Released within a similar timeframe, the Oppo A3 (2018) and Oppo F9 (F9 Pro) represent Oppo’s efforts in the competitive mid-range smartphone market. Both devices center around the Mediatek Helio P60 chipset, but diverge in areas like display quality and charging capabilities, making a direct comparison crucial for budget-conscious consumers.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Oppo F9 (F9 Pro) is the better choice. While both phones share the same Helio P60 processor, the F9’s significantly improved display contrast ratio (1814:1 vs. unspecified for the A3) and 20W fast charging provide a more refined user experience, justifying a potential price premium.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 - all versions |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat13 600/100 Mbps | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat13 600/100 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2018, April. Released 2018, May | 2018, August. Released 2018, August |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 6), aluminum back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 156 x 75.3 x 7.8 mm (6.14 x 2.96 x 0.31 in) | 156.7 x 74 x 8 mm (6.17 x 2.91 x 0.31 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 159 g (5.61 oz) | 169 g (5.96 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2280 pixels, 19:9 ratio (~405 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.2 inches, 96.9 cm2 (~82.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.3 inches, 97.4 cm2 (~84.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53) | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6771 Helio P60 (12 nm) | Mediatek MT6771 Helio P60 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G72 MP3 | Mali-G72 MP3 |
| OS | Android 8.1 (Oreo), ColorOS 5 | Android 8.1 (Oreo), upgradable to Android 10, ColorOS 7.0 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | - | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | - | 16 MP, f/1.8, 1/3.1, 1.0µm, PDAF
Auxiliary lens |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/1.8, PDAF | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.2 | 25 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.9µm |
| Video | - | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 4.2, A2DP, LE | 4.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | GPS | GPS, GLONASS, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | microUSB 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | - | 20W wired |
| Type | Li-Ion 3400 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 3500 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Knight Black, Soybean Meal, Stardust Silver, Garnet Red | Sunrise Red, Twilight Blue, Starry Purple, Jade Green |
| Models | PADM00, CPH1837, PADT00 | CPH1823, CPH1881, CPH1825 |
| Price | About 330 EUR | About 290 EUR |
| Tests |
|---|
| Audio quality | - |
Noise -92.8dB / Crosstalk -92.1dB |
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 94h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1814:1 (nominal), 3.069 (sunlight) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
Voice 71dB / Noise 74dB / Ring 81dB
|
| Performance | - |
GeekBench: 5673 (v4.4)
GFXBench: 6.5fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo A3 (2018)
- Potentially lower price point
- Identical processor to the F9
- Similar battery endurance
- Lack of detailed display specifications
- No information on charging speed
- Limited camera details
Oppo F9 (F9 Pro)
- Superior display contrast ratio
- 20W fast charging
- Similar battery endurance
- Potentially higher price
- Shares the same processor as the A3
- Limited camera details
Display Comparison
Both the Oppo A3 and F9 feature displays with a contrast ratio of 1814:1 (nominal) and 3.069 (sunlight), suggesting similar panel technology and outdoor visibility. However, the lack of detailed display specifications for the A3 – such as screen size, resolution, and panel type – makes a definitive assessment difficult. The F9’s higher contrast ratio in sunlight implies better readability under direct sunlight conditions, a benefit for outdoor users. Without knowing the A3’s peak brightness, it’s hard to determine if it can compete with the F9 in bright environments.
Camera Comparison
Both the Oppo A3 and F9 are listed with 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or features like Optical Image Stabilization (OIS). This makes a meaningful camera comparison impossible. It’s likely both phones rely on software processing to enhance image quality, but without knowing the hardware specifications, it’s difficult to assess their photographic capabilities. The prevalence of low-resolution auxiliary cameras in this price range suggests avoiding expectations of high-quality macro or depth sensing.
Performance
The core performance of both devices is identical, powered by the Mediatek MT6771 Helio P60 (12 nm) chipset with an octa-core CPU configuration (4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53). This means users can expect similar performance in everyday tasks, multitasking, and even moderate gaming. Thermal management will likely be comparable, as the chipset and process node are the same. The absence of RAM specifications for the A3 prevents a complete performance comparison; however, the F9’s performance will be influenced by its RAM configuration, which is not provided in the context data.
Battery Life
Both the Oppo A3 and F9 achieve an endurance rating of 94 hours, indicating similar battery life under typical usage scenarios. However, the F9’s 20W wired charging capability provides a significant advantage over the A3, which lacks charging speed information. 20W charging allows for a much faster 0-100% charge time, reducing downtime and improving convenience. While both phones offer comparable endurance, the F9’s faster charging is a practical benefit for users who frequently need to top up their battery.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A3 (2018) if you prioritize a potentially lower price point and are comfortable with a more basic feature set. Buy the Oppo F9 (F9 Pro) if you value a more vibrant display for media consumption and faster charging to minimize downtime, even if it means spending slightly more.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Helio P60 in either phone struggle with demanding games like PUBG Mobile?
The Helio P60 is a capable mid-range chipset, but it will likely require reduced graphics settings and frame rates to achieve smooth gameplay in demanding titles like PUBG Mobile. Expect playable performance at medium settings, but don't anticipate a high-end gaming experience on either the A3 or F9.
❓ Given the similar battery endurance ratings, will I notice a real-world difference in how long these phones last on a single charge?
While both phones have a 94-hour endurance rating, the F9’s 20W fast charging provides a significant advantage in convenience. You’ll spend less time tethered to a charger, even if the overall battery life is comparable. The A3’s charging speed, being unknown, is likely slower, impacting usability for those who frequently need to recharge.
❓ Is the lack of detailed camera information a major drawback for both phones?
Yes, the absence of sensor size, aperture, and OIS details makes it difficult to assess the camera performance. It’s likely both phones rely heavily on software processing, and image quality may be inconsistent, especially in low-light conditions. Don't expect flagship-level camera capabilities from either device.
