Vivo X200T vs X200 FE
Here we compared two flagship smartphones: the 6.67-inch Vivo X200T (with MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Plus) that was released on January 27, 2026, against the Vivo X200 FE, which is powered by MediaTek Dimensity 9300 Plus and came out 7 months before. 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
Key differences
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200T
- Handles wireless charging up to 40W
- Has a 0.36 inch larger screen size
- 27% better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (2725K versus 2140K)
- More recent OS version: Android 16 versus 15
- Faster storage type - UFS 4.1 versus UFS 3.1
- The phone is 7 months newer
- 24% faster in single-core GeekBench 6 test: 2729 and 2209 points
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200 FE
- Slow-motion recording at 960FPS
- Weighs 19 grams less
- Ready for eSIM technology
Review
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
Scores with a red asterisk (*) are approximate and may change in the future as we gather more data.
Select your primary usage scenario to get a more accurate NanoReview Score
Value for money (Beta)
Tests and specifications
Comparison table of technical specifications and testsDisplay
| Type | AMOLED | AMOLED |
| Size | 6.67 inches | 6.31 inches |
| Resolution | 1260 x 2800 pixels | 1260 x 2800 pixels |
| Aspect ratio | 20:9 | 19.5:9 |
| PPI | 460 ppi | 461 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz |
| Adaptive refresh rate | Yes | Yes (1-120 Hz) |
| Max rated brightness | 1600 nits | 1800 nits |
| Max rated brightness in HDR | 5000 nits | 5000 nits |
| HDR support | Yes, Dolby Vision | Yes, HDR10+ |
| Touch sampling rate | - | 300 Hz |
| Screen protection | Tempered glass | Schott Xensation Core |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 90.3% | 90.3% |
| Display features | - DCI-P3 - Always-On Display - DC Dimming |
- DCI-P3 - Always-On Display - DC Dimming |
| RGB color space | - | 99.8% |
| PWM | - | 360 Hz |
| Response time | - | 1 ms |
| Contrast | - | ∞ Infinity |
Screen space comparison
Vivo X200T
6.67″ (20:9 ratio) = 16.6 in2
X200 FE
6.31″ (19.5:9 ratio) = 15.1 in2
~9% more screen space
Peak brightness test (auto)
Design and build
| Height | 160.01 mm (6.3 inches) | 150.8 mm (5.94 inches) |
| Width | 74.29 mm (2.92 inches) | 71.8 mm (2.83 inches) |
| Thickness | 7.99 mm (0.31 inches) | 8 mm (0.31 inches) |
| Weight | 205 g (7.23 oz) | 186 g (6.56 oz) |
| Waterproof | IP69 | IP69 |
| Advanced cooling | Vapor chamber | Vapor chamber |
| Rear material | Glass | Glass |
| Frame material | Metal | Metal |
| Colors | Black, Purple | Black, Blue, Pink, Yellow |
| Fingerprint scanner | Yes, in-display | Yes, in-display |
| Repairability | - | Average (2.99/5) |
| Drop resistance | - | Good (C) · 100 drops |
Screen-to-body ratio
Performance
| Chipset | MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Plus | MediaTek Dimensity 9300 Plus |
| Max clock | 3730 MHz | 3400 MHz |
| CPU cores | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) |
| Architecture | - 4 cores at 2.4 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 3 cores at 3.3 GHz: Cortex-X4 - 1 core at 3.73 GHz: Cortex-X925 |
- 4 cores at 2 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 3 cores at 2.85 GHz: Cortex-X4 - 1 core at 3.4 GHz: Cortex-X4 |
| L3 cache | 12 MB | 8 MB |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | TSMC |
| Lithography process | 3 nanometers | 4 nanometers |
| Neural processor (NPU) | MediaTek NPU 890 | MediaTek NPU 790 |
| Graphics | Mali-G925 Immortalis MP12 | Mali-G720 Immortalis MP12 |
| GPU shading units | 1536 | 1536 |
| GPU clock | 1612 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| FLOPS | ~4952.1 GFLOPS | ~3993.6 GFLOPS |
Benchmarks
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
Compute Score (GPU)
| Compute Score (GPU) | 21754 | 15299 |
| Single-core score | 2729 | 2209 |
| Multi-core score | 8430 | 7239 |
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
| CPU | 800906 | 662181 |
| GPU | 988549 | 664075 |
| Memory | 371345 | 295511 |
| UX | 565189 | 518654 |
| Total score | 2725989 | 2140421 |
| Samples | [6 tests] | [10 tests] |
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
| Stability | - | 65% |
| Graphics test | - | 12 FPS |
| Graphics score | - | 1561 |
3DMark Solar Bay
| Graphics test | - | 26 FPS |
| Section 1 | - | 28 FPS |
| Section 2 | - | 26 FPS |
| Section 3 | - | 22 FPS |
| Graphics score | - | 6745 |
PCMark 3.0
| Web score | - | 13991 |
| Video editing | - | 5556 |
| Photo editing | - | 26454 |
| Data manipulation | - | 12139 |
| Writing score | - | 21943 |
AnTuTu 11 Ranking List (#124th place)
Recent User Tests
Vivo X200T
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 📘 2026-07-24 (GTALVG) | AnTuTu | 2594807 |
| 📘 2026-07-05 (Sachin) | AnTuTu | 2688395 |
| 📘 2026-05-19 (Sagark) | AnTuTu | 2472407 |
| 📘 2026-05-14 (adi) | GeekBench CPU | 2729 / 8430 |
| 📘 2026-05-14 (adi) | AnTuTu | 2908444 |
Vivo X200 FE
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 📘 2026-09-11 (Viva plesenь) | AnTuTu | 2148340 |
| 📘 2026-08-31 (Jojorabbit95) | AnTuTu | 2306009 |
| 📘 2026-06-14 (ShaSha) | AnTuTu | 2235448 |
| 📘 2026-06-04 (Pranav) | AnTuTu | 2140421 |
| 📘 2026-05-17 (Sanjeep halder) | AnTuTu | 1793939 |
Memory
| RAM size | 12 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Memory clock | 5333 MHz | - |
| Channels | 4 | 4 |
| Storage size | 256 GB | 256 GB |
| Storage type | UFS 4.1 | UFS 3.1 |
| Memory card | No | No |
Software
| Operating system | Android 16 | Android 15 |
| ROM | OriginOS 6 | Funtouch 15 |
| OS size | - | 57 GB |
| OS updates | 5 years | 3 years |
| Security updates | - | 4 years |
Battery
| Capacity | 6200 mAh | 6500 mAh |
| Max charge power | 90 W | 90 W |
| Battery type | Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) | Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) |
| Replaceable | No | No |
| Wireless charging | Yes (40 W) | No |
| Reverse charging | Yes | Yes |
| Bypass charging | Yes | - |
| Fast charging | Yes (70% in 30 min) | Yes (48% in 30 min) |
| Full charging time | 0:54 hr | 0:58 hr |
| Battery cycles | - | 800 cycles |
| Web browsing | - | 11:34 hr |
| Watching video | - | 15:00 hr |
| Gaming | - | 07:21 hr |
| Standby | - | 108 hr |
General battery life
Main camera
| Matrix | 50 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 8192 x 6144 | 8192 x 6144 |
| Zoom | Optical, 3x | Optical, 3x |
| Flash | Dual LED | LED |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| 8K video recording | No | No |
| 4K video recording | Up to 60FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| 1080p video recording | Up to 60FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| Slow motion | 240 FPS (1080p) | 960 FPS (1080p) |
| Angle of widest lens | 119° | 119° |
| Lenses | 1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 50 MP 3) Ultrawide: 50 MP |
1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 50 MP 3) Ultrawide: 8 MP |
| Camera features | - Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
- Bokeh mode - Pro mode - RAW support |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/1.6 | f/1.9 |
| Focal length | 23 mm | 23 mm |
| Sensor | Sony IMX921 | Sony IMX921 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.56" (≈ 0.64 inch) | 1/1.56" (≈ 0.64 inch) |
| Pixel size | 1 micron | 1 micron |
| Autofocus | Laser autofocus | Laser autofocus |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.6 | f/2.6 |
| Focal length | 70 mm | 70 mm |
| Sensor | Sony IMX882 | Sony IMX882 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.95" (≈ 0.51 inch) | 1/1.95" (≈ 0.51 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.8 micron | 0.8 micron |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 8 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.2 |
| Focal length | 15 mm | 15 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung JD1 | OmniVision OV08D10 |
| Sensor size | 1/3.14" (≈ 0.32 inch) | 1/4.0" (≈ 0.25 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.7 micron | 1.12 micron |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
Selfie camera
| Megapixels | 32 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 6528 x 4896 | 8192 x 6144 |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.0 |
| Focal length | 20 mm | 20 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung KD1 | Samsung S5KKD1 |
| Sensor size | 1/3.44" (≈ 0.29 inch) | 1/3.44" (≈ 0.29 inch) |
| Pixel size | - | 0.64 micron |
| Autofocus | No | No |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
| Video resolution | 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS | 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS |
| Depth sensor (TOF 3D) | No | No |
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 | 5.4 |
| Bluetooth features | LE | LE |
| USB type | USB Type-C | USB Type-C |
| USB version | 2 | 2 |
| USB features | - Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
- Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
| DisplayPort | Yes | Yes |
| GPS | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS |
| NFC* | Yes | Yes |
| Infrared port | Yes | Yes |
| Number of SIM* | 2 | 2 |
| Type of SIM card | Nano | Nano |
| 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 |
Speakers test
Max loudness
Other
| Category | Flagship | Flagship |
| Announced | January 2026 | June 2025 |
| Release date | February 2026 | July 2025 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $650 | $650 |
| Successor | - | - Vivo X300 FE |
| Sensors | - Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
- Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
| Bundled charger | Yes, 90 W | Yes, 90 W |
*Disclaimer! NFC, GSM network support, and some other specs can be different depending on the country.
Conclusion
After analyzing all the data, we think that the Vivo X200T is definitely a better buy.
Cast your vote
Total votes: 12
Related comparisons
6.
Vivo X200 FE vs OnePlus 13s (2)