Price-performance success!With the Poco F3, Xiaomi once again has a powerful smartphone in its portfolio that features a fast Snapdragon SoC, a bright AMOLED display, a powerful battery, 5G, and a triple-camera setup. Nevertheless, the starting price of 350 Euros (~$426) is very low.Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by Stephanie Chamberlain),🇩🇪 🇳🇱 ... 🇫🇷 🇪🇸 🇵🇹 🇮🇹 🇷🇺 🇭🇺 5G Android Smartphone Touchscreen

The Poco F3 is the successor to the Poco F2 Pro and is based on the Redmi K40 this year, although the latter remains exclusive to the Chinese market. Therefore, the Pro model is no longer the reference, which is, however, also noticeably reflected in terms of pricing.

The Poco F3 still looks like a real bargain at a starting price of 350 Euros (~$426) for the lower storage configuration with 6 GB of RAM and 128 GB of internal storage and 400 Euros (~$487) for the model with 8/256 GB of storage. Mid-range smartphones are usually found in this price range, and even 5G support isn't always a given.

The Xiaomi smartphone also has a lot to offer when it comes to the remaining specifications and features a 120 Hz AMOLED display that promises up to 1300 cd/m² and an accurate color reproduction. In addition, there are dual speakers, a triple-camera setup, Wi-Fi 6, 5G, and much more.

good (86%)Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5GQualcomm Adreno 650Smartphone - 05/20/2021 - v7Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.deDownload your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG4 Reviews, News, CPU, GPU, Articles, Columns, Other"or" search relation.3D Printing,5G,Accessory,AI,Alder Lake,AMD,Android,Apple,ARM,Audio,Biotech,Business,Camera,Cannon Lake,Cezanne (Zen 3),Charts,Chinese Tech,Chromebook,Coffee Lake,Comet Lake,Console,Convertible / 2-in-1,Cryptocurrency,Cyberlaw,Deal,Desktop,E-Mobility,Education,Exclusive,Fail,Foldable,Gadget,Galaxy Note,Galaxy S,Gamecheck,Gaming,Geforce,Google Pixel,GPU,How To,Ice Lake,Intel Evo,Internet of Things (IoT),iOS,iPad,iPad Pro,iPhone,Jasper Lake,Lakefield,Laptop,Launch,Leaks / Rumors,Linux / Unix,List,Lucienne (Zen 2),MacBook,Mini PC,Monitor,MSI,OnePlus,Opinion,Phablet,Radeon,Raptor Lake,Renoir,Review Snippet,Rocket Lake,Ryzen (Zen),Science,Security,Single-Board Computer (SBC),Smart Home,Smartphone,Smartwatch,Software,Storage,Tablet,ThinkPad,Thunderbolt,Tiger Lake,Touchscreen,Ultrabook,Virtual Reality (VR) / Augmented Reality (AR),Wearable,Windows,Workstation,XPS,Zen 3 (Vermeer),Zen 4TickerXiaomi Poco F3 (Poco F Series)ProcessorQualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G 8 x 2.4 - 3.2 GHz, Cortex-A77 / A55 (Kryo 585)Graphics adapterQualcomm Adreno 650Memory6144 MB, LPDDR5Display6.67 inch 20:9, 2400 x 1080 pixel 395 PPI, capacitive, AMOLED, 360 Hz touch sampling rate, 10 multitouch points, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, glossy: yes, HDR, 120 HzStorage128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB, 107.35 GB freeConnections1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, electronic compass, OTGNetworking802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.1, 2G (quad-band), 3G (band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8), 4G (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41, 66), 5G (band 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 41, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, GPSSizeheight x width x depth (in mm): 7.8 x 163.7 x 76.4 ( = 0.31 x 6.44 x 3.01 in)Battery4520 mAh Lithium-PolymerChargingfast charging / QuickchargeOperating SystemAndroid 11CameraPrimary Camera: 48 MPix (f/1.8, 26 mm, 1/2", 0.8 µm); 8 MP (ultra wide, 119°, f/2.2); 5 MP (tele-macro, f/2.4, 50 mm, 1/5.0", 1.12 µm); Camera2 API level: Level 3Secondary Camera: 20 MPix (f/2.45, 1/3.4", 0.8 µm)Additional featuresSpeakers: dual, Keyboard: on-screen, Power adapter (33 watts) | USB Type-C cable | Type-C to 3.5 mm headphone adapter, protective case, SIM eject tool, User Guide, warranty card, MIUI 12.0, 12 Months Warranty, Body SAR: 0.843 W/kg, Head SAR: 0.599 W/kg; GNSS: GPS (dual-band), GLONASS (dual-band), Galileo (triple-band), BeiDou (triple-band), IRNSS, DRM Widevine L1, fanlessWeight196 g ( = 6.91 oz / 0.43 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)Price350 EuroNote: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.see all specifications [+] Add to comparison» Compare devicesWorking For NotebookcheckAre you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!Wanted: German-English-Translator (English native speakers preferred)Details here

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Drive	Size	Resolution	Best Price
85.9 %	05/2021	Xiaomi Poco F3SD 870, Adreno 650	196 g	128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.67"	2400x1080
88.4 %	04/2021	Oppo Find X3 NeoSD 865, Adreno 650	184 g	256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.55"	2400x1080
86.4 %	07/2020	Xiaomi Poco F2 ProSD 865, Adreno 650	219 g	128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.67"	2400x1080
82.7 %	04/2021	Samsung Galaxy A52 5GSD 750G 5G, Adreno 619	189 g	128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	6.50"	2400x1080
85.4 %	05/2021	Motorola Moto G100SD 870, Adreno 650	207 g	128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6.70"	2520x1080

SurveyJoin our Support Satisfaction Survey 2022: We want to hear about your experiences!Participate here

Case - With Gorilla Glass 5 on both sides

Despite its size, the Xiaomi Poco F3 is not too heavy, and it fits well in the hand thanks to the rounded back. We measure a height of 8.2 millimeters, which is slightly more than the manufacturer's specified 7.8 millimeters. This is increased by another 1.75 millimeters if the camera module is included, which is why the smartphone wobbles a lot on flat surfaces without a case on.

We like the build quality and are impressed by the even and tight gap dimensions. Twisting attempts produce a clearly audible creaking noise. Although the Poco F3 doesn't have an IP certification, Xiaomi has equipped the SIM tray with a rubber seal.

Xiaomi uses Corning Gorilla Glass 5 for both the front and the back. Unfortunately, the metal frame doesn't connect directly with the display glass, but the latter is surrounded by an additional plastic frame instead. Similarly, the physical buttons and the card slot's cover are made of plastic.

The smartphone's battery is firmly built into the device, and it can't be replaced by the user. The F3 is available in Deep Ocean Blue, Arctic White, and Night Black.

Top 10 LaptopsMultimedia, Budget Multimedia, Gaming, Budget Gaming, Lightweight Gaming, Business, Budget Office, Workstation, Subnotebooks, Ultrabooks, Chromebooks

under 300 USD/Euros, under 500 USD/Euros, 1,000 USD/Euros, for University Students, Best Displays

Top 10 SmartphonesSmartphones, Phablets, ≤6-inch, Camera Smartphones

Motorola Moto G100Xiaomi Poco F2 ProXiaomi Poco F3Samsung Galaxy A52 5GOppo Find X3 Neo ❌168.4 mm / 6.63 inch74 mm / 2.91 inch9.7 mm / 0.3819 inch207 g0.4564 lbs163.3 mm / 6.43 inch75.4 mm / 2.97 inch8.9 mm / 0.3504 inch219 g0.4828 lbs163.7 mm / 6.44 inch76.4 mm / 3.01 inch7.8 mm / 0.3071 inch196 g0.4321 lbs159.9 mm / 6.3 inch75.1 mm / 2.96 inch8.4 mm / 0.3307 inch189 g0.4167 lbs159.9 mm / 6.3 inch72.5 mm / 2.85 inch7.99 mm / 0.3146 inch184 g0.4057 lbs

Connectivity - Poco F3 without an audio jack or microSD slot

Xiaomi's Poco F3 doesn't offer the option to expand storage via a microSD card, which should be taken into account when deciding on the storage configuration. There is no audio jack either, but at least a corresponding adapter for the USB-C port is included in the box. This operates according to the 2.0 standard and supports OTG.

Otherwise, the Poco phone is pretty comprehensive with Bluetooth 5.2, NFC, and an IR blaster. A notification LED is not available either but an always-on display is.

4 Reviews, News, CPU, GPU, Articles, Columns, Other"or" search relation.3D Printing,5G,Accessory,AI,Alder Lake,AMD,Android,Apple,ARM,Audio,Biotech,Business,Camera,Cannon Lake,Cezanne (Zen 3),Charts,Chinese Tech,Chromebook,Coffee Lake,Comet Lake,Console,Convertible / 2-in-1,Cryptocurrency,Cyberlaw,Deal,Desktop,E-Mobility,Education,Exclusive,Fail,Foldable,Gadget,Galaxy Note,Galaxy S,Gamecheck,Gaming,Geforce,Google Pixel,GPU,How To,Ice Lake,Intel Evo,Internet of Things (IoT),iOS,iPad,iPad Pro,iPhone,Jasper Lake,Lakefield,Laptop,Launch,Leaks / Rumors,Linux / Unix,List,Lucienne (Zen 2),MacBook,Mini PC,Monitor,MSI,OnePlus,Opinion,Phablet,Radeon,Raptor Lake,Renoir,Review Snippet,Rocket Lake,Ryzen (Zen),Science,Security,Single-Board Computer (SBC),Smart Home,Smartphone,Smartwatch,Software,Storage,Tablet,ThinkPad,Thunderbolt,Tiger Lake,Touchscreen,Ultrabook,Virtual Reality (VR) / Augmented Reality (AR),Wearable,Windows,Workstation,XPS,Zen 3 (Vermeer),Zen 4Ticker

Software - Poco phone with Android 11 and MIUI 12.0

The Poco F3 ships with Android 11 and MIUI 12.0 for Poco smartphones. However, we can't identify any special modifications to the interface compared with the one for Xiaomi smartphones.

Besides Google services, the manufacturer also preinstalls numerous third-party apps like Facebook, Amazon, Tik Tok, and some games. Nevertheless, these can all be uninstalled. The display of advertisements after the installation process of an app or within the utility apps, such as when cleaning the system, is a bit more annoying.

The system's rigorous energy management, which sometimes kills background apps or prevents push notifications, is more likely to cause occasional frustration. You have to go into the settings and optimize this behavior manually in those cases.

Xiaomi doesn't provide specific information on its update intervals. However, an update to the upcoming Android 12 seems to be certain. The security patches are from April 1, 2021, and consequently up to date at the time of our review.

Communication and GNSS - Poco F3 with good positioning, Wi-Fi 6, and 5G

The Poco F3 supports all current mobile standards including 5G for mobile Internet access. The available frequencies are sufficient in Germany, and there are even a few more bands than necessary, but the Xiaomi phone is still far from being a globetrotter. The F3's connection stability didn't show any issues in the test.

The Wi-Fi module supports Wi-Fi 6 with MIMO antenna technology. This should enable high data rates, but the F3 falls short of expectations when receiving data from our reference Netgear Nighthawk AX 12 router. However, since Wi-Fi stability is excellent, this is hardly ever noticed in everyday use.

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 Netgear AX12
Xiaomi Poco F3Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	884 (444min- 914max) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProAdreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	859 (755min- 907max) MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Oppo Find X3 NeoAdreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	724 (352min- 779max) MBit/s ∼82% -18%
Motorola Moto G100Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	692 (643min- 704max) MBit/s ∼78% -22%
Average of class Smartphone(5.59 - 1599, n=266, last 2 years)	483 MBit/s ∼55% -45%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GAdreno 619, SD 750G 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	282 (275min- 287max) MBit/s ∼32% -68%
iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 Netgear AX12
Motorola Moto G100Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	788 (733min- 833max) MBit/s ∼100% +20%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProAdreno 650, SD 865, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	770 (741min- 794max) MBit/s ∼98% +18%
Oppo Find X3 NeoAdreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	743 (382min- 808max) MBit/s ∼94% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F3Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	654 (311min- 702max) MBit/s ∼83%
Average of class Smartphone(15.5 - 1414, n=266, last 2 years)	469 MBit/s ∼60% -28%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GAdreno 619, SD 750G 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	331 (322min- 337max) MBit/s ∼42% -49%

050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900Tooltip; iperf3 Client (receive) 1 m 4M x10 Netgear AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø644 (311-702) ; iperf3 Client (transmit) 1 m 4M x10 Netgear AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø869 (444-914)

Xiaomi is significantly superior in terms of positioning features, and it supports the major satellite navigation systems at least with dual-band connectivity. Outdoor positioning is very fast and accurate, and the smartphone can also determine its location well indoors.

The Poco F3 has to face a comparison with the Garmin Edge 500 on a short bike ride. Although a few deviations are still noticeable here and there on the smartphone, it's much more accurate than the bike computer.

Telephone and call quality

The Poco F3's phone app hardly differs from that of other Android smartphones, and it has a well-arranged design. The integration of SIP accounts is available, and it worked flawlessly in the test.

The call quality is characterized by a very natural voice transmission when held to the ear. Over the speaker, the user's voice sounds a bit more muffled and reverberates slightly, but the F3 also shows a satisfactory performance in this regard. Even when the speaker is about two meters away from the smartphone, they can still be understood quite well. Noise suppression works very well for minor sources of interference, but if it's a really loud environment, the noises come through every now and then, or the voice of the F3 user will even only be reproduced with small interruptions.

The Poco smartphone supports dual SIM (2x nano), VoLTE, and Wi-Fi calling, but eSIMs are not supported.

Cameras - Decent triple-camera setup

The 20 MP front-facing camera is now integrated into the display, but it's comparatively small with a diameter of 2.65 millimeters. The lens uses the full resolution and doesn't support pixel-binning. In daylight, the selfies are good, but lens flare can be seen when there is background light. The pictures become noisy quite quickly once light decreases, and the portrait effect also shows significant transitions in this case. Videos are recorded in Full HD at 60 fps at best.

The centerpiece of the main camera is a 48 MP sensor, which is likely the slightly older Sony IMX582. Good-looking pictures can be taken in daylight, but they are heavily sharpened and could use a bit more dynamism despite pixel-binning. In addition, Xiaomi provides an ultra wide-angle lens with 8 MP that captures details well in the center of the image, but it shows some fuzziness towards the edges and is prone to chromatic aberrations. A so-called tele-macro lens is also available on the spec sheet, which also takes up a lot of space on the back. However, we can't find an actual use for it, because both the macro functionality as well as zooming are managed by the main sensor; at least no difference can be noticed when the tele-macro lens is covered. A digital zoom of up to 10x is possible.

Videos are recorded in Ultra HD (30 fps) at best and don't have access to optical image stabilization. The electronic one is present and also makes itself noticed, but it also provides for more image noise. The autofocus works quite reliably, but audio is accompanied by a slight noise.

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.

Wide angleWide angleZoom (5x)Ultra wide-angleLow lightclick to load imagesXiaomi Poco F3Samsung Galaxy S21 UltraApple iPhone 12 miniCanon EOS 90Dclick to load imagesXiaomi Poco F3Samsung Galaxy S21 UltraApple iPhone 12 miniCanon EOS 90Dclick to load imagesXiaomi Poco F3Samsung Galaxy S21 UltraApple iPhone 12 miniCanon EOS 90Dclick to load imagesXiaomi Poco F3Samsung Galaxy S21 UltraApple iPhone 12 miniCanon EOS 90Dclick to load imagesXiaomi Poco F3Samsung Galaxy S21 UltraApple iPhone 12 miniCanon EOS 90D

The main camera of the Poco F3 shows good color reproduction without too many deviations under controlled lighting conditions. Our test chart is captured rather mediocrely using the 48 MP mode, and it already shows minor blurring in the picture's center.

Accessories and warranty - Only a one-year warranty

The Poco F3 comes with a modular power adapter (max. 33 watts), a USB cable (Type-A to Type-C), a USB-C to audio jack adapter, a SIM tool, and a transparent silicone protective case.

Xiaomi only provides a 12-month warranty for its smartphone, which doesn't affect the retailer's warranty.

Input devices and handling - Fingerprint sensor in the frame of the Poco F3

The capacitive touchscreen is covered with a protective film out of the box, and it has good gliding properties. However, we like the Gorilla Glass 5 surface even more. Inputs are generally implemented very quickly and precisely.

Google's GBoard is preinstalled as the standard keyboard, but it can also be replaced with any other layout from the Play Store. A one-hand mode that reduces the display to between 3.5 and 4.5 inches is also implemented. In addition, various gesture shortcuts are supported, but double-tap to wake isn't available for the display. In return, the fingerprint scanner can be assigned actions that are triggered by a double tap, such as controlling the flashlight, taking a screenshot, or opening the notification panel. This also works pretty well in most cases.

The fingerprint sensor works reliably and with a pleasing speed in the test. Additionally, 2D facial recognition is possible via the front-facing camera, and although it's faster and more convenient, it's also less secure.

Display - Poco F3 with super bright AMOLED display and 120 Hz

The Poco F3 has a 6.67-inch (16.94 cm) AMOLED display that has a resolution of 2400x1080 pixels and alternatively supports a fixed refresh rate of 60 or 120 Hz, with the former being the default. However, this isn't quite as fixed, because the panel automatically switches back to 60 Hz after a few seconds of showing a static image in 120 Hz mode.

The Xiaomi smartphone doesn't disappoint in terms of brightness, and it achieves an average of 902 cd/m² with a fully white background and the ambient light sensor enabled. In the APL50 measurement with evenly distributed bright and dark areas, it even reaches 1,175 cd/m² in the center of the screen. This makes the panel ideally suited for playing HDR content, and it also supports HLG, HDR10, and HDR10+. Those who prefer to adjust the display brightness manually can use a maximum of 497 cd/m².

Due to its OLED technology, the F3 isn't immune to screen flickering. The amplitude curve is very irregular below a display brightness of 27%, and the frequency fluctuates between 163.2 and 490.2 Hz, which can be quite problematic for sensitive users, especially since there's no optional DC-dimming mode. If brightness is further increased, the amplitude curve is more even (454.2-520.8 Hz), and above 64%, the panel switches to a constant 120 Hz mode.

889cd/m² 887cd/m² 920cd/m² 897cd/m² 889cd/m² 930cd/m² 888cd/m² 896cd/m² 922cd/m²

Distribution of brightnessX-Rite i1Pro 3Maximum: 930 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 902 cd/m² Minimum: 2.52 cd/m²Brightness Distribution: 95 %Center on Battery: 889 cd/m²Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.4ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.64-98 Ø5.699.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)Gamma: 2.26

	Xiaomi Poco F3AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67	Oppo Find X3 NeoAMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.55	Xiaomi Poco F2 ProSuper AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.67	Samsung Galaxy A52 5GSuper AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.50	Motorola Moto G100IPS/LTPS, 2520x1080, 6.70
Screen		-57%	-41%	-84%	-207%
Brightness middle	889	758 -15%	799 -10%	744 -16%	562 -37%
Brightness	902	753 -17%	801 -11%	749 -17%	535 -41%
Brightness Distribution	95	98 3%	97 2%	98 3%	90 -5%
Black Level *					0.57
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	0.9	1.7 -89%	1.46 -62%	2.2 -144%	3.99 -343%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	1.9	5 -163%	2.92 -54%	7 -268%	9.74 -413%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	1.3	2.1 -62%	2.7 -108%	2.1 -62%	6.5 -400%
Gamma	2.2697%	2.2797%	2.23798%	2.06107%	2.174101%
CCT	661498%	6370102%	6003108%	6516100%	688294%
Contrast					986

* ... smaller is better

ℹTo 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	490.2 Hz	≤ 26 % brightness setting
The display backlight flickers at 490.2 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 26 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 490.2 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 22226 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

The black level of the AMOLED display is absolute, so that there is a perfect contrast ratio.

We examine the color calibration with the CalMAN analysis software. In the factory settings, reproduction is a bit too cool, and the rather large DCI-P3 color space is targeted. If you go through the trouble of adjusting it again (see screenshot), you get a more natural reproduction with very good Delta E values.

The Original mode uses the smaller sRGB color space, and it's often the better choice for Xiaomi smartphones when you want a natural color reproduction. However, this is not the case with the Poco F3, because the white balance has too much green, so the content looks sickly.

ℹDisplay 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
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 1.2 ms rise
↘ 1.2 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (23.6 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 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 0.711 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (37.3 ms).

The Poco F3 can convince outdoors, and it benefits from its immense brightness reserves in particular. The reflections on the display are also kept within limits, so that legibility should also be assured on bright summer days.

The viewing-angle stability of the Xiaomi smartphone is very good. Although brightness decreases a bit at flat viewing angles, this isn't a problem in everyday use. The typical greenish shimmer of the OLED panel is also only discreetly visible.

A lot of performance with the Snapdragon 870

Our test device is powered by a Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 with 6 GB of LPDDR5 RAM, but the Poco F3 is also available in a variant with 8 GB of RAM. The 7 nm chipset is a refresh of the Snapdragon 865/865+. The Prime Core's peak clock speed has only been increased by 100 MHz to 3.2 GHz, and the Adreno 650 now also reaches clock rates of up to 670 MHz (SD865/+: 587/646 MHz).

This only results in a minimal increase in CPU performance, but GPU performance can certainly achieve a gain of 9%. The latter doesn't apply to the Poco F3, though, since the increase is lower, but the Moto G100 with the same SoC manages to squeeze a bit more out from it.

Either way, the Poco smartphone demonstrates a strong system speed and has enough performance reserves for all tasks.

Geekbench 5.3 | PCMark for Android | 3DMark | GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | GFXBench 3.0 | GFXBench 3.1 | GFXBench | Antutu v9 | AnTuTu v8 | VRMark | UL Procyon AI Inference | AImark | Basemark GPU 1.2 | BaseMark OS II

Geekbench 5.3
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	998 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	911 Points ∼91% -9%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	923 Points ∼92% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	636 Points ∼64% -36%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	972 Points ∼97% -3%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	921 Points ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(967 - 1046, n=10)	997 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone(58 - 1755, n=272, last 2 years)	630 Points ∼63% -37%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	3368 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	3141 Points ∼92% -7%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	3399 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	1878 Points ∼55% -44%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	2870 Points ∼84% -15%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	3329 Points ∼98% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(2870 - 4455, n=10)	3315 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone(248 - 4914, n=272, last 2 years)	2107 Points ∼62% -37%
Vulkan Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	3587 Points ∼76%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	4737 Points ∼100% +32%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	3059 Points ∼65% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	1272 Points ∼27% -65%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	3369 Points ∼71% -6%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	3665 Points ∼77% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(3159 - 4324, n=9)	3570 Points ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone(72 - 8702, n=191, last 2 years)	2403 Points ∼51% -33%
OpenCL Score 5.3 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	3606 Points ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	4464 Points ∼100% +24%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	3158 Points ∼71% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	1304 Points ∼29% -64%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	3555 Points ∼80% -1%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	3259 Points ∼73% -10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(3482 - 3724, n=10)	3599 Points ∼81% 0%
Average of class Smartphone(255 - 9069, n=192, last 2 years)	2430 Points ∼54% -33%

PCMark for Android
Work 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	13610 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(10829 - 16054, n=9)	12771 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone(4436 - 18567, n=112, last 2 years)	10107 Points ∼74% -26%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	12440 Points ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	10743 Points ∼70% -14%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	10347 Points ∼68% -17%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	9573 Points ∼63% -23%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	11166 Points ∼73% -10%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	15299 Points ∼100% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(10060 - 14315, n=5)	11688 Points ∼76% -6%
Average of class Smartphone(82 - 15299, n=196, last 2 years)	8300 Points ∼54% -33%

3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	7970 Points ∼69%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	11492 Points ∼100% +44%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	8652 Points ∼75% +9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	4040 Points ∼35% -49%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	8035 Points ∼70% +1%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	9821 Points ∼85% +23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(7970 - 11064, n=6)	9680 Points ∼84% +21%
Average of class Smartphone(149 - 13121, n=256, last 2 years)	4679 Points ∼41% -41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	12033 Points ∼72%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	16809 Points ∼100% +40%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	12547 Points ∼75% +4%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	4239 Points ∼25% -65%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	13531 Points ∼80% +12%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	12625 Points ∼75% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(12033 - 14968, n=6)	13731 Points ∼82% +14%
Average of class Smartphone(122 - 31940, n=256, last 2 years)	6258 Points ∼37% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	3653 Points ∼66%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	5454 Points ∼99% +49%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	3956 Points ∼72% +8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	3469 Points ∼63% -5%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	3318 Points ∼60% -9%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	5525 Points ∼100% +51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(3318 - 5784, n=6)	4837 Points ∼88% +32%
Average of class Smartphone(651 - 6394, n=254, last 2 years)	3194 Points ∼58% -13%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	7377 Points ∼82%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	8947 Points ∼100% +21%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	8145 Points ∼91% +10%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	2927 Points ∼33% -60%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	6960 Points ∼78% -6%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	8119 Points ∼91% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(6960 - 8975, n=6)	8213 Points ∼92% +11%
Average of class Smartphone(91 - 11528, n=258, last 2 years)	3862 Points ∼43% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	9498 Points ∼79%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	11999 Points ∼100% +26%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	9466 Points ∼79% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	2802 Points ∼23% -70%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	10199 Points ∼85% +7%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	9382 Points ∼78% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(9498 - 10646, n=6)	10266 Points ∼86% +8%
Average of class Smartphone(73 - 19364, n=258, last 2 years)	4646 Points ∼39% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	4140 Points ∼75%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	4733 Points ∼86% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	5466 Points ∼99% +32%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	3466 Points ∼63% -16%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	3296 Points ∼60% -20%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	5518 Points ∼100% +33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(3296 - 5793, n=6)	4925 Points ∼89% +19%
Average of class Smartphone(635 - 5793, n=258, last 2 years)	3225 Points ∼58% -22%
Wild Life Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	4288 Points ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	5038 Points ∼100% +17%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	1103 Points ∼22% -74%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	4166 Points ∼83% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(4166 - 4351, n=10)	4256 Points ∼84% -1%
Average of class Smartphone(153 - 10062, n=156, last 2 years)	3158 Points ∼63% -26%
Wild Life Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	4271 Points ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	5039 Points ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	1097 Points ∼22% -74%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	4152 Points ∼82% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(4152 - 4352, n=10)	4244 Points ∼84% -1%
Average of class Smartphone(174 - 11700, n=153, last 2 years)	3258 Points ∼65% -24%
Wild Life Extreme (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	1223 Points ∼99%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(1203 - 1243, n=9)	1230 Points ∼100% +1%
Average of class Smartphone(102 - 3080, n=105, last 2 years)	976 Points ∼79% -20%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	1222 Points ∼100%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(1195 - 1246, n=9)	1225 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone(101 - 2864, n=103, last 2 years)	951 Points ∼78% -22%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	71 fps ∼51%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	60 fps ∼43% -15%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	60 fps ∼43% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	53 fps ∼38% -25%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	90 fps ∼65% +27%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	138 fps ∼100% +94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(60 - 142, n=9)	105 fps ∼76% +48%
Average of class Smartphone(9.5 - 143, n=211, last 2 years)	66.5 fps ∼48% -6%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	200 fps ∼75%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	266 fps ∼100% +33%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	205 fps ∼77% +3%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	56 fps ∼21% -72%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	224 fps ∼84% +12%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	203 fps ∼76% +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(171 - 231, n=9)	218 fps ∼82% +9%
Average of class Smartphone(6 - 428, n=211, last 2 years)	128 fps ∼48% -36%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	60 fps ∼55%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	60 fps ∼55% 0%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	60 fps ∼55% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	33 fps ∼30% -45%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	89 fps ∼82% +48%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	109 fps ∼100% +82%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(60 - 116, n=9)	93.3 fps ∼86% +56%
Average of class Smartphone(4.5 - 121, n=210, last 2 years)	53.8 fps ∼49% -10%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	119 fps ∼79%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	151 fps ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	125 fps ∼83% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	33 fps ∼22% -72%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	131 fps ∼87% +10%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	123 fps ∼81% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(104 - 140, n=9)	129 fps ∼85% +8%
Average of class Smartphone(1 - 251, n=212, last 2 years)	73.4 fps ∼49% -38%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	59 fps ∼75%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	60 fps ∼76% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	59 fps ∼75% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	25 fps ∼32% -58%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	79 fps ∼100% +34%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	75 fps ∼95% +27%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(50 - 95, n=9)	73.2 fps ∼93% +24%
Average of class Smartphone(3.1 - 121, n=209, last 2 years)	41.6 fps ∼53% -29%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	81 fps ∼79%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	103 fps ∼100% +27%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	88 fps ∼85% +9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	26 fps ∼25% -68%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	92 fps ∼89% +14%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	86 fps ∼83% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(72 - 99, n=9)	88.7 fps ∼86% +10%
Average of class Smartphone(1.4 - 169, n=210, last 2 years)	50.4 fps ∼49% -38%

GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	44 fps ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	54 fps ∼100% +23%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	44 fps ∼81% 0%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	16 fps ∼30% -64%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	47 fps ∼87% +7%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	43 fps ∼80% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(31 - 51, n=9)	45 fps ∼83% +2%
Average of class Smartphone(3.3 - 81, n=209, last 2 years)	25.9 fps ∼48% -41%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	48 fps ∼77%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	62 fps ∼100% +29%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	51 fps ∼82% +6%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	16 fps ∼26% -67%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	57 fps ∼92% +19%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	51 fps ∼82% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(43 - 59, n=9)	55 fps ∼89% +15%
Average of class Smartphone(1.8 - 96.6, n=209, last 2 years)	30.3 fps ∼49% -37%
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	49 fps ∼86%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	57 fps ∼100% +16%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	46 fps ∼81% -6%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	18 fps ∼32% -63%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	49 fps ∼86% 0%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	45 fps ∼79% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(33 - 54, n=10)	48.1 fps ∼84% -2%
Average of class Smartphone(1.5 - 98, n=269, last 2 years)	26.9 fps ∼47% -45%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	57 fps ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	67 fps ∼100% +18%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	54 fps ∼81% -5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	20 fps ∼30% -65%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	57 fps ∼85% 0%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	53 fps ∼79% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(50 - 62, n=10)	58.3 fps ∼87% +2%
Average of class Smartphone(2 - 257, n=269, last 2 years)	31.6 fps ∼47% -45%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	33 fps ∼83%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	40 fps ∼100% +21%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	29 fps ∼73% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	11 fps ∼28% -67%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	31 fps ∼78% -6%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	30 fps ∼75% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(21 - 34, n=10)	30.3 fps ∼76% -8%
Average of class Smartphone(2.1 - 69, n=270, last 2 years)	18.1 fps ∼45% -45%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	22 fps ∼81%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	27 fps ∼100% +23%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	20 fps ∼74% -9%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	7.6 fps ∼28% -65%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	22 fps ∼81% 0%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	20 fps ∼74% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(18 - 23, n=10)	21.9 fps ∼81% 0%
Average of class Smartphone(0.7 - 101, n=270, last 2 years)	12.1 fps ∼45% -45%

Antutu v9 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	680139 Points ∼95%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	714632 Points ∼100% +5%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	393060 Points ∼55% -42%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	678958 Points ∼95% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(676505 - 716502, n=8)	693149 Points ∼97% +2%
Average of class Smartphone(117053 - 1041980, n=87, last 2 years)	534776 Points ∼75% -21%

AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	595585 Points ∼94%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	631025 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	569967 Points ∼90% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	334292 Points ∼53% -44%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	588115 Points ∼93% -1%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	602626 Points ∼95% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(573296 - 595585, n=3)	585665 Points ∼93% -2%
Average of class Smartphone(53335 - 727247, n=168, last 2 years)	356279 Points ∼56% -40%

VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	5042 Score ∼68%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	7402 Score ∼100% +47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(5042 - 7402, n=2)	6222 Score ∼84% +23%
Average of class Smartphone(421 - 7649, n=50, last 2 years)	3104 Score ∼42% -38%

UL Procyon AI Inference - Overall Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	12855 Points ∼76%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	17021 Points ∼100% +32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(12855 - 17835, n=4)	15283 Points ∼90% +19%
Average of class Smartphone(1555 - 63613, n=47, last 2 years)	12232 Points ∼72% -5%

AImark - Score v2.x (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	111838 Points ∼95%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	42629 Points ∼36% -62%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(111838 - 123847, n=6)	118039 Points ∼100% +6%
Average of class Smartphone(4293 - 286905, n=105, last 2 years)	69348 Points ∼59% -38%

Basemark GPU 1.2
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	83 (42.14min- 271.19max) fps ∼100%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	80.6 fps ∼97% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(80.6 - 83, n=2)	81.8 fps ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone(4.7 - 115, n=53, last 2 years)	35.9 fps ∼43% -57%
OpenGL Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	74.07 (41.02min- 105.16max) fps ∼100%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	68.5 fps ∼92% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(68.5 - 74.1, n=2)	71.3 fps ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone(5 - 99.1, n=52, last 2 years)	33.2 fps ∼45% -55%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	77.84 (40.81min- 128.99max) fps ∼100%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	74.19 fps ∼95% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(74.2 - 77.8, n=2)	76 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone(8.79 - 137, n=51, last 2 years)	37.6 fps ∼48% -52%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	68.66 (35.88min- 142.67max) fps ∼100%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	63.85 fps ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(63.9 - 68.7, n=2)	66.3 fps ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone(10.5 - 79.3, n=51, last 2 years)	32.6 fps ∼47% -53%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	6356 Points ∼100%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	6182 Points ∼97% -3%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	6273 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	3459 Points ∼54% -46%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	5916 Points ∼93% -7%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	5993 Points ∼94% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(5551 - 6369, n=8)	6096 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone(615 - 8124, n=192, last 2 years)	4024 Points ∼63% -37%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	9997 Points ∼99%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	8412 Points ∼83% -16%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	10075 Points ∼100% +1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	6242 Points ∼62% -38%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	8852 Points ∼88% -11%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	10059 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(8852 - 10489, n=8)	9706 Points ∼96% -3%
Average of class Smartphone(1160 - 19657, n=192, last 2 years)	7223 Points ∼72% -28%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	7692 Points ∼87%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	8144 Points ∼92% +6%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	8874 Points ∼100% +15%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	4211 Points ∼47% -45%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	6757 Points ∼76% -12%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	6681 Points ∼75% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(6683 - 8167, n=8)	7473 Points ∼84% -3%
Average of class Smartphone(522 - 9044, n=192, last 2 years)	4727 Points ∼53% -39%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	12801 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	13833 Points ∼100% +8%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	11736 Points ∼85% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	3989 Points ∼29% -69%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	11431 Points ∼83% -11%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	11637 Points ∼84% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(10386 - 12801, n=8)	11931 Points ∼86% -7%
Average of class Smartphone(349 - 25642, n=192, last 2 years)	6528 Points ∼47% -49%
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F3Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 6144	1658 Points ∼93%
Oppo Find X3 NeoQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 12288	1542 Points ∼86% -7%
Xiaomi Poco F2 ProQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 6144	1456 Points ∼81% -12%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 750G 5G, Adreno 619, 6144	1365 Points ∼76% -18%
Motorola Moto G100Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Adreno 650, 8192	1791 Points ∼100% +8%
Asus ROG Phone 3 Strix EditionQualcomm Snapdragon 865, Adreno 650, 8192	1650 Points ∼92% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G(1411 - 1791, n=8)	1606 Points ∼90% -3%
Average of class Smartphone(10 - 2392, n=192, last 2 years)	1351 Points ∼75% -19%

Web browsing feels fast, but the Poco F3 is much slower compared to the Moto G100. Especially in Java environments, this translates into a performance drop of up to 35%.

Jetstream 2 | JetStream 1.1 | Speedometer 2.0 | WebXPRT 3 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)	91.208 Points ∼100% +21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (60.7 - 97.5, n=7)	84.6 Points ∼93% +13%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)	75.089 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)	67.698 Points ∼74% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (12.4 - 182, n=182, last 2 years)	56.7 Points ∼62% -24%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)	56.483 Points ∼62% -25%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)	160.92 Points ∼100% +53%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)	145.11 Points ∼90% +38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (105 - 171, n=8)	143 Points ∼89% +36%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)	119.9 Points ∼75% +14%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)	105.4 Points ∼65%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 414, n=194, last 2 years)	104 Points ∼65% -1%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)	92.34 Points ∼57% -12%

Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)	74.8 runs/min ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)	74.5 runs/min ∼100% 0%
Motorola Moto G100 (Chome 90)	73.6 runs/min ∼98% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (51.4 - 74.8, n=7)	69.5 runs/min ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (9 - 244, n=167, last 2 years)	55.1 runs/min ∼74% -26%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)	45.44 runs/min ∼61% -39%

WebXPRT 3 - ---
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)	147 Points ∼100% +18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (99 - 151, n=8)	128 Points ∼87% +2%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)	125 Points ∼85%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)	118 Points ∼80% -6%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)	103 Points ∼70% -18%
Average of class Smartphone (20 - 252, n=198, last 2 years)	85.9 Points ∼58% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)	82 Points ∼56% -34%

Octane V2 - Total Score
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)	34161 Points ∼100% +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (20543 - 40652, n=8)	31802 Points ∼93% +20%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)	31224 Points ∼91% +17%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)	26577 Points ∼78%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)	24369 Points ∼71% -8%
Average of class Smartphone (1986 - 64222, n=204, last 2 years)	20626 Points ∼60% -22%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)	17730 Points ∼52% -33%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (414 - 29635, n=206, last 2 years)	3471 ms * ∼100% -99%
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (Chrome 89)	2393.3 ms * ∼69% -37%
Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro (Chrome84)	1993.1 ms * ∼57% -14%
Xiaomi Poco F3 (Chrome 90)	1743.8 ms * ∼50%
Oppo Find X3 Neo (Chrome 90)	1623.2 ms * ∼47% +7%
Motorola Moto G100 (Chrome 90)	1589.3 ms * ∼46% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G (1069 - 1744, n=8)	1425 ms * ∼41% +18%

* ... smaller is better

The fast UFS 3.1 storage delivers a fast performance in the test, but it falls a bit short of expectations.

	Xiaomi Poco F3	Oppo Find X3 Neo	Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G	Motorola Moto G100	Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		28%	17%	-18%	25%	17%	-29%
Sequential Read 256KB	1378.12	1737.64 26%	1634.45 19%	926.67 -33%	1729.8 26%	1574 ?(1030 - 1898, n=29) 14%	870 ?(45.6 - 2037, n=270, last 2 years) -37%
Sequential Write 256KB	684.13	768.59 12%	721.95 6%	484.62 -29%	716.8 5%	733 ?(233 - 1095, n=29) 7%	409 ?(11.9 - 1465, n=270, last 2 years) -40%
Random Read 4KB	208.02	260.89 25%	229.74 10%	176.05 -15%	253.6 22%	229 ?(126 - 317, n=29) 10%	155 ?(13.5 - 325, n=270, last 2 years) -25%
Random Write 4KB	170.57	250.97 47%	226.45 33%	179.23 5%	252.9 48%	231 ?(121 - 323, n=29) 35%	148 ?(5.5 - 449, n=270, last 2 years) -13%

Games - Strong hardware with software brake

We put the gaming capabilities of the Poco F3 to the test with GameBench. The Adreno 650 in the smartphone promises unrestricted gaming fun just like the 120 Hz display and the dual speakers.

In fact, the F3 also includes a small promo kit for PUBG Mobile, but it had already expired before the market launch, and it can no longer be claimed. However, the game runs very smoothly on the smartphone and even at 60 fps in the HD setting. Those who want to enjoy the game in its full glory will have to settle for 40 fps.

We're a bit disappointed with Armajet, because the F3 only achieves 30 fps here, although more should be possible both technically and in terms of the app. This is due to poor optimization and communication with the publishers, and experience shows that it will also affect other titles that support high frame rates.

Although the demanding Genshin Impact also runs smoothly at the highest details, it sometimes exhibits minor frame drops and other times greater ones.

051015202530354045505560Tooltip; Armajet; 1.59.8: Ø30 (29-31) ; Genshin Impact; 1.5.0_2574575_2578841: Ø59.4 (37-61) ; PUBG Mobile; HD; 1.4.0: Ø59.9 (58-61) ; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD; 1.4.0: Ø40 (39-41)

Emissions - Good dual speakers

The Poco F3 only barely exceeds the 30 °C (~86 °F) mark in idle usage. Under sustained load, temperatures increase over the entire surface, and the smartphone gets lukewarm, which is absolutely harmless.

The stress test immediately reveals the reason for the somewhat weaker performance in some benchmarks, since the SoC's performance can't be maintained consistently in either 3DMark stress test. Only minimal losses are visible in GFXBench. In everyday use, however, the performance losses shouldn't be noticeable, since there are more than enough performance reserves.

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Samsung Galaxy A52 5GAdreno 619, SD 750G 5G, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	99.7 (1097min- 1100max) % ∼100% +21%
Motorola Moto G100Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	99.2 (4109min- 4141max) % ∼99% +21%
Oppo Find X3 NeoAdreno 650, SD 865, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	83.2 (4216min- 5068max) % ∼83% +1%
Xiaomi Poco F3Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	82.2 (3521min- 4286max) % ∼82%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Xiaomi Poco F3Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	82.2 (1002min- 1219max) % ∼100%

Max. LoadIdle

35.9 °C97 F 36 °C97 F 33.3 °C92 F 35.9 °C97 F 35.3 °C96 F 33 °C91 F 36 °C97 F 34.9 °C95 F 32 °C90 F

Maximum: 36 °C = 97 FAverage: 34.7 °C = 94 F

32.6 °C91 F 33.9 °C93 F 35.9 °C97 F 30.9 °C88 F 33.9 °C93 F 35.7 °C96 F 31.1 °C88 F 32.9 °C91 F 34.8 °C95 F

Maximum: 35.9 °C = 97 FAverage: 33.5 °C = 92 F

Power Supply (max.)27.5 °C = 82 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260Max. LoadIdle

29.2 °C85 F 29.5 °C85 F 30.2 °C86 F 29 °C84 F 29.6 °C85 F 30.5 °C87 F 28.8 °C84 F 29.3 °C85 F 29.5 °C85 F

Maximum: 30.5 °C = 87 FAverage: 29.5 °C = 85 F

28 °C82 F 28.3 °C83 F 28.3 °C83 F 26.8 °C80 F 28.1 °C83 F 28.3 °C83 F 28 °C82 F 28.3 °C83 F 28.7 °C84 F

Maximum: 28.7 °C = 84 FAverage: 28.1 °C = 83 F

Power Supply (max.)26.3 °C = 79 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Voltcraft IR-260(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.7 °C / 94 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 36 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 22 to 52.9 °C for the class Smartphone.(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 35.9 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.5 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

The two speakers have a comparatively pleasing sound as long as they aren't turned up too loud. The higher mids and lower trebles in particular are reproduced appealingly, but distortion sets in quite quickly with higher frequencies. The support for Dolby Atmos should be added via an update.

There's no audio jack, but the adapter enables a low-noise output with a very good sound quality (SNR: 93.39 dBFS) via the USB-C port. All common audio codecs (SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, aptX TWS+, LDAC, and LHDC) are available for Bluetooth.

dB(A)0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.323.92523.320.53120.324401926.55029.835.76317.225.78012.926.210019.426.112512.139.51601149.92009.548.825012.655.331513.660.240010.562.35001167.96309.768.480011.174.8100011.576.8125012.778.9160013.479.1200012.775.8250013.676.3315014.180.440001380.1500013.276.8630013.978.6800013.475.21000013.773.21250014.467.81600016.765SPL25.189.4N0.679.5median 13median 73.2Delta0.99.842.343.336.539.731.731.132.437.43935.531.730.622.123.721.221.215.830.217.541.714.547.113.349.512.455.712.557.514.363.11764.322.169.720.274.414.974.114.672.814.574.31572.816.865.318.365.51969.519.675.720.17720.879.420.271.321.158.364.130.385.116.51.260.8median 17median 65.52.610.8hearing rangehide medianshow median Pink NoiseXiaomi Poco F3Motorola Moto G100Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.4 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.6% lower than median(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)Compared to same class»6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 88% worse»The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%Compared to all devices tested»31% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 62% worse»The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.6% lower than median(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.7% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median(+) | mids are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(±) | higher highs - on average 6.7% higher than median(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23% difference to median)Compared to same class»46% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 41% worse»The best had a delta of 12%, average was 23%, worst was 65%Compared to all devices tested»67% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 26% worse»The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%

Battery life - Strong but not excellent

Power consumption can be described as good for the most part. Only the activated communication modules draw a bit too much power from the battery.

The 4,520 mAh battery can be quickly recharged with the included power adapter. A full charge only takes 53 minutes, the 50% mark is already reached after 19 minutes, and the 80% mark after 33 minutes.

Unfortunately, wireless charging is not supported.

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.01 / 0.15 Watt
Idle	0.76 / 1.29 / 1.45 Watt
Load	4.6 / 8.87 Watt
Key:min: ,med: ,max:Metrahit EnergyCurrently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.

	Xiaomi Poco F34520 mAh	Oppo Find X3 Neo4500 mAh	Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro4700 mAh	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G4500 mAh	Motorola Moto G1005000 mAh	Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G	Average of class Smartphone
Power Consumption		-30%	-110%	-7%	-24%	-45%	-15%
Idle Minimum *	0.76	0.92 -21%	2 -163%	0.92 -21%	0.9 -18%	1.27 ?(0.7 - 3, n=9) -67%	0.939 ?(0.12 - 2.5, n=217, last 2 years) -24%
Idle Average *	1.29	2.38 -84%	3.1 -140%	1.78 -38%	1.5 -16%	2.07 ?(0.9 - 4.3, n=9) -60%	1.755 ?(0.65 - 3.6, n=217, last 2 years) -36%
Idle Maximum *	1.45	2.41 -66%	4 -176%	1.81 -25%	2.1 -45%	2.34 ?(1.2 - 4.31, n=9) -61%	1.992 ?(0.69 - 4, n=217, last 2 years) -37%
Load Average *	4.6	3.91 15%	6.4 -39%	3.86 16%	6.7 -46%	6.16 ?(4.6 - 9.9, n=9) -34%	4.46 ?(2.1 - 7.4, n=217, last 2 years) 3%
Load Maximum *	8.87	8.13 8%	11.6 -31%	6.14 31%	8.5 4%	9.32 ?(5.5 - 13.8, n=9) -5%	7.35 ?(3.56 - 12.3, n=217, last 2 years) 17%

* ... smaller is better

The Poco F3's battery runtimes are really good. However, the Xiaomi smartphone scores surprisingly poorly in the Reader's test, although it's still a good result.

In our real-world Wi-Fi test, Oppo demonstrates in an impressive way how more endurance can be squeezed out from a similarly large battery; the Poco can only outperform the Galaxy A52 5G in the comparison field.

Battery Runtime

Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)		26h 02min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 90)		13h 25min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		15h 18min
Load (maximum brightness)		5h 29min

	Xiaomi Poco F34520 mAh	Oppo Find X3 Neo4500 mAh	Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro4700 mAh	Samsung Galaxy A52 5G4500 mAh	Motorola Moto G1005000 mAh
Battery Runtime		40%	22%	6%	36%
Reader / Idle	1562		1954 25%	1917 23%	2846 82%
H.264	918		1466 60%	1052 15%	1285 40%
WiFi v1.3	805	1127 40%	923 15%	710 -12%	1049 30%
Load	329		286 -13%	324 -2%	302 -8%

+ bright and color-accurate AMOLED display+ strong positioning capabilities+ fast SoC+ stable Wi-Fi 6 and 5G+ good speakers- no microSD support- no audio jack- tele-macro lens with no apparent function- MIUI with ads- only 12 months of warranty

Verdict - Strong overall package with minor shortcomings

With the Poco F3, Xiaomi has once again put together a really strong price-performance package that mainly scores points with its very good display and high performance. However, the phone aspect hasn't been neglected either. The positioning capabilities are second to none, and even several flagship models aren't as precise.

The Xiaomi Poco F3 features a great display and a lot of computing power.

Battery life is also really good, but it lags behind last year's F2 Pro model. Performance isn't much faster either, but in return, the display is now capable of 120 Hz and 5G is on board. In contrast, compromises have to be made in terms of the camera setup. The main sensor isn't as modern as it used to be, and the exact function of the tele-macro lens will probably remain Xiaomi's secret.

Therefore, users who want a better camera and don't necessarily need 120 Hz or 5G might be better off with the F2 Pro, especially since it's just as cheap now.

At the time of writing, you can find both the 128 GB/6 GB version and the 256 GB/8 GB version on newegg for $384 and $419, respectively.

Xiaomi Poco F3- 2021-05-2005/20/2021v7Daniel Schmidt

Chassis80%Keyboard67 / 75 → 89%Pointing Device95%Connectivity52 / 70 → 74%Weight88%Battery90%Display92%Games Performance61 / 64 → 95%Application Performance84 / 86 → 97%Temperature92%Noise100%Audio77 / 90 → 86%Camera63%Average80%86%Smartphone - Weighted AverageXiaomi Poco F3 (Poco F Series)News•Xiaomi Poco F3: The new king o... |News•Poco F2 Pro proves itself in o... |Review•Xiaomi Poco F2 Pro Smartphone ... |Review•Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Smartphone...

Pricecompare

Read all 5 comments / answer static version load dynamicLoading CommentsComment on this articleEditor of the original article: Daniel Schmidt - Managing Editor Mobile- 427 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2013As a child I was fascinated by my Commodore 16, and this sparked my enthusiasm for computers. Using my first modem, I surfed the BTX videotext system and later the World Wide Web. I have always been captivated by the latest technologies, and this is especially true for mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. I’ve been part of the Notebookcheck team since 2013 and have also on occasion written for Notebookinfo.de, and I’m looking forward to testing new innovations for our readers. I like to spend my spare time indulging in photography and barbecues and being with my family.contact me via:@Tellheim,Facebook,tellheim1763,LinkedIn, XingTranslator: Stephanie Chamberlain - Translator- 506 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2020I've been fascinated with technology ever since I got my very first Android smartphone, which was quite a while ago. The power packed into such a small footprint still amazes me. Learning to program made my understanding of technology deeper, and at the same time, it expanded my interest to the area of desktop computers and laptops. All this led me to enjoy reading and watching reviews of new devices, and that's how I stumbled upon Notebookcheck. I immediately found their reviews to be very comprehensive, and luckily, I've even had the chance of translating them since 2019. When it comes to the huge field of technology, I'm currently also interested in specializing in Java programming.contact me via:LinkedInPlease share our article, every link counts!