Oppo Reno7 Z 5G vs Vivo iQOO Z7
The Oppo Reno7 Z 5G (2022) runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G, while the Vivo iQOO Z7 (2023) runs on the MediaTek Dimensity 920. Both devices score the same overall rating of 50/100. Key differences: the Vivo iQOO Z7 is faster in AnTuTu (750,481 vs 592,015); the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G has NFC for contactless payments, the Vivo iQOO Z7 doesn't.
Profile comparison
Category scores
Oppo Reno7 Z 5G
Vivo iQOO Z7
What makes Oppo Reno7 Z 5G better?
- Better display (84/100 vs 69/100)
- Better portability (80/100 vs 77/100)
What makes Vivo iQOO Z7 better?
- Higher AnTuTu: 750481 vs 592015
- Better Geekbench Single: 936 vs 905
- Better Geekbench Multi: 2318 vs 2101
- Faster charging: 44W vs 33W
- Higher performance (51/100 vs 46/100)
- Longer battery life (38/100 vs 35/100)
Comparison verdict
The Oppo Reno7 Z 5G and the Vivo iQOO Z7 received the same MobileRank rating — 50/100. In the "performance" category, the Vivo iQOO Z7 is a bit better (51/100 vs 46/100). In the "display" category, the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G notably outperforms the Vivo iQOO Z7 (84/100 vs 69/100). In the "camera" category, both devices are on the same level — 40/100. In the "battery" category, the Vivo iQOO Z7 and the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G are nearly equal (38/100 vs 35/100). In the "portability" category, the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G and the Vivo iQOO Z7 are nearly equal (80/100 vs 77/100).
Specs comparison
| Specification | Oppo Reno7 Z 5G | Vivo iQOO Z7 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G | MediaTek Dimensity 920 | |
| AnTuTu | 592015 | 750481 | |
| Geekbench Single | 905 | 936 | |
| Geekbench Multi | 2101 | 2318 | |
| Display | 6.4" AMOLED | 6.4" AMOLED | |
| Resolution | 1080x2400 | 1080x2400 | |
| Refresh rate | — | 90 Hz | |
| Battery | 4500 mAh | 4500 mAh | |
| Charging | 33W | 44W | |
| Main camera | 64 MP | 64 MP | |
| Front camera | 16 MP | 16 MP | |
| RAM | 8GB | 6GB / 8GB | |
| Storage | 128GB | 128GB | |
| OS | Android 12, ColorOS 12 | Android 13, Funtouch 13 | |
| Brightness (peak) | 600 nits | 1300 nits | |
| NFC | yes | no | |
| Protection | IPX4 | IP54 | |
| Dimensions | 159.9×73.2×7.5 mm | 158.9×73.5×7.8 mm | |
| Weight | 173 g | 173 g | |
| Launch price | — | — |
Camera comparison
Oppo Reno7 Z 5G
- Main: 64MP f/1.7
- Front: 16MP
Vivo iQOO Z7
- Main: 64MP
- Front: 16MP
Display comparison
Oppo Reno7 Z 5G
- 6.4" AMOLED
- Resolution: 1080x2400
- Refresh rate: —
Vivo iQOO Z7
- 6.4" AMOLED
- Resolution: 1080x2400
- Refresh rate: 90 Hz
Battery and charging
Oppo Reno7 Z 5G
- 4500 mAh
- Wired: 33W
- No wireless charging
Vivo iQOO Z7
- 4500 mAh
- Wired: 44W
- No wireless charging
Overall performance score
We compared Oppo Reno7 Z 5G and Vivo iQOO Z7, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Vivo iQOO Z7 leads Oppo Reno7 Z 5G by 21.1% in our overall performance rating.
Benchmarks
Detailed category analysis
performance
In the "performance" category, the Vivo iQOO Z7 is a bit better (51/100 vs 46/100).
display
In the "display" category, the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G notably outperforms the Vivo iQOO Z7 (84/100 vs 69/100).
camera
In the "camera" category, both devices are on the same level — 40/100.
battery
In the "battery" category, the Vivo iQOO Z7 and the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G are nearly equal (38/100 vs 35/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G and the Vivo iQOO Z7 are nearly equal (80/100 vs 77/100).
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G or the Vivo iQOO Z7?
Both devices scored 50/100. The choice depends on your priorities: if performance matters more — go with the Vivo iQOO Z7 (51/100 vs 46/100).
What is the rating of the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G and the Vivo iQOO Z7?
The Oppo Reno7 Z 5G has a MobileRank rating of 50/100, the Vivo iQOO Z7 — 50/100.
Which is more powerful: the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G or the Vivo iQOO Z7?
The Vivo iQOO Z7 leads on performance (51/100 vs 46/100).
Should you choose the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G over the Vivo iQOO Z7?
Neither model stands out enough to recommend it for a specific use case: the clearest difference is display — better on the Oppo Reno7 Z 5G (84/100 vs 69/100).