OBLUE A101 vs Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition)
Android
OBLUE A101
87.6%speed held · 5 min · multi-threadVS
Android
Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition)
Dimensity 9500 (MT6993) · Mali-G1-Ultra MC12
69.2%speed held · 5 min · multi-threadOBLUE A101 holds its speed better under sustained load
87.6% against 69.2% of full speed
Under sustained load
OBLUE A101 keeps 87.6% of its speed, Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition) 69.2%.
Throughput ribbonshare of full speed over time
| OBLUE A101 | Measure | Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 min · multi-thread | Test | 5 min · multi-thread |
| 2.43 GIPS | Fastest sample | 1.44 GIPS |
| 2.11 GIPS | Second-half average | 1.08 GIPS |
| 80% | Lowest 5-second average | 63% |
| Nominal | Hottest state reported | Serious |
The devices
| OBLUE A101 | Measure | Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition) |
|---|---|---|
| Android | Platform | Android |
| – | Chip | Dimensity 9500 (MT6993) |
| – | GPU | Mali-G1-Ultra MC12 |
| Android 16 | OS | Android 17 |
More matchups
OBLUE A10187.6%
vs
Xiaomi Pad 688.2%
Dead heat: both hold their speed equally well
iPad mini (6th generation)88.4%
vs
OBLUE A10187.6%
Dead heat: both hold their speed equally well
iPhone 13 Pro Max86.2%
vs
OBLUE A10187.6%
OBLUE A101 holds its speed better under sustained load
iPhone 16 Pro85.5%
vs
OBLUE A10187.6%
OBLUE A101 holds its speed better under sustained load
Samsung Galaxy S25 FE34,132
vs
Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition)40,322
Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition) scores 18% higher overall
HONOR 600 Pro49,080
vs
Vivo X300 Pro (Satellite Edition)40,322
HONOR 600 Pro scores 22% higher overall
Where does yours land?
Run the benchmark on your own device and compare it with either of these in the app.