Umidigi Note 100 vs Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G: A Deep Dive into Budget 5G Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user, the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G emerges as the stronger choice. Its significantly faster 67W charging, coupled with a comparable endurance rating, provides a more convenient and less stressful user experience. While the Umidigi Note 100 offers a newer chipset, the real-world performance difference is unlikely to be substantial for typical tasks.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | Umidigi Note 100 | Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - Global |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 34, 39, 38, 40, 41, 66 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Global |
| 5G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 48, 66, 77, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78 SA/NSA - Global |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 40, 78 SA/NSA - India | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2025, February 13 | 2022, February 28 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, February | Available. Released 2022, March 23 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 167.8 x 77.4 x 7.7 mm (6.61 x 3.05 x 0.30 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 | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 205 g (7.23 oz) |
| - | IP53, dust and splash resistant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 720 x 1600 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~258 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.8 inches, 111.6 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 700 nits, 1200 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.3 GHz Cortex-A76 & 6x2.1 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Unisoc T765 (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G57 MC2 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 14 | Android 11, MIUI 13 for POCO |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB 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 | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Triple | 50 MP, (wide), AF 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, (wide) | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Video | Yes | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| - | 24-bit/192kHz audio | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO |
| Radio | Wireless FM radio | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C, 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 (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 20W wired | 67W wired, PD3.0, QC3, 70% in 22 min, 100% in 41 min |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Rock Black, Interstellar Blue, Lake Green, Starry White | Laser Black, Laser Blue, Poco Yellow |
| Models | - | 2201116PG |
| Price | $ 106.99 / C$ 152.99 / € 116.99 | € 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) |
Umidigi Note 100
- Potentially more future-proof chipset (Unisoc T765)
- 6nm process for improved efficiency
- Competitive endurance rating
- Significantly slower 20W charging
- Unisoc chipset lacks Qualcomm’s software optimization
- Limited brand recognition
Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G
- Ultra-fast 67W charging (PD3.0, QC3)
- Proven Snapdragon 695 performance
- Strong brand reputation (Xiaomi)
- Chipset is a generation older than the T765
- May not offer the absolute highest performance in synthetic benchmarks
- Potential for MIUI bloatware
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 price point, neither is expected to compete with flagship OLED panels. The Poco X4 Pro 5G’s larger display size (typically 6.67 inches vs. the Note 100’s 6.7 inches) may offer a more immersive viewing experience, but without further data, it’s difficult to quantify the difference. Bezels are likely comparable, reflecting cost-saving measures in both designs.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but specifics are lacking. The absence of detailed sensor information makes a direct comparison difficult. It’s reasonable to assume both utilize a multi-camera setup with a primary sensor, ultrawide, and potentially a macro lens. However, without knowing sensor sizes, apertures, and image processing algorithms, it’s impossible to determine which phone captures superior images. The prevalence of 2MP macro lenses in this segment suggests their utility is limited, focusing more on marketing than actual image quality.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Poco X4 Pro 5G utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm), featuring 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold and 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver cores. The Umidigi Note 100 employs the Unisoc T765 (6nm) with 2x2.3 GHz Cortex-A76 and 6x2.1 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While the T765 boasts slightly higher clock speeds on its prime cores, the Snapdragon 695 benefits from Qualcomm’s optimized architecture and software support. This translates to potentially smoother performance in graphically demanding applications and better sustained performance under load. The absence of LPDDR5x RAM specifications suggests both likely use LPDDR4x, limiting memory bandwidth.
Battery Life
Both devices achieve an endurance rating of 119 hours, indicating similar overall battery life under typical usage. However, the charging capabilities are drastically different. The Poco X4 Pro 5G supports 67W wired charging with PD3.0 and QC3, achieving 70% charge in 22 minutes and 100% in 41 minutes. The Umidigi Note 100 is limited to 20W wired charging. This difference is significant; the Poco X4 Pro 5G offers a far more convenient charging experience, minimizing downtime and maximizing usability. The comparable endurance ratings suggest the Poco’s faster charging effectively mitigates any potential battery capacity differences.
Buying Guide
Buy the Umidigi Note 100 if you prioritize a potentially more future-proof chipset with the Unisoc T765 and are comfortable with slower 20W charging. Buy the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G if you value rapid charging – getting from 0 to 70% in just 22 minutes – and a proven track record of reliable performance within the budget segment.