Vivo X300 vs Vivo X100
Here we compared two flagship smartphones: the 6.31-inch Vivo X300 (with MediaTek Dimensity 9500) that was released on October 13, 2025, against the Vivo X100, which is powered by MediaTek Dimensity 9300 and came out 2 years 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 X300
- Comes with 1040 mAh larger battery capacity: 6040 vs 5000 mAh
- 36% better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (3330K versus 2447K)
- Handles wireless charging up to 40W
- Newer Bluetooth version (v6.0)
- Waterproof body (IP69 classification)
- The phone is 2 years newer
- More recent OS version: Android 16 versus 15
- Ready for eSIM technology
Reasons to consider the Vivo X100
- Has a 0.47 inch larger screen size
- Supports higher wattage charging (120W versus 90W)
- Slow-motion recording at 960FPS
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 | 6.31 inches | 6.78 inches |
| Resolution | 1216 x 2640 pixels | 1260 x 2800 pixels |
| Aspect ratio | 19.5:9 | 20:9 |
| PPI | 460 ppi | 453 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz |
| Adaptive refresh rate | Yes (1-120 Hz) | Yes |
| Max rated brightness | 2000 nits | 3000 nits |
| Max rated brightness in HDR | 4500 nits | - |
| HDR support | Yes, Dolby Vision | Yes, HDR10+ |
| Touch sampling rate | 300 Hz | 300 Hz |
| Screen protection | Reinforced Glass | Corning Gorilla Glass |
| Screen-to-body ratio | 90.3% | 90% |
| 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 | β Infinity | - |
Screen space comparison
Vivo X100
6.78β³ (20:9 ratio) = 17.2 in2
Vivo X300
6.31β³ (19.5:9 ratio) = 15.1 in2
~13% more screen space
Peak brightness test (auto)
Design and build
| Height | 150.57 mm (5.93 inches) | 164.05 mm (6.46 inches) |
| Width | 71.92 mm (2.83 inches) | 75.19 mm (2.96 inches) |
| Thickness | 7.95 mm (0.31 inches) | 8.49 mm (0.33 inches) |
| Weight | 190 g (6.7 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, Blue, Red, Pink, Purple | White, Black, Blue, Red |
| Fingerprint scanner | Yes, in-display | Yes, in-display |
| Repairability | Good (3/5) | - |
| Drop resistance | Very good (B) Β· 180 drops | - |
Screen-to-body ratio
Performance
| Chipset | MediaTek Dimensity 9500 | MediaTek Dimensity 9300 |
| Max clock | 4210 MHz | 3250 MHz |
| CPU cores | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) | 8 (1 + 3 + 4) |
| Architecture | - 4 cores at 2.7 GHz: C1-Pro - 3 cores at 3.5 GHz: C1-Premium - 1 core at 4.21 GHz: C1-Ultra |
- 4 cores at 2 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 3 cores at 2.85 GHz: Cortex-X4 - 1 core at 3.25 GHz: Cortex-X4 |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | 8 MB |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | TSMC |
| Lithography process | 3 nanometers | 4 nanometers |
| Neural processor (NPU) | MediaTek NPU 990 | MediaTek NPU 790 |
| Graphics | Mali-G1 Ultra MP12 | Immortalis-G720 MC12 |
| GPU shading units | 1536 | 1536 |
| GPU clock | 1716 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| FLOPS | ~5271.5 GFLOPS | ~3993.6 GFLOPS |
Benchmarks
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
Compute Score (GPU)
| Compute Score (GPU) | 25501 | 15081 |
| Single-core score | 3204 | 2186 |
| Multi-core score | 9874 | 7422 |
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
| CPU | 981387 | 740213 |
| GPU | 1256247 | 789881 |
| Memory | 364630 | 362038 |
| UX | 728537 | 555582 |
| Total score | 3330801 | 2447714 |
| Samples | [25 tests] | [6 tests] |
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
| Stability | 57% | 50% |
| Graphics test | 23 FPS | 14 FPS |
| Graphics score | 3119 | 1877 |
3DMark Solar Bay
| Stability | - | 53% |
| Graphics test | 49 FPS | 29 FPS |
| Section 1 | 56 FPS | 32 FPS |
| Section 2 | 48 FPS | 30 FPS |
| Section 3 | 42 FPS | 26 FPS |
| Graphics score | 12817 | 7740 |
3DMark Wild Life Extreme
| Stability | - | 41% |
| Graphics test | - | 28 FPS |
| Graphics score | - | 4700 |
PCMark 3.0
| Web score | 14375 | 11741 |
| Video editing | 5995 | 5651 |
| Photo editing | 34571 | 28882 |
| Data manipulation | 12159 | 12096 |
| Writing score | 22695 | 22861 |
AnTuTu 11 Ranking List (49th and 141st place)
Recent User Tests
Vivo X300
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| π 2026-09-16 (Asura) | CPU Throttle | 70% |
| π 2026-09-07 (Asura) | CPU Throttle | 63% |
| π 2026-08-23 (vakiho) | AnTuTu | 3455310 |
| π 2026-08-22 -> Asura | AnTuTu | 3524597 |
| π 2026-08-12 (burmalda) | AnTuTu | 3363428 |
Vivo X100
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| π 2026-08-29 (Bhumit) | AnTuTu | 2262755 |
| π 2026-08-08 (holu096) | GeekBench CPU | 2186 / 7422 |
| π 2026-08-08 (holu096) | AnTuTu | 2517701 |
| π 2026-06-17 (lnz) | GeekBench CPU | 2253 / 7347 |
| π 2026-06-17 (lnz) | AnTuTu | 2447714 |
Memory
| RAM size | 12 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Memory clock | 5333 MHz | 4200 MHz |
| Channels | 4 | 4 |
| Storage size | 256 GB | 256 GB |
| Storage type | UFS 4.1 | UFS 4.0 |
| Memory card | No | No |
Software
| Operating system | Android 16 | Android 14 (Can be upgraded to Android 15) |
| ROM | OriginOS 6 | Funtouch 15 |
| OS updates | 5 years | 3 years |
| Security updates | - | 3 years |
Battery
| Capacity | 6040 mAh | 5000 mAh |
| Max charge power | 90 W | 120 W |
| Battery type | Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) | Li-Po |
| Replaceable | No | No |
| Wireless charging | Yes (40 W) | No |
| Reverse charging | Yes, (wireless) | Yes |
| Bypass charging | Yes | - |
| Fast charging | Yes (67% in 30 min) | Yes (50% in 11 min) |
| Full charging time | 0:48 hr | 0:21 hr |
| Battery cycles | 1200 cycles | - |
| Web browsing | 12:36 hr | - |
| Watching video | 20:41 hr | - |
| Gaming | 07:52 hr | - |
| Standby | 107 hr | - |
General battery life
Smartphones With Long Battery Life (#81st place)
Main camera
| Matrix | 200 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 16320 x 12288 | 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 120FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| 1080p video recording | Up to 60FPS | Up to 60FPS |
| Slow motion | 240 FPS (1080p) | 960 FPS (1080p) |
| Angle of widest lens | 119Β° | 119Β° |
| Lenses | 1) Standard: 200 MP 2) Telephoto: 50 MP 3) Ultrawide: 50 MP |
1) Standard: 50 MP 2) Telephoto: 64 MP 3) Ultrawide: 50 MP |
| Camera features | - Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
- Bokeh mode - Pro mode - RAW support |
| Image resolution | 200 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/1.68 | f/1.6 |
| Focal length | 23 mm | - |
| Sensor | Samsung ISOCELL HPB | Sony IMX920 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.4" (β 0.71 inch) | 1/1.49" (β 0.67 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.56 micron | 1.2 micron |
| Autofocus | Laser autofocus | Laser autofocus |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 64 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.6 | f/2.6 |
| Focal length | 70 mm | 70 mm |
| Sensor | Sony LYT-602 | Omnivision OV64B |
| Sensor size | 1/1.95" (β 0.51 inch) | 1/2.0" (β 0.5 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.8 micron | 0.7 micron |
| Stabilization | Optical | Optical |
| Image resolution | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.0 |
| Focal length | 15 mm | 15 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung S5KJN1 | Samsung S5KJN1 |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 0.64 micron |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
Selfie camera
| Megapixels | 50 megapixels | 32 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 8192 x 6144 | 6528 x 4896 |
| Aperture | f/2.0 | f/2.0 |
| Focal length | 20 mm | 20 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung S5KJN1 | Samsung S5KGD2 |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) | 1/2.8" (β 0.36 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 0.8 micron |
| Autofocus | Phase autofocus | 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 | 6.0 | 5.4 |
| Bluetooth features | LE | LE |
| USB type | USB Type-C | USB Type-C |
| USB version | 3.2 | 2 |
| USB features | - Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
- Charging - USB-Storage mode - OTG |
| DisplayPort | Yes | No |
| GPS | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC | GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC |
| 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* | Yes | No |
| Hybrid slot | No | No |
| 5G support | Yes | Yes |
Sound
| Speakers | Stereo | Stereo |
| Headphone audio jack | No | No |
| FM radio | No | No |
| Dolby Atmos | No | - |
Speakers test
Max loudness
Other
| Category | Flagship | Flagship |
| Announced | October 2025 | November 2023 |
| Release date | October 2025 | November 2023 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | $569 |
| Successor | - | - Vivo X300 |
| Sensors | - Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
- Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
| Bundled charger | Not included | Yes, 120 W |
Further details
Notes on Vivo X100:
- The top version with 16 GB of RAM comes with LPDDR5T memory type, while the others utilize LPDDR5X.
*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 X300 is definitely a better buy.
Cast your vote
Total votes: 13
Related comparisons
3.
Vivo X300 vs Vivo X300 Pro (3)