Released in 2020, the Meizu 17 Pro and Oppo Reno Ace represent distinct approaches to the flagship smartphone experience. The Reno Ace prioritized blazing-fast charging and a competitive price, while the Meizu 17 Pro aimed for a more holistic premium experience with a newer chipset and wireless charging. This comparison dissects their key differences to determine which device holds up better today.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Meizu 17 Pro emerges as the stronger choice. While the Oppo Reno Ace boasts incredibly fast 65W wired charging, the Meizu 17 Pro’s Snapdragon 865 offers a noticeable performance uplift and the addition of 27W wireless charging provides greater convenience. The Reno Ace remains a compelling option for those prioritizing charging speed above all else.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 |
| 5G bands | 41, 78, 79 SA/NSA | - |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE |
| | CDMA 800 & TD-SCDMA | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, May 08. Released 2020, May 11 | 2019, October. Released 2019, October |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, ceramic back, ceramic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 6), glass back (Gorilla Glass 5), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 160 x 77.2 x 8.5 mm (6.30 x 3.04 x 0.33 in) | 161 x 75.7 x 8.7 mm (6.34 x 2.98 x 0.34 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 219 g (7.72 oz) | 200 g (7.05 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~390 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~402 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.6 inches, 106.9 cm2 (~86.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.5 inches, 103.5 cm2 (~84.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 700 nits (typ) | AMOLED, 90Hz, HDR10, 500 nits (typ) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Cortex-A77 & 3x2.42 GHz Cortex-A77 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.96 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 485) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM8250 Snapdragon 865 5G (7 nm+) | Qualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855+ (7 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 650 | Adreno 640 (700 MHz) |
| OS | Android 10, Flyme 8.1 | Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 10, ColorOS 7.0 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| | UFS 3.1 | UFS 3.0 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | 5-LED dual-tone flash, Auto-HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS
13 MP, f/2.4, 53mm (telephoto), 1/3.4", 1.0µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/3.2", 1.4µm, AF
2 MP B/W, f/2.4, 1/5.0", 1.75µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.72", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.4, 79mm (telephoto), 1.0µm, PDAF
32 MP, f/2.2, 15mm, 129˚ (ultrawide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm
0.3 MP, TOF 3D, f/1.4, (depth) | - |
| Video | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p; gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; (gyro-EIS); video rec. only with main camera |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 0.8µm | 16 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | Yes |
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with dual speakers |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS |
| Radio | No | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 а/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, 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 | 30W wired, QC3, 45% in 30 min
27W wireless | 65W wired, 100% in 30 min |
| Type | Li-Po 4500 mAh | Li-Po 4000 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Mint, Black, White | Electric purple, Interstellar blue, Gundam Edition |
| Models | - | PCLM10 |
| Price | About 560 EUR | About 380 EUR |
| Tests |
|---|
| Audio quality | - |
Noise -92.0dB / Crosstalk -93.3dB |
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 99h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
Voice 79dB / Noise 75dB / Ring 87dB
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 354367 (v7), 434063 (v8)
GeekBench: 11008 (v4.4), 2627 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 35fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Meizu 17 Pro
- More powerful Snapdragon 865 chipset
- Wireless charging support (27W)
- Potentially better thermal management
- Likely superior camera image processing
- Slower wired charging (30W)
- Display specs are unknown
Oppo Reno Ace
- Incredibly fast 65W wired charging
- Excellent battery endurance (99h)
- Bright display (717 nits)
- Competitive price point
- Older Snapdragon 855+ chipset
- No wireless charging
- Potentially less refined camera system
Display Comparison
The Oppo Reno Ace’s display achieves a measured peak brightness of 717 nits, a respectable figure for outdoor visibility. However, the context data lacks specifics on the Meizu 17 Pro’s display, making a direct brightness comparison difficult. Given Meizu’s history with high-quality panels, it’s reasonable to assume comparable or superior brightness. Both displays feature an 'infinite' (nominal) contrast ratio, typical of AMOLED technology. The Reno Ace’s display is likely a standard 60Hz panel, while the Meizu 17 Pro, being a higher-tier device, may have included a higher refresh rate, though this is not confirmed in the provided data.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are described as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, lacking specific details. However, the absence of sensor size information necessitates a cautious approach. Given the Reno Ace’s focus on value, it likely employs a more cost-optimized camera system. The Meizu 17 Pro, positioned as a premium device, likely features a larger main sensor and more sophisticated image processing algorithms. Without further data, it’s difficult to assess the quality of either camera system beyond general expectations for flagship-level devices. We can assume both phones offer a variety of shooting modes, but the Meizu 17 Pro likely provides a more refined and consistent photographic experience.
Performance
The Meizu 17 Pro’s Snapdragon 865 5G (7nm+) chipset represents a significant architectural leap over the Oppo Reno Ace’s Snapdragon 855+ (7nm). The 865 features the newer Cortex-A77 cores in its prime configuration (1x2.84 GHz), offering improved IPC (Instructions Per Clock) compared to the Kryo 485 cores (1x2.96 GHz) in the 855+. While the 855+ boasts a slightly higher clock speed on its prime core, the 865’s architectural improvements and 5G modem integration provide a more well-rounded performance advantage. The 865 also benefits from a more efficient 7nm+ node, potentially leading to better thermal management during sustained workloads. This translates to longer gaming sessions with less throttling for the Meizu 17 Pro.
Battery Life
Both the Meizu 17 Pro and Oppo Reno Ace achieve an impressive endurance rating of 99 hours, suggesting similar real-world battery life despite differing charging technologies. The Reno Ace’s standout feature is its 65W wired charging, capable of a full charge in just 30 minutes. The Meizu 17 Pro, while slower at 30W wired charging (45% in 30 minutes), compensates with the addition of 27W wireless charging. This provides a convenient alternative for topping up the battery without needing a cable. The Reno Ace’s charging speed is ideal for users who frequently run out of battery, while the Meizu 17 Pro offers a more versatile charging ecosystem.
Buying Guide
Buy the Meizu 17 Pro if you need a more future-proof device with better overall performance, wireless charging capabilities, and a slightly more refined software experience. Buy the Oppo Reno Ace if you absolutely prioritize the fastest possible wired charging and are willing to compromise on chipset generation and wireless charging convenience. Gamers will also appreciate the 865's improved GPU.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 855+ in the Oppo Reno Ace throttle significantly during extended gaming sessions?
The Snapdragon 855+ is a capable chipset, but it is known to throttle under sustained load due to its 7nm process. While Oppo likely implemented thermal management solutions, the Meizu 17 Pro’s Snapdragon 865 with its 7nm+ process will generally exhibit less throttling and maintain higher performance for longer periods during demanding games.
❓ How does the 27W wireless charging on the Meizu 17 Pro compare to the 65W wired charging on the Oppo Reno Ace in terms of convenience?
While 65W wired charging is significantly faster, 27W wireless charging offers unparalleled convenience. You can simply place the Meizu 17 Pro on a wireless charging pad without needing to fumble with cables. For users who prioritize ease of use over absolute charging speed, wireless charging is a compelling advantage.
❓ Is the difference in chipset performance between the Snapdragon 865 and 855+ noticeable in everyday tasks?
For basic tasks like browsing, social media, and messaging, the difference will be minimal. However, when launching demanding apps, multitasking, or playing graphically intensive games, the Snapdragon 865 in the Meizu 17 Pro will provide a smoother and more responsive experience.
