The Oppo A95 and Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G represent compelling options in the crowded budget smartphone market. The A95 focuses on a balanced experience, while the Poco X4 Pro 5G aggressively targets users prioritizing 5G connectivity and rapid charging. This comparison dissects their key differences to help you choose the right device.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G emerges as the stronger choice. Its newer Snapdragon 695 chipset, built on a more efficient 6nm process, delivers noticeably better performance and 5G capabilities. The significantly faster 67W charging is a game-changer, offsetting the similar battery endurance ratings.
| 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 - Global |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Global |
| 5G bands | - | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA - Global |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 40, 78 SA/NSA - India |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, November 16 | 2022, February 28 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, November 16 | Available. Released 2022, March 23 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 160.3 x 73.8 x 8 mm (6.31 x 2.91 x 0.31 in) | 164.2 x 76.1 x 8.1 mm (6.46 x 3.00 x 0.32 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 175 g (6.17 oz) | 205 g (7.23 oz) |
| | - | IP53, dust and splash resistant |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~409 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.43 inches, 99.8 cm2 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 430 nits (typ), 800 nits (peak) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 700 nits, 1200 nits (peak) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6115 Snapdragon 662 (11 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 11, ColorOS 11.1 | Android 11, MIUI 13 for POCO |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| | - | UFS 2.2 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | 108 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.52", 0.7µm, PDAF - Global version
64 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 0.7µm, PDAF - India version
8 MP, f/2.2, 118˚ (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro) |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, 27mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| | - | 24-bit/192kHz audio |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO |
| Radio | Unspecified | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/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 | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 33W wired, 54% in 30 min | 67W wired, PD3.0, QC3, 70% in 22 min, 100% in 41 min |
| Type | Li-Po 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Glowing Starry Black, Glowing Rainbow Silver | Laser Black, Laser Blue, Poco Yellow |
| Models | CHP2365, CPH2365 | 2201116PG |
| Price | About 230 EUR | € 160.40 / $ 419.99 / £ 255.00 / ₹ 12,940 |
| SAR | - | 1.06 W/kg (head) 1.09 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.60 W/kg (head) 0.96 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 119h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-26.8 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 335353 (v8), 384646 (v9)
GeekBench: 2063 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 17fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo A95
- Reliable and consistent performance for everyday tasks.
- Balanced feature set.
- Potentially more refined software experience (depending on ColorOS version).
- Older Snapdragon 662 chipset.
- Slower 33W charging.
- Lacks 5G connectivity.
Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G
- Faster Snapdragon 695 5G chipset.
- Significantly faster 67W charging with PD3.0/QC3.
- Future-proof 5G connectivity.
- Software experience can be more heavily customized (MIUI).
- Potential for more pre-installed bloatware.
- May experience more aggressive battery optimization.
Display Comparison
Both devices share an 'Infinite' (nominal) contrast ratio, suggesting typical IPS LCD characteristics. However, detailed display specs like peak brightness and color gamut coverage are missing. Given the Poco X4 Pro 5G’s positioning, it likely benefits from a slightly more modern panel. The lack of high refresh rate on either device suggests a focus on power efficiency over visual fluidity.
Camera Comparison
Both phones list 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details. Without sensor size or aperture information, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the market segment suggests the Poco X4 Pro 5G may feature a more advanced primary sensor. The Oppo A95 likely relies on software processing to enhance image quality, while the Poco’s newer ISP (Image Signal Processor) within the Snapdragon 695 could offer superior noise reduction and dynamic range. The presence of a 2MP macro lens on either device is largely a marketing tactic and unlikely to deliver significant photographic value.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Poco X4 Pro 5G’s Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm) is a clear upgrade over the Oppo A95’s Snapdragon 662 (11nm). The 6nm process inherently offers better power efficiency and thermal performance, translating to sustained performance during prolonged use. The CPU configuration – 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver in the Poco versus 4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver in the Oppo – further favors the Poco, particularly in multi-threaded tasks. While both phones likely feature similar RAM configurations, the chipset advantage gives the Poco a significant edge.
Battery Life
Both phones achieve an endurance rating of 119 hours, indicating similar real-world battery life under typical usage. However, the charging speeds are drastically different. The Oppo A95’s 33W charging reaches 54% in 30 minutes, while the Poco X4 Pro 5G’s 67W charging hits 70% in 22 minutes and 100% in 41 minutes. This faster charging is a substantial convenience factor, especially for users who frequently need to top up their battery quickly. The Poco also supports PD3.0 and QC3 standards, offering wider charger compatibility.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo A95 if you prioritize a consistently reliable, if not groundbreaking, experience and are less concerned with 5G or extremely fast charging. It's a solid all-rounder for everyday tasks. Buy the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G if you want future-proof 5G connectivity, significantly faster charging speeds, and a more capable processor for gaming and demanding applications.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Poco X4 Pro 5G's 6nm Snapdragon 695 chipset run noticeably hotter than the Oppo A95's Snapdragon 662 during extended gaming sessions?
The 6nm process of the Snapdragon 695 is inherently more thermally efficient than the 11nm process of the Snapdragon 662. While the 695 is more powerful, it's designed to maintain performance for longer periods without significant throttling, meaning it's likely to run cooler under sustained load.
❓ Is the 67W charging on the Poco X4 Pro 5G compatible with all USB-C chargers, or do I need a specific charger to achieve the fastest speeds?
The Poco X4 Pro 5G supports USB Power Delivery (PD3.0) and Quick Charge 3 (QC3) standards. While it will charge with any USB-C charger, you'll need a charger that specifically supports PD3.0 or QC3 to achieve the full 67W charging speed. Using a standard USB-C charger will result in slower charging times.
❓ How does the software experience differ between Oppo's ColorOS on the A95 and Xiaomi's MIUI on the Poco X4 Pro 5G?
ColorOS is generally considered to be a more refined and less intrusive software experience compared to MIUI. MIUI often includes more pre-installed apps (bloatware) and a more heavily customized user interface. However, MIUI offers a wider range of customization options and features.
