% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 4462, n=56)
97.3 fps ∼100% +1208%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1134 Score ∼50%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1092 Score ∼48% -4%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
552 Score ∼24% -51%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
2000 Score ∼88% +76%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1681 Score ∼74% +48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1092 - 1134, n=2)
1113 Score ∼49% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (119 - 5025, n=63)
2271 Score ∼100% +100%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
937 Points ∼67%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1400 Points ∼100% +49%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
834 Points ∼60% -11%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1106 Points ∼79% +18%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
10 Points ∼1% -99%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1024 Points ∼73% +9%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
1099 Points ∼79% +17%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
1077 Points ∼77% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (926 - 1400, n=3)
1088 Points ∼78% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=643)
765 Points ∼55% -18%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1881 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
1886 Points ∼53% 0%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1000 Points ∼28% -47%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
893 Points ∼25% -53%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
778 Points ∼22% -59%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1462 Points ∼41% -22%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3559 Points ∼100% +89%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
3086 Points ∼87% +64%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (1881 - 1916, n=3)
1894 Points ∼53% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=643)
2116 Points ∼59% +12%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2808 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
3174 Points ∼68% +13%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1316 Points ∼28% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
2008 Points ∼43% -28%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
661 Points ∼14% -76%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
3096 Points ∼67% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
4646 Points ∼100% +65%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2947 Points ∼63% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2808 - 3174, n=3)
2939 Points ∼63% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=643)
1558 Points ∼34% -45%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
5006 Points ∼74%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
5089 Points ∼75% +2%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
2687 Points ∼40% -46%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
3372 Points ∼50% -33%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
2165 Points ∼32% -57%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5238 Points ∼77% +5%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
6760 Points ∼100% +35%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
5681 Points ∼84% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (5000 - 5089, n=3)
5032 Points ∼74% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=643)
3039 Points ∼45% -39%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2254 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Mi A3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096
2556 Points ∼77% +13%
Nokia 4.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439, Adreno 505, 3072
1310 Points ∼39% -42%
Samsung Galaxy A20e
Samsung Exynos 7884B, Mali-G71 MP2, 3072
1608 Points ∼48% -29%
LG K50
Mediatek Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320, 3072
323 Points ∼10% -86%
Honor 20 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2220 Points ∼67% -2%
Xiaomi Mi 9T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 6144
3329 Points ∼100% +48%
Nokia 8.1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710, Adreno 616, 4096
2731 Points ∼82% +21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (2240 - 2556, n=3)
2350 Points ∼71% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=643)
1526 Points ∼46% -32%
AnTuTu v8
UX (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
27535 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
27535 Points ∼71% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (27535 - 27705, n=3)
27592 Points ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6969 - 78191, n=17)
38778 Points ∼100% +41%
MEM (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
38271 Points ∼77%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
38271 Points ∼77% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (37857 - 38271, n=3)
38133 Points ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (24176 - 100390, n=17)
49489 Points ∼100% +29%
GPU (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33000 Points ∼41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33000 Points ∼41% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (33000 - 33527, n=3)
33176 Points ∼41% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5938 - 199051, n=17)
81164 Points ∼100% +146%
CPU (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
70889 Points ∼80%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
70889 Points ∼80% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (70133 - 70889, n=3)
70637 Points ∼80% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (40746 - 151146, n=17)
88721 Points ∼100% +25%
Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
169695 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
169695 Points ∼66% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
  (169222 - 169695, n=3)
169537 Points ∼66% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (84645 - 501784, n=17)
258152 Points ∼100% +52%

The Redmi Note 8 performed well in browser benchmarks with Google Chrome. The device loads websites quickly, and scrolling animations always remained fluid. The Redmi Note 8 also proved competitive in browser benchmarks.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=115)
36.4 Points ∼100% +19%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
30.692 Points ∼84% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
30.65 Points ∼84%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (30.5 - 30.7, n=3)
30.6 Points ∼84% 0%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
30.008 Points ∼82% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
21.488 Points ∼59% -30%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
15.921 Points ∼44% -48%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
51.061 Points ∼100% +1%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
51.046 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (49.8 - 51, n=3)
50.4 Points ∼99% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
50.33 Points ∼99%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=540)
42.5 Points ∼83% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
39.076 Points ∼77% -22%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
27.086 Points ∼53% -46%
LG K50 (Chrome 77)
22.823 Points ∼45% -55%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=103)
40.2 runs/min ∼100% +31%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
33 runs/min ∼82% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
30.8 runs/min ∼77%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (29.5 - 30.8, n=3)
30.3 runs/min ∼75% -2%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chome 76)
29.5 runs/min ∼73% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
21.63 runs/min ∼54% -30%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
18.23 runs/min ∼45% -41%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=173)
67.4 Points ∼100% +30%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
62 Points ∼92% +19%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
58 Points ∼86% +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (51 - 58, n=3)
53.7 Points ∼80% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
52 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
48 Points ∼71% -8%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
38 Points ∼56% -27%
LG K50 (Chrome 77)
26 Points ∼39% -50%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
9591 Points ∼100% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
9405 Points ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
9260 Points ∼97% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (9107 - 9405, n=3)
9257 Points ∼97% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
7470 Points ∼78% -21%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=701)
6908 Points ∼72% -27%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
4810 Points ∼50% -49%
LG K50 (Chrome 77)
4258 Points ∼44% -55%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
LG K50 (Chrome 77)
12799.1 ms * ∼100% -181%
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=726)
10451 ms * ∼82% -129%
Nokia 4.2 (Chrome 74)
9768.3 ms * ∼76% -114%
Samsung Galaxy A20e (Chrome 72.0.3626.121)
5546.4 ms * ∼43% -22%
Honor 20 Lite (Chrome 75)
4852.6 ms * ∼38% -6%
Xiaomi Mi A3 (Chrome 76)
4583.8 ms * ∼36% -0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
4561.76 ms * ∼36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (4504 - 4584, n=3)
4550 ms * ∼36% -0%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi equips the Redmi Note 8 with eMMC flash storage, which is a touch slower than the UFS equivalent in the Xiaomi Mi A3. Unsurprisingly, sequential read speeds are the most significant differences between the two Xiaomi smartphones here. The Redmi Note 8 has faster storage than all our comparison devices, though. Our review unit has a slightly slower microSD card reader than many of our comparison devices, but it is still satisfactory for a smartphone at this price.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8Xiaomi Mi A3Nokia 4.2Samsung Galaxy A20eLG K50Gigaset GS195Honor 20 LiteAverage 128 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
26%
-41%
-16%
-28%
-46%
-3%
-7%
-29%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
52.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
50.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
65.87 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
25%
64.28 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
22%
58.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
11%
62.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
18%
66.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
27%
65 (52.8 - 73.5, n=14)
23%
49.5 (1.7 - 87.1, n=437)
-6%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
71.63 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67.8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
86.74 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
21%
79.23 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
11%
78.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
80.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
13%
75.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
6%
77.1 (71.6 - 85.9, n=14)
8%
67.7 (8.1 - 96.5, n=437)
-5%
Random Write 4KB
91.23
117.4
29%
4.31
-95%
13.18
-86%
12.03
-87%
4.97
-95%
73.1
-20%
38.9 (8.48 - 127, n=16)
-57%
23.1 (0.14 - 259, n=762)
-75%
Random Read 4KB
84.76
126.9
50%
17.51
-79%
79.76
-6%
52.12
-39%
28.43
-66%
38.7
-54%
69.5 (20.7 - 108, n=16)
-18%
48.5 (1.59 - 226, n=762)
-43%
Sequential Write 256KB
160.53
184
15%
18.17
-89%
103.57
-35%
78.9
-51%
29.42
-82%
200.9
25%
171 (90 - 201, n=16)
7%
99.5 (2.99 - 590, n=762)
-38%
Sequential Read 256KB
297.65
502.2
69%
220.39
-26%
300.36
1%
263.42
-12%
107.25
-64%
288.1
-3%
286 (144 - 499, n=16)
-4%
280 (12.1 - 1781, n=762)
-6%

Games - The Adreno 610 isn't always powerful enough

The Adreno 610 is powerful enough even to play complex 3D games smoothly. Incidentally, the touchscreen and associated sensors worked perfectly during our gaming tests.

We verified what framerates some popular games run at with GameBench, our go-to frame-rate tool. While older titles like Dead Trigger 2 will run at 60 FPS on high graphics settings, more complex games like PUBG Mobile will hover at 30 FPS on smooth graphics and 24.7 FPS on balanced graphics. However, Asphalt 9: Legends proved unplayable regardless of the graphics settings to which we set it. As the graphics below demonstrate, frame rates are all over the place and never exceed 31 FPS even on low graphics.

PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
Dead Trigger 2
Dead Trigger 2