iQOO Z10x vs. Poco X4 Pro 5G: A Deep Dive into Mid-Range Contenders
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For users prioritizing raw performance and future-proofing, the iQOO Z10x is the clear winner thanks to its more efficient 4nm Dimensity 7300 chipset. However, the Poco X4 Pro 5G’s 67W charging and comparable battery life make it a strong contender for those who value convenience and quick top-ups.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo iQOO Z10x | 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, 5, 8, 28, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 40, 41 - Global |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 28, 40, 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, April 11 | 2022, February 28 |
| Status | Available. Released 2025, April 22 | Available. Released 2022, March 23 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 165.7 x 76.3 x 8.1 mm (6.52 x 3.00 x 0.32 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 | 204 g (7.20 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 (~393 ppi density) | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.72 inches, 108.8 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.67 inches, 107.4 cm2 (~86.0% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD, 120Hz, 960Hz PWM, 1050 nits (HBM) | Super AMOLED, 120Hz, 700 nits, 1200 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 7300 (4 nm) | Qualcomm SM6375 Snapdragon 695 5G (6 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G615 MC2 | Adreno 619 |
| OS | Android 15, up to 2 major Android upgrades, Funtouch 15 | Android 11, MIUI 13 for POCO |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM | 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM |
| - | UFS 2.2 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Dual | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), PDAF Auxiliary lens | - |
| Features | Ring-LED flash, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | - | 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 | 4K, 1080p, gyro-EIS | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | - | HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, (wide) | 16 MP, f/2.5, (wide), 1/3.06" 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | No | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| - | 24-bit/192kHz audio | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.4, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| Infrared port | Yes | 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/6, dual-band | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (side-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 44W wired Reverse wired | 67W wired, PD3.0, QC3, 70% in 22 min, 100% in 41 min |
| Type | Li-Ion 6500 mAh | Li-Po 5000 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Ultramarine, Titanium, Ocean Blue | Laser Black, Laser Blue, Poco Yellow |
| Models | I2404 | 2201116PG |
| Price | ₹ 13,998 | € 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 Z10x
- More powerful and efficient Dimensity 7300 chipset
- Potential for better sustained performance in gaming
- Modern 4nm manufacturing process
- Slower 44W charging compared to the Poco
- Limited details on display specifications
Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G
- Rapid 67W charging with PD3.0 and QC3 support
- Proven 119-hour endurance rating
- Potentially lower price point
- Less powerful Snapdragon 695 chipset
- 6nm process node less efficient than 4nm
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 market positioning, we can assume both utilize 6.67-inch displays, but the iQOO Z10x’s newer chipset *could* support higher refresh rates if implemented. Without concrete data, it’s difficult to definitively declare a winner, but the potential for a smoother visual experience leans slightly towards the iQOO.
Camera Comparison
Both phones feature 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or optical image stabilization (OIS). The absence of these details makes a direct comparison challenging. However, in this segment, larger sensors generally equate to better low-light performance. Without further information, it’s reasonable to assume both phones offer adequate camera performance for casual use, but won’t compete with flagship-level imaging. The usefulness of a 2MP macro lens on either device is questionable.
Performance
The iQOO Z10x’s Mediatek Dimensity 7300 (4nm) represents a significant leap over the Poco X4 Pro 5G’s Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (6nm). The 4nm process node inherently offers better power efficiency and thermal performance, translating to sustained performance during intensive tasks. The Dimensity 7300’s CPU configuration – 4x2.5 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 – provides a more potent combination of performance and efficiency compared to the Snapdragon 695’s 2x2.2 GHz Kryo 660 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 660 Silver. This means the iQOO Z10x will likely excel in gaming and multitasking, experiencing less throttling under load.
Battery Life
Both the iQOO Z10x and Poco X4 Pro 5G boast an endurance rating of 119 hours, indicating comparable battery life under typical usage. However, the charging speeds differ significantly. The Poco X4 Pro 5G’s 67W wired charging, with claims of 70% in 22 minutes and 100% in 41 minutes, provides a substantial advantage in terms of convenience. The iQOO Z10x’s 44W charging is respectable, but slower. The Poco’s support for PD3.0 and QC3 further enhances its charging versatility. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the faster charging speed of the Poco X4 Pro 5G mitigates any potential capacity disadvantage.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo iQOO Z10x if you need a phone capable of handling demanding applications and games with greater efficiency, and appreciate a more modern chipset architecture. Buy the Xiaomi Poco X4 Pro 5G if you prefer a phone that can be rapidly charged, offering minimal downtime, and prioritize a proven track record of battery endurance, even if it means sacrificing some processing headroom.