vivo Y70t vs Oppo Reno 5G: Which 5G Phone Offers the Best Performance and Value?
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing consistent performance and slightly faster charging, the Oppo Reno 5G emerges as the better choice. The Snapdragon 855, despite its age, offers a performance edge over the Exynos 880, particularly in demanding tasks. However, the Y70t remains a viable option for those seeking a more power-efficient device.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | vivo Y70t | Oppo Reno 5G |
| Network | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2G bands | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 | GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 |
| 3G bands | HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 2100 | HSDPA 800 / 850 / 900 / 1700(AWS) / 1900 / 2100 |
| 4G bands | 1, 3, 5, 8, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 66 - Global |
| 5G bands | 1, 41, 78 SA/NSA | 78 NSA/Sub6 |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G | HSPA 42.2/5.76 Mbps, LTE (5CA) Cat18 1200/150 Mbps, 5G (2+ Gbps DL) |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / CDMA2000 / LTE / 5G | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / EVDO / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA2000 1x | CDMA2000 1xEV-DO | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2021, June 03 | 2019, April. Released 2019, May |
| Status | Available. Released 2021, June 03 | Discontinued |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | - | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 6), glass back (Gorilla Glass 5), aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 162 x 76.6 x 8.5 mm (6.38 x 3.02 x 0.33 in) | 162 x 77.2 x 9.3 mm (6.38 x 3.04 x 0.37 in) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | · Nano-SIM· Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 190 g (6.70 oz) | 215 g (7.58 oz) |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~395 ppi density) | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~387 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.53 inches, 104.7 cm2 (~84.4% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.6 inches, 108.6 cm2 (~86.8% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | IPS LCD | AMOLED |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Cortex-A77 & 6x1.8 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Kryo 485 & 3x2.42 GHz Kryo 485 & 4x1.78 GHz Kryo 485) |
| Chipset | Exynos 880 (8 nm) | Qualcomm SM8150 Snapdragon 855 (7 nm) |
| GPU | Mali-G76 MP5 | Adreno 640 |
| OS | Android 10, Funtouch 10.5 | Android 9.0 (Pie), ColorOS 6 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | No | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM | 256GB 8GB RAM |
| UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | LED flash, HDR, panorama | Laser AF, Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama |
| Single | 8 MP, f/2.0, (wide) | - |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.8, 25mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF 2 MP (macro) Auxiliary lens | 48 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/3.0, 130mm (periscope telephoto), 5x optical zoom, PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/2.2, 16mm (ultrawide) |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/240fps, gyro-EIS; video rec. only with main camera |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | LED flash, HDR |
| Single | 8 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 | No |
| 35mm jack | Yes | No |
| Loudspeaker | Yes | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| - | 24-bit/192kHz audio | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.1, A2DP, LE, aptX HD | 5.0, A2DP, EDR, LE, aptX HD |
| NFC | No | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS, BDS, GALILEO, QZSS |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | microUSB 2.0, OTG | USB Type-C, 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, gyro, proximity, compass | Fingerprint (under display, optical), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired | 20W wired |
| Type | 4500 mAh | Li-Po 4065 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Black, Blue, White | Ocean Green, Jet Black |
| Models | V2002A | CPH1921 |
| Price | About 190 EUR | About 880 EUR |
vivo Y70t
- Potentially better power efficiency with Exynos 880
- More affordable price point (likely)
- Slightly newer chipset
- Slower charging speed (18W)
- Lower peak performance compared to Snapdragon 855
- Potential for more thermal throttling
Oppo Reno 5G
- Faster charging speed (20W)
- Stronger CPU and GPU performance with Snapdragon 855
- Potentially better camera image processing
- Less power efficient chipset
- Older chipset architecture
- May exhibit larger bezels
Display Comparison
Neither device boasts a standout display. Given the context data focuses on internal specs, we can infer both likely utilize LCD panels common in this price bracket. The Reno 5G, being a slightly older model, may exhibit larger bezels. Color accuracy is likely similar, leaning towards the saturated tones favored by both vivo and Oppo. Without specific display specs, a clear winner is difficult to determine, but the Reno 5G’s potential for a slightly higher quality panel due to its original positioning cannot be discounted.
Camera Comparison
Without detailed camera specs, a direct comparison is limited. However, both phones likely feature multi-camera setups geared towards versatility. The Reno 5G, originating as a more premium device, likely benefits from a larger primary sensor and potentially better image signal processing (ISP). The Exynos 880 does include an ISP capable of decent image quality, but the Snapdragon 855’s ISP has a proven track record. The presence of a 2MP macro camera on either device is largely a marketing gimmick and shouldn’t heavily influence purchasing decisions. The Reno 5G’s potential for better dynamic range and low-light performance gives it a slight edge.
Performance
The core difference lies in the chipsets. The Oppo Reno 5G’s Snapdragon 855, fabricated on a 7nm process, generally outperforms the vivo Y70t’s Exynos 880 (8nm). The Snapdragon 855’s Kryo 485 CPU architecture, with its 1x2.84 GHz prime core, provides a significant boost in single-core performance, crucial for responsive app launches and UI navigation. While the Exynos 880’s Cortex-A77 cores are capable, they are clocked lower and built on a less efficient node. This translates to potentially more thermal throttling under sustained load on the Y70t. The Snapdragon 855 also benefits from a more mature Adreno 640 GPU, offering superior graphics performance for gaming.
Battery Life
The vivo Y70t’s 18W charging is slower than the Oppo Reno 5G’s 20W charging. While battery capacity isn’t specified, the Exynos 880’s 8nm process generally offers better power efficiency than the Snapdragon 855’s 7nm process. This means the Y70t *could* achieve comparable battery life despite a potentially smaller battery capacity. However, the Reno 5G’s faster charging mitigates this advantage, allowing for quicker top-ups. The Reno 5G’s more powerful processor will also draw more power during intensive tasks, potentially negating some of the efficiency gains.
Buying Guide
Buy the vivo Y70t if you need a reliable 5G phone with a focus on power efficiency and are less concerned with peak performance. It’s ideal for everyday tasks, social media, and light gaming. Buy the Oppo Reno 5G if you prefer a phone capable of handling more demanding applications, including graphically intensive games, and appreciate the slightly faster 20W charging. It’s the better choice for power users and gamers.