Price trumps prestige. | The Xiaomi 17T Pro promises high-end technology at an attractive price. In this review, we’ll assess how the display, camera, performance, and battery life hold up in everyday use, and whether the smartphone can live up to its premium claims amid stiff competition.
|The Xiaomi 17T Pro is a logical upgrade that builds on the key strengths of its predecessor. The new Dimensity 9500 delivers plenty of power; the exceptionally bright and color-accurate AMOLED display remains one of the device’s major strengths; and the Leica camera system impresses with a powerful main lens and a well-designed 5x periscope zoom. The 7,000-mAh battery takes the smartphone’s battery life to a whole new level. Despite its high performance, heat buildup remains manageable in everyday use, though the device does throttle significantly under prolonged heavy use.
|The biggest weaknesses lie in areas where Xiaomi has failed to make consistent improvements over the years. The USB port still operates only at the slow USB 2.0 standard and does not support video output. The ultra-wide-angle camera falls significantly short compared with the other cameras; the speakers sound good only at moderate volumes, and voice quality suffers in significant ambient noise. Added to this are pre-installed third-party apps and ads within the system. The update guarantee is decent but doesn’t match that of leading competitors.
+ Long battery life and fast charging
+ Good main camera and zoom
+ Bright and accurate display
+ High-speed Wi-Fi 7
- USB 2.0 only
- mediocre speakers
- weak ultra-wide-angle lens
The Xiaomi 17T Pro can be purchased directly from the Xiaomi Store, where it is available in the following storage configurations: 12 / 256 GB (MSRP: 900 euros), 12/512 GB (MSRP: 1,000 euros), and 12/1,024 GB (MSRP: 1,100 euros).
Alternatively, it’s available at a lower price at ComputerUniverse, or with a contract at Sparhandy.
XIAOMI 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compatible with Tmobile Mint Tello & Global) (512GB + 12GB) NFC Global ROM Unlocked 50MP Triple Pro Leica Cam eSIM 6.83" 144Mhz Model 2602EPTC0G Liberado (Black)
XIAOMI 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compatible with Tmobile Mint Tello & Global) (512GB + 12GB) NFC Global ROM Unlocked 50MP Triple Pro Leica Cam eSIM 6.83" 144Mhz Model 2506BPN68G Liberado (Deep Blue)
Xiaomi 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compatible with Tmobile Mint Tello & Global) (512GB + 12GB) NFC Global ROM Unlocked 50MP Triple Pro Leica Cam eSIM 6.83" 144Mhz Model 2506BPN68G Liberado (Deep Violet)
The Xiaomi 15T Pro set new standards in the upper mid-range segment last year, and now, the Xiaomi 17T Pro aims to raise the bar even higher. Instead of a cautious model refresh, Xiaomi is introducing noticeable changes, particularly under the hood: the new Dimensity 9500 chip replaces the Dimensity 9400+, the battery capacity increases from 5,500 to a whopping 7,000 mAh, and it supports faster charging at up to 100 watts. The Leica camera has also been further refined: the new main camera with Light Fusion 950 is designed to deliver better results, especially in challenging lighting conditions.
However, more power and a larger battery alone don’t make for a better smartphone. The key question is whether Xiaomi has specifically built on the strengths of the 15T Pro and addressed any potential weaknesses. Our review shows how the Xiaomi 17T Pro performs in everyday use and whether the upgrade is worth the extra cost.
Processor
MediaTek Dimensity 9500 8c/8t, 1 x 4.2 GHz ARM C1-Ultra, 3 x 3.5 GHz ARM C1-Premium, 4 x 2.7 GHz ARM C1-Pro, Cortex-X930 Travis / Cortex-A730 6x Gelas
Display
6.83 inch 19.5:9, 2772 x 1280 pixel 447 PPI, capacitive Touchscreen, AMOLED, 12 Bit Color depth, Refresh rate: 60 - 144 Hz, Scratch resistance on Mohs hardness scale: 5; Screen-body-ratio: 91 %; Corning Gorilla Glass 7i, glossy: yes, HDR, 144 Hz
Storage
512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash, 512 GB
, 476.6 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 Infrared, Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Proximity, Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Electronic compass, Color temperature, OTG, IR-Blaster
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz be = Wi-Fi 7), Bluetooth 6.0, 2G (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), 3G (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8), LTE (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 48, 66, 71), 5G-Sub6 (Band 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 75, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.25 x 162.2 x 77.5 ( = 0.32 x 6.39 x 3.05 in)
Battery
7000 mAh Lithium-Ion, Silicon-Carbon-Anode
Charging
wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge
Operating System
Android 16
Camera
Primary Camera: 50 MPix (Light Fusion 950, f/1.67, 23 mm, OIS) + 12 MPix (Ultra Wide, f/3.0, 15 mm) + 50 MPix (5x opt. Zoom, f/3.0, 115 mm, OIS); Camera2-API-Level: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix (f/2.2, 21 mm)
Additional features
Speakers: Dual , HyperOS 3.0, 12 Months Warranty, Bluetooth Audio Codecs: SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, aptX TWS+, LHDC V5, LDAC, LC3; Auracast | GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), BeiDou (B1I, B1C, B2a, B2b), Galileo (E1, E5a, E5b), QZSS (L1, L5), NavIC (L5) | HDR: HLG, HDR10, HDR10+, Dolby Vision | DRM Widevine L1 | IP68 | USB Copy Test: 23.16 MB/s (connected to Samsung Portable SSD T7 (USB 3.2 Gen. 2), Supported File Systems for external storages: FAT32, exFAT, NTFS | Body-SAR: 0.998 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.997 W/kg | charging speed: 10 - 100 W (wired) / up to 50 W (wireless)
Biometric security: optical fingerprint, 2D facial recognition | Vibration motor: linear (X-axis) | Telephony features: Dual-Nano-SIM, Dual-eSIM, Wi-Fi Calling, VoLTE, Vo5G
Update Policy: 5 years Android-Updates (till 06/2031), 6 years security patches (till 05/2032)
, fanless, waterproof
Weight
219 g ( = 7.73 oz / 0.48 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
The Xiaomi 17T Pro has a nominal thickness of 8.25 mm, which our measurements confirm. With the camera module, it measures up to 11.7 mm. It is available in Deep Blue (our test unit), Black, and Deep Violet variants.
The build quality feels premium, thanks in large part to the matte aluminum frame. The front is protected by Corning Gorilla Glass 7i, while the back is made of fiberglass. The bezels are tight-fitting and uniform, but the device creaks noticeably under torsion.
The 17T Pro is IP68-certified, making it both dustproof and waterproof.
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Xiaomi 17T Pro Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xiaomi 17 Vivo X300 FE DIN A6 ❌
163.33 mm / 6.43 in 77.82 mm / 3.06 in 8.3 mm / 0.3268 in 220 g0.485 lbs162.2 mm / 6.39 in 77.5 mm / 3.05 in 8.25 mm / 0.3248 in 219 g0.4828 lbs158.4 mm / 6.24 in 75.8 mm / 2.98 in 7.3 mm / 0.2874 in 190 g0.4189 lbs151.1 mm / 5.95 in 71.8 mm / 2.83 in 8.1 mm / 0.3189 in 191 g0.4211 lbs150.8 mm / 5.94 in 71.8 mm / 2.83 in 8.2 mm / 0.3228 in 190.2 g0.4193 lbs148 mm / 5.83 in 105 mm / 4.13 in 1 mm / 0.03937 in 1.5 g0.00331 lbs
The Xiaomi 17T Pro’s features are high-end in many areas, ranging from wireless connectivity and cameras to the battery and associated charging technology.
However, when it comes to the USB port, Xiaomi remains conservative and continues to rely on a full-size USB 2.0 port without video output.
The Xiaomi 17T Pro ships with Android 16 and HyperOS 3.0 and is expected to receive five years of version updates and six years of security patches. These are long timeframes, but Samsung, Google, and Honor show that even more is possible.
Advertising is also built into the 17T Pro’s system, though to a lesser extent than on budget devices. However, Xiaomi is by no means shy about third-party apps and preinstalls numerous ones, all of which can be uninstalled.
The Xiaomi 17T Pro comes in surprisingly thick packaging, which, however, contains no visible plastic components. Xiaomi does not provide any specific information regarding sustainability or the materials used.
Repair guides and replacement parts were not yet available from Xiaomi at the time of testing; however, since the Xiaomi 15T Pro was part of the self-repair program, it is likely that the 17T Pro will also be added to the program soon.
The frequency bands supported for mobile communications are broad and have only a few gaps, which, however, have not been an issue in Europe so far. Reception is good in everyday use and gives no cause for criticism.
For Wi-Fi, the Xiaomi 17T Pro offers fast Wi-Fi 7 and, when paired with our reference router, the Asus RT-BE96U, delivers extremely high data transfer rates.
| Networking | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be | |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 3845 (min: 3505) MBit/s ∼100% |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 4387 (min: 3333) MBit/s ∼100% |
| Vivo X300 FE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be | |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 1479 (min: 1211) MBit/s ∼38% |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 1892 (min: 1838) MBit/s ∼43% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | 887 (min: 479) MBit/s ∼90% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | 914 (min: 876) MBit/s ∼88% |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | 1799 (min: 955) MBit/s ∼100% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | 1645 (min: 1513) MBit/s ∼100% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | 989 (min: 488) MBit/s ∼100% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | 946 (min: 814) MBit/s ∼91% |
| Xiaomi 17 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | 1086 (min: 1009) MBit/s ∼60% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | 1262 (min: 1051) MBit/s ∼77% |
| Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | 956 (min: 595) MBit/s ∼97% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | 1040 (min: 459) MBit/s ∼100% |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | 1289 (min: 508) MBit/s ∼72% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | 1495 (min: 719) MBit/s ∼91% |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 2040 (min: 370) MBit/s ∼53% |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 2200 (min: 407) MBit/s ∼50% |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | 685 (min: 52.5) MBit/s ∼69% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | 721 (min: 52.2) MBit/s ∼69% |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | 1279 (min: 287) MBit/s ∼71% |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | 1396 (min: 339) MBit/s ∼85% |
| iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 1818 (min: 327) MBit/s ∼47% |
| iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U | 1918 (min: 328) MBit/s ∼44% |
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1767 (955-1834) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1644 (1513-1679) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø872 (479-913) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø912 (876-933) MBit/s
Xiaomi 17T Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U; iperf 3.1.3: Ø3845 (3505-4039) MBit/s
Xiaomi 17T Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U; iperf 3.1.3: Ø4386 (3333-4542) MBit/s
With tri-band GNSS, the Xiaomi phone has an excellent foundation for location tracking. It acquires a satellite signal fairly quickly even indoors, though it could be a bit more accurate outdoors.
During a bike ride, we compared the 17T Pro with the Garmin Venu 2. The smartwatch was generally more accurate, even though the smartphone updated its location just as frequently. However, this doesn’t pose a problem for everyday navigation tasks.
The Xiaomi 17T Pro can use either two nano-SIM cards or two eSIMs; mixed use is also possible.
When held to the ear, the call quality is impressive, with natural voice transmission. However, background noise suppression is only satisfactory. Especially on main roads, noise frequently seeps through, and the user’s voice then sounds constricted and somewhat muffled.
The Xiaomi 17T Pro’s front camera has a high resolution and does not use pixel binning. This results in quite impressive photos; even at higher ISO settings, the images remain clear—the algorithm does a good job here. Videos can be recorded in Ultra HD at 30 FPS.
The highlight is on the back: The new main sensor is an OmniVision Light Fusion 950, which, at 1/1.31 inches, is quite large and allows for good shots. The image has a warm tone and is significantly brightened, which makes details appear less pronounced. However, the depth of field is very pronounced.
The ultra-wide-angle lens is the weakest link in the chain; it shows aberrations along edges in the peripheral areas, and details appear slightly washed out. Another highlight, however, is the 5x optical periscope zoom, which even allows for 120x magnification with AI support. Here, the image quality is very consistent, and even a 10x zoom still produces good shots.
Video recording is possible at up to 8K (30 FPS). Ultra HD is available at 120 FPS, but only with the main sensor; if you reduce the frame rate to 60 FPS, you can use all the lenses.
Image comparison
Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.
Main cameraMain cameraUltra wide-angle5-x ZoomLow-Light

click to load images

13.4 ∆E
5.2 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
21 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
2.8 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
14.1 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
1 ∆E
5 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
4.5 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
14.7 ∆E
9.5 ∆E
2.5 ∆E

7.9 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
2.1 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
4 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
6.5 ∆E
11.1 ∆E
12.7 ∆E
13 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
14.2 ∆E
15.7 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
In addition to the smartphone, the package includes a USB-C cable, a SIM ejector tool, and a dark gray silicone protective case. A power adapter must be purchased separately in Europe.
The warranty in Germany is valid for twelve months and can be extended with the Xiaomi Care insurance package, which covers accidental damage for two years (70 euros) or, optionally, also includes theft coverage (99 euros).
The Xiaomi 17T Pro’s capacitive touchscreen responds to input quickly and reliably. An optical fingerprint sensor is integrated into the bottom edge and reliably recognizes the registered finger, unlocking the device quickly. Additionally, a less secure facial recognition feature can be used via the front camera.
The linear vibration motor provides pleasant haptic feedback, though some users may find it a bit too strong.
The physical buttons are located on the right side and are fairly easy to reach. However, people with smaller hands will need to reposition their grip to reach the volume rocker.
The AMOLED display on the Xiaomi 17T Pro is quite similar to that of its predecessor, the 15T Pro, but is even brighter. When measuring a reduced white area (APL18), we recorded up to 3,507 cd/m². The pixel density also remains high, and the refresh rate reaches up to 144 Hz. Xiaomi doesn’t skimp on HDR standards either, supporting all common formats.
Xiaomi refers to “DC dimming” for the 17T Pro; at minimum brightness, we measured a base frequency of 120 Hz and another at 3,846 Hz, suggesting high-frequency PWM dimming. Even so, the display should still be relatively easy on the eyes. Complaints are unlikely here.
| 1068 cd/m² | 1057 cd/m² | 1047 cd/m² | ||
| 1063 cd/m² | 1068 cd/m² | 1044 cd/m² | ||
| 1071 cd/m² | 1066 cd/m² | 1053 cd/m² | ||
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 1071 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1059.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.53 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 1068 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1.3 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.71}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2.2 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.96}
99.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
CCT: 6875 K
| Xiaomi 17T Pro AMOLED, 2772x1280, 6.8" | Vivo X300 FE AMOLED, 2640x1216, 6.3" | Samsung Galaxy S26+ LTPO-AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.7" | Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra AMOLED, 2608x1200, 6.9" | Xiaomi 17 LTPO AMOLED , 2656x1220, 6.3" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -39% | -18% | 3% | ||
| APL18 Peak Brightness (cd/m²) | 3507 | 2035 -42% | 2751 -22% | 3519 0% | |
| HDR Peak Brightness (cd/m²) | 3295 | 2100 -36% | 2875 -13% | 3458 5% | |
| Response Times | -9% | -84% | 16% | 30% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * (ms) | 1.13 ?(0.547, 0.5865) | 1.3 ?(0.6, 0.7) -15% | 3.79 ?(2.137, 1.648) -235% | 0.86 ?(0.433, 0.427) 24% | 0.4 ?(0.2, 0.2) 65% |
| Response Time Black / White * (ms) | 1.01 ?(0.4925, 0.5165) | 1.1 ?(0.6, 0.5) -9% | 1.18 ?(0.6195, 0.561) -17% | 0.87 ?(0.4395, 0.433) 14% | 0.6 ?(0.3, 0.3) 41% |
| PWM Frequency (Hz) | 120 | 360.9 | 240 | 120 | 120 |
| PWM Amplitude * (%) | 15.46 | 16 -3% | 15.27 1% | 14.02 9% | 18 -16% |
| Screen | 24% | -23% | 21% | -13% | |
| Brightness middle (cd/m²) | 1068 | 1096 3% | 1384 30% | 1771 66% | 1030 -4% |
| Brightness (cd/m²) | 1060 | 1063 0% | 1379 30% | 1773 67% | 1021 -4% |
| Brightness Distribution (%) | 97 | 92 -5% | 95 -2% | 99 2% | 98 1% |
| Black Level * (cd/m²) | |||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.3 | 0.62 52% | 2.8 -115% | 1.3 -0% | 1.44 -11% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.5 | 1.53 39% | 4.5 -80% | 2.8 -12% | 3.68 -47% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.2 | 1 55% | 2.2 -0% | 2.1 5% | 2.5 -14% |
| Gamma | 2.26 97% | 2.24 98% | 2.05 107% | 2.25 98% | 2.274 97% |
| CCT | 6875 95% | 6573 99% | 6514 100% | 6452 101% | 6868 95% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -8% / 4% | -42% / -38% | 13% / 16% | 9% / 1% |
* ... smaller is better
ℹ
To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 120 Hz Amplitude: 15.46 % Secondary Frequency: 3846 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 120 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 120 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7738 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Series of measurements taken at a fixed zoom level and with different brightness settings (Although the amplitude curve at minimum brightness appears flat, this is due to the scaling. The info box shows a magnified version of the amplitude at minimum brightness.)
We use Calman to check the display’s color accuracy, using the default setting because it produces the most natural appearance. The measured values are very good; no color distortions are visible to the naked eye.
ℹ
Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1.01 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.4925 ms rise | |
| ↘ 0.5165 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (19.8 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 1.13 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.547 ms rise | |
| ↘ 0.5865 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (30.9 ms). | ||
Outdoors, the Xiaomi 17T Pro is easy to read even on sunny days.
Viewing angle stability is also good; however, at wide viewing angles, the screen loses brightness and takes on a cooler tone.
The Xiaomi 17T Pro uses a MediaTek Dimensity 9500 SoC with 12 GB of RAM, which ensures high system speed and is also well-suited for gaming.
However, the AI benchmarks are lower than expected.
| Geekbench 6.7 | |
| Single-Core | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 3676 Points +12% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 3662 Points +12% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (3269 - 3635, n=8) | 3447 Points +5% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 3269 Points |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 3209 Points -2% |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288 | 2857 Points -13% |
| Average of class Smartphone (196 - 3883, n=185, last 2 years) | 1880 Points -42% |
| Multi-Core | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 11034 Points +10% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 11004 Points +10% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 10842 Points +8% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (9402 - 10941, n=8) | 10243 Points +2% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 10042 Points |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288 | 9276 Points -8% |
| Average of class Smartphone (830 - 11811, n=185, last 2 years) | 5608 Points -44% |
| PCMark for Android - Work 3.x | |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 19432 Points +27% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 19076 Points +25% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 18445 Points +20% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 15312 Points |
| Average of class Smartphone (4507 - 28557, n=136, last 2 years) | 15213 Points -1% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (13432 - 17480, n=5) | 14831 Points -3% |
| CrossMark - Overall | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 2598 Points +139% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 2356 Points +117% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 2098 Points +93% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (1086 - 2177, n=3) | 1661 Points +53% |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288 | 1504 Points +38% |
| Average of class Smartphone (376 - 2856, n=104, last 2 years) | 1262 Points +16% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 1086 Points |
| BaseMark OS II | |
| Overall | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 14678 Points +99% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 13984 Points +90% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 11422 Points +55% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (7369 - 11787, n=6) | 10474 Points +42% |
| Average of class Smartphone (1885 - 16690, n=112, last 2 years) | 8099 Points +10% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 7369 Points |
| System | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 20996 Points +116% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 19207 Points +98% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (9722 - 16276, n=6) | 14558 Points +50% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 12733 Points +31% |
| Average of class Smartphone (4117 - 21153, n=112, last 2 years) | 11654 Points +20% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 9722 Points |
| Memory | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 18501 Points +181% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 16964 Points +158% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 13372 Points +103% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (6586 - 13155, n=6) | 9806 Points +49% |
| Average of class Smartphone (2760 - 24052, n=112, last 2 years) | 9458 Points +44% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 6586 Points |
| Graphics | |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 52356 Points +119% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 51530 Points +115% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 42732 Points +79% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (23930 - 48863, n=6) | 40533 Points +69% |
| Average of class Smartphone (1046 - 61797, n=112, last 2 years) | 25522 Points +7% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 23930 Points |
| Web | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 2321 Points +21% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 2319 Points +21% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 2234 Points +16% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (1924 - 2319, n=6) | 2158 Points +12% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 1924 Points |
| Average of class Smartphone (1062 - 2587, n=112, last 2 years) | 1763 Points -8% |
| UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI | |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 23076 Points +697% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 22076 Points +663% |
| Average of class Smartphone (2895 - 78695, n=97, last 2 years) | 20165 Points +597% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 19236 Points +564% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (2895 - 19373, n=5) | 14726 Points +409% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 2895 Points |
| Geekbench AI | |
| Single Precision NPU 1.7 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 756 Points +158% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 698 Points +138% |
| Average of class Smartphone (80 - 5210, n=119, last 2 years) | 663 Points +126% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 559 Points +91% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (190 - 834, n=7) | 442 Points +51% |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288 | 417 Points +42% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 293 Points |
| Half Precision NPU 1.7 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (80 - 36297, n=119, last 2 years) | 2604 Points +721% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 767 Points +142% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 646 Points +104% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 561 Points +77% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (176 - 833, n=7) | 439 Points +38% |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288 | 417 Points +32% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 317 Points |
| Quantized NPU 1.7 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (124 - 49889, n=119, last 2 years) | 3894 Points +375% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 1621 Points +98% |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 1409 Points +72% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 1285 Points +57% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (432 - 1744, n=7) | 993 Points +21% |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288 | 941 Points +15% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 820 Points |
| AI Benchmark - Score V6 | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 19229 Points |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (765 - 21660, n=4) | 9942 Points |
| Average of class Smartphone (55.6 - 22780, n=78, last 2 years) | 5815 Points |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288 | 1098 Points |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | Points |
| Antutu v11 - Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384 | 3753628 Points +15% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (3258253 - 3692957, n=4) | 3498009 Points +7% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288 | 3258253 Points |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288 | 3190793 Points -2% |
| Average of class Smartphone (584158 - 4273120, n=37, last 2 years) | 2614794 Points -20% |
The integrated ARM Mali-G1 Ultra graphics unit supports hardware-based ray tracing and delivers high performance that, in some cases, even surpasses that of the Adreno 840.
| 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 7232 Points +3% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 7005 Points |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6959 Points -1% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6321 Points -10% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 4926 Points -30% |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 7206 Points +4% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 7021 Points +1% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6932 Points |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6311 Points -9% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 4959 Points -28% |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 30621 Points +44% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 26896 Points +26% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 25598 Points +20% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 21446 Points +1% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 21283 Points |
| 3DMark / Solar Bay Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| 3DMark / Solar Bay Unlimited Score | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| 3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 3212 Points +18% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 2731 Points |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 2704 Points -1% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 2532 Points -7% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 979 Points -64% |
| 3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 3265 Points +30% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 2736 Points +9% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 2566 Points +2% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 2519 Points |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 1009 Points -60% |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 120 fps 0% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 120 fps 0% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 120 fps |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 106 fps -12% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 60 fps -50% |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 125 fps |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 119 fps -5% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 114 fps -9% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 108 fps -14% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 103 fps -18% |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 120 fps 0% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 120 fps 0% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 120 fps 0% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 120 fps |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 60 fps -50% |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 344 fps |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 313 fps -9% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 296 fps -14% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 281 fps -18% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 241 fps -30% |
| GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 60 fps |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 56 fps -7% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 50 fps -17% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 49 fps -18% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 44 fps -27% |
| Jetstream 2 - 2.2 Total | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146) | 354.246 Points +198% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (108 - 362, n=7) | 247 Points +108% |
| Average of class Smartphone (2 - 480, n=90, last 2 years) | 216 Points +82% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro (Edge 147) | 118.918 Points |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 147) | 108.028 Points -9% |
| Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141) | 2 Points -98% |
| Speedometer 3 - Score 3.0 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146) | 27.1 runs/min |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143) | 25.1 runs/min |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (17.9 - 27.6, n=2) | 22.8 runs/min |
| Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141) | 20.9 runs/min |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.06 - 45.5, n=86, last 2 years) | 16.2 runs/min |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146) | 85043 Points +208% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (27638 - 96438, n=5) | 65908 Points +138% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143) | 58421 Points +111% |
| Average of class Smartphone (2800 - 126661, n=141, last 2 years) | 52606 Points +90% |
| Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141) | 50987 Points +84% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 150) | 27638 Points |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 150) | 1334.6 ms * |
| Average of class Smartphone (257 - 28190, n=120, last 2 years) | 1057 ms * +21% |
| Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141) | 634.81 ms * +52% |
| Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (372 - 1335, n=7) | 605 ms * +55% |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143) | 522.8 ms * +61% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146) | 387.8 ms * +71% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi 17T Pro | Vivo X300 FE | Samsung Galaxy S26+ | Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra | Xiaomi 17 | Average 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 103% | 6% | 132% | 145% | 94% | 37% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s) | 3021.51 | 3752.1 24% | 3574.74 18% | 4064.33 35% | 3943.44 31% | 3625 ?(1954 - 4366, n=45) 20% | 2241 ?(270 - 4370, n=173, last 2 years) -26% |
| Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s) | 2770.02 | 3222.5 16% | 2543.31 -8% | 3987.65 44% | 3784.97 37% | 3211 ?(339 - 4113, n=45) 16% | 1931 ?(103.2 - 4113, n=173, last 2 years) -30% |
| Random Read 4KB (MB/s) | 414.44 | 421.6 2% | 419.84 1% | 575.86 39% | 487.69 18% | 411 ?(279 - 614, n=45) -1% | 311 ?(47.6 - 614, n=173, last 2 years) -25% |
| Random Write 4KB (MB/s) | 108.71 | 508.6 368% | 122.63 13% | 551.82 408% | 643.31 492% | 477 ?(48.2 - 1071, n=45) 339% | 359 ?(13.1 - 1071, n=173, last 2 years) 230% |
Under sustained load, the surface temperatures of the Xiaomi 17T Pro do rise noticeably, but they peak at a maximum of 42 °C, which is absolutely safe.
In 3DMark stress tests, however, this leads to significant throttling. Although the Galaxy S26+ throttles more heavily, it is generally faster.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Maximum: 42 °C = 108 F Average: 40.9 °C = 106 F | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Maximum: 40.3 °C = 105 F Average: 39.3 °C = 103 F | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40.9 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.3 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.2 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 72.8 % +18% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 61.9 % |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 60.7 % -2% |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 77 % +19% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 73.8 % +14% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 64.8 % |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 59.6 % -8% |
| Solar Bay Stress Test Stability | |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 73 % +11% |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 72.8 % +10% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 65.9 % |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 60.6 % -8% |
| Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
| Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 98.7 % +66% |
| Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 74.7 % +26% |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 63.6 % +7% |
| Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 59.5 % |
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.14.3: Ø32.2 (26-40.1) %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.14.3: Ø29.2 (25.6-42.9) %
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø96.7 (75.7-122.2) %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø110.7 (95.2-156.9) %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø150 (129.5-161.9) %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø38.1 (31.2-48.9) %
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø38.8 (29-44.1) %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø34.5 (28.6-47.1) %
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.0.6.2: Ø17.5 (14-23.5) %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.0.6.2: Ø17.3 (15-23.7) %
The two speakers on the Xiaomi 17T Pro sound quite pleasant at medium volume, but if you turn them up all the way, you’ll quickly notice that they run out of steam not only in terms of volume but also in terms of precision.
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 44% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 23%, worst was 134%
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.3% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 7% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 23%, worst was 134%
Power consumption is at a reasonable level, though it is slightly higher at full display brightness. Under load, however, it is very low.
The 17T Pro charges at up to 100 watts, allowing for a full charge within 45 minutes. Wireless charging supports up to 50 watts.
| Xiaomi 17T Pro 7000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S26+ 4900 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 6500 mAh | Xiaomi 17 7000 mAh | Vivo X300 Pro 5440 mAh | Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -22% | 0% | 2% | -48% | -23% | -4% | |
| Idle Minimum * (Watt) | 0.89 | 0.56 37% | 0.87 2% | 0.7 21% | 0.86 3% | 0.975 ?(0.6 - 1.7, n=6) -10% | 0.879 ?(0.39 - 1.7, n=134, last 2 years) 1% |
| Idle Average * (Watt) | 1.67 | 1.28 23% | 1.29 23% | 1.4 16% | 1.8 -8% | 1.765 ?(1 - 2.3, n=6) -6% | 1.474 ?(0.7 - 4.36, n=134, last 2 years) 12% |
| Idle Maximum * (Watt) | 1.73 | 1.31 24% | 1.33 23% | 1.7 2% | 1.86 -8% | 2.01 ?(1.3 - 2.6, n=6) -16% | 1.663 ?(0.75 - 4.46, n=134, last 2 years) 4% |
| Load Average * (Watt) | 6.27 | 12.38 -97% | 8.84 -41% | 5.9 6% | 10.63 -70% | -28% | 6.75 ?(2.9 - 14.9, n=94, last 2 years) -8% |
| Load Maximum * (Watt) | 8.63 | 16.9 -96% | 9.15 -6% | 11.7 -36% | 21.99 -155% | 13.3 ?(8.63 - 22, n=5) -54% | 11.2 ?(4.75 - 22, n=94, last 2 years) -30% |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.89 (1.045-12.9) Watt
Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.69 (0.09289-15.2) Watt
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.963 (0.868-1.286) Watt
Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.117 (1.048-1.805) Watt
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø12.3 (11.3-12.8) Watt
Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø10.8 (10.6-10.9) Watt
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.963 (0.868-1.286) Watt
Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.117 (1.048-1.805) Watt
Thanks to its 7,000 mAh battery, the Xiaomi 17T Pro lasted about 26 hours in our Wi-Fi test. That’s a very good result, but the Xiaomi 17 shows that even more is possible with an identical battery.
Battery Runtime
| WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 150) | 25h 59min | |
The Xiaomi 17T Pro impresses above all with its enormous battery life, high performance, an outstanding display, and powerful cameras; however, it still has a few avoidable weaknesses, such as USB 2.0, the weak ultra-wide-angle camera, and performance throttling under heavy load.
Xiaomi 17T Pro
- 07/23/2026 v8
Daniel Schmidt
Connectivity
56 / 69 → 81%
Games Performance
44 / 55 → 79%
Application Performance
66 / 85 → 77%
Smartphone - Weighted Average
CO2 Emissions
No Data
Materials
25%
Packaging
90%
Power Use
95.5%
Repairability
40%
Software Updates
94.5%
Total Sustainability Score: 57.5%
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500 ⎘ Arm Mali G1- Ultra MC12 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: $842.50 List Price: 1000€ | 219 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.83" 2772x1280 447 PPI AMOLED | |
| Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 829 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: List Price: 899€ | 190.2 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.31" 2640x1216 461 PPI AMOLED | |
| Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600 ⎘ Samsung Xclipse 960 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: List Price: 1249€ | 190 g | 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.70" 3120x1440 513 PPI LTPO-AMOLED | |
| Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: List Price: 900€ | 220 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.90" 2608x1200 416 PPI AMOLED | |
| Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x | Amazon: 1. $830.00 XIAOMI 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compat... 2. $970.00 XIAOMI 17 5G Ai (Compatible ... 3. $960.00 XIAOMI 17 5G Ai (Compatible ... List Price: 650€ | 191 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.30" 2656x1220 464 PPI LTPO AMOLED |
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was given to the author by the manufacturer free of charge for the purposes of review. There was no third-party influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Editor of the original article: Daniel Schmidt - Managing Editor Mobile - 987 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2013
As a child I was fascinated by my Commodore 16, and this sparked my enthusiasm for computers. Using my first modem, I surfed the BTX videotext system and later the World Wide Web. I have always been captivated by the latest technologies, and this is especially true for mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. I’ve been part of the Notebookcheck team since 2013 and have also on occasion written for Notebookinfo.de, and I’m looking forward to testing new innovations for our readers. I like to spend my spare time indulging in photography and barbecues and being with my family.
Translator: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 816412 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008
My main responsibility as an editorial assistant is maintaining the Library section, which aggregates reviews from other publications and channels. In addition, my daily breakfast is Notebookcheck's long list of new content, which I comb through to select the most interesting topics for translation from English to French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch."
Daniel Schmidt, 2026-07-28 (Update: 2026-07-28)