The mid-range smartphone market is fiercely competitive, and the Oppo F31 Pro and Xiaomi Poco X3 Pro represent compelling options for users seeking performance and features without a flagship price tag. The F31 Pro arrives with MediaTek’s newer Dimensity 7300, while the X3 Pro leverages the established Snapdragon 860. This comparison dissects their key differences to determine which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing rapid charging and potentially more efficient performance, the Oppo F31 Pro emerges as the winner. Its 80W charging significantly outperforms the Poco X3 Pro’s 33W, and the Dimensity 7300’s 4nm process offers a potential edge in thermal management. However, gamers heavily invested in Snapdragon optimizations may still prefer the X3 Pro.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 19, 28, 38, 40, 41, 42, 48 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - International |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA | - |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 - India |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2025, September 16 | 2021, March 22 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, September 16 | Available. Released 2021, March 24 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 6), plastic back |
| Dimensions | 158.2 x 75 x 8 mm (6.23 x 2.95 x 0.31 in) | 165.3 x 76.8 x 9.4 mm (6.51 x 3.02 x 0.37 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 215 g (7.58 oz) |
| | - | IP53, dust and splash resistant |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | DT-Star D+ | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2372 pixels (~397 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.57 inches, 105.0 cm2 (~88.5% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~84.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, 600 nits (typ), 1400 nits (HBM) | IPS LCD, 120Hz, 2404Hz PWM, HDR10, 450 nits (typ) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.96 GHz Kryo 485 Gold & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 Gold & 4x1.78 GHz Kryo 485 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 7300 (4 nm) | Qualcomm Snapdragon 860 (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G615 MC2 | Adreno 640 |
| OS | Android 15, ColorOS 15 | Android 11, upgradable to Android 12, MIUI 13 for POCO |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| | - | UFS 3.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF, OIS
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | Color spectrum sensor, LED flash, HDR, panorama | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide), 1.0µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Single | - | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.4", 0.8µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps, gyro-EIS, OIS | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps, 1080p@960fps, gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | Panorama | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.4, (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/3.4", 0.8µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| | - | 24-bit/192kHz audio |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, GLONASS, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | No | FM radio, recording |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band | 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 | 80W wired, 33W PPS, 13.5W PD, 13.5W QC, UFCS, 37% in 20 min
10W reverse wired | 33W wired, 59% in 30 min, 100% in 59 min |
| Type | Si/C Li-Ion 7000 mAh | Li-Po 5160 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Space Grey, Desert Gold | Phantom Black, Frost Blue, Metal Bronze |
| Models | CPH2763 | M2102J20SG, M2102J20SI |
| Price | About 260 EUR | $ 128.04 / £ 249.99 |
| SAR | 1.13 W/kg (head) 0.84 W/kg (body) | 0.99 W/kg (head) 0.67 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.57 W/kg (head) 0.90 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 112h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1401:1 (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-26.1 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 453223 (v8)
GeekBench: 2574 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 38fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Oppo F31 Pro
- Significantly faster 80W charging
- Potentially better thermal management with 4nm Dimensity 7300
- Modern CPU architecture
- Missing detailed display specifications
- Camera specs are unknown
Xiaomi Poco X3 Pro
- Proven Snapdragon 860 performance
- Established gaming optimizations
- Good battery endurance (112h)
- Slower 33W charging
- 7nm process may run hotter under load
- Display isn't a standout feature
Display Comparison
Both devices share a nominal contrast ratio of 1401:1, suggesting similar visual pop. However, detailed display specs like peak brightness, panel type (LCD vs AMOLED), and refresh rate are missing for the Oppo F31 Pro. The Poco X3 Pro’s display, while adequate, isn’t known for exceptional color accuracy or brightness. Without further data on the F31 Pro’s panel, it’s difficult to definitively declare a winner, but the X3 Pro’s established specs provide a baseline.
Camera Comparison
Detailed camera specifications beyond 'Photo / Video' are absent for both devices. This makes a direct comparison challenging. However, the importance of sensor size and image processing algorithms cannot be overstated. Without knowing the megapixel counts, aperture values, or the presence of Optical Image Stabilization (OIS), it’s impossible to determine which phone captures superior images. The absence of detail suggests neither phone is positioned as a camera-centric flagship.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Oppo F31 Pro’s MediaTek Dimensity 7300 (4nm) boasts a modern CPU configuration with 4x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 cores and 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This contrasts with the Xiaomi Poco X3 Pro’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 860 (7nm), featuring a 1x2.96 GHz Kryo 485 Gold core, 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 Gold cores, and 4x1.78 GHz Kryo 485 Silver cores. The Dimensity 7300’s 4nm process should translate to improved power efficiency and potentially lower temperatures under sustained load compared to the 7nm Snapdragon 860. While the Snapdragon 860’s single prime core clocks slightly higher, the Dimensity 7300’s architecture and process node give it a potential advantage in multi-core tasks and sustained performance. RAM specifications are missing for both, but LPDDR5X would be a significant benefit for either.
Battery Life
The Poco X3 Pro has an endurance rating of 112 hours, but the Oppo F31 Pro’s battery life is unknown. However, the charging speeds are dramatically different. The F31 Pro’s 80W wired charging, with support for 33W PPS, 13.5W PD, 13.5W QC, and UFCS, is significantly faster than the X3 Pro’s 33W wired charging. The F31 Pro can achieve 37% charge in just 20 minutes, while the X3 Pro takes 30 minutes for 59% and nearly an hour for a full charge. This charging speed difference is a major advantage for the F31 Pro, mitigating any potential disadvantage from a smaller battery capacity (if one exists).
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo F31 Pro if you need blazing-fast charging, appreciate a potentially cooler-running device during extended use, and value the benefits of a newer chipset architecture. Buy the Xiaomi Poco X3 Pro if you prioritize a proven gaming platform with established Snapdragon optimizations, and are less concerned with the latest charging technology or the newest processor generation.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Dimensity 7300 in the Oppo F31 Pro overheat during prolonged gaming sessions?
The Dimensity 7300’s 4nm process is designed for improved thermal efficiency compared to the Snapdragon 860’s 7nm process. While gaming performance will depend on software optimization, the F31 Pro *should* exhibit less throttling and maintain higher frame rates for longer periods under sustained load. However, real-world testing is needed to confirm this.
❓ Is the 33W charging on the Poco X3 Pro slow compared to the Oppo F31 Pro's 80W?
Yes, the difference is substantial. The Oppo F31 Pro can gain 37% charge in 20 minutes, while the Poco X3 Pro requires 30 minutes to reach 59%. A full charge on the X3 Pro takes nearly an hour, whereas the F31 Pro will likely be significantly faster. This makes the F31 Pro ideal for users who need to quickly top up their battery.
❓ Will the Snapdragon 860 in the Poco X3 Pro provide a better gaming experience than the Dimensity 7300 in the Oppo F31 Pro?
The Snapdragon 860 has a strong track record in gaming, with many titles optimized for Qualcomm chipsets. However, the Dimensity 7300 is a capable performer and its modern architecture could offer competitive performance. The actual gaming experience will depend on the specific game and software optimization on both devices.
