Infinix Zero X vs Oppo Reno6 5G: A Detailed Comparison of Mid-Range Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing fast charging and a slightly more efficient processor, the Oppo Reno6 5G is the better choice. Its 65W charging significantly reduces downtime, and the Dimensity 900 offers a performance edge. However, the Infinix Zero X remains a compelling option for budget-conscious buyers who don't mind a slightly slower charging speed.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Infinix Zero X | Oppo Reno6 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 - International |
| 5G bands | - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 20, 28, 7, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA - International |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G |
| - | 1, 3, 28, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA - China | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, September 13 | 2021, May 27 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, September 17 | Available. Released 2021, June 11 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), aluminum frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 164.1 x 75.7 x 7.8 mm (6.46 x 2.98 x 0.31 in) | 156.8 x 72.1 x 7.6 mm (6.17 x 2.84 x 0.30 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 193 g (6.81 oz) | 182 g (6.42 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.43 inches, 99.8 cm2 (~88.3% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 120Hz, 700 nits (peak) | AMOLED, 90Hz, 430 nits (typ), 600 nits (HBM), 750 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6785V/CD Helio G95 (12 nm) | Mediatek Dimensity 900 (6 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G76 MC4 | Mali-G68 MC4 |
| OS | Android 11, XOS 7.6 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 12, ColorOS 12 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | No |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| UFS 2.2 | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Quad-LED flash, HDR, panorama | Color spectrum sensor, LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.4, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.9, (wide), PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/3.4, 125mm (periscope telephoto), PDAF, 5x optical zoom, OIS 8 MP, f/2.3, 13mm, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm, AF | 64 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.7µm, PDAF 8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm 2 MP (macro) |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash | Panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, (wide) | 32 MP, f/2.4, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with dual speakers | Yes |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | Yes | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | FM radio | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 45W wired, 40% in 15 min | 65W wired |
| Type | 4500 mAh | Li-Po 4300 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Nebula Black, Starry Silver | Stellar Black, Aurora, Blue, Purple |
| Models | - | PEQM00, CPH2251 |
| Price | About 320 EUR | € 146.99 / ₹ 25,999 |
| SAR | - | 1.14 W/kg (head) 0.08 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.96 W/kg (head) 1.18 W/kg (body) |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 109h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -30.0 LUFS (Average) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 362450 (v8), 430765 (v9) GeekBench: 2131 (v5.1) |
Infinix Zero X
- More affordable price point
- Decent 45W fast charging
- Capable 5G connectivity
- Less efficient Helio G95 chipset
- Limited display brightness information
- Camera specs are largely unknown
Oppo Reno6 5G
- Faster and more efficient Dimensity 900 chipset
- 65W SuperVOOC charging for rapid top-ups
- Higher peak display brightness
- Higher price compared to the Infinix Zero X
- Battery capacity not specified
- May not offer significant camera improvements over competitors
Display Comparison
The Oppo Reno6 5G boasts a measured peak brightness of 632 nits, suggesting a more visible display in direct sunlight compared to the Infinix Zero X, for which brightness data is unavailable. While both displays likely feature similar infinite contrast ratios (nominal), the Reno6 5G’s higher peak brightness is a tangible advantage for outdoor usability. The absence of refresh rate information for the Zero X suggests it may be limited to 60Hz, while the Reno6 5G is likely to offer a smoother 90Hz or 120Hz experience, enhancing scrolling and animations.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are advertised as having capable photo and video capabilities, but detailed sensor information is lacking for the Infinix Zero X. The Reno6 5G likely benefits from Oppo’s established image processing algorithms. Without knowing the main sensor size or aperture of the Zero X, it’s difficult to assess its low-light performance. The Reno6 5G’s camera system likely prioritizes image quality and consistency, while the Zero X may focus on offering a versatile camera setup at a lower cost. The absence of details regarding OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on either device makes it difficult to compare video stabilization performance.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Infinix Zero X utilizes the Mediatek Helio G95 (12nm), while the Oppo Reno6 5G features the Mediatek Dimensity 900 (6nm). The Dimensity 900’s 6nm fabrication process is significantly more efficient, leading to lower power consumption and potentially less thermal throttling during sustained workloads. The Reno6 5G’s CPU, with its 2x2.4 GHz Cortex-A78 cores, also offers a performance advantage over the Zero X’s 2x2.05 GHz Cortex-A76 cores. While both phones share 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 efficiency cores, the architectural improvements and process node of the Dimensity 900 translate to a smoother experience, particularly in demanding games and multitasking scenarios.
Battery Life
Both the Infinix Zero X and Oppo Reno6 5G share an endurance rating of 109 hours, suggesting similar overall battery life under typical usage. However, the charging speeds differ significantly. The Oppo Reno6 5G’s 65W wired charging is substantially faster than the Zero X’s 45W charging, allowing for a 40% charge in just 15 minutes on the Zero X, but a significantly faster full charge on the Reno6 5G. This faster charging capability is a major convenience factor for users who frequently need to top up their battery quickly.
Buying Guide
Buy the Infinix Zero X if you need a capable 5G smartphone with a decent camera and fast charging without breaking the bank. It’s ideal for users who prioritize value and don’t demand the absolute best performance. Buy the Oppo Reno6 5G if you prefer a more polished experience, faster charging speeds, and a chipset built on a more efficient 6nm process, even if it comes at a higher price.