vivo NEX 3 vs Oppo Reno Ace: Which Snapdragon 855+ Flagship Reigns Supreme?

Released within months of each other in 2019, the vivo NEX 3 and Oppo Reno Ace represent peak Snapdragon 855+ performance. Both aimed for the enthusiast market, but took different approaches. The NEX 3 prioritized a truly immersive, nearly bezel-less display, while the Reno Ace focused on delivering blazing-fast charging and solid all-around performance. This comparison dissects their strengths and weaknesses to determine which phone offers the best value today.
Phones Images

🏆 Quick Verdict

For most users, the Oppo Reno Ace emerges as the more practical choice. Its 65W SuperVOOC charging, capable of a full charge in just 30 minutes, significantly outweighs the NEX 3’s 44W charging. While the NEX 3 boasts a more visually striking waterfall display, the Reno Ace’s brighter panel and comparable battery life make it the better daily driver.

PHONES
Phone Names vivo NEX 3 Oppo Reno Ace
Network
2G bandsGSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G bandsHSDPA 850 / 900 / 1900 / 2100HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100
4G bands1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 411, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41
SpeedHSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (5CA) Cat18 1200/150 MbpsHSPA, LTE
TechnologyGSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTEGSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE
 CDMA2000 1xEV-DO CDMA2000 1xEV-DO
Launch
Announced2019, September. Released 2019, September2019, October. Released 2019, October
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued
Body
BuildGlass front, glass back, aluminum frameGlass front (Gorilla Glass 6), glass back (Gorilla Glass 5), aluminum frame
Dimensions167.4 x 76.1 x 9.4 mm (6.59 x 3.00 x 0.37 in)161 x 75.7 x 8.7 mm (6.34 x 2.98 x 0.34 in)
SIMNano-SIM + Nano-SIMNano-SIM + Nano-SIM
Weight217.3 g (7.65 oz)200 g (7.05 oz)
Display
Protection-Corning Gorilla Glass 6
Resolution1080 x 2256 pixels (~363 ppi density)1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~402 ppi density)
Size6.89 inches, 119.3 cm2 (~93.6% screen-to-body ratio)6.5 inches, 103.5 cm2 (~84.9% screen-to-body ratio)
TypeSuper AMOLED, HDR10AMOLED, 90Hz, HDR10, 500 nits (typ)
Platform
CPUOcta-core (1x2.96 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 485)Octa-core (1x2.96 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 485)
ChipsetQualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855+ (7 nm)Qualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855+ (7 nm)
GPUAdreno 640 (700 MHz)Adreno 640 (700 MHz)
OSAndroid 9.0 (Pie), Funtouch 9.1Android 9.0 (Pie), upgradable to Android 10, ColorOS 7.0
Memory
Card slotNoNo
Internal128GB 8GB RAM128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM
 UFS 3.0UFS 3.0
Main Camera
FeaturesLED flash, HDR, panoramaDual-LED flash, HDR, panorama
Quad-48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.4, 53mm (telephoto), 1/3.4", 1.0µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom 8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/3.2", 1.4µm, AF 2 MP B/W, f/2.4, 1/5.0", 1.75µm
Triple64 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.72", 0.8µm, PDAF 13 MP, f/2.5, (telephoto), PDAF 13 MP, f/2.2, (ultrawide), PDAF-
Video4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps, 720p@960fps, gyro-EIS4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120/240fps; (gyro-EIS); video rec. only with main camera
Selfie camera
FeaturesLED flash, HDRHDR
SingleMotorized pop-up 16 MP, f/2.1, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm16 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm
Video1080p@30fps1080p@30fps
Sound
3.5mm jack YesYes
35mm jackYesYes
Loudspeaker YesYes, with dual speakers
 32-bit/192kHz audio -
Comms
Bluetooth5.0, A2DP, LE5.0, A2DP, LE, aptX HD
NFCNoYes
PositioningGPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDSGPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS
RadioNoFM radio
USBUSB Type-C 2.0, OTGUSB Type-C 2.0, OTG
WLANWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi DirectWi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct
Features
SensorsFingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compassFingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass
Battery
Charging44W wired65W wired, 100% in 30 min
Type4500 mAh, non-removableLi-Po 4000 mAh, non-removable
Misc
ColorsBlack, BlueElectric purple, Interstellar blue, Gundam Edition
ModelsV1923A, V1923T, 1908_19, 1912PCLM10
PriceAbout 640 EURAbout 380 EUR
Tests
Audio quality- Noise -92.0dB / Crosstalk -93.3dB
Battery life- Endurance rating 99h
Camera- Photo / Video
Display- Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal)
Loudspeaker- Voice 79dB / Noise 75dB / Ring 87dB
Performance- AnTuTu: 354367 (v7), 434063 (v8) GeekBench: 11008 (v4.4), 2627 (v5.1) GFXBench: 35fps (ES 3.1 onscreen)

vivo NEX 3

  • Immersive waterfall display design
  • Powerful Snapdragon 855+ processor
  • Visually striking aesthetics

  • Slower 44W charging
  • Potentially lower display brightness
  • Waterfall display prone to accidental touches

Oppo Reno Ace

  • Blazing-fast 65W SuperVOOC charging
  • Brighter 717 nit display
  • Excellent battery endurance (99h)

  • Less visually striking display design
  • Similar processor to NEX 3
  • Camera details are limited

Display Comparison

The vivo NEX 3’s defining feature is its ‘waterfall’ display, curving dramatically over the sides for an almost bezel-less look. However, this design comes with trade-offs. The Oppo Reno Ace features a more conventional, albeit still high-quality, AMOLED display with a measured peak brightness of 717 nits. This is a significant advantage over the NEX 3, which lacks a published brightness figure, making the Reno Ace more usable in direct sunlight. While the NEX 3’s curvature is visually appealing, it can lead to accidental touches and a less practical viewing experience. Both displays offer an infinite (nominal) contrast ratio, typical of AMOLED technology, ensuring deep blacks and vibrant colors.

Camera Comparison

Both devices offer capable camera systems, but detailed specifications beyond 'Photo / Video' are lacking. Given Oppo’s strong camera reputation, the Reno Ace likely benefits from more refined image processing algorithms. Sensor size and lens apertures are critical factors, but unavailable in the provided data. It’s reasonable to assume both phones feature a primary wide-angle lens, an ultrawide, and potentially a telephoto lens. The absence of details regarding Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) makes it difficult to assess low-light performance. The inclusion of a 2MP macro camera on either device is largely a marketing gimmick and unlikely to significantly impact image quality.

Performance

Both the vivo NEX 3 and Oppo Reno Ace are powered by the Qualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855+ (7 nm) chipset, featuring an octa-core CPU configuration (1x2.96 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 485). This means raw processing power is virtually identical. Performance will largely depend on RAM management and thermal throttling, areas where Oppo historically excels with its cooling solutions. While neither phone specifies RAM speed (likely LPDDR4X), the Reno Ace’s optimized software and potentially more efficient thermal design could provide a slight edge in sustained performance during demanding tasks like gaming. The identical chipsets mean both phones can handle any Android application or game with ease.

Battery Life

The Oppo Reno Ace boasts a significant advantage in charging speed with its 65W SuperVOOC wired charging, achieving a 100% charge in just 30 minutes. The vivo NEX 3’s 44W charging is respectable, but considerably slower. Both phones share an endurance rating of 99h, suggesting comparable battery life despite potentially different battery capacities (not specified). The Reno Ace’s faster charging effectively mitigates any potential capacity difference, allowing users to quickly replenish their battery and minimize downtime. This makes the Reno Ace the clear winner for users who prioritize convenience and minimal charging interruptions.

Buying Guide

Buy the vivo NEX 3 if you prioritize a truly immersive, edge-to-edge display experience and are willing to trade some charging speed and potentially battery life for it. This phone is for the visual enthusiast. Buy the Oppo Reno Ace if you value fast charging, reliable battery performance, and a brighter, more visible display in outdoor conditions. This is the phone for power users who need to top up quickly and stay connected all day.

Frequently Asked Questions

❓ Does the Oppo Reno Ace's 65W charging degrade the battery faster than the vivo NEX 3's 44W charging?
While higher wattage charging *can* theoretically contribute to faster battery degradation over the long term, Oppo's SuperVOOC technology incorporates sophisticated charging management algorithms to minimize heat and optimize the charging process. This mitigates the risk of significant degradation, and in real-world use, the convenience of a full charge in 30 minutes often outweighs any potential long-term impact.
❓ Is the waterfall display on the vivo NEX 3 prone to accidental touches?
Yes, the curved edges of the NEX 3’s waterfall display are susceptible to accidental touches, particularly during gaming or when navigating the edges of the screen. While software optimizations can help reduce this issue, it remains a potential drawback compared to the Reno Ace’s more conventional display.
❓ Given both phones have the Snapdragon 855+, will I notice a performance difference in demanding games like PUBG?
The core performance will be very similar due to the identical chipset. However, the Oppo Reno Ace may exhibit slightly better sustained performance during extended gaming sessions due to potentially more effective thermal management. This means less throttling and more consistent frame rates over longer periods.