Doogee Blade GT vs. Xiaomi Poco F4: A Deep Dive into Battery, Performance, and Value
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing all-day (and multi-day) battery life, the Doogee Blade GT is the clear winner thanks to its remarkable 30:21h endurance. However, the Xiaomi Poco F4 offers a significantly faster charging experience and a brighter screen, making it ideal for those who value convenience and media consumption.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Doogee Blade GT | Xiaomi Poco F4 |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 7, 8, 28, 38, 41, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2024, December | 2022, June 23 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, January | Available. Released 2022, June 27 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back |
| Dimensions | 178.5 x 83.5 x 10.5 mm (7.03 x 3.29 x 0.41 in) | 163.2 x 76 x 7.7 mm (6.43 x 2.99 x 0.30 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 260 g (9.17 oz) | 195 g (6.88 oz) |
| - | IP53, dust and splash resistant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Mohs level 6 | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~392 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.72 inches, 109.0 cm2 (~73.1% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz | AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, Dolby Vision, 900 nits (HBM), 1300 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x3.2 GHz Kryo 585 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 585 & 4x1.80 GHz Kryo 585) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 7050 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM8250-AC Snapdragon 870 5G (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G68 MC4 | Adreno 650 |
| OS | Android 14 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 13, MIUI 14.2 for POCO |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | No |
| Internal | 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| - | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF, OIS 5 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide) Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Triple | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide) 1/2.0", 0.7µm, PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Single | 20 MP, f/2.3, (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| - | 24-bit/192kHz audio | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | Yes | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (L1), BDS (B1I+B2a), GALILEO (E1+E5a), QZSS (L1+L5), NavIC (L5) |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 67W wired, PD3.0, QC3, 100% in 38 min |
| Type | 5500 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Silver | Moonlight Silver, Night Black, Nebula Green |
| Models | - | 22021211RG, 22021211RI |
| Price | About 340 EUR | ₹ 16,999 |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 101h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -26.1 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 590961 (v8), 698586 (v9) GeekBench: 3190 (v5.1) GFXBench: 49fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
| EU LABEL | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery | 30:21h endurance, 1300 cycles | - |
| Energy | Class E | - |
| Free fall | Class A (270 falls) | - |
| Repairability | Class C | - |
Doogee Blade GT
- Exceptional 30:21h battery endurance
- Long battery lifespan with 1300 charge cycles
- Efficient 6nm Dimensity 7050 chipset
- Slow 18W charging
- Limited camera details suggest a less capable system
Xiaomi Poco F4
- Blazing-fast 67W charging (0-100% in 38 minutes)
- Bright 1003 nit display for excellent outdoor visibility
- Powerful Snapdragon 870 5G chipset
- Significantly shorter battery life (101h)
- Requires more frequent charging
Display Comparison
The Xiaomi Poco F4 boasts a significantly brighter display, peaking at 1003 nits, which translates to excellent visibility outdoors. The Doogee Blade GT’s display brightness is not specified, but given its focus on battery life, it likely prioritizes efficiency over peak luminance. The Poco F4’s infinite contrast ratio (typical for AMOLED panels) provides deeper blacks and more vibrant colors. While both likely utilize AMOLED technology, the Poco F4’s higher brightness gives it a clear advantage for outdoor use and HDR content viewing.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature photo and video capabilities, but detailed sensor information is lacking for the Doogee Blade GT. The Poco F4’s camera system is likely to be more refined, benefiting from Qualcomm’s image signal processor (ISP). Without specific details on the Blade GT’s sensor size and aperture, it’s difficult to assess its low-light performance. The Poco F4 likely offers more consistent image quality and a wider range of features. The absence of details on the Doogee Blade GT’s camera suggests it’s not a primary selling point.
Performance
The Poco F4’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (7nm) is a proven performer, featuring a Kryo 585 core clocked at 3.2 GHz. This contrasts with the Doogee Blade GT’s Mediatek Dimensity 7050 (6nm). While the Dimensity 7050’s Cortex-A78 cores reach 2.6 GHz, the Snapdragon 870 generally offers superior sustained performance and GPU capabilities. The 6nm process of the Dimensity 7050 should offer better efficiency, but the Snapdragon 870’s architecture is more mature and optimized. The Poco F4 is likely to handle demanding games and applications with greater ease.
Battery Life
The Doogee Blade GT’s standout feature is its exceptional battery endurance, rated at 30:21 hours. This is dramatically longer than the Poco F4’s 101 hours. However, the Poco F4 compensates with its 67W wired charging, capable of a full charge in just 38 minutes, supporting PD3.0 and QC3 standards. The Blade GT’s 18W charging is considerably slower. The Blade GT prioritizes longevity, while the Poco F4 prioritizes convenience. The Blade GT also claims 1300 charge cycles, suggesting a longer lifespan for the battery itself.
Buying Guide
Buy the Doogee Blade GT if you need a phone that can reliably last through heavy usage for multiple days, and 18W charging isn't a dealbreaker. This is the phone for travelers, outdoor enthusiasts, or anyone who dislikes frequent charging. Buy the Xiaomi Poco F4 if you prefer a phone with a vibrant, bright display, incredibly fast 67W charging, and don't mind charging more frequently. This is the phone for media consumers, gamers, and those who want a quick power-up.