We subjected the POCO F5 Pro to our rigorous SBMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in terms of autonomy, charging and efficiency. In the results of these tests, we will analyze how it performed in a number of tests and in several common use cases.
Overview
Key Specifications:
- Battery Capacity: 5160mAh
- 67W charger (included)
- 6.67-inch, 1440 x 3200, 120Hz OLED display
- Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 (4nm)
- ROM/RAM combination tested: 256GB + 8GB
Pros
- Excellent autonomy of almost 2.5 days when used moderately
- Very good battery life when playing games and watching videos
- Fast and efficient wired and wireless charging
- Low discharge currents when tested on internal test cases
Against
- Low call autonomy
The battery performance of the POCO F5 Pro places the device at the top of our database. The POCO F5 Pro, equipped with a larger battery, has clearly outclassed its predecessor POCO F4 GT in terms of runtime and efficiency. The charging experience, however, doesn’t match that of its predecessor due to the lower charging power of the latest model.
The autonomy of the POCO F5 Pro was impressive: almost 2.5 days when used in moderation, and the power loss of the device averaged 1% per night. Battery life in testing individual use cases, such as watching videos or playing games, was also very good, but battery life during calls was below average. The autonomy on the move of the device was decent.
The charging experience was solid for both wired and wireless charging. The 67W wired charger took just 55 minutes to top up the battery, while wireless charging took just under 2 hours to reach a full charge. Furthermore, the autonomy recovered after a quick charge of 5 minutes averaged a decent 6 hours and 21 minutes.
Charging efficiency was good, both wired and wireless, as was the efficiency of the adapter. Battery discharge currents were quite low in most of our use cases, especially when streaming video, meaning the device was well optimized.
When comparing the POCO F5 Pro to devices in the same high-end price range ($400-$599), the results were solid and above average for all three subscores: battery life, charging and efficiency.
Trial summary
Learn about SBMARK battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, SBMARK engineers conduct a series of objective tests over a one-week period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introduction and how we test articles for more details on our smartphone’s battery protocol.)
The following section compiles the key elements of our extensive testing and analysis performed in the SBMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations in the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.
| Drums | Battery charger | wireless | Screen | Processor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LITTLE F5 Pro | 5160mAh | 67W (included) |
30W | AMOLED 1440×3200 |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1 |
| Little F4GT | 4700mAh | 120W (included) |
– | AMOLED 1080×2400 |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 |
| Honor 90 | 5000mAh | 66W (not included) |
– | OLEDs 1200 x 2664 |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1 |
How the autonomy score is composed
The Battery Life Score is made up of three performance subscores: Home/Office, On the Go, and Calibrated Use Cases. Each subscore includes the results of a full range of tests to measure range in all kinds of real-life scenarios.
85 hours
Light use
Active: 2h30/day
59 hours
Moderate use
Active: 4 hours a day
36 hours
Intensive use
Active: 7 hours a day
Home office
A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a series of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) (making calls, streaming video, etc.) – 4 hours of active use over the course of 16 hours. – a period of one hour, plus 8 hours of “sleep”. The robot repeats this series of actions every day until the device runs out.
In movement
129
Samsung Galaxy M51
Samsung Galaxy M51
The use of the smartphone on the go puts a strain on autonomy due to additional “hidden” needs, such as the continuous signaling associated with the selection of the cellular network. SBMARK Battery experts take the phone outdoors and perform a series of well-defined activities following the same three-hour travel itinerary (walking, taking the bus, the subway…) for each device
Calibrated
133
Samsung Galaxy M51
Samsung Galaxy M51
For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and to our bots repeatedly perform actions related to a specific use case (like gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting with an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have used at least 5% battery power.
In charge
142
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
How the recharge score is composed
Charging is a full part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where range is at its lowest, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The SBMARK Battery Recharge Score is made up of two subscores, (1) Full Charge and (2) Quick Boost.
Charge complete
137
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
The full charge tests evaluate the reliability of the battery charge indicator; measure how much time and how much energy it takes for the battery to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the user interface, and until fully charged.
The charging curves, in wired and wireless mode (if available) show the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the energy consumption in watts during the charging phases towards full capacity.
The charging curves, in wired and wireless mode (if available) show the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the energy consumption in watts during the charging phases towards full capacity.
Quick push
147
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), the quick boost tests measure how much charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The graph here compares the average range gain with a 5-minute quick charge.
Efficiency
128
Oppo Reno6 5G
Oppo Reno6 5G
How the efficiency score is composed
The SBMARK Energy Efficiency Score is composed of two sub-scores, Charge Rate and Discharge Rate, both of which combine data obtained during a typical robot-based usage scenario, calibrated testing and charge rating, taking into consideration battery capacity of the device. SBMARK calculates the product’s annual energy consumption, shown in the graph below, which is representative of overall efficiency during a charge and when in use.
Charge Up
149
Nubia Red Magic 7 Pro
Nubia Red Magic 7 Pro
The secondary charge score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to the amount of energy required to fill the battery compared to the energy the battery can supply; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the remaining consumption when the phone is fully charged and still connected to the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The graph below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.
Discharge
119
Apple iPhone 14 Pro
Apple iPhone 14 Pro
The sub-discharge score evaluates how quickly a battery discharges during a test, which is independent of battery capacity. It is the ratio of the capacity of a battery divided by its autonomy. A small capacity battery may have the same run time as a large capacity battery, indicating that the device is well optimized, with a low discharge rate.
Start a new Thread