Thanks for your visite. If you like my work, you can support me with the following possibilities:
Subscribe to my YouTube channel I post full test videos every month. By subscribing you will be notified of each new video, but the number of YouTube subscribers is important to obtain products to test.
Subscribe to my page on Facebook I regularly post updates on Facebook, I also organize contests to win prizes. Here too, the number of fans is important to obtain material.
Use my links I don't display ads on my site because I don't like it. My only source is from purchases you make from my links. I earn a meager commission on every purchase (about 2% on average), it costs you nothing and keeps me going. Here are some links to buy your products:
I'm a regular on the F range at Poco, I started by buying the Poco F2 Pro and I really liked this phone (I still have it by the way), I then bought the Poco F3, the Poco F4 GT and now that the Poco F4 is out I couldn't not buy it. However, do not believe that I am a compulsive buyer who buys everything that comes out, no, my choices are based on purely pragmatic criteria and my satisfaction with previous models. I hope Poco has resisted the temptation to re-use components from their other phones by changing the bare minimum to justify launching a new model.
offer
Get a 50€ discount in the presale phase at Goboo: Poco F4 / -50€ [b] After the phase presale, Goboo will undoubtedly remain the cheapest store. I bought mine from them.[b][b][b]linkManufacturer web site:https://po.co[b]linkSite where I have bought the Poco F4: https://s.zbanx.com/r/kFxgOquluKN1[b]
Structure of my tests
I test the phones according to a pre-established structure (see below) to provide you with as much information as possible. Unfortunately, this takes a long time. Some tests like network performance tests take several days and for photo tests I sometimes have to wait until the weather is suitable to take pictures in good conditions. I am therefore obliged to publish the tests step by step, so I invite you to come back if the test is not complete at the time of your visit.[b] How are my tests different from others on the web?
- I usually buy the devices with my own money, so price is just as important as you are! - I keep the devices for at least a few weeks (sometimes more) to see what they are worth in real conditions. - I answer (when possible) your questions to help you decide before you buy - no one pays me to do these reviews, so I'm completely neutral and independent... - My pages are not filled with ads
The list below shows the prices for the Poco F4 from more than 50 sites around the world. If you are not satisfied with any price, you can subscribe to a price alert to be the first to be notified when the price drops.[b]bb
Xiaomi Poco X5 5G + 4G Volte Global Unlocked (256GB + 8GB) GSM 6.67" 48 MP Triple Camera (ONLY Tmobi...
helpThe above links are affiliate links from companies such as Amazon, Gearbest, Aliexpress,... If you appreciate my work, I would be grateful if you could purchase these products through these links. It costs you absolutely nothing but I get a small commission that allows me to buy the material I test. Thank you very much!
Timeline
June 27, 2022: purchase of the Poco F4 in presale on Goboo [b] June 28, 2022: the package is already on the way [b][b]
Why this phone?
Poco brand phones had a very particular design until the previous generation but it seems that Poco wanted to appeal to a wider audience by making its new range more neutral. The Poco F4 is no exception to the rule and apart from the circular photo block (like on the Poco F2 Pro), the phone looks like any other phone today. Too bad but luckily I don't buy phones for their outward appearance. What are the interesting elements of this new model? [b] - the phone should be very performance with a combination of Snapdragon 870 for the CPU and an Adreno 650 for the GPU [b] - UFS 3.1 (already present in the F3) for memory access very fast [b] - LPDDR5 memory (always for fast memory) [b] - liquid cooling [b] - photo sensor with OIS [b] - dual frequency GPS [b] - 67W fast charge [b] - dolby atmos sound [b] ...etc... [b] This phone will not bring a revolution but it takes everything we are right to expect on the top of the range with a price lower than the competition. It's a bit like Redmi's niche with added performance.[b]
Unpacking
Poco may still be looking for a little more on the design of their phones, but in terms of the boxes, it's good, I think they found what they were looking for. Poco boxes haven't changed in a long time and the use of yellow and black is very brand specific. The box contains the phone, a 67W charger, a USB-C cable, transparent silicone protection, a needle to open the sim drawer and a manual. I was pleasantly surprised to see that Poco had also added a USB to Jack adapter since the phone does not have a Jack output.
4add_a_photo
[b]
Length : 163.2 Width : 75.9 Thickness : 7.7 Weight : 195 Jack output : No USB Type : Type C Infrared port : Yes
First configuration
The Poco F4 is released with MIUI 13 and therefore follows the same process for initial setup as other phones running the same operating system. I noticed some small changes in the screens with in particular more possibilities for search engines but the change that annoys me the most is the recovery of data from the previous phone. The default method is cable transfer, I don't understand this choice, it makes no sense with the Google environment where everything is saved in the cloud. Those who keep everything local without synchronization are a minority, it's obviously their right to do that but I don't understand Poco's choice. [b][b] I also increasingly feel the presence of Google's additional services. There is of course the assistant which could be switched to one screen, there are now two screens. There is also Google Pay and at each opportunity, Google will slip into the configuration. It's not good or bad, it's just an observation. [b][b]
28add_a_photo
[b]
Finish
The F range from Poco indicates that this phone belongs to the high end. Even if the top of the Poco range is not yet comparable to the top of the Apple or Samsung range, this phone has a very good level of finish, especially for this price range.
The screen occupies 86% of the front surface, the borders at the top are quite thin, they are thicker at the bottom of the phone. The screen is only interrupted by a small selfie sensor located at the top and in the middle of the screen.
On the lower part of the phone, there is a USB C port, a sound sensor, one of the two external speakers and the sim drawer which can hold two sim cards or a sim card in combination with a card memory. The sim drawer is of the double-sided type.
At the top we find an infrared emitter, a sound sensor and the other external speaker. The speakers are not placed in the same place on each side of the phone and with this kind of configuration I often tend to block the output of one of the two speakers depending on the position of my hands because a priori my hands are positioned the same on both sides.
The back is uniform with a reflective surface like glass but I think the phone as a whole is made up of plastic, the same is the case with the bezel.
Poco has tested many possibilities for integrating photo sensors on the back of the phone, I saw large horizontal rectangular blocks, vertical blocks, squares, circles,... and the Poco F4 unites everything in one with a circle contained in a square which is integrated into a rectangle. Everything stands out a bit from the back of the phone, but I've seen much larger sensors on other Pocos or Xiaomi. [b][b] Poco's F range has always been a little wiser than the Poco X or M, this Poco F4 follows this trend with a very classic but nevertheless successful design. As I wrote above, the top of the Poco range is not comparable with the top of the Samsung range but it is still very correct for this price level.[b]
Specifications
[b]The information below comes from the Device Info HW application. The application provides detailed technical information about the tested phone. I tested the Poco F4 in its 6Gb / 128 Gb version and you will find all the technical characteristics in the screens below. [b][b] There are a few interesting elements in these specifications: [b] - UFS 3.1 flash memory: very fast memory access, this will ensure comfort in everyday use [b] - LPDDR5 memory type: good memory performance [b] - using QCA6390 wifi chip, I don't think I have tested this chip before [b] - Qualcomm aptX audio playback (amplification benefit ) [b] - screen frequency of 60 / 90 and 120 Hz [b] - extended screen color coverage [b] - "only" 4500 mAh battery where most of the phones have a 5000 mAh battery today [b]
[b][b]The Poco F4 runs on a Qualcomm architecture and this therefore concerns the CPU, GPU, wifi, bluetooth, GPS and sound output. [b][b] It relies on a Snapdragon 870 for the CPU part, it's a high-end processor but it's not the most powerful at the moment, the Poco X4 GT does better in pure performance by being less expensive. We find this CPU in other phones such as the Motorola Edge 20 Pro, the ZTE Axon 41, the Black Shark 5 or the Xiaomi 12X. [b][b] For the graphics part, it is based on an Adreno 650 which should deliver good performance while remaining behind the GT range at Poco. Even if it's not the most powerful, this Adreno 650 could represent a good compromise between performance and cooling since the latest phones in the GT range that I tested tended to overheat quite quickly. [b][b] With this CPU/GPU combination, I don't directly see a game or an application that could put this phone in failure, everything will be in the details and a framerate can be lower.[b]
Benchmark Antutu/3DMark
I got a score of 572548 points with Antutu v8, that's about the same as with the Poco F3, so there's not really any progress on that side and that's normal because the Poco F3 used the same CPU/GPU. For a performance oriented brand this is a little disappointing but it won't impact day to day use, the Poco F4 is a performance phone and I'm sure a large majority of buyers of this kind of phone do not fully utilize the performance. [b][b]
Load test
To test the energy efficiency of a phone I push all its components to the limit for several minutes, first sequentially and then pushing all the way in at the same time. I observe the real computing power, the ability to keep the phone at a good temperature, the battery consumption. This kind of test also allows you to see if the phone is able to exploit all its power when everything is running at the same time because even if the CPU and the GPU are powerful, when they work together they may not give 100% of their performance. [b][b] The Poco F4 has a less power-hungry but also less efficient CPU than the Poco X4 GT. I have an average consumption of 6.57W for the Poco F4 CPU against 7.2W on the Poco X4 GT but with 26% less performance. The gain in energy is lower than the loss in performance. For the GPU part on the other hand, the performance between the two phones is quite similar but here it is the Poco F4 which consumes more energy. I don't have many phones with this type of test yet but for now the Poco F4 ranks 3rd in power efficiency behind the Poco X4 GT and the Redmi Note 11 Pro+. [b][b] During the duration of the test, the battery rose to 41°C at the end of the test and I obtained an average of 32.9°C, this is an average result which shouldn't bother you if you play with this phone for a long time. [b][b][b]
Antutu score : 572548 Antutu CPU : 159650 Antutu GPU : 239922 Antutu UX : 90810 Antutu Mem : 82166
[b]Top 10 - performance ranking based on Antutu 1. Poco F5 - 910362 2. Poco F4 Gt - 853016 3. Realme Gt - 811858 4. Black Shark 4 Pro - 759986 5. Poco X4 Gt - 714577 6. Oppo Find X2 Pro - 605184 7. Oneplus 8t - 595000 8. Poco F3 - 589677 9. Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro - 581650 10. Oneplus 8 Pro - 579417
Number of smartphones in the ranking:155 Position of this smartphone in the ranking:12/155
Note: this ranking only contains the phones I tested as well as a few others that I added for reference. [b]Gaming[b]To test the performance in game, I download the mobile PUBG game and evaluate the in-game experience, graphics level and depth of vision. This game is quite demanding and should help you evaluating the performance of a phone. As I wrote in the performance review, this phone may not be the best but it is good enough to perform well in game with PUBG Mobile. I got a frame rate of around 40 fps with the textures in HD and the few slowdowns I encountered came from network lag.[b][b][b]
Network performance
The Poco F4 offers very wide frequency coverage in 3G, 4G and 5G. So you should be able to use it anywhere in Europe.[b]
Choose your country to check if your phone is compatible:
The frequencies displayed below will allow you to see if this phone is compatible with your operator or if you will be able to use it in the country where you are going on vacation.
Signal 4G (from December 2020)[b]I decided to change the methodology for measuring the network because I noticed that the configuration of the mobile network changes over time. This makes it more difficult to compare phones because the conditions are no longer exactly the same.[b][b]To overcome this problem, I set up a device that captures 24 hours a day about ten parameters from the mobile network (ex: cell id, rssi, rsrq, snr, frequency,...). I then place the phone next to the device for 24 to 48 hours taking the same measurements so that I can compare them. [b][b] Overview of the phones tested with this methodology[b][b]
Phone tested:
Measurements
Avg signal (reference)
Avg signal (phone)
Min/Max (reference)
Min/Max (phone)
Samsung Galaxy S10+
457
-93.06
-97.39
-89 / -98
-97 / -99
Xiaomi Mi 9t Pro
669
-93.69
-95.84
-90 / -95
-92 / -98
Poco F2 Pro
1438
-91.02
-94.99
-89 / -94
-94 / -96
Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g
1645
-90.77
-95.02
- 88 / -98
-95 / -100
Poco X3
821
-94.89
-103.19
-91 / -97.7
-101 / -104
Umidigi Bison
2343
-92.71
-96.46
-90 / -99
-94 / -102
Oukitel C21
1101
-92.04
-94.99
-90 / -97
-92 / -95
Poco M3
1116
-92.09
-91.74
-88 / -98
-90 / -99
Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro
1071
-90.61
-94.03
-88 / -94
-94 / -96
Umidigi A9 Pro
981
-90.40
-94.01
-88 / -95
-93 / -95
Redmi Note 9t
1201
-92.149
-91.71
-90 / -97
-91 / -97
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
999
-92.35
-93.99
-88 / -97
-92 / -98
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
877
-89.72
-90.56
- 88 / -92
-89 / -95
Poco X3 Pro
1876
-91.45
-92.91
-90 / -94
-90 / -96
Poco F3
1382
-90.79
-94.2
-89 / -94
-93 / -98
Oneplus Nord N100
896
-91.23
-96.005
-88 / - 99
-96 / -99
Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite
2875
-91.36
-91.49
-87 / -96
-90 / -96
Samsung Galaxy A52
1427
-89.27
-93.39
-87 / -98
-92 / -96
Doogee S96 Pro
1259
-94.2
-91.21
-90 / -102
-88 / -95
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s
957
-92.07
-97.62
-90 / -102
-96 / -102
Poco M3 Pro
1247
-91.76
-102.97
-99 / -104
-88 / -98
Realme Gt
843
-96.49
-94.02
-93 / -101
- 92 / -96
F150 R2022
1002
-92.4
-105.1
-90 / -97
-98 / -110
Umidigi Bison Pro
936
-94.2
-104.98
-91 / -98
-95 / -105
Redmi 10
2141
-94.74
-100.92
-92 / -98
-99 / -101
Tcl 10 Pro
871
-93.43
-94.001
-92 / -96
-93 / -95
Poco M4 Pro
570
-93.71
-96.78
-91 / -98
-95 / -99
Google Pixel 5
1444
-91.02
-97.02
-90 / -94
-97 / -101
Xiaomi 11t
1576
-92.305
-92.003
-90 / -96
-92 / -93
Redmi Note 11
1223
-92.5
-91.32
-92/-97
-90 / -93
Black Shark 4 Pro
2383
-95.178
-95.42
-90 / -100
-93 / -101
Redmi Note 11 Pro
349
-95.33
-93
-89 / -101
-92 / -94
Poco M4 Pro 4g
1202
-90.85
-88.95
-87 / - 95
-88 / -98
Tcl 30 Se
567
-92.11
-92.85
-88 / -98
-99 / -93
Poco X4 Pro
562
-92.06
-94.01
-90 / -95
-95 / -93
Redmi Note 11 Pro Plus 5g
945
-93.5
-93.54
-91 / -97
-92 / -97
Poco F4 Gt
832
-95.02
-93.09
-90 / -99
-93 / -97
Oukitel Wp18
1351
-95.94
-92.92
-91 / -97
-92 / -97
Poco X4 Gt
387
-96.99
-96.505
-96 / -98
-95 / -98
Poco F4
524
-95.78
-95.04
-93 / -99
-94/-96
Oneplus Nord 2t
1340
-98.83
-96.305
-95 / -102
-90 / -99
Redmi 10a
707
-89.026
-97.97
-87 / -91
-97 / -103
Poco M5
762
-95.18
-95.07
-98 / -93
-99 / -94
Unihertz Tank
1426
-91.21
-93.97
-90 / -95
-89 / -96
Poco X5 5g
2234
-92.3
-99.1
-91 / -95
- 100 / -98
Google Pixel 6a
853
-91.8
-95
-90 / -94
-95 / -97
Redmi Note 12
1023
-89.6
-96.99
-88 / -93
-95 / -97
Redmi Note 12 Pro
1576
-91.96
-94.93
-89 / -96
-93 / -95
Unihertz Luna
1133
-91.7
-91.94
-89 / -95
-92 / -94
Poco F5
1321
-91.69
-95.05
-90 / -97
-94 / -97
[b][b]I performed 524 measurements to assess the quality of the 4G signal (I don't have 5G at home) and obtained an average score of -95.04 dBm with the Poco F4 and a score of -95.78 dBm with the probe , the difference is not very big and the Poco even does better than the reference. Beyond the good score, I notice that the signal is very stable throughout the duration of the measurements, the differences are so small that they are not visible on the graph. The deviations were not very high with the probe either but we can clearly see that the Poco is more stable.
[b][b][b]Download/Upload speed[b]To test the download speed, I have identified some 4G cells offering good performance where I test all my devices several times to see what download and upload speed they can achieve.[b]Top 10 - speed ranking in download 1. Samsung Galaxy S20 D:351Mbps U: 20Mbps 2. Poco X3 D:232Mbps U: 55Mbps 3. Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g D:223Mbps U: 52Mbps 4. Poco F2 Pro D:207Mbps U: 53Mbps 5. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite D:153Mbps U: 68Mbps 6. Xiaomi Mi A3 D:150Mbps U: 60Mbps 7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s D:150Mbps U: 60Mbps 8. Xiaomi Mi 8 Lite D:149Mbps U: 60Mbps 9. Samsung Galaxy A21s D:147Mbps U: 51Mbps 10. Huawei Y6 2019 D:145Mbps U: 61Mbps
Number of smartphones in the ranking:30 Position of this smartphone in the ranking:0/30
Note: the theoretical maximum speed of a telephone is often limited by the configuration of the mobile network and the congestion of the network at the time of the measurement. So maybe you could get a higher speed on another network [b][b]
Wifi performance
To test a phone's ability to receive the network properly, I take measurements near my router and then remotely (and always at the same place). This gives me an average in dBm where a value of -90 dBm indicates poorer performance than a value at -30 dBm.[b]
Wifi signal[b]Since the Poco F4 runs on the same architecture as the Poco F3, I expected to get very similar results, but unfortunately that's not the case. I had obtained a very good signal near the router with the F3 but with the F4 the best signal I obtained was -25dBm against -16 with the F3. The signal stabilized around -30dbm which ranks this F4 in the low average of the ranking. I suspect that the position of the wifi antennas and the case of the phone play a role because by changing the orientation of the phone, the signal changed quite strongly. The distance test, on the other hand, is more conclusive with -60 dBm against -67 with the F3. [b][b] My measurements are always made under the same conditions, so this result is surprising and must necessarily be linked to the telephone. This signal deficit is not catastrophic but it is visible in my measurements. I would see if this lack of sensitivity is felt in use.[b][b]Top 10 - wifi sensitivity ranking 1. Poco F2 Pro -11dBm 2. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro -12dBm 3. Realme Gt -12dBm 4. Redmi Note 12 Pro -13dBm 5. Samsung Galaxy A21s -13dBm 6. Redmi Note 11 Pro -13dBm 7. Poco F5 -14dBm 8. Oneplus Nord N100 -15dBm 9. Poco X3 Pro -15dBm 10. Poco F3 -15dBm
Number of smartphones in the ranking:74 Position of this smartphone in the ranking:56/74
[b]Download/Upload speed[b]To test the speed in Wifi, I connect to my router in 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz (if available) and use the Ookla application to measure the speed.[b]Top 10 - wifi download speed ranking 1. Redmi Note 11 Pro Plus 5g 866Mbps 2. Redmi Note 12 Pro 866Mbps 3. Poco F4 866Mbps 4. Google Pixel 6a 866Mbps 5. Poco F4 Gt 866Mbps 6. Poco X4 Gt 866Mbps 7. Oneplus Nord 2t 866Mbps 8. Black Shark 4 Pro 866Mbps 9. Poco F5 866Mbps 10. Poco M4 Pro 4g 433Mbps
Number of smartphones in the ranking:72 Position of this smartphone in the ranking:3/72
Note: I have a 400Mbps line and a modem capable of delivering higher speed, but I can never be sure how much bandwidth is available when doing a test. [b]
GPS performance
[b]To test the accuracy of the GPS signal, I use two positioning applications to evaluate the difference between the actual position and the position indicated by the phone. This test is done outdoors with nothing to obstruct the signal. An accuracy level of up to 3 meters can easily be corrected by an application (e.g. Google Maps).[b][b] Poco F4 is compatible with A-GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, QZSS, Galileo, GPS (L1+L5), GLONASS (L1), BeiDou (B1), Galileo (E1) networks +E5a), BeiDou (B2), NavIC System and QZSS (L1 + L5). The blanket is therefore very wide, it is one of the widest blankets I have tested so far. The signal quickly establishes itself to 3 meters accuracy with a large amount of satellites available. The Poco F4 is dual band, which means that it uses two frequencies on certain networks for better positioning. Even if the accuracy is 3m, your maps application will be able to position you in the right place fairly quickly.[b][b]Top 10 - GPS accuracy ranking 1. Poco M5 1m 2. Poco X4 Gt 1m 3. Unihertz Tank 1m 4. Oukitel C21 1m 5. Redmi 9a 1m 6. Redmi 10a 1m 7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s 1m 8. Doogee S96 Pro 1m 9. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 1m 10. Umidigi Bison Pro 1m
Number of smartphones in the ranking:44 Position of this smartphone in the ranking:25/44
Note: An accuracy of 3 meters or less can easily be corrected by a good GPS application. Phone performance also plays a role in how fast your display updates, so good accuracy could be compromised by too slow a display. [b]
Battery range
To test battery life I developed an application that measures the battery level minute by minute until the battery is empty. This application consumes about ten percent of the phone's resources and I do a test with 100 brightness. This test aims to reproduce a contemplative use of a phone (e.g. surfing the internet, reading articles, spending time on social networks). These results are not valid for intensive gaming/streaming use.
Capacity : 4500 Fast charge : Yes W max : 67 Range (100% brightness) : 554.00 Range (50% brightness) : 1141 Charging time : 98 Discharge speed (100%) : 0.18 Discharge score (100%) : 8.12 Discharge speed (50%) : 0.09 Discharge score (50%) : 3.94 Charging speed : 1.02 Charging score : 45.92
From March 2020, I replaced my subjective battery test with a technical test to better measure the real behaviour of the battery. Now I test the autonomy and charging time under absolutely identical conditions. I perform several measurements, so this test alone takes several days during which I cannot use the phone for anything else.
Battery life - methodology To test the battery life, I measure the battery consumption every minute in strictly identical conditions to be able to compare phones and also to allow you to evaluate your phone in the same conditions. I rule out any influence of applications that could interfere with the measurement. The autonomy is not linear, the battery sometimes discharges much faster at the end. This is a frustrating phenomenon but with my measurements, you will know if you need to find a charger quickly.
Battery life The battery of the Poco F4 has a capacity of 4500 mAh and has discharged from 100% to 1% in 554.00 minutes with 100% brightness, it has discharged from 100% to 1% in 1141 minutes with 50% brightness. I obtain in this way an average discharge speed of 0.18% per minute with 100% luminosity and 0.09% per minute with 50% luminosity, the consumption is therefore 8.12 mA per minute with 100% luminosity and 3.94 with 50% luminosity. To be able to compare the efficiency of the phone and its influence on the battery, you have to compare the 8.12 (or 50%) score with that of other smartphones, the figure should be as low as possible.
Charging time - methodology To test the charging time, I always use the same charger with the same cable. I measure the charging time minute by minute to see the evolution of the charge as well as the charging speed. The charging speed of a battery is not linear, it is often faster at the beginning and slower at the end. The charger is compatible with fast charging.
Charging time The battery of the Poco F4 has a capacity of 4500 mAh and has been charged from 1% to 100% in 98 minutes. This gives me an average charging speed of 1.02% per minute and therefore an increase of 45.92 mA per minute. To compare the performance of the Poco F4 compared to other phones, you should use the 45.92 per minute score, this score should be as high as possible.
Important note: the charging speed is not always linear, the graph below gives you an indication of the battery behaviour.
The following table lists the phones tested with the technical battery test, they are ranked in order of efficiency. A higher battery capacity should logically result in a higher battery life but it is not always the case and it does not give any indication of the efficiency of a phone.
Smartphone
Capacity (mAh)
Battery life (minutes)
Efficiency Score
Battery life (minutes) / 50%
Efficiency Score / 50%
Charging time
.Score charging
Honor 9x
4000
770.00
5.19
1333.00
3.00
151.00
26.49
Nokia 5.3
4000
549.00
7.29
1096.00
3.65
199.00
20.10
Samsung Galaxy S20
4000
565.00
7.08
1217.00
3.29
136.00
29.41
Oukitel C21
4000
497.00
8.05
1324.00
3.02
167.00
23.95
Google Pixel 5
4080
773.00
5.28
1559.00
2.62
81.00
50.37
Umidigi A9 Pro
4150
552.00
7.52
1562.00
2.66
112.00
37.05
Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g
4160
749.00
5.55
1541.00
2.70
163.00
25.52
Realme 6
4300
704.00
6.11
1104.00
3.89
162.00
26.54
Google Pixel 6a
4410
534
8.26
1935
2.28
111
39.73
Samsung Galaxy A52
4500
652.00
6.90
1239.00
3.63
165.00
27.27
Redmi Note 11 Pro Plus 5g
4500
525.00
8.57
1211
3.72
24
187.50
Realme Gt
4500
574.00
7.84
1057.00
4.26
87.00
51.72
Tcl 10 Pro
4500
465.00
9.68
889.00
5.06
133.00
33.83
Poco F4
4500
554.00
8.12
1141
3.94
98
45.92
Black Shark 4 Pro
4500
425.00
10.59
937.00
4.80
29.00
155.17
Oneplus Nord 2t
4500
693
6.49
1492
3.02
121
37.19
Poco F3
4520
657.00
6.88
1840.00
2.46
122.00
37.05
Poco F4 Gt
4700
365.00
12.88
1082
4.34
38
123.68
Poco F2 Pro
4700
1150.00
4.09
1536.00
3.06
180.00
26.11
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s
5000
636.00
7.86
1556.00
3.21
161.00
31.06
Poco M3 Pro
5000
657.00
7.61
1647.00
3.04
131.00
38.17
Poco X4 Pro
5000
643.00
7.78
1361
3.67
74
67.57
Umidigi Bison Pro
5000
610.00
8.20
1632.00
3.06
255.00
19.61
Redmi 10
5000
664.00
7.53
1684.00
2.97
165.00
30.30
Poco M4 Pro
5000
634.00
7.89
1600.00
3.13
123.00
40.65
Xiaomi 11t
5000
476.00
10.50
1204.00
4.15
97.00
51.55
Redmi Note 11
5000
592.00
8.45
1 376.00
3.63
69.00
72.46
Oneplus Nord N100
5000
808.00
6.19
1278.00
3.91
663.00
7.54
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
5000
691.00
7.24
1728.00
2.89
193.00
25.91
Poco X5 5g
5000
493
10.14
1058
4.73
228
21.93
Motorola G8 Power
5000
912.00
5.48
2792.00
1.79
311.00
16.08
Redmi Note 12 Pro
5000
618
8.09
1294
3.86
120
41.67
Redmi Note 12
5000
637
7.85
1517
3.30
81
61.73
Samsung Galaxy A21s
5000
729.00
6.86
1283.00
3.90
166.00
30.12
Redmi Note 9t
5000
766.00
6.53
2054.00
2.43
148.00
33.78
Redmi 9a
5000
694.00
7.20
1902.00
2.63
195.00
25.64
Redmi 9c
5000
656.00
7.62
1915.00
2.61
170.00
29.41
Redmi 10a
5000
682
7.33
1820
2.75
163
30.67
Umidigi Bison
5000
550.00
9.09
1471.00
3.40
238.00
21.01
Tcl 30 Se
5000
650
7.69
1 225.00
4.08
172
29.07
Poco M4 Pro 4g
5000
723.00
6.92
1 500.00
3.33
77.00
64.94
Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
5020
625.00
8.03
1557.00
3.22
213.00
23.57
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s
5020
663.00
7.57
1876.00
2.68
224.00
22.41
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9
5020
650.00
7.72
1808.00
2.78
162.00
30.99
Poco X4 Gt
5080
726.00
7.00
1538
3.30
113
44.96
Umidigi F2
5150
927.00
5.56
1854.00
2.78
299.00
17.22
Poco X3
5160
653.00
7.90
1654.00
3.12
181.00
28.51
Poco X3 Pro
5160
648.00
7.96
1688.00
3.06
138.00
37.39
Doogee S58 Pro
5180
845.00
6.13
1908.00
2.71
177.00
29.27
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite
5260
827.00
6.36
1609.00
3.27
208.00
25.29
Ulefone Armor 7e
5500
768.00
7.16
1140.00
4.82
179.00
30.73
Poco M3
6000
842.00
7.13
1898.00
3.16
217.00
27.65
Doogee S96 Pro
6350
929.00
6.84
1405.00
4.52
424.00
14.98
F150 R2022
8300
879.00
9.44
1498.00
5.54
243.00
34.16
Oukitel Wp18
12500
2 733.00
4.57
2859
4.37
362
34.53
helpHow to read these figures? The battery capacity is an important element in determining the autonomy of a phone but it is not the only factor. A phone with a large battery may have a shorter battery life if it consumes more power. If I had to take an example from everyday life, I would use the universe of the car. If a car has a large fuel tank, it should be able to drive a longer distance unless its average fuel consumption is higher. The battery efficiency score works the same way, it should be as low as possible and represents the energy consumption of the phone. These differences in efficiency are often related to the brightness of the screen, large bright screens will tend to consume more energy and even if they have a large battery, their range will be shorter.
In summary
I measured a charging time of 98 minutes with a UGREEN 100 watt charger, the charge should be able to be faster with the charger delivered with the phone but the graph is intended to show how the charge behaves and we see here that the charge slows down after 80% as it does on many phones but the speed loss is not as high as usual. It takes 16 minutes to get to 20% and the last 20 percent about 20 minutes. [b][b]
the screen at 50% leads to a battery life of 1141 minutes, while with the screen at 100% the battery life drops to 554 minutes, the screen consumption is therefore almost perfectly linear. I also measured the consumption of the screen in isolation and by changing the frequencies available. At 60hz, the screen consumes about 0.68w while at 120h the screen consumes 0.8W. You will therefore lose a little autonomy with the screen at 120hz but the difference is not very significant. [b][b] With normal use, you should last almost 2 days with a full battery, but with intensive use (ex: gaming), the autonomy will drop sharply. With my charging test that lasts about 8 minutes, I lost 5.25% battery. [b][b][b]
Photo camera test
To test the quality of photos produced by a phone, I do a technical test (resolution, sharpness, chromatic aberration,...) in studio (identical conditions) to evaluate the technical part objectively. From the second half of 2020, I built my own laboratory to take completely objective technical measurements. I then take pictures in real conditions to see how the camera performs. I then evaluate these photos according to my criteria but I publish the photos so that you can evaluate the result according to your criteria.[b]
The Poco F4's primary sensor is a 64MP Omnivision OV64B40 sensor. I've never tested this sensor in another phone and I admit to having some apprehension about Omnivision sensors because I haven't yet obtained very good results with this type of sensor. This sensor may be the first that will make me change my mind and I hope that will be the case because the F4 is supposed to represent the top of the range at Poco and installing an average quality sensor there is likely to affect commercial success of this phone. [b][b] For the ultra wide angle sensor, it is also an Omnivision sensor and there too I hope to be positively surprised. The selfie sensor is a Sony IMX 596, but here I have a rather positive view because Sony has been able to demonstrate its ability to produce good sensors on many occasions. The Poco F4 still has the latest macro sensor from GalacyCore, but you shouldn't expect much from this kind of sensor. [b][b][b]
Photo quality
Photo quality (indoor/studio)[b]The studio test is carried out under the same conditions so that the results can be compared on an equal basis. I calibrate my lighting for each test to obtain the same brightness and colour temperature. This test is a preliminary analysis of the technical qualities of a camera. Most phones fail this test, so you should also read the results of the other tests in the following paragraphs.[b][b] Main sensor: Omnivision OV64B40
To test this sensor, I directly took a photo in pro mode to see what it had inside and the result is interesting. With the correct shutter speed, the photo is correctly exposed (it's slightly underexposed in auto mode), the sharpness looks really good (look at the rubix cube texture), the colors look correct to me as well. In automatic mode, the exposure is a little less good, but it's about the average of the photos I take in the studio. The colors are darker but it's related to the exposure, I don't see too much difference towards blue or yellow. This first studio test is encouraging. [b][b]
This photo confirms what I thought of the sharpness on the first image. The sharpness in the center is excellent, it deteriorates a little on the periphery but the level of sharpness remains good. The color rendition looks quite good as I'm photographing a non-reflective surface here, so the colors returned are darker and better contrasted. I'm curious to see how this sensor will fare in daylight. Secondary sensor: Omnivision ov8856
Ultra wide-angle sensors have almost all the same faults and this one is no exception. The exposure level is two or three notches below the photo taken with the main sensor, the distortion is significant but with objects seen up close it is normal, the sharpness does not seem very good because I cannot distinguish the rubix cube texture. I also see noise appearing everywhere and chromatic aberrations. This sensor will therefore probably not shine outdoors either because its technical qualities are not of a very high level. [b][b]
This second photo confirms my first verdict, the sharpness is bad, even in the center. I can barely read the text of the Canadian note and on the periphery it's even worse. I see a lot of noise here and the outlines of the image look like a mush of pixels. I have little hope that this sensor can produce good results outdoors. [b][b]
10add_a_photo
[b][b]Photo: technical test[b]I was inspired by industrial technical tests to create my own technical test to evaluate the technical quality of a camera. This test is an objective assessment of a camera's ability to render a scene correctly. [b][b]I test the following elements:[b]- centre sharpness, peripheral sharpness[b]- colour fidelity based on 24 reference colours[b]- level of chromatic aberration[b]- dynamic range (ability to capture dark and light areas without loss)[b]- distortion[b][b]The technical evaluation may differ from the subjective evaluation as the feeling of a photo will be influenced by the processing provided by each manufacturer.[b][b] Main sensor: Omnivision OV64B40
To test this sensor, I directly took a photo in pro mode to see what it had inside and the result is interesting. With the correct shutter speed, the photo is correctly exposed (it's slightly underexposed in auto mode), the sharpness looks really good (look at the rubix cube texture), the colors look correct to me as well. In automatic mode, the exposure is a little less good, but it's about the average of the photos I take in the studio. The colors are darker but it's related to the exposure, I don't see too much difference towards blue or yellow. This first studio test is encouraging. [b][b]
This photo confirms what I thought of the sharpness on the first image. The sharpness in the center is excellent, it deteriorates a little on the periphery but the level of sharpness remains good. The color rendition looks quite good as I'm photographing a non-reflective surface here, so the colors returned are darker and better contrasted. I'm curious to see how this sensor will fare in daylight. Secondary sensor: Omnivision ov8856
Ultra wide-angle sensors have almost all the same faults and this one is no exception. The exposure level is two or three notches below the photo taken with the main sensor, the distortion is significant but with objects seen up close it is normal, the sharpness does not seem very good because I cannot distinguish the rubix cube texture. I also see noise appearing everywhere and chromatic aberrations. This sensor will therefore probably not shine outdoors either because its technical qualities are not of a very high level. [b][b]
This second photo confirms my first verdict, the sharpness is bad, even in the center. I can barely read the text of the Canadian note and on the periphery it's even worse. I see a lot of noise here and the outlines of the image look like a mush of pixels. I have little hope that this sensor can produce good results outdoors. [b][b]
10add_a_photo
[b][b]Outdoor photo quality[b] Main sensor: Omnivision OV64B40
I was a little apprehensive before testing this sensor because until now I had not been impressed by the performance of Omnivision sensors. I took this series of photos in good conditions with a beautiful light at the end of the afternoon and the result is correct if the Sony and Samsung sensors deliver better photos in the same conditions. To support my words, I will show you below a photo taken with a Samsung sensor (with the Poco X4 GT) in slightly less favorable conditions:
The photo taken by the Poco F4 is pleasant to look at but does not arrive at the level of the photo taken with the Poco X4 GT. Photos from the Poco F4 are quite bright, colors are natural, and dynamic range is average (foliage is quite dark). If I dwell a little more on the details of the photo, I see two defects that are only visible when zooming in. First there is a white outline that settles around the leaves and this shows that the sharpening treatment is too aggressive. The other problem comes from chromatic aberrations, they are very visible around the leaves. As long as you are viewing the photos on a phone it will not show but if you are viewing the photos on a large screen the flaws will be visible. The photo is not the priority at Poco and it's a shame because for their high-end model, they could have made another choice to be able to compete with other brands in the same price range. I can't say that this Poco is bad in photos, it would be exaggerated and misleading but if the photo is a priority for you, it may not be the ideal phone for you.
25add_a_photo
Secondary sensor: Omnivision OV8856_i
Ultra wide angle sensors in most cases produce poorer quality photos and this is again the case for this one. We find all the usual defects such as deformations, the significant loss of sharpness at the periphery, a lower dynamic range and for this sensor I would add that the colors are too cold with a fairly significant dominance of blue.
14add_a_photo
[b][b]Test photo / night[b]
The Poco F4's night mode does a pretty good job of rendering low-light settings, and it does so without forcing colors. It's clearly not the best phone for night photography but if you're looking at your photos on a small screen, it won't be a problem. On a large screen, you will quickly see some defects appear such as excessive smoothing, noisy areas and image recomposition problems. [b][b] With the ultra-wide angle sensor, however, night photos are not good at all, the brightness is not sufficient, the photos are noisy and even on a small screen, the quality is not good.
14add_a_photo
[b][b]
Video quality
Stabilisation[b] The Poco F4 is equipped with an optical stabilizer (OIS), so it is able to stabilize a video mechanically rather than by software manipulation. This stabilization is visible in 4k 60fps but not totally effective because we still see some jerks when I walk.[b]Video normale conditions The Poco F4 is capable of shooting 4k/60 fps and when the conditions are right, the video quality is quite good as well. I find here the defects noticed for the photo but it is much less visible because of the movement. Focusing is fast, exposure time adaptation is also very fast, and I don't see the exposure jumps that can occur between light and dark areas.[b]Video low light[b] Video at night is not the strength of this phone, I would even say that it is a huge regression compared to the Poco F3 which produced much better quality videos. The video is much too dark and therefore absolutely unusable.[b]
External audio quality
[b]This test is intended to give you an overview of the volume and sound quality during calls and when listening to music through the external speakers. [b][b] Audio/music test [b] The Poco F4 is capable of producing sound in Dolby Atmos and therefore can produce good quality sound . I measured a volume that exceeded 80 dB at times, it's a little above average. The highs are very marked (a bit too much I think), the low frequencies are well rendered but lack a bit of depth like on most speakers of this type. The sound is of comparable quality to other recently launched Pocos (X and F range) but does not reach the level of sound produced by the high-end Samsung. [b][b] Audio test / calls [b] To measure the volume in call, I made an error which is visible on the video, the sound was not at maximum and therefore the volume was too low. I realized this after uploading the video to YouTube. The sound level without speaker is good and the sound quality is good, the sound is quite soft and even if the high frequencies are a bit louder, the sound quality for calls is good.[b]
Audio quality (headphones)
To test the quality of the phone's audio output, I connect the device's audio output to a measuring tool, then play sounds on all frequencies and measure the differences between the original sound and the sound produced by the phone. In this way I measure the phone's ability to correctly reproduce all sounds.[b]
I used the usb to jack adapter that came with this phone to test the sound quality through headphones. Overall the quality is good but I notice fairly marked differences on the high frequencies where the signal deviates from the standard by 2 to 5 db, the difference on the low frequencies is much less important. Some higher-pitched sounds will therefore be somewhat muffled by other frequencies. Only experienced users may be able to notice this. [b][b] The Poco F4 does not produce a very powerful sound through the headphones because I arrive at around 90 dB, it is below average and it is felt with the headphones because even with the sound at maximum, the volume is quite bearable. The advantage of a controlled volume is that the sound is not distorted. [b][b] I notice a small regression in sound fidelity for the latest Pocos I've tested but this shouldn't affect your choice unless you're a purist. The measurements I take are objective observations but that does not mean that the sound is degraded to the point that anyone can notice it.[b]
Screen quality
To test the screen, I use a colorimetric probe that measures the color accuracy of a screen, as well as other parameters to see if a screen is able to correctly reproduce an image. I also test the brightness level to determine if the screen will be able to display an image in full sunlight.[b]
Screen size : 6.67 Resolution :
1080 x 2400 Ratio : 20:9 Type : Amoled % occupancy : 86 dE white : 3.6 dE red : 1.5 dE green : 1.1 dE blue : 1.1 dE jaune : 1.1 dE cyan : 1.4 dE magenta : 1.4 White temperature : 6373 Contrast : 1000000:1 Brightness : 700
Colorimetry[b]
The Poco F4 is equipped with a good quality AMOLED screen, but to take advantage of more realistic colorimetry, you must use the "normal" mode in the screen settings. With these parameters, I obtain a dE of 1.61. Separate color measurements are very good with an average around 1.5, it is white that deviates the most with a dE of 3.6 and a color temperature of 6400k (ideally 6500k is needed). This small gap is not really visible to the untrained eye.[b][b]Top 10 - ranking of the best screens by colorimetry 1. Poco X4 Gt dE = 0.6 2. Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g dE = 0.73 3. Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro dE = 0.83 4. Redmi Note 11 dE = 0.91 5. Redmi Note 12 Pro dE = 0.97 6. Google Pixel 6a dE = 1.01 7. Google Pixel 5 dE = 1.11 8. Realme Gt dE = 1.17 9. Redmi Note 12 dE = 1.17 10. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite dE = 1.19
Number of smartphones in the ranking:75 Position of this smartphone in the ranking:24/75
Note: the colorimetric difference is measured in dE. After three, the human eye will perceive a colorimetric difference, so the dE should be the lowest. The tests were all carried out with a colorimetric probe. [b]Brightness / Contrast[b]In normal mode, I measured a brightness of 471 cd/m² and in adaptive mode I measured a brightness of 700 cd/m². With such brightness, you will be able to read your screen in the sun without having to seek shade. The surface of the screen is quite reflective though, so you'll likely need to angle the screen to avoid mirroring. [b][b] The contrast is infinite, the blacks are deep and do not turn gray like on IPS screens. [b][b] The screen is also Dolby Vision compatible, which means that if you watch a film encoded in Dolby Vision, you will benefit from a livelier image with less marked shadow areas such as with an HDR process. The 120hz frequency will also ensure visual comfort and movements on the screen will be more fluid. [b][b][b]
Biometry
The phone is equipped with a side fingerprint sensor (power button), this sensor works very well and its location is the same as on most phones. Facial recognition is done in 2D.[b]
Operating system
[b]The Poco F4 runs on MIUI 13, so the experience is exactly the same as on other Pocos/Xiaomi. MIUI is a modified version (a fork) of Android which is developed by Xiaomi, this operating system is very close to Android in its philosophy but has been enriched over time by Xiaomi. The main criticisms that can be addressed to it are the presence of a large number of unsolicited applications and the presence of advertisements. Applications can be stored in a drawer, they will not bore you. I must be lucky for the ads because I haven't seen any.[b]
Encoutered bugs
Not yet available / tested[b][b]
Accessories Poco F4
To better enjoy your experience with your smartphone, I offer links to all kinds of accessories that you might find useful
I assigned a score of 1 to 10 for each test that determines the strengths and weaknesses of a product. I am using 0 for criteria that have not (yet) been tested. A score of 1 to 3 indicates poor performance (and yes, it does), a score of 4 to 6 indicates average performance, a score of 7 to 8 indicates good performance, and a score of 9 and 10 indicates exceptional performance. . The score is calculated based on my measurements and when there are no measurements, it is a subjective opinion based on my experience.
The scores are not static, they change over time because the performance of new products changes and this must be taken into account.
Poco F4
Finish quality
7.5
6.00
CPU performance
7.5
6.5
GPU performance
7.5
6.5
Screen quality
7.5
7.00
Photo quality
7.00
5.00
Video quality
7.00
5.00
Wi-Fi performance
7.00
7.00
Mobile download speed
8.00
5.00
Mobile network sensitivity
8.00
6.00
Frequency coverage
8.00
7.00
Audio quality
7.5
6.00
GPS performance
7.5
6.00
Operating system
8.00
8.00
Overall score
98
89
Global ranking 1. Black Shark 4 Pro 114 / 140 2. Realme Gt 112.5 / 140 3. Poco F2 Pro 111.5 / 140 4. Oneplus Nord 2t 111.5 / 140 5. Poco F5 111 / 140 6. Samsung Galaxy S20 111 / 140 7. Poco F4 Gt 110.5 / 140 8. Google Pixel 5 109.6 / 140 9. Poco F3 108.5 / 140 10. Poco X4 Gt 108 / 140 11. Google Pixel 6a 108 / 140 12. Poco X3 Pro 107.5 / 140 13. Samsung Galaxy S10+ 107 / 140 14. Xiaomi 11t 107 / 140 15. Redmi Note 11 Pro Plus 5g 106.5 / 140 16. Redmi Note 12 Pro 106 / 140 17. Xiaomi Mi 9t Pro 106 / 140 18. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro 105.5 / 140 19. Samsung Galaxy A52 104 / 140 20. Tcl 10 Pro 104 / 140 21. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 104 / 140 22. Redmi Note 11 Pro 103 / 140 23. Poco X4 Pro 102.5 / 140 24. Poco M4 Pro 4g 102 / 140 25. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10s 102 / 140 26. Poco M4 Pro 101.5 / 140 27. Unihertz Luna 101.5 / 140 28. Redmi Note 11 101 / 140 29. Xiaomi Mi 10 Lite 5g 101 / 140 30. Poco X3 101 / 140 31. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 101 / 140 32. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 Lite 101 / 140 33. Redmi Note 9t 100.5 / 140 34. Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro 100 / 140 35. Unihertz Tank 99 / 140 36. Poco X5 5g 98.5 / 140 37. Poco M5 98.5 / 140 38. Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite 98 / 140 39. Doogee S96 Pro 98 / 140 40. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9s 98 / 140 41. Poco F4 98 / 130 42. Poco M3 Pro 98 / 140 43. Redmi 10 97.5 / 140 44. Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 97 / 140 45. Redmi Note 12 95.5 / 140 46. Umidigi Bison Pro 95 / 140 47. F150 R2022 95 / 140 48. Poco M3 94.5 / 140 49. Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 94 / 140 50. Realme 6 93 / 140 51. Umidigi A9 Pro 92 / 140 52. Umidigi Bison 92 / 140 53. Tcl 30 Se 92 / 140 54. Oukitel C21 89.5 / 140 55. Motorola G8 Power 89 / 140 56. Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 89 / 140 57. Nokia 5.3 89 / 140 58. Xiaomi Mi A3 89 / 140 59. Oneplus Nord N100 88.5 / 140 60. Honor 9x 88 / 140 61. Redmi 10a 88 / 140 62. Xiaomi Mi 8 Lite 86 / 140 63. Meizu Note 9 86 / 140 64. Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 85 / 140 65. Umidigi S3 Pro 83 / 140 66. Umidigi F2 82 / 140 67. Samsung Galaxy A21s 82 / 140 68. Redmi 9a 81 / 140 69. Oukitel Wp18 81 / 140 70. Redmi 9c 80 / 140 71. Ulefone Armor 7e 80 / 140 72. Doogee S58 Pro 78.5 / 140 73. Honor 8x 78 / 140 74. Umidigi F1 77 / 140 75. Huawei Y6 2019 74 / 140 76. Xiaomi Mi 10t Pro 57 / 70 77. Samsung Galaxy S23 8 / 10 78. Elephone U5 0 / 0
Test / Review conclusion
[b]I had bought the Poco F3 in 2021 for 299.90€ and this phone really offered everything one could expect for a phone of this price. The Poco F4 uses the same technical bases as the Poco F3 and I bought it for €350 on Goboo. The prices of telephones have increased a lot in one year and this no doubt partly explains this increase, but what is unfortunate is that in the end, I buy a more expensive telephone but which does not have much more to offer than its predecessor. The Poco F4 is certainly not a bad phone but I'm disappointed with the lack of new features, the price increase is not going to plead in its favor either. [b][b] The F4 uses the same CPU/GPU base as the previous generation, the performance is quite good but there is more competition so it is no longer a distinguishing criterion whereas Poco has always been the price/performance king. [b][b] For the photo, the Poco F4 regresses compared to the F3 and I find that really unfortunate because even if the Poco are not photo-oriented phones, we are talking here about the high-end Poco which finally comes to position itself with a photo quality worthy of the mid-range. By day and under the sun, the photos are good but of lower quality than the previous generation. The contribution of optical stabilization (OIS) alone does not justify the purchase of this phone. [b][b] The battery life is good despite its 4500 mAh, the Poco F4 is fortunately not too greedy and can therefore claim good autonomy in normal use. The temperature rise is reasonable, the heat is noticeable without becoming a big problem. [b][b] The screen is of good quality but here it is also the same as in the Poco F3 and we find amoled in most phones in this price range. I can continue to list the other positive points of this phone but I would always come to the same conclusion which is that it brings nothing compared to the previous generation and that it is being overtaken by the competition. The Poco F4 is a good generalist phone that could have been the king in its segment a year ago but today the world has moved on and Poco has stood still.[b]Strengths[b]Screen quality[b] Dolby Atmos sound[b] Energy efficiency[b] Dual band GPS [b]Wi-Fi speed [b]4G network sensitivity [b]CPU/GPU performance and fast memory[b][b]Weaknesses[b]Regressing photo quality [b] Night video [b] Audio frequency deviations with headphones [b] Video stabilization not effective enough [b][b][b]Alternatives to this product[b][b]Not yet available / tested[b][b]
Laurent Willen Instead of watching nonsense on TV or YouTube, I spend my time in the evenings testing products and sharing my passion for technology, travel and photography.
I run this site in my own name and completely independently, no one pays me to do so.
I have more than 20 years of experience in the digital world, I have managed and developed many high traffic websites in companies in Belgium such as Mobistar, Microsoft, Immoweb, BrusselsAirlines, Proximus, Orange,...
This blog is not my main activity, I receive more than 2000 emails per year that I have to answer in my free time. To be able to continue to help you, you can support me by purchasing your products through my links. It costs you absolutely nothing and it keeps me going.
Common Questions / Answers: - I'm a freelance blogger, I don't work for Amazon, Aliexpress, Gearbest, ... so I can't help you with your orders. - I do not write sponsored articles. - you can unsubscribe from alerts using the unsubscribe link in each email.
test
Welcome to my blog!
My tests are more detailed than on most other sites. I am totally independent and nobody pays me to test a product.
If you don't have the time or desire to read the general conditions, here is a summary: - I don't use your data - I only use Google Analytics for my statistics - I have voluntarily blocked external scripts that can use your data - I only display one advertisement per visit and you can choose it.
On which site do you usually buy?
This blog is written completely independently and its content is not influenced by the advertisers present on certain pages. There are some pages that generate affiliate income with companies like Amazon, Aliexpress, Gearbest, and many more. More informations? Consult the general conditions
LAURENTWILLEN.BE
Laurent Willen
