vivo iQOO U5 vs Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G: A Deep Dive into Mid-Range 5G Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing convenience and minimizing downtime, the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G is the superior choice. Its 67W charging capability, achieving a full charge in just 41 minutes, dramatically outperforms the iQOO U5’s 18W charging, despite both phones sharing the same Snapdragon 695 5G processor.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo iQOO U5 | Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 - Global |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Global |
| 5G bands | 1, 5, 8, 28, 41, 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 / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA2000 1x | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 40, 78 SA/NSA - India | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, December 24 | 2022, February 28 |
| Status | Available. Released 2022, January 01 | Available. Released 2022, March 23 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 164 x 75.8 x 8.3 mm (6.46 x 2.98 x 0.33 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 | 185 g (6.53 oz) | 205 g (7.23 oz) |
| - | IP53, dust and splash resistant | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2408 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~401 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.58 inches, 104.3 cm2 (~83.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz, HDR10 | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 700 nits, 1200 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 619 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 12, OriginOS Ocean | Android 11, MIUI 13 for POCO |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 4GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM | 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| UFS 2.2 | UFS 2.2 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), PDAF 2 MP (macro) | - |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, f/1.8, (wide) | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Triple | - | 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 | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, f/1.8, (wide) | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| - | 24-bit/192kHz audio | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD/Adaptive | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | - | Yes |
| NFC | No | Yes (market/region dependent) |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO |
| Radio | No | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | 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, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 67W wired, PD3.0, QC3, 70% in 22 min, 100% in 41 min |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | White, Gray, Aurora | Laser Black, Laser Blue, Poco Yellow |
| Models | V2165A | 2201116PG |
| Price | About 180 EUR | € 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) |
vivo iQOO U5
- Potentially lower price point
- Functional 5G connectivity
- Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G chipset
- Slow 18W charging
- Limited battery endurance advantage
- Missing detailed camera specifications
Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G
- Ultra-fast 67W charging
- Excellent 119-hour endurance rating
- PD3.0 and QC3 charging support
- Potentially higher price
- Shared Snapdragon 695 5G chipset with iQOO U5
- Missing detailed camera specifications
Display Comparison
Both devices share an 'Infinite' (nominal) contrast ratio, suggesting typical IPS LCD characteristics. However, detailed display specs like peak brightness, color gamut coverage, and refresh rate are missing. Given the price point, we can assume both utilize 60Hz panels. The absence of LTPO technology means neither phone will offer adaptive refresh rates for power saving. The user experience will likely be similar in terms of visual quality, relying on software calibration for color accuracy.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or optical image stabilization (OIS). This suggests a focus on affordability over premium camera features. Without further information, it's difficult to assess image quality. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on either device is likely a marketing tactic, offering limited practical benefit due to the small sensor size and lack of detail. Image processing algorithms will be a key differentiator, but without sample images, it's impossible to compare.
Performance
Both the iQOO U5 and the Poco X4 Pro 5G are powered by the Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) chipset, featuring an octa-core CPU configuration with 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold and 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver cores. This means CPU performance will be virtually identical. The real-world difference will likely come down to thermal management and RAM configuration (not specified in the provided data). The 6nm process node offers reasonable efficiency, but sustained workloads could lead to throttling. Gaming performance will be adequate for mid-tier titles, but don't expect flagship-level frame rates.
Battery Life
The Poco X4 Pro 5G boasts a significant advantage in charging speed with its 67W wired charging, supporting PD3.0 and QC3 standards, achieving 70% charge in 22 minutes and 100% in 41 minutes. The iQOO U5, limited to 18W charging, will take considerably longer to fully replenish. While both phones have an endurance rating of 119 hours, the faster charging of the Poco X4 Pro 5G mitigates the impact of battery drain, offering a more convenient user experience. The actual battery capacity (mAh) is not specified, but the endurance rating suggests comparable efficiency.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo iQOO U5 if you need a functional 5G phone and are extremely budget-conscious, willing to trade charging speed and potentially battery longevity for a lower upfront cost. Buy the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G if you prioritize fast charging, extended battery life (indicated by the 119-hour endurance rating), and a more complete feature package, even if it means spending a bit more.