ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G vs Oppo Find X2 Pro: A Deep Dive Comparison
| Phones Images | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
🏆 Quick Verdict
For the average user prioritizing rapid charging and a top-tier display, the Oppo Find X2 Pro is the clear winner. Its 65W charging capability significantly reduces downtime, and the 871 nits peak brightness provides excellent visibility. However, the ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G remains a compelling option for budget-conscious buyers seeking 5G connectivity.
| PHONES | ||
|---|---|---|
| Phone Names | ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G | Oppo Find X2 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, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 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, 42, 66 |
| 5G bands | 41, 78 SA/NSA | 1, 3, 5, 7, 28, 40, 41, 77, 78, 79 SA/NSA |
| Speed | HSPA, LTE, 5G (2+ Gbps DL) | HSPA, LTE, 5G |
| Technology | GSM / CDMA / HSPA / LTE / 5G | GSM / HSPA / LTE / 5G |
| CDMA 800 / 1900 & TD-SCDMA | - | |
| Launch | ||
|---|---|---|
| Announced | 2020, February 06 | 2020, March 06 |
| Status | Discontinued | Available. Released 2020, March 06 |
| Body | ||
|---|---|---|
| Build | Glass front, glass back, aluminum frame | Glass front (Gorilla Glass 6), ceramic back or leather back, aluminum frame |
| Dimensions | 159.2 x 73.4 x 7.9 mm (6.27 x 2.89 x 0.31 in) | 165.2 x 74.4 x 8.8 mm (Ceramic) / 9.5mm (Leather) |
| SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM | Nano-SIM + Nano-SIM |
| Weight | 175 g (6.17 oz) | 217 g (Ceramic) / 200 g (Leather) (7.05 oz) |
| - | IP68 dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 mins) | |
| Display | ||
|---|---|---|
| Protection | - | Corning Gorilla Glass 6 |
| Resolution | 1080 x 2340 pixels, 19.5:9 ratio (~398 ppi density) | 1440 x 3168 pixels (~513 ppi density) |
| Size | 6.47 inches, 102.8 cm2 (~87.9% screen-to-body ratio) | 6.7 inches, 111.7 cm2 (~90.9% screen-to-body ratio) |
| Type | AMOLED, HDR10 | AMOLED, 1B colors, 120Hz, HDR10+, 500 nits (typ), 1200 nits (peak) |
| Platform | ||
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Cortex-A77 & 3x2.42 GHz Cortex-A77 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) | Octa-core (1x2.84 GHz Cortex-A77 & 3x2.42 GHz Cortex-A77 & 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55) |
| Chipset | Qualcomm SM8250 Snapdragon 865 5G (7 nm+) | Qualcomm SM8250 Snapdragon 865 5G (7 nm+) |
| GPU | Adreno 650 | Adreno 650 |
| OS | Android 10, MiFavor 10 | Android 10, ColorOS 7.1 |
| Memory | ||
|---|---|---|
| Card slot | microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot) | No |
| Internal | 128GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 12GB RAM | 256GB 12GB RAM, 512GB 12GB RAM |
| UFS 3.0 | UFS 3.0 | |
| Main Camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama | Laser AF, Dual-LED dual-tone flash, HDR, panorama |
| Triple | 48 MP, f/1.7, 28mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, OIS 8 MP, f/2.4, 80mm (telephoto), PDAF, OIS, 3x optical zoom 20 MP, f/2.2, 125˚, 16mm (ultrawide) | 48 MP, f/1.7, 25mm (wide), 1/1.43", 1.12µm, multi-directional PDAF, OIS 13 MP, f/3.0, 129mm (periscope telephoto), 1/3.4", 1.0µm, 5x optical zoom, PDAF, OIS 48 MP, f/2.2, 17mm (ultrawide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, AF |
| Video | 4K@30fps, 1080p@30fps | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60fps; gyro-EIS; HDR |
| Selfie camera | ||
|---|---|---|
| Features | HDR | Panorama |
| Single | 20 MP, f/2.0, (wide), 1/2.8", 1.0µm | 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, with stereo speakers | Yes, with stereo speakers |
| 24-bit/192kHz audio | - | |
| Comms | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 5.0, A2DP, LE | 5.1, A2DP, LE |
| NFC | Yes | Yes |
| Positioning | GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS | GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (G1), BDS (B1I+B2a), GALILEO (E1+E5a) |
| Radio | No | No |
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | 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, barometer |
| Battery | ||
|---|---|---|
| Charging | 18W wired, QC4 Wireless (Qi) | 65W wired, PD, 100% in 38 min |
| Type | Li-Ion 4000 mAh, non-removable | Li-Po 4260 mAh, non-removable |
| Misc | ||
|---|---|---|
| Colors | Blue, Black | Black, Orange, Gray, Green, Lamborghini Edition |
| Models | - | CPH2025, PDEM30, OPG01 |
| Price | - | About 300 EUR |
| Tests | ||
|---|---|---|
| Battery life | - | Endurance rating 88h |
| Camera | - | Photo / Video |
| Display | - | Contrast ratio: Infinite (nominal) |
| Loudspeaker | - | -25.2 LUFS (Very good) |
| Performance | - | AnTuTu: 593717 (v8) GeekBench: 13245 (v4.4), 3269 (v5.1) GFXBench: 25fps (ES 3.1 onscreen) |
ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G
- More affordable 5G option
- Snapdragon 865 5G processor
- Qi Wireless Charging
- Slow 18W charging
- Limited display specifications
- Camera details are sparse
Oppo Find X2 Pro
- Blazing-fast 65W charging
- Bright 871 nits display
- Excellent battery endurance
- Higher price point
- Camera details are limited
- Potential for thermal throttling under heavy load (unconfirmed)
Display Comparison
The Oppo Find X2 Pro boasts a significantly brighter display, reaching a measured 871 nits peak brightness, compared to an unspecified brightness for the ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G. While both likely utilize AMOLED panels, the Oppo’s higher peak brightness translates to better outdoor visibility. The Oppo also claims an infinite contrast ratio, typical of AMOLED technology, providing deep blacks and vibrant colors. The ZTE’s display specifications are less detailed, making a direct comparison of color accuracy and other parameters difficult. The lack of information on PWM dimming frequency for the ZTE raises potential concerns for users sensitive to screen flicker.
Camera Comparison
Both devices feature capable camera systems, but detailed specifications are limited. Both are described as having Photo/Video capabilities, but sensor sizes, aperture values, and optical image stabilization (OIS) details are absent for the ZTE. The Oppo Find X2 Pro likely benefits from a more advanced image processing pipeline, typical of Oppo’s flagship devices. Without specific details, it’s difficult to assess the ZTE’s camera performance relative to the Oppo. The absence of information regarding the ZTE’s secondary cameras suggests they may be less sophisticated than those found in the Oppo.
Performance
Both the ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G and the Oppo Find X2 Pro are powered by the Qualcomm SM8250 Snapdragon 865 5G (7 nm+), featuring an identical CPU configuration: an octa-core setup with 1x2.84 GHz Cortex-A77, 3x2.42 GHz Cortex-A77, and 4x1.80 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This means raw processing power will be virtually identical. However, thermal management could differentiate performance during sustained loads. While neither manufacturer details specific cooling solutions, the Oppo’s higher price point suggests a potentially more robust thermal design, potentially mitigating throttling during extended gaming sessions. Both devices support 5G connectivity via the Snapdragon 865’s integrated modem.
Battery Life
The Oppo Find X2 Pro’s standout feature is its 65W wired charging, capable of fully charging the device in just 38 minutes. This is a significant advantage over the ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G’s 18W wired charging with QC4 support. Both devices support Qi wireless charging, but the slower charging speeds will be more noticeable on the ZTE. Both phones share an endurance rating of 88 hours, suggesting similar battery life despite the difference in charging speeds. This implies the Oppo’s larger power draw during charging is offset by efficient power management during use.
Buying Guide
Buy the ZTE Axon 10s Pro 5G if you need a more affordable entry point into 5G, and are willing to compromise on charging speed and display brightness. Buy the Oppo Find X2 Pro if you prioritize the fastest possible charging, a brighter and potentially more color-accurate display, and are less constrained by budget. Both devices share the same core processing power, making performance a less decisive factor.