Little by little, that beautiful era of mobile phones with a volume below 80 cc is being left behind. So that we understand each other, something like a Google Pixel 4a or a non-Max iPhone (such as the iPhone 13 Pro), with dimensions that typically imply smaller widths and heights and that, in the end, were somewhat more compact and could be used with one hand. Although, of course, giving up large panels.
The drama of finding a compact Android mobile
The Vivo X80 Pro can boast a well-used front, with a surface covered almost entirely by that 6.78-inch panel with curvature on the sides and a hole for the front camera. On this side, it can blend in perhaps with a few phones with these same design lines, which are so popular. Still, the rear is as differential as it is striking: that huge module that we already talked about in the first impressions of the X80 Pro continues to seem to us it is most remarkable and distinctive and that most characterize this terminal.
The front will sound like many other mobiles, but the rear is as differential as it is striking
.
Is it practical? Actually (and speaking of use, not design and electronics), it’s not much, starting because the included case doesn’t reasonably protect it. The usual thing is that, due to its dimensions, our fingers are supported when grabbing the mobile in horizontal orientation. However, the lenses are not usually covered, and the truth is that, in general, it is a very, very clean mobile.
Speaking of which, the materials are suitable for this resistance to fingerprints and for the grip, so it does not slip. Although yes: it is big and heavy, and if we are not used to these volumes, we will notice it mainly (primarily if we are used to watching videos and others horizontally using only one hand for support).
Performance: enough processor, excess heat
There are already several phones that we had tested with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, the processor that starred in Qualcomm’s commitment to the high-end this year before the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ (its successor) was released last May. And it seems that it is becoming clear that it is not the company’s star processor, although it does not fall short daily.
We have been able to play and use demanding apps without obvious performance problems, but the Vivo does not stop being hot even in everyday use, almost as we saw in the ZTE Axon 40 Ultra. With the cover, this temperature is isolated and is not excessively annoying to use. Still, it affects energy consumption, and heat is usually not a good friend of electronics long-term.
Despite this, it should be noted that we do not see lag or other signs of hardware insufficiency, with a good dose of RAM (12 GB). At a quantitative level, we assess the usual benchmarks, seeing that their results align with those of other phones with a similar configuration.
Screen: finally, the QHD + is not (ironically) something “plus.”
Good news! While in the X70, it was only the Pro+ that left FullHD+ behind, in the X80, the Pro already exceeds that resolution to stay at 3,200 x 1,440 pixels and a remarkable density of 517 pixels per inch. Some features in 2022 are not yet inherent in all flagships and therefore make the Vivo stand out against some rivals.
Therefore, we are talking about a 6.78-inch AMOLED LTPO curved screen with a refresh rate of up to 120 hertz and the resolution we have just mentioned. On paper, it doesn’t look bad at all, and after having thoroughly tested it, it seems that the panel gives a lot of itself.
The sharpness is more than sufficient, with a good dose of contrast and sufficient maximum brightness for good viewing in direct sunlight. The automatic brightness adjustment works well in general. However, it sometimes requires a minor adjustment, and the color modes allow us to stay with a more standard saturation than what comes from the factory and adjust the temperature.
In the screen settings, we see these options and the possibility of selecting the resolution and the refresh rate. Also, some less common additions, such as visual enhancement, only work for compatible apps and add a little more contrast and dynamic range to videos (but it is pretty noticeable and depends on the video).
With good touch sensitivity and gesture navigation that works smoothly, the only drawback we see in this panel is perhaps something more related to the preferences and use made by the user than to its specifications: we have run into the curve. Since Samsung started a path of no return with the curved panels and managed to activate an inevitable switch in the aesthetics so that we interpret the curve as something cool and sophisticated, exactly that happens to us: it seems to us something beautiful, attractive.
But when using it… Beauty knows little, especially seeing the inevitable shadow under the curve and some virtual buttons that are not easily pressed. They are exceptional cases, but it has happened to us with some web pages.
The inevitable twilight is due to the curvature—this feature’s “not pretty” part.
Regarding the refresh rate, we see that the system offers us three possibilities: 60 Hz (standard), 120 Hz (maximum), and an automatic adjustment, which, as we have verified, goes from 10 to 120 Hz. It should be said that at 120 Hz, the experience is better in terms of fluidity (it is very noticeable in the scrolls). As we can see in the autonomy section, there are no drastic differences between one rate or another (this is conditioned by use, of course).
For its part, the hole for the front camera has not given us any display or handling problems. The spot is about 4 millimeters, so the toolbar is about 6.5 millimeters, which is not a record (Samsung continues to win), but it is adequate without being too broad or wasting space.
