Notebookcheck

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro Smartphone Review: Plenty of features for a cheap price

Repeat offender. Xiaomi tries to rattle the competition with cheap and well-equipped mid-range smartphones. With the Redmi Note 9 Pro, Xiaomi has thrown another wrench into the gears of established price points. For an MSRP of 250 Euros (~$282), the 6.67-inch smartphone comes with a 64-MP quad-camera and a massive battery. Our review will show whether a purchase is worthwhile.
Manuel Masiero, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Marius S.),

After the Redmi Note 9S, Xiaomi has now released another exciting mobile phone in the form of the Redmi Note 9 Pro. For a relatively cheap price, Xiaomi once again offers a large smartphone with a lot of features. The Redmi Note 9 Pro is aimed at the upper mid-range segment.

A 6.67-inch IPS display with a resolution of 2400x1080 pixels, 6 GB of LPDDR4X RAM, the octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G SoC and an impressive 5020-mAh battery are the main ingredients of the Redmi Note 9 Pro.

Our configuration of the Redmi Note 9 Pro with 64 GB of storage space can be purchased starting from 250 Euros (~$282). The 128-GB variant is available for 299 Euros (~$337).

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Redmi Note Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G 8 x 2.3 GHz, Cortex-A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
6144 MB 
Display
6.67 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 395 PPI, capacitive, IPS, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, FHD+, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 64 GB 
, 45.1 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm headphone jack, Card Reader: microSD up to 512 GB (FAT, FAT32, and exFAT), 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Linear Z-axis vibration motor, proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, electronic compass, IR blaster, Wi-Fi direct, USB OTG, DRM Widevine Level 1, Camera2 API Level 3
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM (Band 2, 3, 5, 8), UMTS (bands 1, 2, 4, 5, 8), LTE (bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41), head SAR 0.662 W/kg, body SAR 1.021 W/kg, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.8 x 165.75 x 76.68 ( = 0.35 x 6.53 x 3.02 in)
Battery
5020 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 64 MPix Quad-camera: 64-MP main optics (autofocus, f/1.89, 1/1.72", 0.8µm) + 8-MP ultra-wide (f/2.2, 1/4.0", 1.12µm) + 5-MP macro (f/2.4, 1/5", 1.12µm) + 2-MP depth information (f/2.4, 1/5", 1.75µm), video at up to [email protected], slow-motion @720p960FPS
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix f/2.48, 1.0µm, slow-motion selfie @120fps
Additional features
Speakers: Mono speaker on the bottom edge, Keyboard: virtual, modular 33-watt charger, USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), SIM tool, protective case, quick-start guide, warranty information, MIUI 11, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
209 g ( = 7.37 oz / 0.46 pounds), Power Supply: 40 g ( = 1.41 oz / 0.09 pounds)
Price
250 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Competing Devices

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Drive
Size
Resolution
Best Price
83 %
06/2020
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
SD 720G, Adreno 618
209 g64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.67"2400x1080
80 %
01/2020
Samsung Galaxy A51
Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3
172 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.5"2400x1080
81 %
11/2019
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4
200 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.53"2340x1080
80 %
06/2020
realme 6 Pro
SD 720G, Adreno 618
195 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.6"2400x1080
79 %
05/2020
Oppo A91
Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3
172 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.4"2400x1080
81 %
04/2020
Huawei P40 Lite
Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6
183 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2310x1080

Case - 6.67-inch Form Factor, Good Build Quality, Sturdy

While the Xiaomi Mi series is directed at high-end users, the Redmi series covers the entry-level and mid-range segments. Although the Redmi Note 9 Pro comes without luxury features such as a glass back, this is not noticeable at first glance.

Furthermore, the smartphone's appearance is enhanced by its thin bezels, which combined with the shiny back cover and the rounded-off edges and corners result in a fairly premium-looking design. Our test device has a "glacier white" back cover, and an "interstellar grey" as well as a "tropical green" color variant is also available.

Similarly, the feel of the Redmi 9 Pro matches its beautiful design. With a weight of 209 grams (~7.37 oz), it lies well in the hand and material transitions are barely noticeable. Additionally, the display, frame and back cover offer a slight amount of resistance. As a result, the 6.67-inch device never feels smooth enough to slip out of the hand. The Xiaomi smartphone is very robust and unlikely to bend or yield under pressure.

Size Comparison

165.75 mm / 6.53 inch 76.68 mm / 3.02 inch 8.8 mm / 0.3465 inch 209 g0.4608 lbs163.8 mm / 6.45 inch 75.8 mm / 2.98 inch 8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch 195 g0.4299 lbs161.35 mm / 6.35 inch 76.4 mm / 3.01 inch 8.79 mm / 0.3461 inch 200 g0.4409 lbs160.2 mm / 6.31 inch 73.3 mm / 2.89 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs159.2 mm / 6.27 inch 76.3 mm / 3 inch 8.7 mm / 0.3425 inch 183 g0.4034 lbs158.5 mm / 6.24 inch 73.6 mm / 2.9 inch 7.9 mm / 0.311 inch 172 g0.3792 lbs

Features - NFC and IR Blaster

Unlike the Redmi Note 9S, the Redmi Note 9 Pro is always equipped with 6 GB of RAM regardless of the internal storage capacity. Meanwhile, the memory speeds are identical: The Redmi Note 9 Pro's 64 GB or 128 GB of storage space also runs at UFS speeds, which is not a given in this price class. However, our memory benchmarks suggest that even though Xiaomi cites UFS 2.1 storage, only UFS 2.0 storage was used.

The internal storage can be expanded via a microSD card with a capacity of up to 512 GB that can be formatted to the exFAT file system. However, we were unable to transfer over app data. It is also noteworthy that the smartphone has room for both a microSD card and two nano SIM cards.

The fact that the USB Type-C port of the Redmi Note 9 Pro only runs at USB 2.0 speeds is likely a consequence of the low price. Thankfully, the budget nature of the phone is not apparent in other areas and there is a headphone jack and an IR blaster, the latter of which is a convenient extra.

Left: microSD & dual SIM card slot
Left: microSD & dual SIM card slot
Right: power button with integrated fingerprint sensor, volume rocker
Right: power button with integrated fingerprint sensor, volume rocker
Top: microphone, IR blaster
Top: microphone, IR blaster
Bottom: 3.5-mm headphone jack, USB Type-C 2.0, microphone, speaker
Bottom: 3.5-mm headphone jack, USB Type-C 2.0, microphone, speaker

Software - Android 10 and MIUI 11 for the Redmi Note 9 Pro

The Redmi Note 9 Pro runs Android 10 with Xiaomi's own user interface MIUI 11. At the time of writing (end of June), the latest security patches date back to April 1, which still makes them fairly recent.

Apart from the Google apps and a small toolbox, Xiaomi has also included a handful of bloatware apps such as Facebook, Netflix and AliExpress in the ROM. However, all of them can be uninstalled if they are not needed.

The Redmi Note 9 Pro supports DRM Widevine level 1, allowing users to stream HD video content from streaming services such as Netflix.

Communication and GPS - Super-Fast Wi-Fi

In addition to GSM and UMTS, the Redmi Note 9 Pro also supports LTE bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, and 41, meaning it was not exactly designed for global use. However, European users should not experience any issues.

The 6.67-inch smartphone supports the short-range communications standards NFC, Bluetooth 5.0 and MIMO-compatible Wi-Fi 5 (Wi-Fi 802.11ac). In the real-world test with our reference router Netgear Nighthawk AX12, the smartphone achieves excellent and also fairly consistent download and upload speeds. As a result, its Wi-Fi speeds are significantly higher than those of all of its competitors.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Adreno 618, SD 720G, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
619 (min: 283, max: 670) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mali-G76 MP4, Helio G90T, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
353 (min: 330, max: 362) MBit/s ∼57% -43%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
298 (min: 185, max: 350) MBit/s ∼48% -52%
Huawei P40 Lite
Mali-G52 MP6, Kirin 810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
298 (min: 61, max: 334) MBit/s ∼48% -52%
Oppo A91
Mali-G72 MP3, Helio P70, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
294 (min: 80, max: 338) MBit/s ∼47% -53%
realme 6 Pro
Adreno 618, SD 720G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
292 (min: 145, max: 352) MBit/s ∼47% -53%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=553)
264 MBit/s ∼43% -57%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Adreno 618, SD 720G, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
551 (min: 465, max: 583) MBit/s ∼100%
Huawei P40 Lite
Mali-G52 MP6, Kirin 810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
338 (min: 286, max: 403) MBit/s ∼61% -39%
Oppo A91
Mali-G72 MP3, Helio P70, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
332 (min: 312, max: 337) MBit/s ∼60% -40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mali-G76 MP4, Helio G90T, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
319 (min: 302, max: 325) MBit/s ∼58% -42%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9611, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
297 (min: 189, max: 335) MBit/s ∼54% -46%
realme 6 Pro
Adreno 618, SD 720G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
290 (min: 137, max: 336) MBit/s ∼53% -47%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=553)
250 MBit/s ∼45% -55%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø609 (283-670)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø551 (465-583)
GPS signal indoors
GPS signal indoors
GPS signal outdoors
GPS signal outdoors

The Redmi Note 9 Pro determines the current position via the satellite navigation networks GPS, Galileo, GLONASS and BeiDou. Although the process takes a while indoors, it is able to locate us with an accuracy of within three meters after about 25 seconds. Outdoors, the precision is identical, while the satellite uplink then only takes a few seconds.

In our real-world navigation test, the Xiaomi smartphone performs admirably as well. While it tracks our position with slightly inferior precision in dense housing areas as opposed to more open areas on our 12-kilometer bike ride compared to the professional navi Garmin Edge 500, the accuracy is still relatively high. It is more than capable of handling daily navigation tasks.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: Overview
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: Overview
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: Lake
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: Lake
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: Turn
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: Turn
Garmin Edge 500: Overview
Garmin Edge 500: Overview
Garmin Edge 500: Lake
Garmin Edge 500: Lake
Garmin Edge 500: Turn
Garmin Edge 500: Turn

Telephony and Call Quality - Redmi Note 9 Pro with VoLTE and Wi-Fi Calling

The SIM tray of the Redmi Note 9 Pro accepts two nano SIM cards, both of which can be used for 4G connectivity. VoLTE and Wi-Fi calling are supported.

The smartphone's call quality is decent. However, both the earpiece and the speakerphone sound somewhat dull during calls. By contrast, the Redmi Note 9 Pro reliably filters out ambient noise.

Cameras - 64-MP Quad-camera System with a Narrow Dynamic Range

Picture taken with the main camera
Picture taken with the main camera

Compared to the predecessor Redmi Note 8 Pro, the camera setup of the Redmi Note 9 Pro has almost not changed. There is still a quad-camera system with a 64-MP resolution. The main camera combines four adjacent pixels into one through pixel-binning, which results in pictures with a default resolution of 16 MP. Via the camera settings, a 64-MP mode is available as well for pictures at the maximum resolution.

In addition to the 64-MP main camera (f/1.89, 1/1.72", 0.8 µm), there is an 8-MP ultra-wide-angle lens (f/2.2, 1/4.0", 1.12µm), a 5-MP macro lens (f/2.4, 1/5", 1.12µm) and a 2-MP sensor for depth information (f/2.4, 1/5", 1.75µm). The differences compared to the Redmi Note 8 Pro are as follows: The macro lens of the previous model only has a resolution of 2 MP. In return, it comes with a 20-MP selfie camera for a nominally slightly higher resolution. On the Redmi Note 9, a 16-MP sensor occupies the front.

Picture taken with the selfie camera (all filters at maximum)
Picture taken with the selfie camera (all filters at maximum)

In daylight, the quad-camera setup takes decent, sharp pictures (scenes 1 through 4), which are lacking in terms of contrast, making them look somewhat plain. Furthermore, the smartphone's dynamic range is subpar, resulting in lost details in very bright and very dark parts of the image. Night shots are not too impressive either (scene 5), since the camera simply does not do a very good job in this discipline. The Redmi Note 9 Pro is still able to capture pictures with an overall good quality relative to the price. This includes the selfie camera, which also takes decent pictures.

The main camera can record at up to 4K and 30 frames per second or at Full HD and 60 FPS. The selfie camera records videos at up to Full HD and 30 FPS with a respectable image quality that is similar to that of the main camera.

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.

Tageslicht-Szene 1Tageslicht-Szene 25-facher ZoomUltraweitwinkelLowlight-Umgebung

Controlled lighting conditions reveal that the Redmi Note 9 strays somewhat far from an ideal color representation. Although the smartphone is at its best when displaying red tones in simulated daylight (top ColorChecker card), it still significantly misses the mark when it comes to displaying the reference colors. While the color accuracy is far higher in poor lighting (bottom color card), this does not make up for the overall poor image quality. The Xiaomi smartphone was able to capture our test chart with a sufficient degree of sharpness.

ColorChecker
28.6 ∆E
49.3 ∆E
37.5 ∆E
35 ∆E
42 ∆E
58 ∆E
48.7 ∆E
32 ∆E
34.2 ∆E
26.7 ∆E
57.7 ∆E
59.4 ∆E
29.6 ∆E
44.9 ∆E
30.1 ∆E
62.6 ∆E
36.8 ∆E
42 ∆E
64.9 ∆E
64.9 ∆E
49 ∆E
36 ∆E
23.3 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: 41.94 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 64.93 ∆E
ColorChecker
3.6 ∆E
2.6 ∆E
6 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
1.7 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
7.4 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
5.8 ∆E
0.8 ∆E
4 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
8 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro: 5.91 ∆E min: 0.82 - max: 11.17 ∆E

Accessories and Warranty - 33-Watt Quick Charger Included

Xiaomi has included a modular 33-watt charger, a USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), a SIM tool and a protective case in the Redmi Note 9 Pro's scope of delivery. The package also includes a quick-start guide and a pamphlet with warranty information.

Xiaomi offers buyers of the Redmi Note 9 Pro a 24-month warranty.

Input Devices & Handling - Power Button with Integrated Fingerprint Sensor

The Redmi Note 9 Pro offers a very smooth user experience thanks to its octa-core Snapdragon 720G SoC. It is complemented by hitch-free input devices, which mainly includes the 6.67-inch touchscreen and its pre-applied screen protector. The same holds true for the fingerprint sensor within the power button, which reliably unlocks the smartphone - previously, the fingerprint sensor was located on the back of the Redmi Note 8 Pro. Alternatively, the Redmi Note 9 Pro can also be unlocked via facial recognition. However, it only uses 2D facial data.

Keyboard portrait mode
Keyboard portrait mode
Keyboard landscape mode
Keyboard landscape mode

Display - Default Color Mode with a High Color Fidelity

Subpixel array
Subpixel array

The IPS display's resolution of 2400x1080 pixels is starting to become common among mid-range devices, and in this case it translates to a high pixel density of 395 PPI. The panel reaches a fairly high average luminance of 578.6 cd/m² with the ambient light sensor enabled, which is the default setting. While the smartphone displays an even distribution of bright and dark areas (APL50) with a maximum brightness of 572 cd/m², disabling the ambient light sensor results in a lower brightness of 449 cd/m².

The Redmi Note 9 uses pulse-width modulation (PWM) to control the display's brightness. However, PWM flickering only occurs at brightness levels of 43% and below. Even then, the frequency of 2404 Hz is so high that even sensitive users should not be affected by it.

575
cd/m²
610
cd/m²
578
cd/m²
563
cd/m²
610
cd/m²
567
cd/m²
559
cd/m²
578
cd/m²
567
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 610 cd/m² Average: 578.6 cd/m² Minimum: 1.25 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 610 cd/m²
Contrast: 1649:1 (Black: 0.37 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.8 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.9
ΔE Greyscale 2.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.1
99.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.31
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.67
Samsung Galaxy A51
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.53
realme 6 Pro
IPS, 2400x1080, 6.6
Oppo A91
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.4
Huawei P40 Lite
IPS, 2310x1080, 6.4
Screen
-34%
-65%
-86%
-112%
-43%
Brightness middle
610
589
-3%
669
10%
442
-28%
594
-3%
478
-22%
Brightness
579
589
2%
630
9%
419
-28%
613
6%
448
-23%
Brightness Distribution
92
94
2%
87
-5%
90
-2%
89
-3%
87
-5%
Black Level *
0.37
0.42
-14%
0.37
-0%
0.49
-32%
Contrast
1649
1593
-3%
1195
-28%
976
-41%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.8
2.22
-23%
4.8
-167%
6.1
-239%
6.1
-239%
3
-67%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
3
8.24
-175%
9
-200%
9.7
-223%
10.6
-253%
5.6
-87%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.5
2.6
-4%
6.2
-148%
5.9
-136%
7
-180%
4.1
-64%
Gamma
2.31 95%
2.111 104%
2.24 98%
2.35 94%
2.28 96%
2.26 97%
CCT
6864 95%
6508 100%
7846 83%
7631 85%
7370 88%
7282 89%

* ... 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 2404 Hz ≤ 43 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2404 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 43 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2404 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18032 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Taking a closer look at the smartphone with a spectrophotometer and the CalMAN software confirms our positive impression. The Redmi Note 9 shines with great contrasts and an even illumination across the entire IPS panel. The "standard" color profile offers the highest color accuracy. In comparison, the modes "automatic" (default setting) and "increased contrast" miss the mark by a large margin and they are also accompanied by a slight blue tint. However, these are the right settings for users who are looking for a more colorful experience.

Color accuracy (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Color accuracy (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Color space (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Color space (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Grayscale (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Grayscale (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (color profile automatic, target color space sRGB)
Color accuracy (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Color accuracy (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Color space (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Color space (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Grayscale (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Grayscale (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (color profile increased contrast, target color space sRGB)
Color accuracy (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Color accuracy (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Color space (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Color space (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Grayscale (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Grayscale (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)
Saturation sweeps (color profile standard, target color space sRGB)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
25.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10.8 ms rise
↘ 14.8 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 46 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (24.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
44.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.4 ms rise
↘ 24.4 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. » 68 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (39.2 ms).

Thanks to its high luminosity, the Redmi Note 9 Pro is well suited to outdoor use. As per usual, direct sunlight should be avoided in order to prevent glare and reflections that make it significantly harder to read the display. However, the screen content still remains visible even in this case.

Viewing the IPS panel from a very steep angle does not result in distorted colors. Instead, this only decreases the perceived brightness, which is not really an issue.

Outdoor use in sunny weather (adaptive brightness)
Outdoor use in sunny weather (adaptive brightness)
Outdoor use in sunny weather (maximum brightness)
Outdoor use in sunny weather (maximum brightness)

Performance - High Performance Thanks to the Snapdragon 720G

The combination of the octa-core Snapdragon 720G SoC, the Adreno 618 graphics unit and 6 GB of LPDDR4X RAM has turned the Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro into a snappy mid-range smartphone.

As our synthetic benchmarks show, it offers more than enough performance for daily use, although it is not one of the fastest phones in our comparison. While the Realme 6 Pro, which is equipped with the same CPU/GPU combination, achieves very similar results in graphics-intensive tests such as 3DMark, it outperforms our Xiaomi test device in system benchmarks such as AnTuTu and PCMark by a small margin. Meanwhile, the Huawei P40 Lite is the clear winner overall in terms of raw performance.

Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
Vulkan Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
982 Points ∼60%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
1063 Points ∼65% +8%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1337 Points ∼81% +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (982 - 1063, n=3)
1017 Points ∼62% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=65)
1644 Points ∼100% +67%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
1163 Points ∼47%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
1201 Points ∼48% +3%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1338 Points ∼54% +15%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2493 Points ∼100% +114%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (1163 - 1201, n=3)
1179 Points ∼47% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=60)
1770 Points ∼71% +52%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
1771 Points ∼90%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
1759 Points ∼90% -1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1475 Points ∼75% -17%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1430 Points ∼73% -19%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
1949 Points ∼99% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (1690 - 1771, n=3)
1740 Points ∼89% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (445 - 3531, n=84)
1959 Points ∼100% +11%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
569 Points ∼94%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
567 Points ∼94% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
320 Points ∼53% -44%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
282 Points ∼47% -50%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
604 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (559 - 569, n=3)
565 Points ∼94% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=84)
558 Points ∼92% -2%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
7829 Points ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5649 Points ∼56% -28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
9967 Points ∼99% +27%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
10106 Points ∼100% +29%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
8185 Points ∼81% +5%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
9164 Points ∼91% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (7673 - 10106, n=3)
8536 Points ∼84% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 13202, n=483)
5784 Points ∼57% -26%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
9091 Points ∼61%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
6416 Points ∼43% -29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
14946 Points ∼100% +64%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
13777 Points ∼92% +52%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
12070 Points ∼81% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (9027 - 13777, n=3)
10632 Points ∼71% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19711, n=643)
6333 Points ∼42% -30%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2721 Points ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2161 Points ∼73% -21%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2543 Points ∼85% -7%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2562 Points ∼86% -6%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2304 Points ∼77% -15%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2977 Points ∼100% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2562 - 2765, n=3)
2683 Points ∼90% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4057, n=145)
2629 Points ∼88% -3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2250 Points ∼78%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1438 Points ∼50% -36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1978 Points ∼69% -12%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2255 Points ∼78% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1103 Points ∼38% -51%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2552 Points ∼89% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2250 - 2257, n=3)
2254 Points ∼78% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=145)
2880 Points ∼100% +28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2340 Points ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1554 Points ∼59% -34%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2087 Points ∼79% -11%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2317 Points ∼88% -1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1248 Points ∼47% -47%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2636 Points ∼100% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2317 - 2353, n=3)
2337 Points ∼89% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6644, n=145)
2597 Points ∼99% +11%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3236 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2311 Points ∼58% -29%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3326 Points ∼84% +3%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3067 Points ∼77% -5%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2621 Points ∼66% -19%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3972 Points ∼100% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3067 - 3256, n=3)
3186 Points ∼80% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5766, n=491)
2155 Points ∼54% -33%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2539 Points ∼92%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1530 Points ∼56% -40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2322 Points ∼84% -9%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2558 Points ∼93% +1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1102 Points ∼40% -57%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2752 Points ∼100% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2539 - 2558, n=3)
2549 Points ∼93% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 9567, n=491)
2038 Points ∼74% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2667 Points ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1654 Points ∼56% -38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2412 Points ∼82% -10%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2656 Points ∼90% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1265 Points ∼43% -53%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2954 Points ∼100% +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2656 - 2680, n=3)
2668 Points ∼90% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8204, n=492)
1893 Points ∼64% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3226 Points ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2336 Points ∼58% -28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3362 Points ∼84% +4%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3125 Points ∼78% -3%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2606 Points ∼65% -19%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
4003 Points ∼100% +24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3125 - 3267, n=3)
3206 Points ∼80% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5721, n=521)
2066 Points ∼52% -36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3785 Points ∼99%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1993 Points ∼52% -47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2323 Points ∼61% -39%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3835 Points ∼100% +1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1747 Points ∼46% -54%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3488 Points ∼91% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3785 - 3835, n=3)
3808 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=521)
2712 Points ∼71% -28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3645 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2060 Points ∼56% -43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2412 Points ∼66% -34%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3651 Points ∼100% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1885 Points ∼52% -48%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3591 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3645 - 3669, n=3)
3655 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=521)
2282 Points ∼62% -37%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3170 Points ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2217 Points ∼60% -30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3280 Points ∼89% +3%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3083 Points ∼84% -3%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2550 Points ∼69% -20%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3676 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3083 - 3170, n=3)
3135 Points ∼85% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=571)
2044 Points ∼56% -36%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2356 Points ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1473 Points ∼54% -37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2218 Points ∼81% -6%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2388 Points ∼87% +1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1117 Points ∼41% -53%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2740 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2356 - 2388, n=3)
2371 Points ∼87% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 8469, n=571)
1705 Points ∼62% -28%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
2499 Points ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1592 Points ∼55% -36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2390 Points ∼82% -4%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
2514 Points ∼87% +1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1276 Points ∼44% -49%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
2904 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (2499 - 2514, n=3)
2507 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7305, n=572)
1630 Points ∼56% -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3263 Points ∼90%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2225 Points ∼61% -32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3267 Points ∼90% 0%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3076 Points ∼85% -6%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2568 Points ∼71% -21%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3638 Points ∼100% +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3070 - 3263, n=3)
3136 Points ∼86% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5054, n=613)
1908 Points ∼52% -42%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3620 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2027 Points ∼55% -44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2219 Points ∼60% -39%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3683 Points ∼100% +2%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1767 Points ∼48% -51%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3384 Points ∼92% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3620 - 3683, n=3)
3650 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12494, n=612)
2234 Points ∼61% -38%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3534 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2068 Points ∼59% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2390 Points ∼68% -32%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3528 Points ∼100% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
1899 Points ∼54% -46%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3437 Points ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3501 - 3534, n=3)
3521 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9492, n=615)
1928 Points ∼55% -45%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
20054 Points ∼73%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
20393 Points ∼74% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
22928 Points ∼83% +14%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
14849 Points ∼54% -26%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
24514 Points ∼89% +22%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
27654 Points ∼100% +38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (14849 - 20054, n=3)
18307 Points ∼66% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 57583, n=761)
15165 Points ∼55% -24%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
51789 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
25086 Points ∼47% -52%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
39137 Points ∼73% -24%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
53600 Points ∼100% +3%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
23159 Points ∼43% -55%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
47563 Points ∼89% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (51789 - 53600, n=3)
52696 Points ∼98% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209431, n=759)
25420 Points ∼47% -51%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
38315 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23866 Points ∼58% -38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
33832 Points ∼83% -12%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
33926 Points ∼83% -11%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
23447 Points ∼57% -39%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
41003 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (33926 - 38671, n=3)
36971 Points ∼90% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 110468, n=759)
20080 Points ∼49% -48%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
85 fps ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
46 fps ∼52% -46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
82 fps ∼92% -4%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
85 fps ∼96% 0%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
89 fps ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (85 - 86, n=3)
85.3 fps ∼96% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=767)
43.3 fps ∼49% -49%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
60 fps ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
40 fps ∼67% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
58 fps ∼97% -3%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
59 fps ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (59 - 60, n=3)
59.7 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=776)
30.3 fps ∼51% -49%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
41 fps ∼77%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
24 fps ∼45% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
49 fps ∼92% +20%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
41 fps ∼77% 0%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
53 fps ∼100% +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (41 - 42, n=3)
41.3 fps ∼78% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=672)
25.4 fps ∼48% -38%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
39 fps ∼75%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23 fps ∼44% -41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
42 fps ∼81% +8%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
38 fps ∼73% -3%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
52 fps ∼100% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (37 - 39, n=3)
38 fps ∼73% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=680)
21.6 fps ∼42% -45%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
30 fps ∼91%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
15 fps ∼45% -50%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
29 fps ∼88% -3%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
30 fps ∼91% 0%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
33 fps ∼100% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (30 - 31, n=3)
30.3 fps ∼92% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=535)
20.5 fps ∼62% -32%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
29 fps ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼41% -52%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
26 fps ∼76% -10%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
27 fps ∼79% -7%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
34 fps ∼100% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (27 - 29, n=3)
27.7 fps ∼81% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=537)
18.7 fps ∼55% -36%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
11 fps ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5.5 fps ∼42% -50%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
6.8 fps ∼52% -38%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
11 fps ∼85% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
4.5 fps ∼35% -59%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
13 fps ∼100% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (11 - 11, n=3)
11 fps ∼85% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=283)
11 fps ∼85% 0%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
6.9 fps ∼63%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.5 fps ∼32% -49%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
11 fps ∼100% +59%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
7 fps ∼64% +1%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
2.9 fps ∼26% -58%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
7.9 fps ∼72% +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (6.9 - 7, n=3)
6.97 fps ∼63% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=281)
7.97 fps ∼72% +16%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼81%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9.1 fps ∼43% -46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
17 fps ∼81% 0%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
17 fps ∼81% 0%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
7.5 fps ∼36% -56%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
21 fps ∼100% +24%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (17 - 17, n=3)
17 fps ∼81% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=287)
16.4 fps ∼78% -4%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
18 fps ∼86%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼48% -44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
19 fps ∼90% +6%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
19 fps ∼90% +6%
Oppo A91
Mediatek Helio P70, Mali-G72 MP3, 8192
8.8 fps ∼42% -51%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
21 fps ∼100% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (18 - 19, n=2)
18.5 fps ∼88% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=286)
19 fps ∼90% +6%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
18 fps ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 fps ∼53% -44%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
16 fps ∼84% -11%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼95% 0%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
19 fps ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (18 - 18, n=3)
18 fps ∼95% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=460)
13.8 fps ∼73% -23%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
17 fps ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.6 fps ∼43% -49%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
14 fps ∼70% -18%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼80% -6%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
20 fps ∼100% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (16 - 17, n=3)
16.3 fps ∼82% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=464)
12.3 fps ∼62% -28%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
271934 Points ∼85%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
181295 Points ∼57% -33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
282085 Points ∼88% +4%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
275464 Points ∼86% +1%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
319383 Points ∼100% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (271934 - 275931, n=3)
274443 Points ∼86% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=89)
309759 Points ∼97% +14%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
1226 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
10 Points ∼1% -99%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1145 Points ∼89% -7%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
1233 Points ∼96% +1%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
1267 Points ∼98% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (1226 - 1410, n=3)
1290 Points ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=704)
803 Points ∼62% -35%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3757 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2168 Points ∼50% -42%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3419 Points ∼79% -9%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3768 Points ∼87% 0%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
4339 Points ∼100% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3757 - 3807, n=3)
3777 Points ∼87% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=704)
2391 Points ∼55% -36%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
4452 Points ∼94%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1605 Points ∼34% -64%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3609 Points ∼76% -19%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
4573 Points ∼97% +3%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
4726 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (4295 - 4573, n=3)
4440 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8398, n=704)
1777 Points ∼38% -60%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
6856 Points ∼96%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4738 Points ∼66% -31%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
6155 Points ∼86% -10%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
6908 Points ∼96% +1%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
7178 Points ∼100% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (6828 - 6908, n=3)
6864 Points ∼96% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=704)
3345 Points ∼47% -51%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144
3444 Points ∼93%
Samsung Galaxy A51
Samsung Exynos 9611, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
634 Points ∼17% -82%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3054 Points ∼83% -11%
realme 6 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 8192
3481 Points ∼94% +1%
Huawei P40 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 810, Mali-G52 MP6, 6144
3695 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
  (3444 - 3542, n=3)
3489 Points ∼94% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6205, n=704)
1695 Points ∼46% -51%

The Redmi Note 9 Pro performs well when browsing the web. Subjectively, everything is smooth - web pages load quickly, links can be swiftly navigated to and even more-complex HTML-5 pages do not pose a challenge to the smartphone. Thus, the Redmi Note 9 Pro is able to claim second place in our comparison, which puts it directly below the Huawei P40 Lite in our browser benchmarks.

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300)
55.352 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (47.9 - 48.5, n=2)
48.2 Points ∼87% +1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99)
47.901 Points ∼87%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=167)
39.6 Points ∼72% -17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
35.298 Points ∼64% -26%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
27.681 Points ∼50% -42%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300)
91.154 Points ∼100% +5%
realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83)
89.577 Points ∼98% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (86.8 - 89.6, n=3)
88.6 Points ∼97% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99)
86.75 Points ∼95%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
72.098 Points ∼79% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
51.257 Points ∼56% -41%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=594)
45.9 Points ∼50% -47%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300)
53.2 runs/min ∼100% +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99)
45.2 runs/min ∼85%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (44.1 - 45.2, n=2)
44.7 runs/min ∼84% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=151)
42.5 runs/min ∼80% -6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
41.6 runs/min ∼78% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
29.1 runs/min ∼55% -36%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300)
97 Points ∼100% +37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99)
71 Points ∼73%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=231)
69.4 Points ∼72% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (67 - 71, n=3)
69 Points ∼71% -3%
realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83)
67 Points ∼69% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
57 Points ∼59% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
55 Points ∼57% -23%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300)
17925 Points ∼100% +4%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99)
17265 Points ∼96%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (17157 - 17303, n=3)
17242 Points ∼96% 0%
realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83)
17157 Points ∼96% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
15606 Points ∼87% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
10194 Points ∼57% -41%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=762)
7617 Points ∼42% -56%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=788)
9938 ms * ∼100% -249%
Samsung Galaxy A51 (Chrome 79)
4375.1 ms * ∼44% -54%
realme 6 Pro (Chrome 83)
3033.1 ms * ∼31% -6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
3001.5 ms * ∼30% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G (2794 - 3033, n=3)
2892 ms * ∼29% -1%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro (Chrome 80.0.3987.99)
2850.1 ms * ∼29%
Huawei P40 Lite (Huawei Browser 10.1.0.300)
2471.6 ms * ∼25% +13%

* ... smaller is better

The UFS storage of the Redmi Note 9 Pro guarantees good data transfer rates with a focus on high sequential read speeds for quick app-loading times. Meanwhile, the Huawei P40 Lite once again significantly outperforms our test device. Although according to Xiaomi, the Redmi Note 9 Pro uses UFS 2.1 memory, our measurements indicate that only UFS 2.0 storage has been installed.

While the Redmi Note 9 Pro achieves decent results in terms of microSD card performance, its write speeds could have been better. That being said, its competitors show that there is not much room for improvement anyway.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 ProSamsung Galaxy A51Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Prorealme 6 ProOppo A91Huawei P40 LiteAverage 64 GB UFS 2.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-1%
17%
19%
-6%
35%
-8%
-35%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
54.94 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
60.1 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
9%
57.33 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
4%
63.43 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
15%
60.3 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
10%
70.6 (Nano Memory Card)
29%
55.3 (33.3 - 65.3, n=9)
1%
50.6 (1.7 - 87.1, n=507)
-8%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
76.65 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
73 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-5%
71.61 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
86.38 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
13%
77.21 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
1%
82.63 (Nano Memory Card)
8%
73.2 (36.8 - 85.4, n=9)
-5%
68.7 (8.1 - 96.5, n=507)
-10%
Random Write 4KB
112.93
104.4
-8%
180.4
60%
154
36%
28.55
-75%
175.45
55%
71.8 (13.6 - 196, n=13)
-36%
32.4 (0.14 - 319, n=851)
-71%
Random Read 4KB
122.58
110.8
-10%
156.22
27%
158.66
29%
145.64
19%
157.32
28%
113 (60.6 - 157, n=13)
-8%
56.4 (1.59 - 324, n=851)
-54%
Sequential Write 256KB
171.09
184.9
8%
193.54
13%
203.28
19%
185.26
8%
181.69
6%
180 (135 - 222, n=13)
5%
119 (2.99 - 911, n=851)
-30%
Sequential Read 256KB
498.15
496.1
0%
534.5
7%
512.61
3%
505.44
1%
912.99
83%
489 (272 - 687, n=13)
-2%
324 (12.1 - 1802, n=851)
-35%

Gaming - Smooth but Limited to 30 FPS

The preinstalled apps include Xiaomi's game turbo, which is supposed to improve the gameplay experience. It allows users to set limits for button and full-screen gestures while gaming and to increase the sensitivity of the touchscreen.

Since games run smoothly even without the game turbo's small optimizations, the app seems unnecessary. As our Gamebench benchmarks show, the smartphone does not break a sweat even at maximum detail settings. While the frame rate cannot exceed 30 FPS, it also only rarely falls below this value.

Asphalt 9: Legends
Asphalt 9: Legends
PUBG Mobile
PUBG Mobile
010203040Tooltip
; Asphalt 9: Legends; 2.2.2a: Ø29.8 (21-31)
; PUBG Mobile; 0.18.0: Ø29.7 (19-31)

Emissions - No Throttling Under Load

Temperature

GFXBench battery test T-Rex
GFXBench battery test T-Rex
GFXBench battery test Manhattan
GFXBench battery test Manhattan

With up to just 38.4 °C, the thermals of the Redmi Note 9 Pro remain in a pleasantly low range for comfortable handling at all times. Internally, the smartphone dissipates heat so efficiently that the SoC's clock speeds do not need to be throttled. In the GFXBench battery tests, the frame rates remain consistently high in both the T-Rex and the more-demanding Manhattan benchmark even after rendering the same scene 30 times consecutively.

Max. Load
 38.1 °C
101 F
38.4 °C
101 F
38.2 °C
101 F
 
 38.2 °C
101 F
37.5 °C
100 F
37.7 °C
100 F
 
 36.4 °C
98 F
36.6 °C
98 F
38.2 °C
101 F
 
Maximum: 38.4 °C = 101 F
Average: 37.7 °C = 100 F
34.5 °C
94 F
34.7 °C
94 F
38.5 °C
101 F
33.9 °C
93 F
35 °C
95 F
37.5 °C
100 F
34.4 °C
94 F
35.2 °C
95 F
36.3 °C
97 F
Maximum: 38.5 °C = 101 F
Average: 35.6 °C = 96 F
Power Supply (max.)  29.5 °C = 85 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.7 °C / 100 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.4 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 35.4 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 38.5 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.

Speakers

Although the speaker on the bottom of the smartphone produces very linear mid and high tones, it appears to only know bass from hearsay. With 87.1 dB(A), it is able to reach a relatively high and distortion-free maximum volume level. It is generally well suited to occasional video and music playback. Furthermore, voices can be clearly understood, making it a good choice for hands-free mode.

External audio devices can be connected to the Redmi Note 9 Pro via the 3.5-mm headphone jack or via Bluetooth 5.0.

Speaker: Pink noise
Speaker: Pink noise
Headphone jack: Pink noise
Headphone jack: Pink noise
Audio jack measurements
Audio jack measurements (SNR: 82.91 dBFS)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2034.832.92519.625.53123.920.44024.323.15030.533.56318.724.48020.420.410018.620.912517.526.716019.544.520019.244.325016.450.231515.255.640014.259.750014.765.863013.872.180014.675.2100014.175.8125013.574.4160014.474.9200013.976.1250013.878.7315013.879.4400014.771.2500014.271.1630014.470.8800014.974100001575.61250015.166.41600015.356.1SPL26.587.1N0.869.6median 14.7median 71.1Delta0.811.934.933.929.124.125.424.329.426.239.43427.324.821.622.1242320.722.519.938.51840.916.847.516.253.315.957.613.559.213.962.312.964.91465.414.766.614.168.214.268.714.569.815.470.614.97014.867.51562.815.360.815.360.515.64415.535.12779.30.942.8median 15.3median 60.81.311.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Redmi Note 9 ProXiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 52% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 69% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Energy Management - Enormously Long Battery Life Thanks to a Huge Battery

Energy Consumption

On average, the Redmi Note 9 Pro only consumes 3.88 watts under load, making it relatively energy efficient. However, the smartphone still falls short of its predecessor Redmi Note 8 Pro and the Realme 6 Pro in this category.

With the included 33-watt charger, the Redmi Note 9 Pro can quickly recharge its 5020-mAh battery. Fully recharging the device took exactly two hours in our test.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.25 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.75 / 2.19 / 2.24 Watt
Load midlight 3.88 / 5.97 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
5020 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
4500 mAh
realme 6 Pro
4300 mAh
Oppo A91
4025 mAh
Huawei P40 Lite
4200 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-5%
-14%
-11%
15%
3%
-15%
1%
Idle Minimum *
0.75
0.9
-20%
0.79
-5%
0.92
-23%
0.82
-9%
0.79
-5%
1.057 (0.75 - 1.5, n=3)
-41%
0.886 (0.2 - 3.4, n=864)
-18%
Idle Average *
2.19
1.7
22%
2.32
-6%
1.79
18%
1.73
21%
2.14
2%
2.03 (1.79 - 2.19, n=3)
7%
1.754 (0.6 - 6.2, n=863)
20%
Idle Maximum *
2.24
1.8
20%
2.38
-6%
1.88
16%
1.75
22%
2.23
-0%
2.21 (1.88 - 2.5, n=3)
1%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=864)
9%
Load Average *
3.88
5.2
-34%
4.72
-22%
5.41
-39%
2.33
40%
3.6
7%
4.83 (3.88 - 5.41, n=3)
-24%
4.09 (0.8 - 10.8, n=858)
-5%
Load Maximum *
5.97
6.6
-11%
7.68
-29%
7.59
-27%
5.97
-0%
5.17
13%
7.02 (5.97 - 7.59, n=3)
-18%
6.04 (1.2 - 14.2, n=858)
-1%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

With a capacity of 5020-mAh, the battery of the Redmi Note 9 Pro is decidedly large and is in fact the largest battery of any smartphone in our comparison. The only direct competitor in this aspect is its sibling Redmi Note 9S, which contains the same battery.

The Redmi Note 9 Pro shows a seemingly unending amount of stamina and should easily last users one day or even multiple days. With almost 20 hours, the smartphone reaches an excellent runtime in our Wi-Fi test. When playing an H.264 video, it shows a similarly high amount of stamina.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
38h 56min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
19h 35min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
18h 16min
Load (maximum brightness)
5h 03min
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro
5020 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A51
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
4500 mAh
realme 6 Pro
4300 mAh
Oppo A91
4025 mAh
Huawei P40 Lite
4200 mAh
Battery Runtime
-24%
-21%
-12%
-49%
-10%
Reader / Idle
2336
1689
-28%
1893
-19%
2154
-8%
H.264
1096
846
-23%
984
-10%
1176
7%
WiFi v1.3
1175
698
-41%
864
-26%
1031
-12%
605
-49%
1007
-14%
Load
303
289
-5%
212
-30%
228
-25%

Pros

+ good value
+ NFC
+ microSD & 2x dual SIM
+ fast Wi-Fi
+ low SAR values
+ 33-watt charger
+ fast system performance
+ no throttling
+ very long battery life

Cons

- preinstalled bloatware
- pictures with narrow dynamic range
- gaming limited to 30 FPS

Verdict - Once Again with Plenty of Features for a Cheap Price

In review: Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro. Test device courtesy of Xiaomi Germany
In review: Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro. Test device courtesy of Xiaomi Germany

With the Redmi Note 9 Pro, Xiaomi has added another smartphone that shines with a great price-performance ratio to its portfolio.

For 250 Euros (~$282), it offers a lot: A bright, 6.67-inch IPS display, 6 GB of RAM, 64 or 128 GB of internal storage, the fast octa-core Snapdragon 720G SoC and a quad-camera system with a resolution of 64 MP. Thanks to the 5020-mAh battery, the Redmi Note 9 Pro reaches excellent runtimes, the 33-watt power adapter charges the smartphone quickly and there are handy extras such as a large card tray that simultaneously accepts one microSD and two SIM cards.

The Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro offers a lot of value for its price, while its long battery life and extra features such as NFC make it stand out from the crowd.

Its disadvantages, on the other hand, are few and far between. That being said, the 64-MP camera is not quite as impressive as its specifications might suggest, since it is ultimately lacking in terms of dynamic range. In contrast, games being limited to 30 FPS is not a huge issue, particularly since they rarely fall below this FPS mark. Although the smartphone contains preinstalled advertisement bloatware, the respective apps can be deleted.

The release of this smartphone may fill buyers of the Redmi Note 9S with regret. While the Redmi Note 9 Pro is physically almost identical, it offers several higher-end features including an NFC module for a rather small premium. Upgrading from a Redmi Note 8 Pro is not particularly worthwhile however, since there were only minor gen-to-gen improvements.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro - 06/23/2020 v7
Manuel Masiero

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
96%
Connectivity
50 / 70 → 72%
Weight
88%
Battery
92%
Display
89%
Games Performance
29 / 64 → 46%
Application Performance
70 / 86 → 81%
Temperature
91%
Noise
100%
Audio
80 / 90 → 89%
Camera
65%
Average
77%
83%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Pro Smartphone Review: Plenty of features for a cheap price
Manuel Masiero, 2020-06-23 (Update: 2020-06-25)
Manuel Masiero
Editor of the original article: Manuel Masiero - Review Editor
In 1986, when I had annoyed my parents long enough, they finally bought me a C64 that I had seen at a friend's place - and immediately knew that this was what I wanted. Since then, the fascination for computers has never left me and basically I tinker with everything I can get my hands on. From the C64 to the Amiga 500 and a hugely uncool IBM computer with 8088 CPU (and green IBM monochrome monitor!) in the early 90s, the list grew longer and longer. The current projects are called PC, Tablet and Smartphone.