Oppo Find 5 Review: A Phone Of Firsts From A Brand To Watch
Has a relatively unknown Chinese manufacturer of high-end home theater equipment actually created a flagship Android smartphone capable of going head to head with the industry's established heavyweights? We take Oppo's S4 Pro-powered Find 5 for a spin.
Test Setup And Benchmark Methodology
Test System And Comparison Unit Specs
At this juncture, it's worth noting that whilst the Find 5's Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro SoC could certainly claim to be on the metaphorical bleeding edge when it first launched in Q1 2013, two quarters is a very long time in our industry. Unsurprisingly, it has now been surpassed by a number of newer processors.
With this in mind, we've selected our comparison devices to provide an illustration of the Find 5's relative position in the current smartphone market, and to demonstrate the performance differences between some of the key SoCs that have been released in recent times. We start off with the nearly legacy Samsung Galaxy S3 with its dual-core Krait CPU and Adreno 225 GPU, then move onto the Google Nexus 4, which also features a Qualcomm S4 Pro SoC, and then onto the Snapdragon 600-equipped HTC One.
Rounding off our comparison suite are two devices from the current high-end of the spectrum: the Apple iPhone 5s, which includes the company’s own A7 SoC with the class-leading PowerVR G430 graphics core, and the Sony Xperia Z1 which features Qualcomm's newest SoC, the Snapdragon 800.
Device | SoC | CPU Core | GPU Core | Memory | Display |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oppo Find 5 | Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro APQ6084 | Krait 200 (quad-core) @ 1.5 GHz | Adreno 320 (quad-core) @ 400 MHz | 2 GB LPDDR2 | 5” IPS @ 1920x1080 |
Apple iPhone 5s | Apple A7 | ARM v8 (dual-core) @ 1.3 GHz | PowerVR G6430 (four-cluster) @ 300 MHz | 1 GB DDR3 | 4” IPS @ 1136x640 |
HTC One | Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 APQ6084T | Krait 300 (quad-core) @ 1.7 GHz | Adreno 320 (quad-core) @ 400 MHz | 2 GB LPPDR2 | 4.7” Super LCD3 @ 1920x1080 |
Google Nexus 4 | Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro APQ6084 | Krait 200 (quad-core) @ 1.5 GHz | Adreno 320 (quad-core) @ 400 MHz | 2 GB LPDDR2 | 4.7” IPS @ 1280x768 |
Samsung Galaxy S3 | Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Plus MSM8960 | Krait (dual-core) @ 1.5 GHz | Adreno 225 (dual-core) @ 400 MHz | 2 GB LPDDR2 | 4.8” SAMOLED @ 1280x702 |
Sony Xperia Z1 | Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 MSM8974 | Krait 400 (quad-core) @ 2.2 GHz | Krait 400 (quad-core) @ 2.2 GHz | 2 GB DDR3 | 5” TFT @ 1920x1080 |
Benchmark Suite and Methodology
All mobile devices are tested in their respective stock configurations using the most recent official firmware (specific details provided below) with the Wi-Fi connected and SIM card removed (after network initialization).
Operating System: | Android 4.1.1 |
---|---|
Build: | X909EN 12.A.10 GLO 010 130719 |
Kernel: | 3.4.0-3284 |
Browser: | Opera 16.0.1212.63780 |
Our test suite consists of five major sections: CPU, GPU, Web, Display, and Battery. All tests are performed using the most recent version of the relevant benchmarking tool, with the one exception being Web testing on Android devices. Those are run on a static version of the Chromium-based Opera 16 browser to ensure consistent comparisons across the platform.
CPU Benchmarks: | AnTuTu v4.1 |
---|---|
CF-Bench Pro v1.1 | |
Primate Labs Geekbench v3 | |
Principled Technologies Mobile XPRT v2013 | |
GPU Benchmarks: | Futuremark 3DMark v1.2.0.1232 |
Rightware Basemark GUI Free v1 | |
Rightware Basemark X v1 | |
Epic Games Epic Citadel v1.07 | |
Kishonti GFXBench v2.7.2 | |
Silicon Studios Mobile GPUMark v2 | |
Web Benchmarks: | Rightware Browsermark v2.0 |
JSBench | |
Futuremark Peacekeeper v2.0 | |
Impact HTML5 Benchmark | |
Principled Technologies WebXPRT v2013 | |
Display Measurements: | Brightness (Minimum and Maximum) |
Black Level (200 nits) | |
Contrast Ratio (200 nits) | |
Color Temperature (200 nits) | |
Color Gamut Volume (sRGB and AdobeRGB) | |
Battery Tests: | Video: MXPlayer Pro/Photos looping the 1080p Sintel trailer (200 nits, muted) |
With the groundwork now established, let’s move on to CPU testing and see how the Find 5 fares in computational performance.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Current page: Test Setup And Benchmark Methodology
Prev Page Default ROM And Supported Alternatives Next Page Results: System TestsNintendo Switch 2 design seemingly leaked by carrying case maker — similar aesthetics but with a larger screen and Joy-Cons
Elon Musk reportedly wanted OpenAI to be a for-profit entity but has now sued to block the move
PlayStation 5 transformed into a laptop for $2,750 — Chinese modders made Sony's console more portable with a 17.3-inch 4K display weighing over 9 pounds
-
Mr Fender Hey guys, you forgot about their ColorOS - now it's basically the official firmware of OPPO Find5.Reply -
marclee37 I live in Hong Kong ssp, I see there are much many other China brand good looking good quality Android phones- 2gb ram is a norm, 3gb ram started to appear. 1080 screen, 5" screen, 13M cam, these are basic general spec, for price no more than US$320.Reply -
house70 Being unlocked, it is a perfect go-to phone for trips abroad. As far as hardware, the only "downside" is the lack of LTE bands in it's radio.Reply
SOftware is where it lacks, though. I got this because Oppo promised frequent updates to the OS, and TBH the Android-based variant it came with was not too bad of an experience. Then it became clear that the development team does not really know what they're doing (same minor but annoying bugs with every release, now barely coming through with 4.2, etc). They could have given CyanogenMod the kernel and drivers and let them pick up the development. CM-based ROMs are functional, but still plagued by bugs that come from lack of access to proprietary code.
Basically, their approach (at one point there were 2 or 3 versions of ROMs in development, none out of a beta state) stretched them way too thin, and it shows.
Last but not least, ignoring many requests of just embracing AOSP and let the plethora of apps do the rest was not a smart move on Oppo's part. -
danlw As an Audioholic, I have heard of the Oppo name. Their Blu-Ray players are considered by many in the high-end community to be top quality. In fact, Lexicon, a maker of ultra-elite electronics, actually stuck a $500 Oppo BDP-83 inside a new case and sold it for $3,500! (Audioholics: Lexicon BD-30 Blu-Ray Player (Oppo BDP-83 Clone) Review)Reply
With this phone, however, I doubt Apple will stick it inside their own chassis and call it ther own. It is mildly interesting, but as is often the case, forays into new market segments by otherwise high quality manufacturers are often precarious.
By all means, get an Oppo Blu-Ray player. As far as the phone, they need to get through their growing pains. -
programit Why isn't the phone compared to current versions of others. I see you put it against the latest iphone and a 16 month old dates Samsung S3. Why not the S4 or Note3 which are current models and hence what it is up against.Reply
It seemed a bit biased and not truly giving a comparison with current market phones. -
nebun got to love the iPhone 5s....like it or not....it's the best all around...the benches speak for themselves...did it mention "NO CRAPWARE and FAST OS UPDATES"Reply