Vivo X200 Ultra vs Apple iPhone 17 Pro

88 out of 100
Vivo X200 Ultra
VS
91 out of 100
Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Here we compared two flagship smartphones: the 6.82-inch Vivo X200 Ultra (with Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite) that was released on April 21, 2025, against the Apple iPhone 17 Pro, which is powered by Apple A19 Pro and came out 4 months after. On this page, you will find tests, full specs, strengths, and weaknesses of each of the devices.

Select the amount of RAM to evaluate performance and value for money more precisely
Memory

Key differences

An overview of the main advantages of each smartphone
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200 Ultra
  • Has a 0.52 inch larger screen size
  • Comes with 1748 mAh larger battery capacity: 6000 vs 4252 mAh
  • Delivers 79% higher peak brightness (1800 against 1008 nits)
  • Waterproof body (IP69 classification)
  • Supports higher wattage charging (90W versus 40W)
  • Fingerprint scanner
  • 22% better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (3092K versus 2538K)
  • 11% higher pixel density (510 vs 460 PPI)
  • CPU with a higher amount of cores (+2)
  • Has a built-in infrared port
Reasons to consider the Apple iPhone 17 Pro
  • Shows 10% longer battery life (26:48 vs 24:25 hours)
  • Newer Bluetooth version (v6.0)
  • The rear camera has a 4x optical zoom
  • 34% faster in single-core GeekBench 6 test: 3992 and 2979 points
  • Weighs 23 grams less
  • Ready for eSIM technology

Review

Evaluation of Vivo X200 Ultra and Apple iPhone 17 Pro crucial features
Display
Screen quality, color accuracy, brightness
Camera
Photo and video recording quality
Performance
CPU and memory performance (apps, system)
Gaming
Capabilities for playing modern games
Battery
Battery life, charging type and speed
Connectivity
Networks, ports, data transmission
NanoReview Score
Final comparison evaluation
Select your primary usage scenario to get a more accurate NanoReview Score
πŸ“± Primary usage:

Value for money (Beta)

You provided custom prices of 948 USD for the Vivo X200 Ultra and 1330 USD for the Apple iPhone 17 Pro.
Currency
12 / 256 GB
VS
12 / 256 GB
47.9
(Average)
Value Index
32.7
(Mediocre)

Tests and specifications

Comparison table of technical specifications and tests

Display

Type AMOLED OLED
Size 6.82 inches 6.3 inches
Resolution 1440 x 3168 pixels 1206 x 2622 pixels
Aspect ratio 19.8:9 19.5:9
PPI 510 ppi 460 ppi
Refresh rate 120 Hz 120 Hz
Adaptive refresh rate Yes (1-120 Hz) Yes (1-120 Hz)
Max rated brightness 1800 nits 3000 nits
Max rated brightness in HDR 4500 nits 1600 nits
HDR support Yes, Dolby Vision Yes, Dolby Vision
Screen protection Armor glass Ceramic Shield 2
Screen-to-body ratio 90.3% 90.4%
Display features - DCI-P3
- Always-On Display
- DC Dimming
- DCI-P3
- Always-On Display
Display tests
RGB color space 99.9% -
PWM 121 Hz -
Response time 2 ms -
Contrast ∞ Infinity -
Screen space comparison
X200 Ultra
6.82β€³ (19.8:9 ratio) = 17.5 in2
iPhone 17 Pro
6.3β€³ (19.5:9 ratio) = 15.1 in2
~16% more screen space
Peak brightness test (auto)
X200 Ultra +79%
1800 nits
1008 nits
Sources: NotebookCheck [3]

Design and build

Height 163.14 mm (6.42 inches) 150 mm (5.91 inches)
Width 76.76 mm (3.02 inches) 71.9 mm (2.83 inches)
Thickness 8.69 mm (0.34 inches) 8.75 mm (0.34 inches)
Weight 229 g (8.08 oz) 206 g (7.27 oz)
Waterproof IP69 IP68
Advanced cooling Vapor chamber Vapor chamber
Rear material Glass Glass
Frame material Metal Metal
Colors Black, Silver, Red Silver, Blue, Orange
Fingerprint scanner Yes, in-display No
Repairability - Good (3.04/5)
Drop resistance - Very good (B) Β· 180 drops
Screen-to-body ratio

Performance

Chipset specifications of Vivo X200 Ultra and Apple iPhone 17 Pro
SoC
Chipset Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Apple A19 Pro
Max clock 4320 MHz 4260 MHz
CPU cores 8 (2 + 6) 6 (2 + 4)
Architecture - 6 cores at 3.53 GHz: Oryon (Phoenix M)
- 2 cores at 4.32 GHz: Oryon (Phoenix L)
- 4 cores at 2.6 GHz:
- 2 cores at 4.26 GHz:
L3 cache 8 MB -
Manufacturing TSMC TSMC
Lithography process 3 nanometers 3 nanometers
Neural processor (NPU) Hexagon Apple Neural Engine
GPU
Graphics Adreno 830 6 core Apple GPU
GPU shading units 1536 768
GPU clock 1100 MHz 1620 MHz
FLOPS ~3379.2 GFLOPS ~2488.3 GFLOPS

Benchmarks

Benchmark comparison of Vivo X200 Ultra and Apple iPhone 17 Pro
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
2979
3992
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
9353
10688
Compute Score (GPU)
24604
44342
Compute Score (GPU) 24604 44342
Single-core score 2979 3992
Multi-core score 9353 10688
Sources: Geekbench [3], [4]
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
X200 Ultra +22%
3092340
2538751
CPU 819790 753740
GPU 1185591 926158
Memory 429927 217137
UX 657032 641716
Total score 3092340 2538751
Samples [11 tests] [6 tests]
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
Stability 50% -
Graphics test 19 FPS -
Graphics score 2561 -
3DMark Solar Bay
Graphics test 45 FPS -
Section 1 51 FPS -
Section 2 46 FPS -
Section 3 39 FPS -
Graphics score 11897 -
Sources: 3DMark [5]
PCMark 3.0
Web score 15343 -
Video editing 7121 -
Photo editing 35679 -
Data manipulation 14476 -
Writing score 21329 -

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Vivo X200 Ultra
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-08-01 (Tt_murco730)AnTuTu 113172230
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-07 (L_8888)AnTuTu 113074394
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-02 (Obsessed)AnTuTu 113179659
πŸ“˜ 2026-05-15 (Π₯зшник)AnTuTu 113172230
πŸ“˜ 2026-03-29 (Tijet)AnTuTu 113033519
Apple iPhone 17 Pro
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-16 (Anatoli)AnTuTu 112304042
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-03 (Vin)Geekbench 6 CPU3890 / 10107
πŸ“˜ 2026-05-11 (Atti rajan)AnTuTu 112301246
πŸ“˜ 2026-04-10 (Resul)AnTuTu 112538751
πŸ“˜ 2026-02-23 (FiLsImRoZeR)AnTuTu 112106484

Memory

RAM
RAM size 12 GB 12 GB
Memory type LPDDR5X LPDDR5X
Memory clock 5300 MHz -
Channels 4 4
Storage
Storage size 256 GB 256 GB
Storage type UFS 4.1 NVMe
Memory card No No

Software

Operating system Android 15 (Can be upgraded to Android 16) iOS 26 (Can be upgraded to iOS 26.5)
ROM OriginOS 6 -
OS updates - 7 years
Security updates - 7 years

Battery

Capacity 6000 mAh 4252 mAh
Max charge power 90 W 40 W
Battery type Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) Li-Ion
Replaceable No No
Wireless charging Yes (40 W) Yes (25 W)
Reverse charging Yes Yes
Bypass charging Yes No
Fast charging Yes (64% in 30 min) Yes (70% in 30 min)
Full charging time 0:49 hr 1:18 hr
Battery cycles - 1000 cycles
Battery life tests
Web browsing 12:14 hr 09:51 hr
Watching video 14:52 hr 19:54 hr
Gaming 06:38 hr 06:49 hr
Standby 95 hr 117 hr
General battery life
24:25 hr
26:48 hr

Main camera

Matrix 50 megapixels 48 megapixels
Image resolution 8192 x 6144 8064 x 6048
Zoom Optical, 3.7x Optical, 4x
Flash Dual LED Dual LED
Stabilization Optical Optical
8K video recording Up to 30FPS No
4K video recording Up to 120FPS Up to 120FPS
1080p video recording Up to 60FPS Up to 120FPS
Slow motion 240 FPS (1080p) 240 FPS (1080p)
Angle of widest lens 116Β° 120Β°
Lenses 1) Standard: 50 MP
2) Telephoto: 200 MP
3) Ultrawide: 50 MP
1) Standard: 48 MP
2) Telephoto: 48 MP
3) Ultrawide: 48 MP
4) Depth
Camera features - Bokeh mode
- Pro mode
- RAW support
- Bokeh mode
- Pro mode
- RAW support
Standard lens
Image resolution 50 MP 48 MP
Aperture f/1.7 f/1.78
Focal length 35 mm 24 mm
Sensor Sony LYT-818 Sony IMX903
Sensor size 1/1.28" (β‰ˆ 0.78 inch) 1/1.28" (β‰ˆ 0.78 inch)
Pixel size 1.22 micron 1.22 micron
Autofocus Laser autofocus Phase autofocus (Dual Pixel)
Stabilization Optical Optical
Telephoto lens
Image resolution 200 MP 48 MP
Aperture f/2.3 f/2.8
Focal length 85 mm 100 mm
Sensor Samsung ISOCELL HP9 Sony IMX973
Sensor size 1/1.4" (β‰ˆ 0.71 inch) 1/2.55" (β‰ˆ 0.39 inch)
Pixel size 0.56 micron 0.7 micron
Stabilization Optical Optical
Ultra-wide lens
Image resolution 50 MP 48 MP
Aperture f/2.0 f/2.2
Focal length 14 mm 13 mm
Sensor Sony LYT-818 Sony IMX972
Sensor size 1/1.28" (β‰ˆ 0.78 inch) 1/2.55" (β‰ˆ 0.39 inch)
Pixel size 1.22 micron 0.7 micron
Stabilization Optical Digital

DxOMark main camera tests

Photo quality
Video quality
172
Generic main camera score
Bokeh 175 170
Zoom 159 141
Samples Photo samples of Vivo X200 Ultra from DxOMark Photo samples of Apple iPhone 17 Pro from DxOMark

Selfie camera

Megapixels 50 megapixels 18 megapixels
Image resolution 8192 x 6144 4896 x 3672
Aperture f/2.5 f/1.9
Focal length 24 mm 20 mm
Sensor Samsung ISOCELL JN1 Sony IMX914
Sensor size 1/2.76" (β‰ˆ 0.36 inch) -
Pixel size 0.64 micron 1 micron
Autofocus Phase autofocus Phase autofocus
Stabilization Digital Optical
Video resolution 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS
Depth sensor (TOF 3D) No Yes

Connectivity

Wi-Fi standard Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be) Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be)
Wi-Fi features - Dual Band
- Wi-Fi MiMO
- Wi-Fi Direct
- Wi-Fi Hotspot
- Wi-Fi Display
- Dual Band
- Wi-Fi MiMO
- Wi-Fi Direct
- Wi-Fi Hotspot
- Wi-Fi Display
Bluetooth version 5.4 6.0
Bluetooth features LE LE
USB type USB Type-C USB Type-C
USB version 3.2 3.2
USB features - Charging
- USB-Storage mode
- OTG
- Charging
- USB-Storage mode
- OTG
DisplayPort Yes Yes
GPS GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC
NFC* Yes Yes
Infrared port Yes No
Network
Number of SIM* 2 -
Type of SIM card Nano eSIM
Multi SIM mode Standby Standby
eSIM support* No Yes
Hybrid slot No No
5G support Yes Yes

Sound

Speakers Stereo Stereo
Headphone audio jack No No
FM radio No No
Dolby Atmos Yes Yes
Speakers test
Max loudness

Other

Category Flagship Flagship
Announced April 2025 September 2025
Release date April 2025 September 2025
Launch price (MSRP) $1099 $1099
Sensors - Proximity sensor
- Gyroscope
- Accelerometer
- Ambient light sensor
- Compass
- Fingerprint
- Barometer
- Proximity sensor
- Gyroscope
- Accelerometer
- Ambient light sensor
- Compass
- Face recognition sensor
Bundled charger Yes, 80 W Not included
Further details
Notes on iPhone 17 Pro:
    - The eSIM-only model has a larger battery than the Nano SIM + eSIM version – 4,252 mAh vs. 3,988 mAh.
    - Only the Chinese version offers dual Nano SIM slots and it also has a weaker 15-watt wireless charging system.
*Disclaimer! NFC, GSM network support, and some other specs can be different depending on the country.

Conclusion

These smartphones have a lot in common, but we would recommend the Apple iPhone 17 Pro. It has a better performance, connectivity, software, design, and sound.

Cast your vote

So, which phone would you choose?
34 (64.2%)
19 (35.8%)
Total votes: 53

User opinions

You can share your opinion or ask a question in the comments below
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!