Notebookcheck Logo

Oppo Reno3 Pro智能手机评测：四摄中端机

小巧的相机专家。

Oppo Reno3 Pro是一款中端智能手机，配备高分辨率相机和时尚外观。 Oppo是否也可以在西方立足，我们将在评测中仔细研究。
ARM Android Smartphone
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Oppo Reno3 Pro (Reno Series)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G 8 x 1.8 - 2.4 GHz, Kryo 475 Gold / Silver
Graphics adapter
Qualcomm Adreno 620
Memory
12 GB 
Display
6.50 inch 20.9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 405 PPI, Capacitive, AMOLED, glossy: yes, 90 Hz
Storage
256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 256 GB 
, 235 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: Audioausgabe via USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 陀螺仪，接近传感器，指南针
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.1, 025 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B6/​B8/​B19), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B12/​B17/​B18/​B19/​B20/​B26/​B28/​B32/​B38/​B39/​B40/​B41/​B66) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.7 x 159.4 x 72.4
Battery
4025 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix f / 1.7，相位比较自动对焦，OIS，双LED闪光灯，视频@ 2160p / 30fps（相机1）; 13.0MP，f / 2.4，长焦镜头（相机2）; 8.0MP，f / 2.2，广角镜头（3号相机）; 2.0MP，f / 2.4，单色，景深（4号相机）
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix f / 2.4，视频@ 1080p / 30fps
Additional features
Speakers: 混合立体声扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟, USB电缆，耳机，硅胶套，SIM卡工具, 24 Months Warranty, SAR值：0.825W / kg（头），1.292W / kg（机体）, fanless
Weight
171 g, Power Supply: 89 g
Price
529 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Comparison devices

Bewertung
Rating Version
Datum
Modell
Gewicht
Laufwerk
Groesse
Aufloesung
Preis ab
84 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
08 / 2020
Oppo Reno3 Pro
SD 765G, Adreno 620		171 g256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080
83.8 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
03 / 2020
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
SD 730G, Adreno 618		208 g256 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.47"2340x1080
82.8 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
02 / 2020
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18		199 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.70"2400x1080
84.1 %
v7 (old)		v7 (old)
01 / 2020
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
SD 765G, Adreno 620		171 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.50"2400x1080

Size comparison

❌
163.7 mm 76.1 mm 8.7 mm 199 g157.8 mm 74.2 mm 9.7 mm 208 g159.4 mm 72.4 mm 7.7 mm 171 g159.4 mm 72.4 mm 7.7 mm 171 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
642 (549min - 664max) MBit/s +1%
Oppo Reno3 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
634 (526min - 657max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
415 (295min - 452max) MBit/s -35%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
313 (306min - 319max) MBit/s -51%
iperf3 receive AX12
Oppo Reno3 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
639 (556min - 658max) MBit/s
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
623 (611min - 633max) MBit/s -3%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
370 (342min - 372max) MBit/s -42%
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
329 (284min - 350max) MBit/s -49%
03570105140175210245280315350385420455490525560595630Tooltip
Oppo Reno3 Pro; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø639 (556-658)
Oppo Reno3 Pro; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø634 (526-657)

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
ColorChecker
4.1 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
8.1 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
5.4 ∆E
7.5 ∆E
8 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
6 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
5.3 ∆E
3.3 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
3 ∆E
2 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
2.6 ∆E
3.8 ∆E
6.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno3 Pro: 5.3 ∆E min: 1.99 - max: 8.54 ∆E
ColorChecker
24.8 ∆E
38.6 ∆E
29.8 ∆E
28.8 ∆E
34.6 ∆E
46.8 ∆E
37.6 ∆E
25 ∆E
26.1 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
44.2 ∆E
48.5 ∆E
22 ∆E
32.5 ∆E
20.6 ∆E
40.3 ∆E
29.3 ∆E
34.1 ∆E
41.6 ∆E
40.6 ∆E
38.7 ∆E
31.4 ∆E
22.7 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
ColorChecker Oppo Reno3 Pro: 32.31 ∆E min: 13.46 - max: 48.47 ∆E
556
cd/m²		551
cd/m²		551
cd/m²
549
cd/m²		601
cd/m²		597
cd/m²
557
cd/m²		600
cd/m²		603
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 603 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 573.9 cd/m² Minimum: 3 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 601 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.84 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 5.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.276
Oppo Reno3 Pro
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5"		Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.5"		Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7"		Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.5"
Response Times
-107%
-18%
1%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
8 ?(3, 5)
8 ?(3, 5)
-0%
10 ?(5, 5)
-25%
8 ?(3, 5)
-0%
Response Time Black / White *
6 ?(3, 3)
24 ?(19, 5)
-300%
6 ?(3, 3)
-0%
6 ?(3, 3)
-0%
PWM Frequency
328.9
255
-22%
229.4
-30%
337.8
3%
Screen
4%
-21%
6%
Brightness middle
601
579
-4%
510
-15%
774
29%
Brightness
574
576
0%
536
-7%
778
36%
Brightness Distribution
91
89
-2%
91
0%
95
4%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.84
4.61
5%
6.6
-36%
5.28
-9%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
8.26
7.72
7%
17.56
-113%
8.55
-4%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.2
4.2
19%
2.9
44%
6.2
-19%
Gamma
2.276 97%
2.244 98%
2.242 98%
2.292 96%
CCT
7164 91%
7201 90%
6989 93%
7319 89%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-52% / -33%
-20% / -20%
4% / 4%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

ℹ
Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
   ↔    Response Time Black to White
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 15 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
   ↔    Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 5 ms fall
The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 17 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ
To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 328.9 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 328.9 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 328.9 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Geekbench 5.5 | PCMark for Android | 3DMark | GFXBench
Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
606 Points
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
595 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (554 - 673, n=17)
603 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (126 - 2437, n=172, last 2 years)
995 Points +64%
Multi-Core (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
1799 Points
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
1676 Points -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1520 - 1966, n=17)
1781 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 6687, n=172, last 2 years)
3312 Points +84%
PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
9647 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
9240 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
6571 Points -32%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
9454 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (8687 - 11041, n=16)
9734 Points +1%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
8573 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
7551 Points -12%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
5851 Points -32%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
7896 Points -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (7245 - 9989, n=17)
8308 Points -3%
3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
43875 Points
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
43778 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (38137 - 48201, n=17)
44398 Points +1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
66415 Points
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
66655 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (56690 - 70216, n=17)
67538 Points +2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
20054 Points
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
19888 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (14891 - 28331, n=17)
20632 Points +3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4494 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3424 Points -24%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4734 Points +5%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4351 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2972 - 4693, n=17)
4318 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (812 - 7285, n=26, last 2 years)
4204 Points -6%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4976 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3485 Points -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
5586 Points +12%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4834 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2844 - 5832, n=17)
4882 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (756 - 9451, n=26, last 2 years)
4740 Points -5%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3357 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3228 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3087 Points -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3224 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1689 - 3529, n=17)
3237 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1093 - 4349, n=26, last 2 years)
3303 Points -2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
4684 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3522 Points -25%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3744 Points -20%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
4545 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (3678 - 4893, n=17)
4562 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 23024, n=73, last 2 years)
11109 Points +137%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
5223 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3648 Points -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3958 Points -24%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
5070 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (4036 - 5437, n=17)
5181 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (840 - 45492, n=73, last 2 years)
19708 Points +277%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3440 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3155 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3148 Points -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3337 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1790 - 3651, n=17)
3275 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1075 - 8749, n=73, last 2 years)
5001 Points +45%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3267 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2405 Points -26%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4022 Points +23%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3187 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2261 - 3346, n=17)
3162 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (286 - 17553, n=73, last 2 years)
3084 Points -6%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3251 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2245 Points -31%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4422 Points +36%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3174 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2048 - 3342, n=17)
3137 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (240 - 29890, n=73, last 2 years)
3263 Points 0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3324 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3202 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3056 Points -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3233 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2964 - 3556, n=17)
3331 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (858 - 7180, n=73, last 2 years)
3286 Points -1%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3497 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2567 Points -27%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4291 Points +23%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3415 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2934 - 3605, n=17)
3413 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (317 - 20131, n=160, last 2 years)
7767 Points +122%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3531 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
2492 Points -29%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
4806 Points +36%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3448 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (2814 - 3592, n=17)
3467 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (267 - 33376, n=160, last 2 years)
11536 Points +227%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
3381 Points
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
3202 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
3120 Points -8%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
3304 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (1898 - 3765, n=17)
3288 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (877 - 8480, n=160, last 2 years)
4613 Points +36%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
21 fps
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps -24%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
28 fps +33%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
20 fps -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (13 - 23, n=17)
20.2 fps -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.6 - 123, n=201, last 2 years)
49.5 fps +136%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
23 fps
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps -22%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
31 fps +35%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
24 fps +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (12 - 24, n=17)
21.6 fps -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.3 - 261, n=201, last 2 years)
79.8 fps +247%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
13 fps
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps -23%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
17 fps +31%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
13 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (8.8 - 15, n=17)
12.3 fps -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.85 - 119, n=201, last 2 years)
37.4 fps +188%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Oppo Reno3 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 12288
8.3 fps
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G, Adreno 618, 8192
6.7 fps -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
Samsung Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18, 6144
11 fps +33%
Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G, Adreno 620, 8192
8.6 fps +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
  (5.3 - 13, n=17)
8.38 fps +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.85 - 104, n=201, last 2 years)
32 fps +286%
Oppo Reno3 ProXiaomi Mi Note 10 ProSamsung Galaxy Note10 LiteOppo Reno3 Pro 5GAverage 256 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-38%
-24%
1%
-9%
121%
Sequential Read 256KB
967
499.2
-48%
777
-20%
961
-1%
826 ?(496 - 984, n=22)
-15%
1839 ?(226 - 4512, n=192, last 2 years)
90%
Sequential Write 256KB
471.6
205.1
-57%
190.8
-60%
476.3
1%
358 ?(198.5 - 914, n=22)
-24%
1425 ?(57.5 - 3908, n=192, last 2 years)
202%
Random Read 4KB
153.1
119.2
-22%
132
-14%
159.1
4%
166.6 ?(108.4 - 265, n=22)
9%
277 ?(22.2 - 483, n=192, last 2 years)
81%
Random Write 4KB
146.7
108.5
-26%
142
-3%
145
-1%
141.5 ?(22.1 - 280, n=22)
-4%
309 ?(9.4 - 753, n=192, last 2 years)
111%
Max. Load
 42.6 °C41.2 °C39.4 °C 
 43.6 °C41.3 °C38.6 °C 
 43.2 °C40.9 °C38.9 °C 
Maximum: 43.6 °C
Average: 41.1 °C
37.6 °C39.4 °C39.9 °C
37.2 °C40.1 °C41.9 °C
37.1 °C41 °C40.5 °C
Maximum: 41.9 °C
Average: 39.4 °C
Power Supply (max.)  43.8 °C | Room Temperature 21.8 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 41.1 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.6 °C / 110 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.9 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.3 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2043.842.3254141.23133.232.24033.436.85036.139.86329.431.68027.528.910025.726.812521.229.516020.438.920019.244.625018.246.331517.654.24001761.450017.765.463018.268.280016.769.810001773.9125015.27916001675.9200015.375.3250015.775315015.371.4400015.871.8500016.265.563001662.9800016.162.81000016.765.21250016.560.71600016.753.4SPL59.828.585.1N12.41.157median 16.7median 62.9median 71.1Delta2.512.814.145.841.541.436.931.231.43635.635.635.331332627.723.723.321.726.619.137.118.243.317.149.415.655.515.359.116.161.8146313.666.41471.613.674.614.872.714.472.214.666.613.763.813.865.414.16814.369.814.670.21564.715.37015.757.365.526.681.718.50.849.8median 15median 63.8median 65.73.412.716hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseOppo Reno3 ProXiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Oppo Reno3 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 71.1% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 71.1% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 71.1% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (122.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 90% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 2% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 97% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 65.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 65.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 65.7% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (121.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 89% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 2% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 97% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Oppo Reno3 Pro
4025 mAh		Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Pro
5260 mAh		Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
4500 mAh		Oppo Reno3 Pro 5G
4025 mAh		Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
893
1112
25%
904
1%
876
-2%
984 ?(476 - 3244, n=203, last 2 years)
10%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
14h 53min

Pros

+ 90 Hz屏幕
+ 纤薄的机身
+ 相机质量好
+ 快速WLAN
+ 内存大

Cons

- 没有5G
- 没有eSIM
- 没有microSD插槽
- 前置摄像头应提供更多细节

总结——配置高：

Oppo Reno3 Pro智能手机评测.
Oppo Reno3 Pro智能手机评测.

Oppo Reno3 Pro的4G版本也是一个不错的选择，尤其是它比5G版本提供更多的内存，但价格相似。 凭借90 Hz的显示屏，时尚的外壳，纤细的机身，合理的续航和出色的相机，我们绝对可以推荐这款中端设备。

那些重视高端功能（如极限性能，WiFi 6、60 Hz的4K视频或eSIM）的人将不得不在较高的价格范围内重新寻找，而对中端功能满意的人则可以节省几百欧元，并且仍然可以获得功能强大的设备。

Oppo Reno3 Pro是功能强大且配置齐全的中端设备。

很难确定真正缺点，充其量，ColorOS偶尔偶尔有些不好用或仍然有未翻译的界面，不过很少引起注意。

Oppo Reno3 Pro - 09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
95%
Connectivity
45 / 70 → 64%
Weight
91%
Battery
91%
Display
87%
Games Performance
39 / 64 → 60%
Application Performance
80 / 86 → 92%
Temperature
87%
Noise
100%
Audio
75 / 90 → 84%
Camera
70%
Average
78%
84%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Notebookcheck中文版（NBC中国） > 评测 > Oppo Reno3 Pro智能手机评测：四摄中端机
Florian Schmitt, 2020-08- 3 (Update: 2020-08- 3)