vivo X70 Pro vs Oppo Find X3 Pro: Which Flagship Reigns Supreme?
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing all-day battery life and a consistently strong camera experience, the vivo X70 Pro emerges as the winner. Its superior endurance rating (123h vs 81h) and capable chipset outweigh the Oppo Find X3 Pro’s faster charging and slightly more powerful processor. However, power users who demand the absolute fastest performance will lean towards the Find X3 Pro.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo X70 Pro | Oppo Find X3 Pro |
| 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 |
| 4G bands | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 38, 39, 40, 41 - International | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 66 - International |
| 5G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 28, 40, 41, 78, 79 SA/NSA - International | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA - International |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE / 5G | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G |
| 3, 5, 77, 78 SA/NSA - India | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA - China | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, September 09 | 2021, March 11 |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, September 17 | Available. Released 2021, March 19 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front (Schott Xensation Up), glass back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 5), glass back (Gorilla Glass 5), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 158.3 x 73.2 x 8 mm (6.23 x 2.88 x 0.31 in) | 163.6 x 74 x 8.3 mm (6.44 x 2.91 x 0.33 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + eSIM |
| Weight | 183/184/185/186 g (6.46 oz) | 193 g (6.81 oz) |
| - | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | Schott Xensation Up | Corning Gorilla Glass 5 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2376 pixels (~398 ppi density) | 1440 x 3216 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~525 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.56 inches, 104.6 cm2 (~90.3% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.7 inches, 108.4 cm2 (~89.6% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, 120Hz, HDR10+, 1300 nits (peak) | LTPO AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, HDR10+, BT.2020, 500 nits (typ), 1300 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x3.0 GHz Cortex-A78 & 3x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) - InternationalOcta-core (1x2.8 GHz Cortex-A78 & 3x2.6 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A55) - China | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Cortex-X1 & 3x2.42 GHz Cortex-A78 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Mediatek Dimensity 1200 (6 nm) - InternationalExynos 1080 (5 nm) - China | Qualcomm SM8350 Snapdragon 888 5G (5 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G77 MC9 - InternationalMali-G78 MP10 - China | Adreno 660 |
| OS | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14, Funtouch OS 14 (International), OriginOS (China) | Android 11, upgradable to Android 14, ColorOS 14 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | No |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 256GB 16GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM | 256GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 16GB RAM |
| UFS 3.1 | UFS 3.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Laser AF, color spectrum sensor, Zeiss optics, Zeiss T* lens coating, Pixel Shift, dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama | Color spectrum sensor, LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 50 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, PDAF, gimbal OIS 8 MP, f/3.4, 125mm (periscope telephoto), 1/4.4", 1.0µm, PDAF, OIS, 5x optical zoom 12 MP, f/2.0, 50mm (telephoto), 1/2.93", 1.22µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom 12 MP, f/2.2, 16mm, 116˚ (ultrawide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm, AF | 50 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, multi-directional PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/2.4, 52mm (telephoto), 1/3.4", 1.0µm, 2x optical zoom, PDAF 50 MP, f/2.2, 16mm, 110˚ (ultrawide), 1/1.56", 1.0µm, multi-directional PDAF 3 MP, f/3.0, (microscope), AF, ring flash, 60x magnification |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.5, 24mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | - |
| Video | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps, gyro-EIS, HDR10+ | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/240fps; gyro-EIS; HDR, 10‑bit video |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | Panorama |
| Single | 32 MP, f/2.5, 24mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm | 32 MP, f/2.4, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound | ||
|---|---|---|
| 3.5mm jack | No | No |
| 35mm jack | No | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| 32-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.2, A2DP, LE, aptX HD |
| Infrared port | Yes | - |
| NFC | Yes (market/region dependent) | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS, NavIC | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (L1), BDS (B1I+B1c+B2a), GALILEO (E1+E5a), QZSS (L1+L5) |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C 3.1, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 44W wired 5W reverse wired | 65W wired, PD, 40% in 10 min 30W wireless, 100% in 80 min 10W reverse wireless |
| Type | 4450 mAh | Li-Po 4500 mAh |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Cosmic Black, Aurora Dawn, White | Gloss Black, Blue, White, Cosmic Mocha, Mars Edition, Photographer Edition |
| Models | V2134A, V2105 | CPH2173, PEEM00, OPG03 |
| Price | About 1040 EUR | About 200 EUR |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | Endurance rating 123h | Endurance rating 81h |
| Camera | Photo / Video | Photo / Video |
| Display | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | -27.5 LUFS (Good) | -25.4 LUFS (Very good) |
| Performance | AnTuTu: 694499 (v9) GeekBench: 2956 (v5.1) GFXBench: 40fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) | AnTuTu: 656467 (v8) GeekBench: 3316 (v5.1) GFXBench: 33fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo X70 Pro
- Exceptional battery life (123h endurance)
- Versatile camera system with strong low-light performance
- Efficient chipset (Dimensity 1200/Exynos 1080)
- Slightly less powerful processor than Snapdragon 888
- Charging speed is slower than Oppo Find X3 Pro
Oppo Find X3 Pro
- Faster Snapdragon 888 processor for demanding tasks
- 65W SuperVOOC charging for rapid power-ups
- Bright and color-accurate display
- Significantly shorter battery life (81h endurance)
- Snapdragon 888 can run hot under sustained load
Display Comparison
The Oppo Find X3 Pro boasts a brighter display, reaching 774 nits compared to the vivo X70 Pro’s 993 nits. While the X70 Pro's measured brightness is higher, the difference isn't as dramatic as the numbers suggest, and both offer 'Infinite' (nominal) contrast ratios. The Find X3 Pro’s display is notable for its color calibration and unique curved design, but lacks the higher refresh rate found on some competitors. The X70 Pro’s display, while excellent, doesn’t stand out as a defining feature. Both displays are excellent for media consumption, but the X70 Pro's higher measured brightness gives it a slight edge in direct sunlight.
Camera Comparison
Both phones excel in the camera department, but approach it differently. Both are capable of excellent photo and video capture. While detailed sensor specs aren't provided, both phones feature multi-camera systems. The X70 Pro’s camera system is geared towards versatility, with a focus on image stabilization and low-light performance. The Find X3 Pro’s camera system emphasizes color accuracy and detail. The Snapdragon 888’s ISP in the Find X3 Pro offers advanced image processing capabilities, but the X70 Pro’s image processing algorithms are also highly refined. The lack of detail on sensor sizes makes a direct comparison difficult, but both phones deliver flagship-level image quality.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Oppo Find X3 Pro utilizes the Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 (5nm), while the vivo X70 Pro features the Mediatek Dimensity 1200 (6nm) internationally and the Exynos 1080 (5nm) in China. The Snapdragon 888, with its Cortex-X1 prime core, generally delivers higher peak performance in benchmarks. However, the Dimensity 1200 and Exynos 1080 are no slouches, offering comparable real-world performance for most tasks. The 5nm process node of the Exynos 1080 offers a slight efficiency advantage over the 6nm Dimensity 1200, but the Snapdragon 888’s architecture provides a more substantial performance boost. Thermal management is a key consideration; the Snapdragon 888 is known to run hotter, potentially leading to throttling under sustained load, while the Dimensity 1200/Exynos 1080 are generally more efficient.
Battery Life
Battery life is where the vivo X70 Pro truly shines. Its endurance rating of 123 hours significantly surpasses the Oppo Find X3 Pro’s 81 hours. This difference is attributable to the more efficient chipset and optimized power management. While the Find X3 Pro boasts significantly faster charging – 65W wired (0-40% in 10 minutes) and 30W wireless (100% in 80 minutes) – the X70 Pro’s 44W wired charging is still respectable. The X70 Pro also offers 5W reverse wired charging, while the Find X3 Pro provides 10W reverse wireless charging. The Find X3 Pro’s faster charging is convenient, but the X70 Pro’s longer battery life reduces the need to charge as frequently.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo X70 Pro if you need exceptional battery life, a versatile camera system optimized for both photos and videos, and a more balanced overall experience. It’s ideal for content creators and users who rely heavily on their phone throughout the day. Buy the Oppo Find X3 Pro if you prioritize raw processing power for demanding games and applications, and value the fastest possible wired charging speeds. It’s best suited for gamers and those who frequently multitask with resource-intensive apps.