Vivo iQOO 16 VS Vivo X300 Pro
We are comparing the Vivo iQOO 16 (Vivo) with the Vivo X300 Pro (Vivo). Scroll down to the pros and cons of each phone, in-depth specs, and performance highlights.
Overall Comparison
KEY DIFFERENCES OF Vivo iQOO 16 AND Vivo X300 Pro
Here’s how Vivo iQOO 16 and Vivo X300 Pro stack up against each other in their most impactful areas.
Reasons to consider the Vivo iQOO 16
-
38% smoother display (165 Hz vs 120 Hz)
-
29% larger battery (8400 mAh vs 6510 mAh)
-
50% higher AnTuTu v11 score (5498720 vs 3658712)
-
6% higher single-core Geekbench score (3764 vs 3563)
-
Higher resolution (1440 x 3168)
-
11% higher multi-core Geekbench score (11619 vs 10512)
-
11% faster charging (100 W vs 90 W)
Reasons to consider the Vivo X300 Pro
-
Higher Selfie Camera Resolution of 50 MP
-
309% brighter (4500 nits vs 1100 nits)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF Vivo iQOO 16 AND Vivo X300 Pro
Below is the detailed specification table comparing Vivo iQOO 16 and Vivo X300 Pro.
Note: Highlighted specs mean that Phone wins that spec row.
If neither side is highlighted, it is a tie or there is not enough data for both specs.
| Specification | Vivo iQOO 16 | Vivo X300 Pro |
|---|---|---|
|
General Information
|
||
| Brand: | Vivo | Vivo |
| Release Date: | September 29, 2026 | October 17, 2025 |
| Mobile Chipset: | Snapdragon 8 Elite Extreme Gen 6 | Dimensity 9500 |
| GPU: | Adreno 850 | Mali-G1 Ultra MP12 |
| Operating System: | Android 17 | Android 16 |
| Weight: | 222.5 g, 227.9 g, 229.8 g (by finish) | 226g |
|
Display
|
||
| Display Size: | 6.85 inches | 6.78 inches |
| Display Resolution: | 1440 x 3168 | 1260×2800 |
| Display Pixels Per Inch: | 508 | 453 |
| Display Technology: | LTPO AMOLED | LTPO AMOLED |
| Display Refresh Rate: | 165 | 120 |
| Display Brightness: | 1100 nits | 4500 nits |
|
Camera
|
||
| Main Camera Setup: | Triple Camera | Triple Camera |
| Main Camera: | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Main Camera Features: | Dual-LED flash, HDR, panorama, Pro mode, RAW support | Laser AF, color spectrum sensor, Zeiss optics, Zeiss T* lens, HDR |
| Main Camera Video: | 8K at 30 fps, 4K at 30/60 fps, 1080p at 30/60/240 fps | 4K at 30/60fps, 1080p at 30/60fps |
| Selfie Camera: | 32 MP | 50 MP |
| Selfie Camera Video: | 4K at 60 fps | 4K at 30/60fps, 1080p at 30/60fps |
|
Standard Lens
|
||
| Megapixels | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Image Resolution | 8192 x 6144 | — |
| Aperture | f/1.68 | 50 MP |
| Focal Length | — | 24 mm |
| Sensor | OmniVision OV50Q | Sony LYT-828 |
| Sensor Size | 1/1.3" | 1/1.28" |
| Pixel Size | — | 1.22 micron |
| Autofocus | PDAF | Laser autofocus |
| Stabilization | OIS | Optical |
|
Telephoto Lens
|
||
| Megapixels | 50 MP | 200 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.65 | f/2.7 |
| Focal Length | 85 mm | 85 mm |
| Sensor | Sony LYT-600 | Samsung ISOCELL HPB |
| Sensor Size | 1/1.95" | 1/1.4" |
| Pixel Size | 0.8 micron | 0.56 micron |
| Autofocus | PDAF | — |
| Stabilization | OIS | Optical |
|
Ultra-wide Lens
|
||
| Megapixels | 50 MP | 50 MP |
| Aperture | f/2.05 | f/2.0 |
| Focal Length | 15 mm | 15 mm |
| Sensor | GalaxyCore GC50D1 | Samsung S5KJN1 |
| Sensor Size | 1/2.0" | 1/2.76" |
| Pixel Size | 0.64 micron | 0.64 micron |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
|
Selfie Lens
|
||
| Megapixels | 32 MP | 50 MP |
| Image Resolution | 6528 x 4896 | 8192 x 6144 |
| Aperture | f/2.2 | f/2.0 |
| Focal Length | 21 mm | 20 mm |
| Sensor | GalaxyCore GC32E1 | Samsung S5KJN1 |
| Sensor Size | 1/3.1" | 1/2.76" |
| Pixel Size | 0.7 micron | 0.64 micron |
| Autofocus | No | Phase autofocus |
| Stabilization | Digital | Digital |
|
Battery & Charging
|
||
| Battery Capacity: | 8400 mAh | 6510 mAh |
| Battery Life (in hours tested): | — | 31 |
| Battery Type: | Si/C Li-Ion | Si-C Li-Ion |
| Charging Speed: | 100W | 90W |
| Wireless Charging: |
|
|
|
Performance
|
||
| RAM: | 16 GB, 12 GB | 16 GB, 12 GB |
| Storage: | 1 TB, 512 GB, 256 GB | 1 TB, 512 GB, 256 GB |
| DxOMark Score: | — | 171 |
|
GEEKBENCH V6
|
||
| Single-Core (V6) | 3764 | 3563 |
| Multi-Core (V6) | 11619 | 10512 |
|
ANTUTU SCORE
|
||
| Overall (AnTuTu V11) | 5498720 | 3658712 |
| CPU | 1512400 | 1062762 |
| GPU | 2045600 | 1342762 |
| MEM | 738900 | 466511 |
| UX | 1201820 | 786677 |
| Overall (AnTuTu V10) | 5195978 | 3539789 |
| CPU | 1407243 | 1039348 |
| GPU | 1940214 | 1371288 |
| MEM | 739539 | 383559 |
| UX | 1108982 | 745594 |
|
Connectivity
|
||
| Network Technology: | 5G | 5G |
| SIM Type: | Dual Nano-SIM | Dual Sim |
| Wi-Fi: |
|
|
| Bluetooth: |
|
|
| GPS: |
|
|
| NFC: |
|
|
| USB: | USB Type-C 3.2 | USB Type-C |
|
Extras & Build
|
||
| Fingerprint Sensor: |
|
|
| Fingerprint Sensor Type: | Under Display | Under Display |
| Face Recognition: |
|
|
| Water Resistance: |
|
|
| Speaker: | Stereo Speakers | Stereo Speakers |
| Audio Jack: | No | — |
Tip: ▲ indicates a higher-is-better spec advantage, while ▼ indicates a lower-is-better advantage.
PERFORMANCE CHART COMPARISON OF Vivo iQOO 16 AND Vivo X300 Pro
The charts below visualize how Vivo iQOO 16 and Vivo X300 Pro stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
SCREEN SIZE COMPARISON OF Vivo iQOO 16 AND Vivo X300 Pro
Here’s a proportional visualization of the Vivo iQOO 16’s 6.85 inches screen compared to the Vivo X300 Pro’s 6.78 inches display.
Vivo iQOO 16
6.85 inches″
Vivo X300 Pro
6.78 inches″
Release Timeline of Vivo iQOO 16 and Vivo X300 Pro
Vivo X300 Pro was released 11 months, 12 days earlier than Vivo iQOO 16.
Value For Money Calculator
Prices use available launch or current data. Enter your own prices to see which phone gives better value.
Vivo iQOO 16
Vivo X300 Pro
Calculating...
Domain Score Summary
Scores are generated by Comparigon's scoring algorithm and are intended as a high-level guide. They may not map 1-to-1 with the individual spec-by-spec comparisons shown in the table.
Our Verdict
In conclusion, the Vivo iQOO 16 has a narrow overall lead compared to the Vivo X300 Pro. It comes out ahead across every comparable key area.
Try to Compare Again One of These Phones With Another Phone
Pick which phone to keep, then search for the other phone to compare.
Disclaimer: Specs, pricing, and benchmarks are sourced from official manufacturer data and verified test results. While we strive for precision, product details and pricing may change. Comparigon may earn an affiliate commission on qualifying purchases.