Poco C55 vs Vivo X300 Pro
The Poco C55 (2023) runs on the MediaTek Helio G85, while the Vivo X300 Pro (2025) runs on the Dimensity 9500. By overall MobileRank rating, the Vivo X300 Pro leads — 87/100 vs 35/100 (a 52-point difference). Key differences: the Vivo X300 Pro has the bigger battery (6510 mAh vs 5000); the Vivo X300 Pro is faster in AnTuTu (3,269,794 vs 346,495); the Vivo X300 Pro has NFC for contactless payments, the Poco C55 doesn't; the Poco C55 is noticeably lighter (192g vs 226g).
Poco C55
Vivo X300 Pro
- Lighter: 192g vs 226g
- Better portability (56/100 vs 43/100)
- Higher AnTuTu: 3269794 vs 346495
- Better Geekbench Single: 3228 vs 420
- Better Geekbench Multi: 9553 vs 1364
- Bigger battery: 6510 vs 5000 mAh
- Faster charging: 90W vs 10W
- Higher performance (93/100 vs 29/100)
- Longer battery life (81/100 vs 43/100)
- Better display (84/100 vs 39/100)
Comparing the Poco C55 vs the Vivo X300 Pro, the Vivo X300 Pro scores 52 points higher (87/100 vs 35/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (93/100 vs 29/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro leads (81/100 vs 43/100). In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 (93/100 vs 29/100). In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 (84/100 vs 39/100). In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 (81/100 vs 43/100). In the "portability" category, the Poco C55 is a bit better (56/100 vs 43/100).
| Specification | Poco C55 | Vivo X300 Pro | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | MediaTek Helio G85 | Dimensity 9500 | |
| AnTuTu | 346495 | 3269794 | |
| Geekbench Single | 420 | 3228 | |
| Geekbench Multi | 1364 | 9553 | |
| Display | 6.7" IPS LCD | 6.8" AMOLED | |
| Resolution | 720x1650 | 1260x2800 | |
| Refresh rate | — | 120 Hz | |
| Battery | 5000 mAh | 6510 mAh | |
| Charging | 10W | 90W | |
| Wireless charging | 0W | 40W | |
| DXOMark (camera) | — | 171 | |
| Main camera | — | 200 MP | |
| Ultrawide | 0 MP | 50 MP | |
| Telephoto | 0 MP | 50 MP | |
| Front camera | 5 MP | 32 MP | |
| RAM | 4GB / 6GB | 12GB / 16GB | |
| Storage | 64GB / 128GB | 256GB / 512GB / 1TB | |
| OS | Android 12, MIUI 13 for POCO | Android 16 | |
| Brightness (peak) | — | 4500 nits | |
| NFC | no | yes | |
| Protection | — | IP68 | |
| Dimensions | 168.8×76.4×8.8 mm | 161.2×75.5×8.0 mm | |
| Weight | 192 g | 226 g | |
| Launch price | — | $899 |
Poco C55
- Main: —
- Front: 5MP
Vivo X300 Pro
- Main: 200MP f/f/1.57
- Ultrawide: 50MP
- Telephoto: 50MP
- Front: 32MP
Poco C55
- 6.7" IPS LCD
- Resolution: 720x1650
- Refresh rate: —
Vivo X300 Pro
- 6.8" AMOLED
- Resolution: 1260x2800
- Refresh rate: 120 Hz
Poco C55
- 5000 mAh
- Wired: 10W
- No wireless charging
Vivo X300 Pro
- 6510 mAh
- NanoReview test: web browsing 13:30 hrs, total 24:37 hrs
- Wired: 90W
- Wireless: 40W
We compared Poco C55 and Vivo X300 Pro, covering their specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Vivo X300 Pro leads Poco C55 by 89.4% in our overall performance rating.
Poco C55
Price unknownperformance
In the "performance" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 (93/100 vs 29/100).
display
In the "display" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 (84/100 vs 39/100).
battery
In the "battery" category, the Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 (81/100 vs 43/100).
portability
In the "portability" category, the Poco C55 is a bit better (56/100 vs 43/100).
Which is better: the Poco C55 or the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Vivo X300 Pro significantly outperforms the Poco C55 by 52 points (87/100 vs 35/100).
What is the rating of the Poco C55 and the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Poco C55 has a MobileRank rating of 35/100, the Vivo X300 Pro — 87/100.
Which is more powerful: the Poco C55 or the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Vivo X300 Pro leads on performance (93/100 vs 29/100).
Should you choose the Poco C55 over the Vivo X300 Pro?
The Poco C55 is a better fit for everyday use. The Vivo X300 Pro is a better fit for gamers and power users, mobile photography enthusiasts, those who care about battery life, budget-conscious buyers.