vivo X90 Pro智能手机评测--联发科的高端SoC能否跟上骁龙8代的步伐？

Name: Vivo X90 Pro
Brand: Vivo

对X80 Pro的升级值得商榷。

虽然vivo X90系列的Pro+机型依靠的是高通骁龙8代，但X90 Pro使用的是新的联发科Dimensity 9200。我们的审查将告诉大家该芯片组在日常使用中的表现如何，以及vivo X90 Pro有哪些不足之处。

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy), Published 02/27/2023 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

5G Touchscreen Smartphone

在我们已经回顾了X90系列的实际旗舰，即 vivo X90 Pro+，它只在中国或作为进口产品出售，我们将仔细看看欧洲的顶级机型。vivo X90 Pro也依靠一个带有蔡司品牌的相机系统和索尼的大型IMX989图像传感器，采用1英寸格式。

vivo X90 Pro的功能也令人印象深刻。6.78英寸、120赫兹的三星E6 AMOLED面板的峰值亮度为1300尼特，以及快速的联发科Dimensity 9200芯片组，由12GB的内存和256GB的存储支持。

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Vivo X90 Pro (X90 Series)

Processor

MediaTek Dimensity 9200 8 x 1.8 - 3.1 GHz, Cortex-X3 / A715 / A510

Graphics adapter

ARM Immortalis-G715 MP11

Memory

12 GB

, LPDDR5x

Display

6.78 inch 20:9, 2800 x 1260 pixel 453 PPI, Capacitive Touchscreen, AMOLED, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 Hz

Storage

256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash, 256 GB

, 221 GB free

Connections

1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, color spectrum, OTG, Miracast, IR Blaster

Networking

Wi-Fi 6E (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz), Bluetooth 5.3, 5G: N1/N3/N5/N8/N28A/N38/N40/N41/N77 /N78/N79; 4G: B1/B2/B3/B4/B5/B7/B8/B12/B17/B18/B19/B20/B26/B28A/B34/B38/B39/B40/B41; 3G: 850/1900/2100MHz; 2G: 850/900/1800/1900MHz, Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 9.3 x 164.1 x 74.5

Battery

4870 mAh Lithium-Polymer

Charging

wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 13

Camera

Primary Camera: 50 MPix (f/1.8, 23mm, 1.6µm) + 50MP (2x optical zoom, f/1.6, 50mm, 1/2.4", 0.7µm) + 12MP (f/2.0), camera2API: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix (f/2.5, 24mm, 1/2.8", 0.8µm)

Additional features

Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: OnScreen, charger, case, USB cable, info material, Funtouch OS 13, 12 Months Warranty, Widevine L1, NSS: GPS L1+L5, BeiDou, Glonass L1, Galileo E1+E5, SBAS, fanless, waterproof

Weight

214.9 g, Power Supply: 243 g

Price

780 Euro

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Drive	Size	Resolution
89.1 % v7 ^(old)	02 / 2023	Vivo X90 Pro Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11	214.9 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.78"	2800x1260
89.1 % v7 ^(old)	02 / 2023	Xiaomi 13 SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740	189 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.36"	2400x1080
89.1 % v7 ^(old)	11 / 2022	Google Pixel 7 Pro Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7	212 g	128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.70"	3120x1440
87 % v7 ^(old)	08 / 2022	OnePlus 10T SD 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730	203.5 g	256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.70"	2412x1080
90 % v7 ^(old)	02 / 2023	Vivo X90 Pro+ SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740	221 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.78"	3200x1440

保护壳 - Vivo X90 Pro带冲孔的保护壳

vivo X90 Pro提供，像 Pro+型号，一种皮革质地，背面有一个巨大的相机模块--中国制造商称之为黄金比例的天际线设计。除此之外，两款X90智能手机的外观都非常相似，价值也值得强调。与前代产品类似，X90 Pro在本地市场上只有黑色版本。灰色变体也可作为进口设备。

与 X80 Pro一样。X90 Pro符合IP68标准，具有防尘和防水功能。这款高档手机的屏幕占正面总面积的比例为90.8%，非常有效。说到显示屏，制造商没有说明在X90 Pro中安装了哪种保护玻璃。

尺寸比较

设备 - 配备UFS 4.0的Vivo智能手机

在设备方面，X90 Pro具有双扬声器系统、蓝牙5.3、快速UFS 4.0存储和用于非接触式支付的NFC芯片。此外，vivo依靠一个USB 3.2端口（Gen. 1），可以实现高数据传输，并通过HDMI或DisplayPort接口进行有线图像输出。在我们的拷贝测试中，包括一个连接的M2.SSD硬盘（三星980 Pro），USB端口的传输速率为212 MB/s，明显低于理论峰值水平。

软件 - Vivo手机与Android 13

vivo X90 Pro安装了谷歌Android 13和内部的Funtouch OS 13。如果你对进口X90 Pro感兴趣，你应该考虑到，vivo在中国没有使用Funtouch界面，而是使用中国同等的Origin OS。

Funtouch OS 13在测试时有2023年1月的安全补丁。vivo智能手机能享受多久的操作系统升级和安全更新还没有正式通知 --X80 Pro有三年的更新。

通信和GNSS - Vivo X90 Pro带WiFi 6E

由于WLAN模块与我们的参考路由器华硕ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000在2.4和5GHz范围内以及通过6GHz频段进行通信，因此vivo手机的家庭网络传输率很高。然而，5-和6-GHz范围内的低接收率是明显的。访问包括许多支持的4G频率的LTE网络是有保证的，而且切换到快速的5G标准也是可能的。

Networking
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000	1787 (min: 928) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	227 (min: 115) MBit/s ∼23%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	229 (min: 219) MBit/s ∼12%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1814 (min: 1250) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000	894 (min: 803) MBit/s ∼50%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	770 (min: 459) MBit/s ∼78%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1894 (min: 955) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1656 (min: 1620) MBit/s ∼91%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000	904 (min: 453) MBit/s ∼51%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	945 (min: 917) MBit/s ∼96%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1645 (min: 1586) MBit/s ∼87%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1743 (min: 1585) MBit/s ∼96%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000	934 (min: 768) MBit/s ∼52%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	933 (min: 865) MBit/s ∼95%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash
iperf3 receive AXE11000	931 (min: 890) MBit/s ∼52%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	981 (min: 965) MBit/s ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone
iperf3 receive AXE11000	714 (min: 34.8) MBit/s ∼40%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	729 (min: 40.5) MBit/s ∼74%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1451 (min: 229) MBit/s ∼77%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1368 (min: 668) MBit/s ∼75%

Vivo X90 Pro; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø229 (219-238)

Vivo X90 Pro; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1810 (1250-1867)

Vivo X90 Pro; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1752 (928-1850)

Vivo X90 Pro; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø223 (115-235)

我们通过在自行车上的实际测试来检查跟踪的准确性。在我们的短途旅行中，我们用Garmin Venu 2记录了路线以进行比较。确定的曲线轮廓不时地偏离实际路线，但在GPS记录的详细视图中，其偏差仍然可以被评为非常低的总体。

手机功能和语音质量--带双卡的vivo手机

这款双SIM卡智能手机支持VoLTE，也允许通过家庭WLAN（WiFi通话）进行通话。与前辈vivo旗舰机现在支持eSIM。

X90 Pro的语音质量并不显眼。声音再现得很干净，我们的对话者也将其描述为清晰。

相机--vivo智能手机的1英寸传感器

3200万像素的前置摄像头能够实现体面的自拍，但人像模式的照片相对较暗，很是显眼。

背面带有蔡司品牌的相机组的中心部分是，与 X90 Pro+大的1英寸索尼传感器，在白天和晚上都能提供非常好的照片。照片有时看起来太亮了，但有很好的基本锐度--有时自动对焦并不总是适合（见兔子图案）。照片往往有点柔和，这一点不如 Apple iPhone 14 Pro与iPhone 14 Pro的过度锐化的照片相比，更加自然。在色彩还原方面，vivo手机不能完全让人信服；绿色调显示得有点太亮了。然而，喜欢自然色彩的用户可以激活蔡司模式。

与之相反的是前辈X90 Pro没有高分辨率的超广角摄像头。即使在良好的光线条件下，照片看起来也有点嘈杂，缺乏细节。作为回报，vivo手机有相当好的变焦质量，尽管它没有潜望镜相机，只有2倍无损变焦。然而，X90 Pro保留了许多细节，最高可放大5倍。专用的vivo V2图像处理器和内部软件优化确保了这方面的坚实图像质量。

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.

Main camera Main camera Ultra wide-angle Low Light 5x Zoom

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

配件和保修 - Vivo X90 Pro带电源适配器

vivo手机配备了一个模块化的120瓦电源，一条USB线和一个保护套。出厂时还安装了一个保护膜。

保修保修期是购买日期后的24个月。

输入设备和操作 - 带有超声波指纹传感器的vivo手机

前代产品的一个真正特点X80 Pro的真正特点是巨大的3D超声波指纹传感器，我们在X90 Pro+中也看到了这一点。 X90 Pro+.然而，X90 Pro只有一个光学指纹传感器，所以面积要小得多，只能扫描一个手指，而且识别率无法跟上前辈的同类产品。很遗憾，vivo在这里吝啬了。然而，X90 Pro仍然具有通过使用前置摄像头的二维面部识别进行生物识别的功能。

显示屏 - Vivo X90 Pro采用OLED技术

乍一看，显示屏没有什么变化。与前代产品一样，X90 Pro的OLED面板对角线尺寸为6.78英寸，刷新率高达120 Hz。频率的自适应调整仍然是不可能的，但可以在60赫兹和120赫兹之间自动切换。在像素密度方面有很大差别。虽然 Vivo X80 Pro配备了QHD+分辨率，而X90 Pro的AMOLED显示屏只能使用全高清+。

vivo智能手机使用频率很低的60赫兹的PWM来控制亮度，这是典型的OLED，但波动很小。在我们测量的峰值中，超过1000cd/m²的最大亮度是非常好的，而现实的APL18测试（平均图像水平）也使这个价格范围内的1225cd/m²的最大亮度令人满意。A 小米13的亮度要高得多，为1765cd/m²。


1002 cd/m²	1024 cd/m²	1054 cd/m²
1005 cd/m²	1018 cd/m²	1063 cd/m²
993 cd/m²	1017 cd/m²	1059 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3

Maximum: 1063 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1026.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.15 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 1018 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 1.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26

	Vivo X90 Pro AMOLED, 2800x1260, 6.8"	Xiaomi 13 OLED, 2400x1080, 6.4"	Google Pixel 7 Pro OLED, 3120x1440, 6.7"	OnePlus 10T Fluid AMOLED, 2412x1080, 6.7"	Vivo X90 Pro+ AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.8"
Screen		-6%	9%	-54%	-5%
Brightness middle	1018	1209 19%	1022 0%	861 -15%	1109 9%
Brightness	1026	1208 18%	1025 0%	856 -17%	1124 10%
Brightness Distribution	93	98 5%	99 6%	97 4%	96 3%
Black Level *
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	0.9	1.2 -33%	0.9 -0%	2.27 -152%	1.1 -22%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	2.2	3 -36%	2.1 5%	4.17 -90%	2.7 -23%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	1.9	2.1 -11%	1.1 42%	2.9 -53%	2 -5%
Gamma	2.26 ^97%	2.26 ^97%	2.22 ^99%	2.303 ^96%	2.25 ^98%
CCT	6473 ^100%	6504 ^100%	6650 ^98%	6141 ^106%	6605 ^98%

* ... smaller is better

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

60 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 60 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 60 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

具有固定变焦水平和不同亮度设置的测量系列

我们的显示器色彩分析是在光谱仪和Calman软件的帮助下进行的。在蔡司档案中，颜色（0.9）和灰度（1.9）表示的偏差非常低，面板的色温几乎是最佳校准。色彩空间的高覆盖率也值得一提；甚至DCI-P3也几乎完全覆盖。

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
1.35 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.6915 ms rise
1.35 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 0.6615 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. » 5 % 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
1.56 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ ms rise
1.56 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

在户外，由于自动模式下的高亮度，X90 Pro给人以非常好的印象。即使在盛夏的阳光下，显示的内容也应该足够明显。然而，那些喜欢手动调节亮度的人将不得不满足于525cd/m²和部分恼人的反射。

OLED面板的可视角度非常好，亮度下降只有在极平的角度下才会明显。

性能 - 采用联发科SoC的vivo智能手机

X90 Pro采用了联发科的最新旗舰SoC，由台积电以第二代4纳米工艺制造。该芯片组将一个ARM Cortex X3内核（3.05 GHz）与三个ARM Cortex A715性能内核（2.85 GHz）和四个节俭的Cortex A510内核（1.8 GHz）相结合。对于图形单元，联发科依靠新的ARMImmortalis G715有11个内核。

与之相比骁龙8代2中的Pro+型号的单核性能。联发科Dimensity 9200 降低了7%，多线程性能降低了12%。PCMark的系统基准测试结果也相对较低。

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1489 Points +8%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1478 Points +7%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	1384 Points
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	1277 Points -8%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (1107 - 1384, n=2)	1246 Points -10%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	1048 Points -24%
Average of class Smartphone (126 - 2437, n=172, last 2 years)	995 Points -28%
Multi-Core
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	5090 Points +20%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	4786 Points +13%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	4232 Points
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	3987 Points -6%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (3494 - 4232, n=2)	3863 Points -9%
Average of class Smartphone (473 - 6687, n=172, last 2 years)	3312 Points -22%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	3222 Points -24%

Antutu v9 - Total Score
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1273775 Points +8%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1262638 Points +7%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (1175789 - 1212168, n=2)	1193979 Points +2%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	1175789 Points
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	846323 Points -28%
Average of class Smartphone (99654 - 1650926, n=104, last 2 years)	798401 Points -32%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	773857 Points -34%

PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	15944 Points +63%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	14094 Points +44%
Average of class Smartphone (4609 - 24088, n=190, last 2 years)	12976 Points +33%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	12748 Points +31%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	11397 Points +17%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (9765 - 9920, n=2)	9843 Points +1%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	9765 Points

CrossMark - Overall
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1219 Points +31%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1038 Points +11%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	932 Points
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 ()	932 Points 0%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	886 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone (187 - 1517, n=157, last 2 years)	884 Points -5%
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	806 Points -14%

BaseMark OS II
Overall
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	8320 Points +23%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	8153 Points +21%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	7684 Points +14%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (6755 - 7488, n=2)	7122 Points +5%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	6755 Points
Average of class Smartphone (1196 - 11976, n=151, last 2 years)	6297 Points -7%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	6164 Points -9%
System
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	13646 Points +40%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	12847 Points +32%
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	12230 Points +25%
Average of class Smartphone (2368 - 16475, n=151, last 2 years)	10163 Points +4%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (9767 - 9997, n=2)	9882 Points +1%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	9767 Points
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	9294 Points -5%
Memory
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	9245 Points
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	8822 Points -5%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (7411 - 9245, n=2)	8328 Points -10%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	8179 Points -12%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	7330 Points -21%
Average of class Smartphone (962 - 12716, n=151, last 2 years)	6767 Points -27%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	5456 Points -41%
Graphics
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	27698 Points
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (26484 - 27698, n=2)	27091 Points -2%
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	24037 Points -13%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	23966 Points -13%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	22837 Points -18%
Average of class Smartphone (1017 - 58651, n=151, last 2 years)	16908 Points -39%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	16375 Points -41%
Web
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	1833 Points +117%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	1739 Points +106%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	1652 Points +96%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	1564 Points +86%
Average of class Smartphone (841 - 2145, n=151, last 2 years)	1564 Points +86%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (843 - 1602, n=2)	1223 Points +45%
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	843 Points

UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200, Immortalis-G715 MP11, 12288	44483 Points
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	42662 Points -4%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (40276 - 44483, n=2)	42380 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone (1267 - 74958, n=143, last 2 years)	16841 Points -62%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 12288	16465 Points -63%
Xiaomi 13 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740, 8192	15961 Points -64%
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	11648 Points -74%

AImark - Score v2.x
OnePlus 10T Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1, Adreno 730, 16384	6955 Points
Google Pixel 7 Pro Google Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7, 12288	5976 Points

MediaTek Dimensity 9200在GFXBench的图形测试中表现良好。然而，即使是屏幕上的速率也经常比在 Pro+型号它必须应付明显更高的分辨率。浏览器基准测试和BaseMark OS II浏览器测试的结果也很明显的低。

3DMark: Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | Wild Life Extreme | Wild Life Unlimited Score
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3792 Points
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3707 Points -2%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3173 Points -16%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2876 Points -24%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1807 Points -52%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3783 Points
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3751 Points -1%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3192 Points -16%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2824 Points -25%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1847 Points -51%

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	14038 Points +4%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	14002 Points +4%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	13492 Points
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10989 Points -19%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6721 Points -50%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	490 fps +9%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	451 fps
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	435 fps -4%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	395 fps -12%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	251 fps -44%

GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	119 fps -1%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	84 fps -30%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	299 fps +13%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	265 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	257 fps -3%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	221 fps -17%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	139 fps -48%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps +15%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	106 fps +2%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	104 fps
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -42%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	56 fps -46%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	218 fps +93%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	181 fps +60%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	171 fps +51%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	113 fps
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	101 fps -11%

GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	93 fps +15%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	81 fps
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	62 fps -23%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -26%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	37 fps -54%

GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	127 fps +43%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	108 fps +21%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	105 fps +18%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	89 fps
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	68 fps -24%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	82 fps
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	66 fps -20%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	59 fps -28%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	50 fps -39%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	28 fps -66%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	61 fps +20%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	56 fps +10%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	51 fps
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	44 fps -14%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	31 fps -39%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	113 fps +8%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	105 fps
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	80 fps -24%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -43%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	38 fps -64%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	156 fps +41%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	142 fps +28%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	123 fps +11%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	111 fps
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	75 fps -32%

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	143.264 Points +112%
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years)	120.4 Points +78%
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	116.455 Points +72%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	98.153 Points +45%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (67.6 - 125, n=2)	96.3 Points +42%
OnePlus 10T (Chrome 104)	81.383 Points +20%
Vivo X90 Pro (Chrome 109)	67.646 Points

Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years)	136.2 runs/min +126%
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	113 runs/min +88%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	104 runs/min +73%
OnePlus 10T (Chrome 104)	93.4 runs/min +55%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (60.2 - 103, n=2)	81.6 runs/min +36%
Vivo X90 Pro (Chrome 109)	60.2 runs/min

WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	139 Points +111%
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	136 Points +106%
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 271, n=152, last 2 years)	113.8 Points +72%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	90 Points +36%
OnePlus 10T	75 Points +14%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (22 - 134, n=3)	74 Points +12%
Vivo X90 Pro (Chrome 109)	66 Points

WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years)	148.7 Points +81%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (82 - 142, n=2)	112 Points +37%
OnePlus 10T (Chrome 104)	106 Points +29%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	98 Points +20%
Vivo X90 Pro (Chrome 109)	82 Points

Octane V2 - Total Score
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	44245 Points +104%
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	43632 Points +102%
OnePlus 10T (Chrome 104)	39982 Points +85%
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years)	37161 Points +72%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (21648 - 45823, n=2)	33736 Points +56%
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	27938 Points +29%
Vivo X90 Pro (Chrome 109)	21648 Points

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Vivo X90 Pro (Chrome 109)	1847.5 ms *
Vivo X90 Pro+ (Chrome Beta 110)	1773.4 ms * +4%
OnePlus 10T (Chrome 104)	1627.3 ms * +12%
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years)	1568 ms * +15%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200 (918 - 1848, n=2)	1383 ms * +25%
Google Pixel 7 Pro (Chrome 106)	1011.5 ms * +45%
Xiaomi 13 (Chrome 108)	870.7 ms * +53%

* ... smaller is better

	Vivo X90 Pro	Xiaomi 13	Google Pixel 7 Pro	OnePlus 10T	Vivo X90 Pro+	Average 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		1%	-56%	-60%	-3%	-5%	-41%
Sequential Read 256KB	3866.75	3454.01 -11%	1346.78 -65%	1568.37 -59%	3397.4 -12%	3608 ?(3249 - 4384, n=26) -7%	1839 ?(226 - 4512, n=192, last 2 years) -52%
Sequential Write 256KB	2643.38	2722.77 3%	874.73 -67%	847.69 -68%	2834.4 7%	2530 ?(555 - 3348, n=26) -4%	1425 ?(57.5 - 3908, n=192, last 2 years) -46%
Random Read 4KB	367.89	393.81 7%	219.01 -40%	173.45 -53%	373.88 2%	406 ?(218 - 483, n=26) 10%	277 ?(22.2 - 483, n=192, last 2 years) -25%
Random Write 4KB	521.43	536.76 3%	253.18 -51%	211.24 -59%	484.29 -7%	421 ?(152.9 - 730, n=26) -19%	309 ?(9.4 - 753, n=192, last 2 years) -41%

游戏--vivo手机只能管理60帧的画面

的图形性能。画面性能的Immortalis G715为像PUBG手机这样的高要求游戏提供了足够的图形性能，即使在最高细节下也能以持续的40帧的速度流畅播放。射击游戏在高清图形设置下以约60 FPS的速度不断播放，由于vivo方面的帧锁定，新的90帧模式无法使用--我们使用GameBench的应用程序来确定帧率.

在我们的测试游戏中，OLED面板的全120赫兹通常不被支持。我们还在Armajet中测得60帧，尽管竞技场射击游戏理论上允许144帧。开放世界的动作RPG游戏《元神冲击》在X90 Pro上的渲染速度甚至只有30帧。

Vivo X90 Pro; Armajet: Ø59.8 (28-61)

Vivo X90 Pro; Genshin Impact: Ø30 (23-32)

Vivo X90 Pro; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø60.1 (50-61)

Vivo X90 Pro; PUBG Mobile; Balanced: Ø59.7 (50-61)

Vivo X90 Pro; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø59.6 (57-61)

Vivo X90 Pro; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD: Ø39.9 (37-41)

排放--vivo智能手机保持冷静

温度

在我们的测量中，表面温度非常低。即使在负载下也几乎没有任何温度发展。然而，在3DMark压力测试中，X90 Pro显示出20%至25%的适度性能损失。

Max. Load

Idle


26.3 °C	26.4 °C	27 °C
26.5 °C	26.5 °C	27 °C
26.6 °C	26.7 °C	26.8 °C

Maximum: 27 °C
Average: 26.6 °C


25.8 °C	25.9 °C	25.8 °C
25.8 °C	25.7 °C	25.8 °C
25.6 °C	25.9 °C	26 °C

Maximum: 26 °C
Average: 25.8 °C

Power Supply (max.) 23.8 °C | Room Temperature 21.3 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260

(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 26.6 °C / 80 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 27 °C / 81 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 26 °C / 79 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.2 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	92.7 % +25%
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	88.5 % +19%
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	78.9 % +6%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	74.1 %
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	67.9 % -8%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	87 % +6%
Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	81.7 %
Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	79.1 % -3%
Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	75.6 % -7%
OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	% -100%

Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø19.9 (18.5-22.6)

Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø20.6 (17.7-22.4)

Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø9.93 (8.31-11)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø21.4 (19.4-22.3)

Vivo X90 Pro Immortalis-G715 MP11, Dimensity 9200, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø64.4 (58.3-78.6)

Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø68.6 (62.7-79.5)

Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø32.8 (26.2-38.6)

OnePlus 10T Adreno 730, SD 8+ Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø61.8 (59-63.6)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø76.6 (70.7-80)

Xiaomi 13 Adreno 740, SD 8 Gen 2, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø80 (76.5-84.2)

Google Pixel 7 Pro Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø36.5 (30.7-39.8)

演讲者

在我们的测试中，立体声扬声器的最大音量达到了92dB（A）以上。声音输出的特点是来自中频的音调，本来可以更线性一点。然而，轻微的低音也是可以识别的。另外，耳机可以通过USB-C端口连接，或通过蓝牙无线连接。

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Vivo X90 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (92.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.5% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.4% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 17% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 38% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi 13 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 23% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

电池寿命 - Vivo X90 Pro，120瓦特

消耗功率

谈到快速充电，vivo智能手机提供有线120瓦和无线50瓦。我们无法验证一个完整的充电过程需要多长时间，因为我们提供的是英国版本的测试。有趣的是，X90 Pro的电池在7.78伏的高电压下运行，导致4,870毫安时（3.89伏）的同等容量。

在我们的测量中，vivo X90 Pro显示出在空闲模式下的耗电量增加。

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.12 / 0.12 Watt
Idle	0.9 / 2.32 / 2.39 Watt
Load	3.64 / 6.53 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Vivo X90 Pro 4870 mAh	Xiaomi 13 4500 mAh	Google Pixel 7 Pro 5000 mAh	OnePlus 10T 4800 mAh	Vivo X90 Pro+ 4700 mAh	Average MediaTek Dimensity 9200	Average of class Smartphone
Power Consumption		28%	19%	24%	9%	-13%	-11%
Idle Minimum *	0.9	0.76 16%	0.78 13%	0.8 11%	0.92 -2%	0.835 ?(0.77 - 0.9, n=2) 7%	0.894 ?(0.4 - 2.37, n=152, last 2 years) 1%
Idle Average *	2.32	1.1 53%	1.61 31%	1.2 48%	1.76 24%	2 ?(1.68 - 2.32, n=2) 14%	1.456 ?(0.6 - 4.26, n=152, last 2 years) 37%
Idle Maximum *	2.39	1.13 53%	1.63 32%	1.3 46%	1.88 21%	2.06 ?(1.72 - 2.39, n=2) 14%	1.616 ?(0.83 - 4.45, n=152, last 2 years) 32%
Load Average *	3.64	2.99 18%	3.29 10%	3.5 4%	3.65 -0%	6.05 ?(3.64 - 8.45, n=2) -66%	6.45 ?(2.3 - 16.5, n=147, last 2 years) -77%
Load Maximum *	6.53	6.63 -2%	6.01 8%	5.9 10%	6.24 4%	8.79 ?(6.53 - 11.1, n=2) -35%	9.8 ?(3.53 - 20.8, n=147, last 2 years) -50%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø8.29 (3.35-15.7)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.3 (1.574-11.4)

Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø3.29 (3.24-3.38)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.193 (1.109-1.298)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø14.8 (12.7-16.8)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø9.77 (9.38-10.2)

Vivo X90 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9200; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø3.29 (3.24-3.38)

Vivo X90 Pro+ Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.193 (1.109-1.298)

电池寿命

在我们的WLAN测试中，X90 Pro在调整显示亮度为150cd/m2的情况下持续了15个小时。这是一个很好的比率，只有小米13在这一点上超过了它。小米13在我们的比较中。

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		15h 9min

Battery Runtime - WiFi v1.3
Vivo X90 Pro 4870 mAh	909 min
Xiaomi 13 4500 mAh	1021 min
Google Pixel 7 Pro 5000 mAh	676 min
OnePlus 10T 4800 mAh	856 min
Vivo X90 Pro+ 4700 mAh	905 min

Pros

+ 明亮的OLED面板

+ 快速的SoC

+ 做工良好

+ 吸引人的主摄像头

+ 快速充电

Cons

- 没有节俭的LTPO面板

- 与前代产品相比，情况有所恶化

- 超广角摄像头充其量是个固体

- 高耗电

判决书

在没有欧洲官方定价的情况下，对X90 Pro进行结论性的评估是困难的。如果中国制造商在欧洲的旗舰手机与X80 Pro的1299欧元建议零售价相匹配，我们认为有几个理由购买前者而不是X90 Pro--尤其是在许多方面更好的小米13要便宜得多。

X90 Pro是否能作为欧洲的旗舰机与三星Galaxy S23 Ultra或小米13 Pro抗衡，这一点非常值得怀疑。

总的来说，X90 Pro确实是一款不错的智能手机，但与前代产品相比，技术上的退化使它有点降级。为什么继任者是 X80 Pro的继任者不得不接受超广角相机和变焦镜头、指纹传感器和显示屏分辨率的降级，这是令人费解的。特别是考虑到X90 Pro是该制造商的欧洲旗舰，与Pro+型号相比，已经不得不接受在SoC方面的妥协。

如果你真的想从vivo获得最好的东西，你将不得不进口真正的高端智能手机 X90 Pro+.除了小米13，我们还看到了谷歌Pixel 7 Pro 作为vivo X90 Pro的一个合适和更便宜的替代品。

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

价格和可用性

vivo宣布在国际上推出vivo X90 Pro，但目前还不知道关于价格和供应的具体细节。然而，前代产品在中国的建议零售价略低，因此我们假设它在中国的售价也将低于1300欧元。X90 Pro已经可以通过进口购买，例如在深圳贸易公司，起价为，约780欧元。.

Vivo X90 Pro - 02/21/2023 v7 ^(old)
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

91%

Keyboard

67 / 75 → 89%

Pointing Device

93%

Connectivity

67 / 70 → 95%

Weight

88%

Battery

91%

Display

94%

Games Performance

69 / 64 → 100%

Application Performance

90 / 86 → 100%

Temperature

96%

Noise

100%

Audio

74 / 90 → 83%

Camera

75%

Average

84%

89%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Price comparison

Editor of the original article: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 458020 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008

contact me via: Facebook

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Notebookcheck中文版（NBC中国） > 评测 > vivo X90 Pro智能手机评测--联发科的高端SoC能否跟上骁龙8代的步伐？

Marcus Herbrich, 2023-02-27 (Update: 2023-02-27)

vivo X90 Pro智能手机评测--联发科的高端SoC能否跟上骁龙8代的步伐？

对X80 Pro的升级值得商榷。

潜在的竞争对手比较

保护壳 - Vivo X90 Pro带冲孔的保护壳

尺寸比较

设备 - 配备UFS 4.0的Vivo智能手机

软件 - Vivo手机与Android 13

通信和GNSS - Vivo X90 Pro带WiFi 6E

手机功能和语音质量--带双卡的vivo手机

相机--vivo智能手机的1英寸传感器

配件和保修 - Vivo X90 Pro带电源适配器

输入设备和操作 - 带有超声波指纹传感器的vivo手机

显示屏 - Vivo X90 Pro采用OLED技术

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

性能 - 采用联发科SoC的vivo智能手机

游戏--vivo手机只能管理60帧的画面

排放--vivo智能手机保持冷静

温度

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

演讲者

Vivo X90 Pro audio analysis

Xiaomi 13 audio analysis

电池寿命 - Vivo X90 Pro，120瓦特

消耗功率

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

电池寿命

Pros

Cons

判决书

价格和可用性

More articles related to this device

Transparency

Price comparison