The Tecno Pova and Xiaomi Poco M5 represent compelling options in the ultra-competitive budget smartphone space. Both aim to deliver a solid experience without breaking the bank, but they take different approaches. The Pova prioritizes a larger form factor and potentially aggressive pricing, while the Poco M5 focuses on a more refined chipset and display experience. This comparison will dissect their strengths and weaknesses to determine which phone reigns supreme.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For most users, the Xiaomi Poco M5 emerges as the better choice. Its Mediatek Helio G99 chipset, built on a more efficient 6nm process, provides a noticeable performance advantage over the Tecno Pova’s Helio G80. While both offer similar 18W charging and endurance ratings, the Poco M5’s superior processing power makes it the more versatile device.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA, LTE |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, October 03. Released 2020, October 16 | 2022, September 05 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2022, September 13 |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 3), plastic frame, plastic back |
| Dimensions | 171.2 x 77.6 x 9.4 mm (6.74 x 3.06 x 0.37 in) | 164 x 76.1 x 8.9 mm (6.46 x 3.00 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | - | 201 g (7.09 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1640 pixels (~263 ppi density) | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.8 inches, 109.8 cm2 (~82.7% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~83.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 480 nits (peak) | IPS LCD, 90Hz, 500 nits (HBM) |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek MT6769V/CU Helio G80 (12 nm) | Mediatek Helio G99 (6 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G52 MC2 | Mali-G57 MC2 |
| OS | Android 10, HIOS 7.0 | Android 12, upgradable to Android 14, HyperOS |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (dedicated slot) |
| Internal | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | - | UFS 2.2 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Features | Quad-LED flash | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 13 MP or 16 MP, f/1.9, (wide), PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lenses | - |
| Triple | - | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens |
| Video | 1440p@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | Dual-LED flash | - |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0 | 5 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/5.0", 1.12µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.3, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 18W wired |
| Type | 6000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Magic Blue, Speed Purple, Dazzle Black | Black, Green, Yellow |
| Models | LD7, LD7j, MZ-TECNO LD7 | 22071219CG |
| Price | About 110 EUR | About 100 EUR |
| SAR | - | 1.04 W/kg (head) 0.83 W/kg (body) |
| SAR EU | - | 0.52 W/kg (head) 0.83 W/kg (body) |
| Tests |
|---|
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 121h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1363:1 |
| Loudspeaker | - |
-27.6 LUFS (Good)
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 386311 (v9)
GeekBench: 1896 (v5.1)
GFXBench: 12fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
Tecno Pova
- Potentially lower price point
- Larger form factor for media consumption
- Comparable battery endurance
- Less powerful Helio G80 chipset
- 12nm process less efficient
- Display specs largely unknown
Xiaomi Poco M5
- More powerful Helio G99 chipset
- 6nm process for better efficiency
- Measured display brightness and contrast ratio
- Potentially higher price
- 18W charging is relatively slow
- Camera specs lack detail
Display Comparison
The Poco M5 boasts a measured peak brightness of 448 nits and a 1363:1 contrast ratio. While the Tecno Pova’s display specifications are not provided, it’s reasonable to assume it falls within a similar range given its market positioning. However, the Poco M5’s contrast ratio suggests deeper blacks and a more vibrant image. The lack of information regarding the Pova’s panel technology (IPS vs. VA) makes a definitive comparison difficult, but the Poco M5’s measured brightness provides a concrete advantage for outdoor visibility.
Camera Comparison
Both devices are listed as having Photo/Video capabilities, but specific details are absent. Without sensor size, aperture, or image processing details, a direct comparison is impossible. However, given the price bracket, it’s likely both rely on similar budget sensors. The absence of any mention of OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) on either device suggests reliance on software stabilization. The usefulness of any included macro cameras (often 2MP) is questionable, and should not be a deciding factor.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Poco M5’s Mediatek Helio G99, fabricated on a 6nm process, offers a significant advantage over the Tecno Pova’s 12nm Mediatek Helio G80. The G99’s Cortex-A76 cores, clocked at 2.2 GHz, outperform the Pova’s 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 cores. This translates to faster app loading times, smoother multitasking, and improved gaming performance. While both utilize octa-core configurations, the architectural improvements and process node shrink of the G99 provide a tangible benefit. The G99’s efficiency also suggests better thermal management under sustained load.
Battery Life
Both the Tecno Pova and Xiaomi Poco M5 achieve an endurance rating of 121 hours, indicating comparable battery life under similar usage conditions. Both also support 18W wired charging. This suggests that while the actual battery capacity might differ, the overall user experience regarding battery longevity and charging speed will be similar. The G99’s improved efficiency in the Poco M5 *could* translate to slightly longer real-world usage, but the endurance rating suggests this difference is minimal.
Buying Guide
Buy the Tecno Pova if you prioritize a potentially lower upfront cost and a larger screen real estate for media consumption, even if it means sacrificing some processing power. Buy the Xiaomi Poco M5 if you value smoother performance in gaming and everyday tasks, a more efficient chipset, and a slightly more polished overall experience, even if it comes at a small price premium.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Poco M5’s Helio G99 handle demanding games like PUBG Mobile at high settings?
The Helio G99 is capable of running PUBG Mobile at high settings, but you may need to adjust graphics settings for consistently smooth frame rates. The 6nm process and Cortex-A76 cores provide a significant performance boost over the G80, making it a more suitable choice for gaming.
❓ Is the 18W charging on either phone considered fast charging in 2024?
18W charging is relatively slow by 2024 standards. Expect a full charge to take around 2-3 hours. While both phones offer the same charging speed, the Poco M5’s more efficient chipset might slightly reduce charging times due to lower power draw during the process.
❓ How does the Tecno Pova’s larger size impact usability?
The Tecno Pova’s larger size may make it less comfortable to use one-handed, particularly for users with smaller hands. However, the larger screen can be beneficial for media consumption and gaming, providing a more immersive experience.
❓ Are there any significant software differences between Tecno’s HiOS and Xiaomi’s MIUI?
Both HiOS and MIUI are heavily customized Android skins. MIUI is generally more feature-rich and polished, but also tends to include more bloatware. HiOS is often simpler and more streamlined, but may lack some of the advanced features found in MIUI. User preference will play a significant role in determining which software experience is better.
