The Lava Shark and Xiaomi Poco F5 Pro represent distinct approaches to the mid-range smartphone market. The Lava Shark aims for affordability with a Unisoc chipset, while the Poco F5 Pro leverages flagship-tier silicon from Qualcomm. This comparison dissects their strengths and weaknesses to determine which device delivers the best experience for your money.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Xiaomi Poco F5 Pro is the superior choice. Its Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 chipset provides significantly faster performance, and the 67W charging is a game-changer. While the Lava Shark offers a budget-friendly entry point, the Poco F5 Pro’s power and convenience justify the higher cost.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | LTE | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18, 19, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66 |
| 5G bands | SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2025, May 23 | 2023, May 09 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, May 23 | Available. Released 2023, May |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | - | 162.8 x 75.4 x 8.6 mm (6.41 x 2.97 x 0.34 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | - | 204 g (7.20 oz) |
| | - | IP53, dust and splash resistant |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1612 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~262 ppi density) | 1440 x 3200 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~526 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.75 inches, 109.5 cm2 | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~87.5% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 90Hz | AMOLED, 68B colors, 120Hz, Dolby Vision, HDR10+, 500 nits (typ), 1000 nits (HBM), 1400 nits (peak) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.3 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.1 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x3.0 GHz Cortex-X2 & 3x2.5 GHz Cortex-A710 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A510) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T765 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM8475 Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 (4 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Adreno 730 |
| OS | Android 15 | Android 13, upgradable to Android 15 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | No |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM | 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM |
| | - | UFS 3.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 13 MP, (wide), AF | - |
| Triple | - | 64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.7µm, PDAF, OIS
8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 8K@24fps, 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 5 MP | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm |
| Video | Yes | 1080p@30/60fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| | - | 24-bit/192kHz audio |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS | GPS (L1), GLONASS (G1), BDS (B1I), GALILEO (E1), QZSS (L1) |
| Radio | Unspecified | No |
| USB | USB Type-C, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted); unspecified sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 67W wired, PD3.0, QC3+, 50% in 15 min
30W wireless, 50% in 32 min |
| Type | Li-Ion 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5160 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Stellar Gold, Stellar Blue | Black, White |
| Models | - | 23013PC75G |
| Price | About 80 EUR | $ 449.99 / € 241.85 |
| SAR | - | 1.09 W/kg (head) 1.08 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 1.00 W/kg (head) 1.00 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 99h |
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-26.2 LUFS (Good) |
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 1057977 (v9)
GeekBench: 4001 (v5.1), 4009 (v6)
GFXBench: 50fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Lava Shark
- Significantly more affordable
- Decent battery endurance (99h)
- Suitable for basic smartphone tasks
- Underpowered Unisoc T765 chipset
- Slow 18W charging
- Display specifications unknown, likely inferior
Xiaomi Poco F5 Pro
- Flagship-level Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 performance
- Ultra-fast 67W wired and 30W wireless charging
- Bright and high-contrast display (1059 nits)
- Higher price point
- May be overkill for basic users
- Camera details are currently unknown
Display Comparison
The Poco F5 Pro boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 1059 nits, compared to an unspecified brightness for the Lava Shark. This higher peak brightness translates to better visibility outdoors under direct sunlight. While both phones feature 'Photo/Video' capabilities, the Poco F5 Pro’s display’s infinite (nominal) contrast ratio suggests a superior viewing experience with deeper blacks. The Lava Shark’s display specifications are currently unknown, making a detailed comparison difficult, but it’s likely to be a more basic LCD panel.
Camera Comparison
Both phones are listed as having 'Photo/Video' capabilities, but without specific sensor details, a meaningful comparison is limited. However, given the Poco F5 Pro’s positioning as a higher-end device, it’s reasonable to expect a more sophisticated camera system with features like optical image stabilization (OIS) and larger sensor sizes. The Lava Shark likely features a more basic camera setup focused on everyday snapshots. The absence of sensor details for both phones makes it difficult to assess image quality and low-light performance.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Poco F5 Pro’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 (4nm) is a substantial upgrade over the Lava Shark’s Unisoc T765 (6nm). The Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 features a Cortex-X2 prime core clocked at 3.0 GHz, alongside Cortex-A710 and A510 cores, offering significantly higher single-core and multi-core performance. The Unisoc T765, with its Cortex-A76 and A55 cores, is geared towards efficiency but lacks the raw power for demanding tasks. The 4nm process node of the Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 also contributes to better thermal efficiency, reducing the likelihood of performance throttling during extended gaming sessions. The Poco F5 Pro will handle graphically intensive games and applications with ease, while the Lava Shark may struggle with more demanding titles.
Battery Life
Both devices achieve an endurance rating of 99 hours, suggesting comparable battery life under similar usage patterns. However, the Poco F5 Pro’s charging capabilities are vastly superior. With 67W wired charging (supporting PD3.0 and QC3+), it can reach 50% charge in just 15 minutes. It also supports 30W wireless charging, reaching 50% in 32 minutes. The Lava Shark is limited to 18W wired charging, resulting in significantly slower charging times. While both phones may last a full day on a single charge, the Poco F5 Pro’s faster charging provides greater convenience and reduces downtime.
Buying Guide
Buy the Lava Shark if you prioritize extreme affordability and basic smartphone functionality. It’s a suitable option for users who primarily browse the web, use social media, and make calls. Buy the Xiaomi Poco F5 Pro if you demand smooth multitasking, demanding gaming performance, and rapid charging. This phone is ideal for power users and mobile gamers who want a flagship-like experience without the flagship price tag.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Unisoc T765 in the Lava Shark struggle with demanding games like Genshin Impact?
Yes, the Unisoc T765 is a mid-range processor and will likely struggle to deliver a smooth gaming experience in graphically intensive titles like Genshin Impact. You'll likely need to lower graphics settings significantly, and even then, expect frame drops and stuttering. The Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 in the Poco F5 Pro is far better suited for demanding games.
❓ How much faster is the 67W charging on the Poco F5 Pro compared to the Lava Shark's 18W charging?
The difference is substantial. The Poco F5 Pro can charge from 0% to 50% in just 15 minutes, while the Lava Shark will take considerably longer – likely over an hour – to reach the same level. This makes the Poco F5 Pro much more convenient for users who need a quick power boost.
❓ Does the Poco F5 Pro get excessively hot during prolonged gaming sessions?
The Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 is known for its thermal efficiency, especially compared to earlier Snapdragon generations. While it will get warm during extended gaming, the 4nm process node helps to mitigate throttling and maintain consistent performance. However, sustained heavy use will still generate heat.
❓ Is the camera on the Poco F5 Pro good enough for serious photography?
While specific camera specs are unavailable, the Poco F5 Pro's positioning suggests a capable camera system. Expect good image quality in well-lit conditions, and potentially decent low-light performance. However, it's unlikely to compete with dedicated flagship camera phones.
