The vivo Y50 (2020) and Oppo F11 Pro represent a fascinating intersection of budget-friendly smartphones from two major players. Released around the same time, both devices aimed to deliver a solid experience without breaking the bank. However, they took different approaches to achieving this, with the Y50 leveraging Qualcomm's Snapdragon 665 and the F11 Pro opting for MediaTek's Helio P70. This comparison dives deep into the specifics to determine which phone offers the best value in today's market.
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing sustained performance and future-proofing, the vivo Y50 (2020) emerges as the better choice. While both phones boast similar battery endurance, the Snapdragon 665's more efficient 11nm process and newer architecture provide a smoother experience, particularly with multitasking and moderate gaming.
| Network |
|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 38, 40, 41 | 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 - V1 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (2CA) Cat7 300/50 Mbps |
| Technology | GSM / HSPA / LTE | GSM / HSPA / LTE |
| | - | 1, 3, 5, 8, 38, 40, 41 - V3 |
| Launch |
|---|
| Announced | 2020, April 06. Released 2020, April 12 | 2019, March. Released 2019, March |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Body |
|---|
| Build | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame | Glass front, plastic back, plastic frame |
| Dimensions | 162 x 76.5 x 9.1 mm (6.38 x 3.01 x 0.36 in) | 161.3 x 76.1 x 8.8 mm (6.35 x 3.00 x 0.35 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 197 g (6.95 oz) | 190 g (6.70 oz) |
| Display |
|---|
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~403 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~397 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.53 inches, 102.9 cm2 (~83.1% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.53 inches, 103.6 cm2 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | IPS LCD |
| Platform |
|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Silver) | Octa-core (4x2.1 GHz Cortex-A73 & 4x2.0 GHz Cortex-A53) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM6125 Snapdragon 665 (11 nm) | Mediatek MT6771 Helio P70 (12 nm) |
| GPU | Adreno 610 | Mali-G72 MP3 |
| OS | Android 10, Funtouch 10.0 | Android 9.0 (Pie), ColorOS 6 |
| Memory |
|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (dedicated slot) | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 8GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 6GB RAM |
| | - | eMMC 5.1 |
| Main Camera |
|---|
| Dual | - | 48 MP, f/1.8, (wide), 1/2.25", 0.8µm, PDAF
Auxiliary lens |
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Quad | 13 MP, f/2.2, (wide), PDAF
8 MP, f/2.2, 13mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm
2 MP (macro)
Auxiliary lens | - |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Selfie camera |
|---|
| Features | - | HDR |
| Single | 16 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | Motorized pop-up 16 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/3.06", 1.0µm |
| Video | 1080p@30fps | 1080p@30fps |
| Sound |
|---|
| 3.5mm jack | - | Yes |
| 35mm jack | Yes | Yes |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes |
| Comms |
|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 4.2, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | No | No |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO | GPS, GLONASS, BDS |
| Radio | FM radio | FM radio |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0, OTG | microUSB 2.0, OTG |
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct |
| Features |
|---|
| Sensors | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, proximity, compass |
| Battery |
|---|
| Charging | 15W wired | 20W wired |
| Type | 5000 mAh | Li-Po 4000 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc |
|---|
| Colors | Starry Black, Iris Blue, Iris Blue, Pearl White | Thunder Black, Aurora Green |
| Models | 1935, V1965A | CPH1969, CPH2209, CPH1987 |
| Price | About 70 EUR | About 320 EUR |
| Tests |
|---|
| Audio quality | - |
Noise -93.4dB / Crosstalk -92.9dB |
| Battery life | - |
Endurance rating 109h
|
| Camera | - |
Photo / Video |
| Display | - |
Contrast ratio: 1392:1 (nominal), 2.987 (sunlight) |
| Loudspeaker | - |
Voice 67dB / Noise 72dB / Ring 80dB
|
| Performance | - |
AnTuTu: 150218 (v7)
GeekBench: 6020 (v4.4)
GFXBench: 7.4fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
vivo Y50 (2020)
- More efficient Snapdragon 665 chipset
- Potentially better sustained performance
- Modern 11nm fabrication process
- Slower 15W charging
- Limited camera details available
Oppo F11 Pro
- Faster 20W wired charging
- Proven 109-hour endurance rating
- Slightly higher CPU clock speeds (on paper)
- Less efficient 12nm Helio P70 chipset
- Potential for more throttling under load
Display Comparison
Both the vivo Y50 and Oppo F11 Pro share identical display specifications, boasting a contrast ratio of 1392:1 (nominal) and 2.987 under sunlight. This suggests a similar viewing experience in both indoor and outdoor conditions. However, the lack of detailed information regarding panel type (IPS vs. AMOLED) and resolution limits a deeper analysis. The shared contrast ratio indicates neither phone excels in dynamic range compared to more modern displays.
Camera Comparison
Both phones are listed as having 'Photo / Video' capabilities, but lack specific details regarding sensor size, aperture, or features like Optical Image Stabilization (OIS). Given the market positioning of these devices, it's likely both rely on similar, relatively basic camera setups. Without further information, it's difficult to definitively say which phone captures better images. The absence of details suggests neither phone is a standout performer in the camera department.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The vivo Y50's Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (11nm) utilizes a more modern fabrication process than the Oppo F11 Pro's MediaTek Helio P70 (12nm). While the Helio P70's Cortex-A73 cores clock slightly higher at 2.1 GHz versus the Snapdragon 665's 2.0 GHz Kryo 260 Gold cores, the 11nm process gives the Snapdragon an edge in power efficiency. This translates to less heat generation under load and potentially less throttling during prolonged gaming sessions. The Snapdragon 665's architecture is also more refined, offering better sustained performance.
Battery Life
Interestingly, both the vivo Y50 and Oppo F11 Pro achieve an identical endurance rating of 109 hours. However, they differ in charging speeds: the Oppo F11 Pro supports 20W wired charging, while the vivo Y50 is limited to 15W. This means the F11 Pro will likely charge from 0-100% faster, despite the similar battery capacity (which is not specified). The Snapdragon 665's efficiency in the Y50 may partially offset the slower charging, contributing to the comparable endurance rating.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y50 (2020) if you need a phone that handles everyday tasks with ease and offers a slightly more responsive experience for the price. It's ideal for users who frequently switch between apps or enjoy casual gaming. Buy the Oppo F11 Pro if you prioritize a slightly faster initial burst of performance and are looking for a phone with a proven track record of battery endurance, though you may experience more noticeable throttling under sustained load.
Frequently Asked Questions
❓ Will the Helio P70 in the Oppo F11 Pro struggle with demanding games like PUBG Mobile?
While the Helio P70 can run PUBG Mobile, you may experience noticeable frame drops and throttling during extended gaming sessions due to its 12nm process and thermal limitations. The Snapdragon 665 in the vivo Y50 is likely to offer a more consistent gaming experience, albeit at similar graphical settings.
❓ Does the slower 15W charging on the vivo Y50 significantly impact usability?
The 15W charging on the vivo Y50 is slower than the Oppo F11 Pro's 20W, but the Snapdragon 665's efficiency means you may not notice a huge difference in overall daily usage. The comparable endurance ratings suggest both phones can comfortably last a full day on a single charge, mitigating the impact of the slower charging speed.
❓ Are the cameras on either phone capable of taking good photos in low-light conditions?
Given the lack of detailed camera specifications, it's unlikely either phone excels in low-light photography. Expect images to be soft and noisy in challenging lighting conditions. Both phones likely rely on software processing to improve image quality, but the limitations of the sensors will be apparent.
