The Oppo K9 Pro and Xiaomi Poco F4 GT represent compelling options in the increasingly competitive mid-range to upper-mid-range smartphone market. The K9 Pro, powered by the Mediatek Dimensity 1200, aims for a balanced experience, while the Poco F4 GT aggressively targets gamers with the flagship Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1. This comparison dissects their strengths and weaknesses to determine which device best suits your needs.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing raw performance and ultra-fast charging, the Xiaomi Poco F4 GT emerges as the winner. Its Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 chipset delivers a noticeable performance edge, and the 120W charging is significantly faster than the K9 Pro’s 60W. However, the K9 Pro remains a strong contender for those seeking a more efficient processor and a potentially more refined software experience.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| 5G bands | 1, 28, 41, 77, 78 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 / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | CDMA2000 1x | - |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2021, September 26 | 2022, April 26 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, October 20 | Available. Released 2022, April 28 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass Victus), glass back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 158.7 x 73.5 x 8.5 mm (6.25 x 2.89 x 0.33 in) | 162.5 x 76.7 x 8.5 mm (6.40 x 3.02 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 180 g (6.35 oz) | 210 g (7.41 oz) |
| | - | Physical magnetic pop-up gaming triggers |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass Victus |
| 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 (~85.6% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.2% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10, 430 nits (typ), 800 nits (peak) | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, HDR10+, 800 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.0 GHz Cortex-A78 & 3x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x3.00 GHz Cortex-X2 & 3x2.50 GHz Cortex-A710 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A510) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 1200 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM8450 Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 (4 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G77 MC9 | Adreno 730 |
| OS | Android 11, ColorOS 11.3 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 14, HyperOS 2 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM |
| | UFS 3.1 | UFS 3.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama | Color spectrum sensor, Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm |
| Triple | 64 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 119˚ (ultrawide)
2 MP (macro) | 64 MP, f/1.9, 26mm (wide), 1/1.73", 0.8µm, PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 120˚ (ultrawide)
2 MP (macro) |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps; gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps, 720p@960fps, HDR |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.4, (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.4, (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 1080p@30/60fps, 720p@120fps, HDR |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers (4 speakers) |
| | - | 24-bit/192kHz audio
Tuned by JBL |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.2, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (L1), BDS (B1I+B1c+B2a), GALILEO (E1+E5a), QZSS (L1+L5), NavIC (L5) |
| Radio | No | No |
| 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 Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, compass |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 60W wired, 50% in 16 min | 120W wired, PD3.0, QC3, 100% in 17 min |
| Type | Li-Po 4500 mAh | Li-Po 4700 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Black, Aurora | Stealth Black, Knight Silver, Cyber Yellow |
| Models | PEYM00 | 21121210G |
| Price | About 360 EUR | € 227.11 / £ 339.99 |
| SAR | - | 1.09 W/kg (head) 0.99 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.59 W/kg (head) 0.96 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 81h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-27.4 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 952124 (v9)
GeekBench: 3637 (v5.1) |
Oppo K9 Pro
- More efficient processor (Dimensity 1200)
- Potentially better sustained performance due to lower thermal output
- Competitive price point
- Less powerful chipset compared to Snapdragon 8 Gen 1
- Slower charging speed (60W)
- Potentially less advanced camera system
Xiaomi Poco F4 GT
- Flagship-level performance (Snapdragon 8 Gen 1)
- Ultra-fast 120W charging
- Likely superior camera system
- Higher power consumption and potential for thermal throttling
- May be more expensive than the Oppo K9 Pro
- Potentially shorter battery lifespan due to faster charging cycles
Display Comparison
Both devices feature displays with an 'Infinite' contrast ratio, suggesting excellent black levels, likely utilizing AMOLED technology. However, detailed specifications like peak brightness and refresh rate are missing. Given the Poco F4 GT’s gaming focus, it likely boasts a higher refresh rate (potentially 120Hz or higher) than the K9 Pro, offering smoother visuals during fast-paced gameplay. The absence of LTPO information suggests neither phone dynamically adjusts refresh rates for power saving, but the Poco’s panel is likely tuned for lower response times.
Camera Comparison
Both phones are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but specific details are absent. The absence of sensor size information makes a direct comparison difficult. However, given the Poco F4 GT’s flagship positioning, it likely features a more advanced camera system with a larger primary sensor and potentially optical image stabilization (OIS). The K9 Pro may focus on computational photography to compensate for potentially smaller sensors. We can assume both phones offer a range of shooting modes, but the Poco F4 GT is likely to excel in low-light conditions and video recording.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Poco F4 GT’s Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 (4nm) is built on a smaller node than the K9 Pro’s Dimensity 1200 (6nm), theoretically offering superior power efficiency and thermal performance. The Snapdragon 8 Gen 1’s CPU configuration – 1x Cortex-X2 at 3.00 GHz, 3x Cortex-A710 at 2.50 GHz, and 4x Cortex-A510 at 1.80 GHz – is geared towards peak performance, while the Dimensity 1200’s – 1x Cortex-A78 at 3.0 GHz, 3x Cortex-A78 at 2.6 GHz, and 4x Cortex-A55 at 2.0 GHz – prioritizes a balance between performance and efficiency. While the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 has a theoretical advantage, its known thermal limitations could lead to throttling during extended gaming sessions, potentially negating some of its performance gains. The Poco F4 GT likely benefits from faster RAM (LPDDR5x) compared to the K9 Pro, further enhancing its performance.
Battery Life
Both devices exhibit an endurance rating of 81 hours, suggesting comparable real-world battery life despite differing charging speeds. However, this rating doesn't account for the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1’s higher power consumption. The Poco F4 GT’s 120W charging is a game-changer, achieving a full charge in just 17 minutes, while the K9 Pro takes 16 minutes to reach 50%. This faster charging is a significant advantage for users who frequently need to top up their battery quickly. The Poco’s higher peak power draw during charging may also contribute to increased heat generation.
Buying Guide
Buy the Oppo K9 Pro if you need a phone that balances performance with efficiency, offering a smooth daily experience without aggressively pushing thermal limits. It’s ideal for users who value consistent performance over peak bursts. Buy the Xiaomi Poco F4 GT if you prioritize maximum gaming performance, lightning-fast charging, and don’t mind potential thermal throttling under sustained heavy loads. This phone is built for demanding mobile gamers and power users.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 in the Poco F4 GT suffer from significant overheating during prolonged gaming sessions?
The Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 is known to generate substantial heat under sustained load. While the Poco F4 GT likely incorporates cooling solutions, users should expect some degree of thermal throttling during extended gaming sessions, potentially impacting performance over time. The Oppo K9 Pro’s Dimensity 1200 is less prone to overheating, offering more consistent performance.
❓ How does the 120W charging on the Poco F4 GT affect long-term battery health compared to the K9 Pro's 60W charging?
While 120W charging is incredibly fast, it can generate more heat and potentially accelerate battery degradation over the long term. However, modern smartphones employ battery management systems to mitigate these effects. The K9 Pro’s slower 60W charging is generally considered gentler on the battery, but the difference in long-term battery health may be minimal with proper charging habits.
❓ Is the difference in CPU architecture between the Dimensity 1200 and Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 noticeable in everyday tasks?
For typical daily tasks like browsing, social media, and video streaming, the difference between the two chipsets will be minimal. Both processors are more than capable of handling these workloads smoothly. The Snapdragon 8 Gen 1’s advantage becomes more apparent in demanding applications like gaming and video editing.
