Released within months of each other in 2020, the Sharp Aquos Zero 2 and Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 5G represent different approaches to the flagship smartphone. The Aquos Zero 2 aimed for a refined, lightweight experience, while the Mi 10 Pro aggressively targeted camera and charging capabilities. This comparison dissects their key differences, focusing on performance, display, camera, and battery to determine which device offers the best value today.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 5G emerges as the stronger choice. Its Snapdragon 865 chipset provides a noticeable performance uplift, and the significantly faster 50W wired and 30W wireless charging capabilities are a major convenience. However, the Aquos Zero 2 may appeal to those prioritizing a potentially lower price point and a more compact form factor.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 28, 38, 39, 41 - Taiwan | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 32, 38, 40 - Global |
| 5G bands | - | 1, 3, 7, 28, 77, 78 Sub6 - Global |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE, 5G (2+ Gbps DL) |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| | - | 1, 3, 41, 78, 79 SA/NSA - China |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, May 22. Released 2020, May 22 | 2020, February 13. Released 2020, February 18 |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 158 x 74 x 8.8 mm (6.22 x 2.91 x 0.35 in) | 162.5 x 74.8 x 9 mm (6.40 x 2.94 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 141 g (4.97 oz) | 208 g (7.34 oz) |
| | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins) | - |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~403 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~386 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.4 inches, 100.5 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 109.2 cm2 (~89.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | OLED, 1B colors, 240Hz, HDR10, Dolby Vision | Super AMOLED, 90Hz, HDR10+, 500 nits (typ) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.78 GHz Kryo 485) | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Cortex-A77 & 3x2.42 GHz Cortex-A77 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855 (7 nm) | Qualcomm SM8250 Snapdragon 865 5G (7 nm+) |
| GPU | Adreno 640 | Adreno 650 |
| OS | Android 10 | Android 10, upgradable to Android 13, MIUI 14 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 256GB 8GB RAM | 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM |
| | UFS 3.0 | UFS 3.0 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | 12.2 MP, f/1.7, (wide), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, OIS
20 MP, f/2.4, 125˚ (ultrawide), AF | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Laser AF, Triple-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | - | 108 MP, f/1.7, (wide), 1/1.33", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS
12 MP, f/2.0, 50mm (telephoto), 1/2.55", 1.4µm, dual pixel PDAF, 2x optical zoom
8 MP, f/2.0, (telephoto), 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS, 3.7x optical zoom, 5x hybrid zoom
20 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/2.8", 1.0µm |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 8K@30fps, 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240/960fps; gyro-EIS |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | HDR | HDR |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.2, 23mm (wide) | 20 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/3", 0.9µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps, gyro-EIS | 1080p@30fps, 720p@120fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| | 24-bit/192kHz audio | 24-bit/192kHz audio |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (G1), BDS (B1), GALILEO (E1+E5a) |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | 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/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, compass, barometer |
| | - | Virtual proximity sensing |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | Wired, PD2.0 | 50W wired, PD3.0
30W wireless
5W reverse wireless |
| Type | Li-Ion 3130 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Blue | Alpine White, Solstice Grey |
| Models | SH-Z20, SHV47, 906SH | M2001J1G |
| Price | About 670 EUR | About 930 EUR |
| SAR | - | 1.09 W/kg (head) 1.02 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.69 W/kg (head) 0.99 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 101h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-25.2 LUFS (Very good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 595246 (v8)
GeekBench: 3331 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 42fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Sharp Aquos Zero 2
- Potentially more affordable price point
- Lighter and more compact design (likely)
- Refined and minimalist aesthetic (based on Sharp's brand)
- Older Snapdragon 855 chipset
- Slower charging speeds (PD2.0 only)
- Lacks 5G connectivity without external modem
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 5G
- Faster Snapdragon 865 5G chipset
- Significantly faster charging (50W wired, 30W wireless)
- Integrated 5G modem
- Larger and heavier design
- Potentially higher price
- More aggressive software (Xiaomi's MIUI)
Display Comparison
The Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro boasts a brighter display, reaching a measured 858 nits, compared to an unspecified peak brightness for the Aquos Zero 2. While both likely utilize high-quality AMOLED panels, the Mi 10 Pro’s higher brightness translates to better visibility in direct sunlight. The Mi 10 Pro’s ‘Infinite’ (nominal) contrast ratio suggests a standard AMOLED implementation, while the Aquos Zero 2’s display technology isn’t detailed, potentially indicating a focus on color accuracy over peak brightness. Bezels are likely comparable given the era, but the Mi 10 Pro’s larger screen size (6.67 inches vs. the Zero 2’s 6.4 inches) will naturally result in a less dense pixel count.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are described as having ‘Photo / Video’ capabilities, but the specifics are lacking. The Mi 10 Pro is known for its 108MP main sensor and versatile camera system, including ultra-wide and telephoto lenses. The Aquos Zero 2’s camera specs are unknown, but given its focus on refinement, it likely prioritizes image quality through software processing rather than sheer megapixel count. Without sensor size or aperture information for the Aquos Zero 2, it’s difficult to make a direct comparison. The Mi 10 Pro’s larger sensor and advanced image processing algorithms likely provide superior low-light performance and dynamic range.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets: the Aquos Zero 2 utilizes the Snapdragon 855 (7nm) while the Mi 10 Pro features the Snapdragon 865 5G (7nm+). The 865 represents a significant architectural improvement, with its Cortex-A77 cores offering better performance per clock cycle than the Kryo 485 cores in the 855. Both CPUs share a similar core configuration (1x high-performance, 3x mid-performance, 4x efficiency), but the 865’s newer architecture provides a clear advantage in demanding tasks. The 865 also integrates a 5G modem, a feature absent in the 855, requiring an external modem in the Aquos Zero 2. While both phones likely feature ample RAM, the 865’s improved memory controller and support for faster LPDDR5 RAM (though not explicitly stated in the provided data) further contribute to its performance lead. Thermal management will be crucial; the 865’s increased power demands could lead to throttling under sustained load.
Battery Life
Both phones share an endurance rating of 101 hours, suggesting similar real-world battery life despite the Aquos Zero 2’s unspecified battery capacity. However, the charging capabilities are drastically different. The Mi 10 Pro supports 50W wired charging (PD3.0), 30W wireless charging, and 5W reverse wireless charging, allowing for a full charge in under an hour. The Aquos Zero 2 only supports wired charging via PD2.0, lacking wireless charging altogether. This charging speed disparity is a significant advantage for the Mi 10 Pro, offering unparalleled convenience for users who frequently need to top up their battery.
Buying Guide
Buy the Sharp Aquos Zero 2 if you prioritize a lighter, potentially more affordable flagship experience and aren't heavily reliant on the latest processing power or fastest charging speeds. Buy the Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 5G if you demand top-tier performance, a versatile camera system, and the convenience of incredibly fast wired and wireless charging, even if it means a larger device.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Does the Snapdragon 865 in the Mi 10 Pro exhibit significant thermal throttling during extended gaming sessions?
While the Snapdragon 865 is a powerful chip, it can generate considerable heat under sustained load. The Mi 10 Pro incorporates a vapor chamber cooling system to mitigate throttling, but some performance degradation is still possible during prolonged gaming. However, it will still outperform the Snapdragon 855 in the Aquos Zero 2 even with some throttling.
❓ Is the lack of wireless charging on the Aquos Zero 2 a dealbreaker for users accustomed to this convenience?
For users who regularly utilize wireless charging, the absence of this feature on the Aquos Zero 2 is a significant drawback, especially considering the Mi 10 Pro’s 30W wireless charging capability. The reliance on wired charging via PD2.0 is considerably slower than the Mi 10 Pro’s options.
❓ How does the software experience differ between Xiaomi's MIUI and Sharp's Aquos OS?
Xiaomi's MIUI is known for its feature-richness and customization options, but it can also be perceived as bloated and aggressive with notifications. Sharp's Aquos OS typically offers a cleaner, more minimalist experience, prioritizing simplicity and ease of use. This difference in software philosophy caters to different user preferences.
