Notebookcheck

Test du Xiaomi Mi 10 : toujours plus de mégapixels

Chinois haut de gamme. Les constructeurs aiment faire rêver avec de gros chiffres, et Xiaomi ne fait ici pas exception. Rien qu'en mentionnant son capteur 108 MP, l'appareil photo est certain d'attirer l'attention. Reste à montrer dans nos tests qu'un nombre plus élevé de mégapixels permet d'avoir une meilleure image.
Mike Wobker, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Stefanie Voigt (traduit par Prévots),
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Mi 10 Gamme)
Processeur
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 8 x 2.4 - 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)
Carte graphique
Mémoire
8192 Mo 
Écran
6.67 pouces 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 386 PPP, capacitif, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, brillant: oui, HDR, 90 Hz
Disque dur
128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash, 128 Go 
, 109 Go libres
Connexions
1 USB 2.0, Connectique audio: USB C, 1 Lecteur d'empreintes digitales, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Capteurs: accéléromètre, gyroscope, capteur de proximité, e-boussole, baromètre, USB C, émetteur Infra-rouge
Réseau
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G GSM (B2 / B3 / B5 / B8), 3G WCDMA (B1 / B2 / B4 / B5 / B8), 4G LTE FDD/TDD (1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 7 / 8 / 20 / 28 / 32 / 38 / 40), 5G Sub6G (n1 / n3 / n7 / n28 / n77 / n78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Taille
Hauteur x Largeur x Profondeur (en mm): 8.96 x 162.6 x 74.8
Batterie
4780 mAh Lithium-Polymère
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Système d'exploitation
Android 10
Appareil photo
Appareil photo primaire: 108 MPix 108 MP (f/1,7, 1 / 1,33", 0,8 µm) + 13 MP (ultra grand-angle, f/2,4, 12mm) + 2 MP (profondeur de champ, f/2,4) + 2MP (macro, f/2,4)
Appareil photo secondaire: 20 MPix f/2,0, 1 / 3", 0,9 µm
Fonctionnalités additionnelles
Haut-parleurs: 2 haut-parleurs, Clavier: virtuel, Rétroéclairage du clavier: oui, chargeur USB, câble USB C, étui de protection, MIUI 11.0.24, 12 Mois Garantie, DAS (tête) : 0,69 W/kg, DAS (corps) : 0,99 W/kg, fanless
Poids
208 g, Alimentation: 121 g
Prix
799 euros
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Appareils du comparatif

Note
Date
Modèle
Poids
Drive
Taille
Résolution
Best Price
88 %
07/20
Xiaomi Mi 10
SD 865, Adreno 650
208 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.67"2340x1080
86 %
04/20
Oppo Find X2 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
202 g512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.7"3168x1440
88 %
05/20
OnePlus 8 Pro
SD 865, Adreno 650
199 g256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.78"3168x1440
88 %
04/20
Samsung Galaxy S20
Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11
163 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.2"3200x1440
87 %
05/20
Huawei P40
Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16
175 g128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash6.1"2340x1080
Xiaomi Mi 10
Xiaomi Mi 10
Xiaomi Mi 10
Xiaomi Mi 10
Xiaomi Mi 10
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1368 (1104min - 1442max) MBit/s ∼100% +51%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
903 (881min - 916max) MBit/s ∼66%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
831 (745min - 872max) MBit/s ∼61% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
827 (791min - 846max) MBit/s ∼60% -8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
754 (346min - 881max) MBit/s ∼55% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 1414, n=598)
280 MBit/s ∼20% -69%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei P40
Mali-G76 MP16, Kirin 990 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
1296 (1095min - 1376max) MBit/s ∼100% +49%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Mali-G77 MP11, Exynos 990, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
882 (847min - 902max) MBit/s ∼68% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
876 (767min - 904max) MBit/s ∼68% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 10
Adreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
867 (440min - 907max) MBit/s ∼67%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Adreno 650, SD 865, 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
509 (264min - 571max) MBit/s ∼39% -41%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 1599, n=598)
267 MBit/s ∼21% -69%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø902 (881-916)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø853 (440-907)
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Xiaomi Mi 10
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500
GNSS - Garmin Edge 500

Comparaison des images

Choisir une scène pour naviguer dans la première image. Un clic permet de changer le niveau de zoom, un autre clic permet de revenir à l'image originale dans une nouvelle fenêtre. La première image montre l'original pris par l'appareil testé.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3Scene 4
Cliquer pour charger les images
ColorChecker
13.1 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
17.8 ∆E
18.9 ∆E
19.8 ∆E
18.7 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
15 ∆E
22.5 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
20.8 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
22.7 ∆E
16.2 ∆E
18.8 ∆E
15.4 ∆E
15.9 ∆E
19.2 ∆E
21.1 ∆E
18.5 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10: 17.14 ∆E min: 8.38 - max: 23.75 ∆E
ColorChecker
19 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
20.6 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
6 ∆E
8.4 ∆E
6 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
14.1 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
2.7 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
12.1 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Mi 10: 9.65 ∆E min: 2.75 - max: 20.57 ∆E
775
cd/m²
784
cd/m²
810
cd/m²
777
cd/m²
786
cd/m²
810
cd/m²
782
cd/m²
786
cd/m²
811
cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 811 cd/m² Moyenne: 791.2 cd/m² Minimum: 2.07 cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité: 96 %
Valeur mesurée au centre, sur batterie: 786 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Valeurs des noirs: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.6-29.43 Ø5.8
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6
98.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
Xiaomi Mi 10
Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.67
Oppo Find X2 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.7
OnePlus 8 Pro
AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.78
Samsung Galaxy S20
AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.2
Huawei P40
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.1
Screen
-134%
17%
-45%
-64%
Brightness middle
786
778
-1%
796
1%
745
-5%
583
-26%
Brightness
791
775
-2%
779
-2%
740
-6%
593
-25%
Brightness Distribution
96
99
3%
94
-2%
97
1%
94
-2%
Black Level *
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.1
4.4
-300%
0.68
38%
2.67
-143%
3.03
-175%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.2
8.7
-295%
1.55
30%
4.52
-105%
5.33
-142%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.8
5.6
-211%
1.1
39%
2
-11%
2
-11%
Gamma
2.26 97%
2.26 97%
2.237 98%
2.092 105%
2.301 96%
CCT
6315 103%
7250 90%
6310 103%
6240 104%
6621 98%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion)

Afin d'abaisser la luminosité de l'écran, certains ordinateurs portables font varier très rapidement le rétroéclairage entre éteint et allumé. La fréquence à laquelle le rétroéclairage s'éteint et se rallume est normalement fixée à une valeur qui permet de rendre la variation indétectable à l'œil nu? Si la fréquence est trop basse, certaines personnes peuvent être sujettes à une fatigue oculaire, des maux de tête ou même percevoir les variations.
Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) décelé 362.3 Hz ≤ 99 Niveau de luminosité

Le rétroéclairage de l'écran scintille à la fréquence de 362.3 Hz (certainement du fait de l'utilisation d'une MDI - Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) à un niveau de luminosité inférieur ou égal à 99 % . Aucun scintillement ne devrait être perceptible au-dessus de cette valeur.

La fréquence de rafraîchissement de 362.3 Hz est relativement élevée, la grande majorité des utilisateurs ne devrait pas percevLa fréquence de rafraîchissement de 362.3 Hz est relativement élevée, la grande majorité des utilisateurs ne devrait pas percevoir de scintillements et être sujette à une fatigue oculaire accrue.oir de scintillements et être sujette à une fatigue oculaire accrue. Néanmoins certaines personnes pourront toujours percevoir un scintillement.

En comparaison, 51 % des appareils testés n'emploient pas MDI pour assombrir leur écran. Nous avons relevé une moyenne à 17553 (minimum : 5 - maximum : 2500000) Hz dans le cas où une MDI était active.

Temps de réponse de l'écran

Le temps de réponse d'un écran mesure la rapidité à laquelle l'écran est capable de changer une couleur pour une autre. Un temps de réponse élevé se traduit par une image floutée pour les objets en mouvement. Les joueurs bénéficieront de faibles latences d'affichage en jeu.
       Temps de réponse noir à blanc
2.4 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 1.2 ms hausse
↘ 1.2 ms chute
L'écran montre de très faibles temps de réponse, parfait pour le jeu.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (24.4 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
       Temps de réponse gris 50% à gris 80%
3.6 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 2 ms hausse
↘ 1.6 ms chute
L'écran montre de très faibles temps de réponse, parfait pour le jeu.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (38.7 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
Geekbench 5.1 / 5.2
Vulkan Score 5.1 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2549 Points ∼69%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2641 Points ∼72% +4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2659 Points ∼72% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3670 Points ∼100% +44%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2693 Points ∼73% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2519 Points ∼69% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2487 - 3259, n=8)
2723 Points ∼74% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 4043, n=66)
1633 Points ∼44% -36%
OpenCL Score 5.1 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2829 Points ∼78%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
2960 Points ∼82% +5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3027 Points ∼84% +7%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3606 Points ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
2932 Points ∼81% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (2829 - 3080, n=8)
2981 Points ∼83% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (272 - 4739, n=61)
1759 Points ∼49% -38%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3309 Points ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3360 Points ∼100% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3318 Points ∼99% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
2731 Points ∼81% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
2988 Points ∼89% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3338 Points ∼99% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3076 - 3449, n=13)
3317 Points ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (421 - 3531, n=118)
1936 Points ∼58% -41%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
910 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
911 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
909 Points ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
903 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
755 Points ∼83% -17%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
906 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (898 - 924, n=13)
912 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (124 - 1342, n=118)
550 Points ∼60% -40%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10613 Points ∼92%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11387 Points ∼99% +7%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11153 Points ∼97% +5%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10431 Points ∼91% -2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8736 Points ∼76% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10952 Points ∼95% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9762 - 15299, n=14)
11519 Points ∼100% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 15299, n=521)
5952 Points ∼52% -44%
Work performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11850 Points ∼81%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13360 Points ∼91% +13%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
13471 Points ∼92% +14%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
14708 Points ∼100% +24%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
11268 Points ∼77% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
13142 Points ∼89% +11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11839 - 19989, n=13)
14121 Points ∼96% +19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 19989, n=679)
6528 Points ∼44% -45%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3336 Points ∼86%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3843 Points ∼99% +15%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
3888 Points ∼100% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3112 Points ∼80% -7%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3684 Points ∼95% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3830 Points ∼99% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3193 - 4061, n=11)
3770 Points ∼97% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 4061, n=173)
2662 Points ∼68% -20%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8175 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8076 Points ∼98% -1%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8279 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6315 Points ∼76% -23%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6326 Points ∼76% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8173 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8064 - 8333, n=11)
8221 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 8783, n=173)
2989 Points ∼36% -63%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6182 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6444 Points ∼97% +4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6618 Points ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5139 Points ∼78% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5456 Points ∼82% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6578 Points ∼99% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6106 - 6754, n=12)
6515 Points ∼98% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 6754, n=173)
2686 Points ∼41% -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5187 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5187 Points ∼94% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5506 Points ∼100% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4063 Points ∼74% -22%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4924 Points ∼89% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5277 Points ∼96% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5187 - 5780, n=12)
5446 Points ∼99% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5780, n=524)
2219 Points ∼40% -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9389 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9345 Points ∼99% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9379 Points ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8106 Points ∼86% -14%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6606 Points ∼70% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9356 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (9157 - 9567, n=12)
9415 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 10043, n=524)
2134 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7957 Points ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7982 Points ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8111 Points ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6638 Points ∼82% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6140 Points ∼76% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7986 Points ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7957 - 8269, n=13)
8099 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 8269, n=525)
1993 Points ∼25% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
3973 Points ∼73%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5209 Points ∼95% +31%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5480 Points ∼100% +38%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3935 Points ∼72% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4998 Points ∼91% +26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4283 Points ∼78% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3956 - 5765, n=12)
5136 Points ∼94% +29%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5765, n=556)
2135 Points ∼39% -46%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12601 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12573 Points ∼99% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
12665 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
11301 Points ∼89% -10%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4293 Points ∼34% -66%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12694 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (12547 - 12993, n=12)
12727 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=556)
2875 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8499 Points ∼87%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9616 Points ∼98% +13%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9807 Points ∼100% +15%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
7981 Points ∼81% -6%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4432 Points ∼45% -48%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8823 Points ∼90% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8499 - 10090, n=12)
9563 Points ∼98% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10699, n=556)
2417 Points ∼25% -72%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4813 Points ∼97%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4582 Points ∼92% -5%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4987 Points ∼100% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
3963 Points ∼79% -18%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4242 Points ∼85% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4895 Points ∼98% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (4582 - 5209, n=12)
4985 Points ∼100% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (435 - 5209, n=605)
2100 Points ∼42% -56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8371 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8045 Points ∼96% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8106 Points ∼96% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8411 Points ∼100% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6244 Points ∼74% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8299 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (7854 - 8432, n=12)
8258 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 9008, n=605)
1801 Points ∼21% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7190 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7012 Points ∼97% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7117 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6732 Points ∼94% -6%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5651 Points ∼78% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7157 Points ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (6943 - 7400, n=13)
7199 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 7400, n=606)
1716 Points ∼24% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4196 Points ∼83%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5054 Points ∼100% +20%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
4928 Points ∼98% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4015 Points ∼79% -4%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
4279 Points ∼85% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
4729 Points ∼94% +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (3965 - 5274, n=12)
4857 Points ∼96% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 5274, n=648)
1970 Points ∼39% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12234 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11458 Points ∼92% -6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11371 Points ∼92% -7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
6388 Points ∼52% -48%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3894 Points ∼31% -68%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
12394 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11175 - 12611, n=12)
11841 Points ∼96% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 12611, n=647)
2384 Points ∼19% -81%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
8581 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8866 Points ∼97% +3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
8811 Points ∼97% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
5646 Points ∼62% -34%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
3973 Points ∼44% -54%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9123 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8215 - 9549, n=12)
8965 Points ∼98% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 9549, n=650)
2048 Points ∼22% -76%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
202 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
202 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
206 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
199 fps ∼97% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
151 fps ∼73% -25%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
203 fps ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (168 - 207, n=13)
201 fps ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=794)
45.4 fps ∼22% -78%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67% -33%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
60 fps ∼67% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
90 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (60 - 138, n=13)
77.5 fps ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 138, n=803)
31.4 fps ∼35% -65%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
123 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
123 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
126 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
108 fps ∼86% -12%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
100 fps ∼79% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
122 fps ∼97% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (96 - 126, n=13)
121 fps ∼96% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=699)
26.8 fps ∼21% -78%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
58 fps ∼66% -34%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
60 fps ∼68% -32%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
46 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
88 fps ∼100% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (58 - 109, n=13)
72.5 fps ∼82% -18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=707)
22.6 fps ∼26% -74%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
86 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
88 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
85 fps ∼97% -1%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
33 fps ∼38% -62%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
86 fps ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (67 - 88, n=14)
84.1 fps ∼96% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=562)
21.6 fps ∼25% -75%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
75 fps ∼97%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼58% -40%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
60 fps ∼78% -20%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
59 fps ∼77% -21%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
57 fps ∼74% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
77 fps ∼100% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (43 - 77, n=14)
59.6 fps ∼77% -21%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=564)
19.6 fps ∼25% -74%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
29 fps ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
18 fps ∼58% -38%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
31 fps ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
22 fps ∼71% -24%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
27 fps ∼87% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
30 fps ∼97% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (18 - 32, n=14)
27.9 fps ∼90% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=317)
11.3 fps ∼36% -61%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼69%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
29 fps ∼100% +45%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (20 - 20, n=14)
20 fps ∼69% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 101, n=315)
8.06 fps ∼28% -60%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
46 fps ∼92%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
28 fps ∼56% -39%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
48 fps ∼96% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼100% +9%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
42 fps ∼84% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
47 fps ∼94% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (28 - 53, n=14)
43.6 fps ∼87% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=321)
16.9 fps ∼34% -63%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
53 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
53 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
54 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
54 fps ∼100% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
49 fps ∼91% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
54 (20min) fps ∼100% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (27 - 54, n=14)
51.1 fps ∼95% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 257, n=320)
19.4 fps ∼36% -63%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼100% +2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
51 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
50 fps ∼98% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
43 fps ∼84% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
50 fps ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (39 - 52, n=14)
49.9 fps ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=487)
14.5 fps ∼28% -71%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
42 fps ∼93%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
26 fps ∼58% -38%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
45 fps ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
43 fps ∼96% +2%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
36 fps ∼80% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
45 fps ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (25 - 46, n=14)
39.1 fps ∼87% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=491)
12.8 fps ∼28% -70%
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
566256 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
599843 Points ∼100% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
585231 Points ∼98% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
504192 Points ∼84% -11%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
450373 Points ∼75% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
595466 Points ∼99% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (538107 - 607937, n=14)
577410 Points ∼96% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53335 - 607937, n=116)
318041 Points ∼53% -44%
BaseMark OS II
Web (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1276 Points ∼84%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1351 Points ∼89% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
1496 Points ∼99% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
1274 Points ∼84% 0%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
1260 Points ∼83% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
1514 Points ∼100% +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (1276 - 1650, n=13)
1472 Points ∼97% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=734)
825 Points ∼54% -35%
Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11730 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11496 Points ∼97% -2%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
11842 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
10703 Points ∼90% -9%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8634 Points ∼73% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
11567 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (11399 - 12073, n=13)
11666 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=734)
2531 Points ∼21% -78%
Memory (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7450 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
6350 Points ∼80% -15%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
7240 Points ∼91% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4271 Points ∼54% -43%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
6942 Points ∼87% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
7945 Points ∼100% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5564 - 8874, n=13)
7251 Points ∼91% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 8874, n=734)
1886 Points ∼24% -75%
System (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
9810 Points ∼98%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
9555 Points ∼95% -3%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
10058 Points ∼100% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
8843 Points ∼88% -10%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
8992 Points ∼89% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
10002 Points ∼99% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (8421 - 10147, n=13)
9708 Points ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=734)
3486 Points ∼35% -64%
Overall (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Mi 10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
5752 Points ∼95%
Oppo Find X2 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5540 Points ∼91% -4%
OnePlus 8 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288
5993 Points ∼99% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11, 8192
4764 Points ∼78% -17%
Huawei P40
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16, 8192
5105 Points ∼84% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192
6072 Points ∼100% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
  (5264 - 6273, n=13)
5879 Points ∼97% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6273, n=734)
1781 Points ∼29% -69%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
64.958 Points ∼100% +28%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
64.567 Points ∼99% +27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (50.9 - 77, n=13)
63.7 Points ∼98% +25%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
63.374 Points ∼98% +25%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
55.572 Points ∼86% +9%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
53.863 Points ∼83% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
50.878 Points ∼78%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 140, n=193)
40.8 Points ∼63% -20%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
115.43 Points ∼100% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.78 Points ∼99% +5%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
114.65 Points ∼99% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (79.1 - 126, n=12)
112 Points ∼97% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
109.2 Points ∼95%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
103.24 Points ∼89% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
93.499 Points ∼81% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 302, n=623)
47.4 Points ∼41% -57%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
71 runs/min ∼100% +26%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
68.6 runs/min ∼97% +22%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chome 80)
67.7 runs/min ∼95% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (30.6 - 74.5, n=13)
63.5 runs/min ∼89% +13%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
63 runs/min ∼89% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
56.2 runs/min ∼79%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chome 80)
50.8 runs/min ∼72% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 158, n=175)
42.9 runs/min ∼60% -24%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
118 Points ∼100%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
104 Points ∼88% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (97 - 120, n=13)
104 Points ∼88% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
101 Points ∼86% -14%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
100 Points ∼85% -15%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
97 Points ∼82% -18%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
95 Points ∼81% -19%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=260)
69.7 Points ∼59% -41%
Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
23678 Points ∼100% +8%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
22976 Points ∼97% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
22834 Points ∼96% +4%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
22016 Points ∼93%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (15745 - 24467, n=13)
21981 Points ∼93% 0%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
21348 Points ∼90% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
18162 Points ∼77% -18%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=791)
7916 Points ∼33% -64%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (1914 - 59466, n=817)
9727 ms * ∼100% -362%
Samsung Galaxy S20 (Chrome 80)
2511.2 ms * ∼26% -19%
Huawei P40 (Huawei Browser 10.1)
2287 ms * ∼24% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 10 (Xiaomi Browser V11.4.23)
2103.5 ms * ∼22%
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80)
2043.6 ms * ∼21% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81)
2021.2 ms * ∼21% +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (1992 - 2538, n=14)
1968 ms * ∼20% +6%
OnePlus 8 Pro (Chrome 80)
1944.7 ms * ∼20% +8%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Xiaomi Mi 10Oppo Find X2 ProOnePlus 8 ProSamsung Galaxy S20Huawei P40Xiaomi Mi 10 ProAverage 128 GB UFS 3.0 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
2%
2%
2%
-20%
19%
-9%
-78%
Random Write 4KB
215.95
204.98
-5%
197.7
-8%
228.1
6%
197
-9%
258.54
20%
186 (29.9 - 230, n=10)
-14%
36 (0.14 - 319, n=888)
-83%
Random Read 4KB
207.04
202.63
-2%
208.3
1%
205.3
-1%
189.4
-9%
264.9
28%
199 (170 - 238, n=10)
-4%
59.4 (1.59 - 324, n=888)
-71%
Sequential Write 256KB
679.51
728.72
7%
730.4
7%
669.9
-1%
212.9
-69%
750.44
10%
542 (213 - 697, n=10)
-20%
128 (2.99 - 911, n=888)
-81%
Sequential Read 256KB
1498.15
1605.6
7%
1627.3
9%
1541.7
3%
1591.6
6%
1738.65
16%
1529 (1406 - 1692, n=10)
2%
342 (12.1 - 1802, n=888)
-77%
010203040506070Tooltip
; Arena of Valor; min: Ø61.4 (55-62)
; Arena of Valor; high HD: Ø61.1 (50-62)
; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø59.8 (57-60)
; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø59.8 (50-60)
 36.8 °C38.2 °C38.7 °C 
 36.1 °C37.4 °C39.3 °C 
 36.5 °C37.9 °C38.9 °C 
Maximum: 39.3 °C
Moyenne: 37.8 °C
35.2 °C35.7 °C36.2 °C
35 °C36.2 °C35.3 °C
34.8 °C35.6 °C35.6 °C
Maximum: 36.2 °C
Moyenne: 35.5 °C
Alimentation (valeur maximale)  27.1 °C | Température ambiante de la pièce 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.8 °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 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.2 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.4 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2032.828.82526.228.13123.3254021.925.5502831.16319.924.48019.122.510019.926.112516.531.616019.644.520017.544.325017.55131513.956.740013.961.450015.865.263015.265.68001466.310001467125013.970.3160013.473.1200013.874.5250014.374.931501473.4400014.572.7500014.670.9630014.569.4800014.768.41000015.165.4125001561.91600014.849.3SPL26.583.5N0.854.8median 14.6median 65.6Delta19.933.431.629.623.929.829.825.525.433.232.926.825.925.529.723.727.419.12918.948.717.247.317.553.81757.315.162.11562.514.767.515.571.315.572.714.773.114.574.814.674.614.576.913.776.714.776.814.574.614.570.714.565.214.864.914.955.915.550.126.985.90.962.7median 14.9median 65.21.311.1hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi 10Oppo Find X2 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi 10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 38% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 55% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Oppo Find X2 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 28% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 24%, worst was 65%
Compared to all devices tested
» 55% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 65%

Consommation énergétique
Éteint/en veilledarklight 0.01 / 0.14 Watts
Au reposdarkmidlight 0.53 / 1.46 / 1.52 Watts
Fortement sollicité midlight 3.83 / 8.89 Watts
 color bar
Légende: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi 10
4780 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Huawei P40
3800 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-105%
-126%
-32%
-29%
-60%
-20%
Idle Minimum *
0.53
1.47
-177%
2.2
-315%
0.9
-70%
1
-89%
1.252 (0.53 - 2.2, n=15)
-136%
0.891 (0.2 - 3.4, n=895)
-68%
Idle Average *
1.46
3.43
-135%
3.3
-126%
1.5
-3%
1.9
-30%
2.16 (1.19 - 3.43, n=15)
-48%
1.757 (0.6 - 6.2, n=894)
-20%
Idle Maximum *
1.52
3.52
-132%
3.7
-143%
2
-32%
2.4
-58%
2.44 (1.23 - 4, n=15)
-61%
2.04 (0.74 - 6.6, n=895)
-34%
Load Average *
3.83
6.2
-62%
5.9
-54%
4.8
-25%
3.5
9%
5.41 (3.5 - 7.4, n=15)
-41%
4.12 (0.8 - 10.8, n=889)
-8%
Load Maximum *
8.89
10.63
-20%
8.3
7%
11.5
-29%
6.9
22%
9.94 (7.68 - 12.3, n=15)
-12%
6.11 (1.2 - 14.2, n=889)
31%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Autonomie
Au repos (module WiFi éteint, luminosité au minimum)
29h 49min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
11h 02min
En lecture de Big Buck Bunny encodé en H.264 1080p
18h 46min
Fortement sollicité (luminosité au maximum)
3h 46min
Xiaomi Mi 10
4780 mAh
Oppo Find X2 Pro
4260 mAh
OnePlus 8 Pro
4510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000 mAh
Huawei P40
3800 mAh
Autonomie de la batterie
-1%
20%
6%
9%
Reader / Idle
1789
2103
18%
2105
18%
2063
15%
H.264
1126
1023
-9%
809
-28%
1052
-7%
WiFi v1.3
662
654
-1%
923
39%
726
10%
806
22%
Load
226
296
31%
279
23%
236
4%

Points positifs

+ qualité de construction
+ luminosité de l'écran
+ performances WLAN
+ 5G et double SIM
+ capteur infrarouge

Points négatifs

- appareil photo
- absence de lecteur de carte
- absence de certification IP

Verdict

En test : le Xiaomi Mi 10. Modèle de test fourni par TradingShenzen.
En test : le Xiaomi Mi 10. Modèle de test fourni par TradingShenzen.

Le Xiaomi Mi 10 nous laisse avec des sentiments mêlés. D'un côté, il est ultra performant au quotidien, paraît excellent, et montre une qualité de finitions à tous les niveaux. Mais d'un autre côté, le capteur photo 108 MP fait des photos au final décevantes. Ici, l'influence de la partie logicielle est une fois de plus mise en avant : d'autres fabricants sont capables de faire mieux avec leur appareil photo, avec bien moins de mégapixels - et nous aurions apprécié qu'il en soit de même pour l'appareil Xiaomi.

Le Xiaomi Mi 10 convainc avec de belles finitions et de bonnes performances au quotidien. Nous en attendions seulement plus de l'appareil photo.

En plus des performances photo, nous n'avons que des reproches mineurs à faire, comme l'absence de lecteur de carte SD. On pourra se passer de prise jack audio, et l'on pourra également se contenter du niveau de batterie moyen. Mais au final, le Xiaomi Mi 10 est plutôt cher, ce qui fait que les concurrents, dont certains sont bien plus puissants, s'avèrent plus séduisants.

 

L’intégralité de cette critique est disponible en anglais en suivant ce lien.

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Xiaomi Mi 10 - 05/25/2020 v7
Mike Wobker

Châssis
88%
Clavier
67 / 75 → 89%
Dispositif de pointage
96%
Connectivité
54 / 70 → 77%
Poids
88%
Autonomie
90%
Écran
91%
Performances en jeu
62 / 64 → 97%
Performances dans les applications
82 / 86 → 95%
Chauffe
90%
Nuisance sonore
100%
Audio
77 / 90 → 86%
Appareil photo
73%
Moyenne
82%
88%
Smartphone - Moyenne compensée

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Revues et rapports de ordinateurs portatifs et smartphones, ordiphones > Critiques > Test du Xiaomi Mi 10 : toujours plus de mégapixels
Mike Wobker, 2020-07- 5 (Update: 2020-07- 5)