Vivo X300 vs Vivo X200T
88
out of 100
VS
84
out of 100
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 X200T, which is powered by MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Plus 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
Key differences
Reasons to consider the Vivo X300
- Newer Bluetooth version (v6.0)
- 22% better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (3330K versus 2725K)
- 17% faster in single-core GeekBench 6 test: 3204 and 2729 points
- Ready for eSIM technology
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200T
- Has a 0.36 inch larger screen size
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 | 6.67 inches |
| Resolution | 1216 x 2640 pixels | 1260 x 2800 pixels |
| Aspect ratio | 19.5:9 | 20:9 |
| PPI | 460 ppi | 460 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 120 Hz | 120 Hz |
| Adaptive refresh rate | Yes (1-120 Hz) | Yes |
| Max rated brightness | 2000 nits | 1600 nits |
| Max rated brightness in HDR | 4500 nits | 5000 nits |
| HDR support | Yes, Dolby Vision | Yes, Dolby Vision |
| Touch sampling rate | 300 Hz | - |
| Screen protection | Reinforced Glass | Tempered glass |
| 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 | β Infinity | - |
Screen space comparison
Vivo X200T
6.67β³ (20:9 ratio) = 16.6 in2
Vivo X300
6.31β³ (19.5:9 ratio) = 15.1 in2
~9% more screen space
Peak brightness test (auto)
Design and build
| Height | 150.57 mm (5.93 inches) | 160.01 mm (6.3 inches) |
| Width | 71.92 mm (2.83 inches) | 74.29 mm (2.92 inches) |
| Thickness | 7.95 mm (0.31 inches) | 7.99 mm (0.31 inches) |
| Weight | 190 g (6.7 oz) | 205 g (7.23 oz) |
| Waterproof | IP69 | IP69 |
| Advanced cooling | Vapor chamber | Vapor chamber |
| Rear material | Glass | Glass |
| Frame material | Metal | Metal |
| Colors | Black, Blue, Red, Pink, Purple | Black, Purple |
| 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 9400 Plus |
| Max clock | 4210 MHz | 3730 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 2.4 GHz: Cortex-A720 - 3 cores at 3.3 GHz: Cortex-X4 - 1 core at 3.73 GHz: Cortex-X925 |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | 12 MB |
| Manufacturing | TSMC | TSMC |
| Lithography process | 3 nanometers | 3 nanometers |
| Neural processor (NPU) | MediaTek NPU 990 | MediaTek NPU 890 |
| Graphics | Mali-G1 Ultra MP12 | Mali-G925 Immortalis MP12 |
| GPU shading units | 1536 | 1536 |
| GPU clock | 1716 MHz | 1612 MHz |
| FLOPS | ~5271.5 GFLOPS | ~4952.1 GFLOPS |
Benchmarks
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
Compute Score (GPU)
| Compute Score (GPU) | 25501 | 21754 |
| Single-core score | 3204 | 2729 |
| Multi-core score | 9874 | 8430 |
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
| CPU | 981387 | 800906 |
| GPU | 1256247 | 988549 |
| Memory | 364630 | 371345 |
| UX | 728537 | 565189 |
| Total score | 3330801 | 2725989 |
| Samples | [25 tests] | [6 tests] |
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
| Stability | 57% | - |
| Graphics test | 23 FPS | - |
| Graphics score | 3119 | - |
3DMark Solar Bay
| Graphics test | 49 FPS | - |
| Section 1 | 56 FPS | - |
| Section 2 | 48 FPS | - |
| Section 3 | 42 FPS | - |
| Graphics score | 12817 | - |
PCMark 3.0
| Web score | 14375 | - |
| Video editing | 5995 | - |
| Photo editing | 34571 | - |
| Data manipulation | 12159 | - |
| Writing score | 22695 | - |
AnTuTu 11 Ranking List (61st and 137th place)
Recent User Tests
Vivo X300
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| π 2026-09-30 -> Forgolka | AnTuTu 12 | 3407758 |
| π 2026-09-20 (Forgolka) | AnTuTu 12 | 3407758 |
| π 2026-09-19 (Niranjan M) | AnTuTu 12 | 3402395 |
| π 2026-09-16 (Asura) | CPU Throttle | 70% |
| π 2026-09-07 (Asura) | CPU Throttle | 63% |
Vivo X200T
| Date | Benchmark | Result |
|---|---|---|
| π 2026-09-22 (Anand) | AnTuTu 12 | 2939313 |
| π 2026-07-24 (GTALVG) | AnTuTu 11 | 2594807 |
| π 2026-07-05 (Sachin) | AnTuTu 11 | 2688395 |
| π 2026-05-19 (Sagark) | AnTuTu 11 | 2472407 |
| π 2026-05-14 (adi) | Geekbench 6 CPU | 2729 / 8430 |
Memory
| RAM size | 12 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |
| Memory clock | 5333 MHz | 5333 MHz |
| Channels | 4 | 4 |
| Storage size | 256 GB | 256 GB |
| Storage type | UFS 4.1 | UFS 4.1 |
| Memory card | No | No |
Software
| Operating system | Android 16 | Android 16 |
| ROM | OriginOS 6 | OriginOS 6 |
| OS updates | 5 years | 5 years |
Battery
| Capacity | 6040 mAh | 6200 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) | Yes (40 W) |
| Reverse charging | Yes, (wireless) | Yes |
| Bypass charging | Yes | Yes |
| Fast charging | Yes (67% in 30 min) | Yes (70% in 30 min) |
| Full charging time | 0:48 hr | 0:54 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 (#82nd place)
Main camera
| Matrix | 200 megapixels | 50 megapixels |
| Image resolution | 16320 x 12288 | 8192 x 6144 |
| Zoom | Optical, 3x | Optical, 3x |
| Flash | Dual LED | Dual 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) | 240 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: 50 MP 3) Ultrawide: 50 MP |
| Camera features | - Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
- Bokeh mode - Pro mode |
| Image resolution | 200 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/1.68 | f/1.6 |
| Focal length | 23 mm | 23 mm |
| Sensor | Samsung ISOCELL HPB | Sony IMX921 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.4" (β 0.71 inch) | 1/1.56" (β 0.64 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.56 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 LYT-602 | Sony IMX882 |
| Sensor size | 1/1.95" (β 0.51 inch) | 1/1.95" (β 0.51 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.8 micron | 0.8 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 JD1 |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) | 1/3.14" (β 0.32 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 micron | 0.7 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 KD1 |
| Sensor size | 1/2.76" (β 0.36 inch) | 1/3.44" (β 0.29 inch) |
| Pixel size | 0.64 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 | Yes |
| 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 | January 2026 |
| Release date | October 2025 | February 2026 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | $650 |
| Sensors | - Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
- Proximity sensor - Gyroscope - Accelerometer - Ambient light sensor - Compass - Fingerprint |
| Bundled charger | Not included | Yes, 90 W |
*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 Vivo X300. It has a better camera, performance, gaming, and connectivity.
Cast your vote
Total votes: 25
Related comparisons
3.
Vivo X300 vs Vivo X300 Pro (3)