Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Smartphone ASUS ROG Phone
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 83 %
iluminação com acumulador: 597 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.12 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 7.3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
114.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.203
| Asus ROG Phone AMOLED, 2160x1080, 6" | Razer Phone 2 IGZO LCD, UltraMotion 120 Hz Display, 2560x1440, 5.7" | Huawei Mate 20 Pro OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3" | Apple iPhone Xs Max OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5" | Xiaomi Black Shark IPS, 2160x1080, 6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 20% | 36% | 40% | -3% | |
| Brightness middle | 597 | 600 1% | 576 -4% | 656 10% | 549 -8% |
| Brightness | 637 | 577 -9% | 582 -9% | 659 3% | 541 -15% |
| Brightness Distribution | 83 | 92 11% | 90 8% | 88 6% | 95 14% |
| Black Level * | 0.31 | 0.42 | |||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.12 | 3.43 33% | 1.3 75% | 1.7 67% | 6.08 -19% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.9 | 6.36 42% | 3.5 68% | 2.8 74% | 10.69 2% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.3 | 4.4 40% | 1.6 78% | 1.7 77% | 6.6 10% |
| Gamma | 2.203 100% | 2.388 92% | 2.18 101% | 1.998 110% | 2.305 95% |
| CCT | 7371 88% | 6069 107% | 6561 99% | 6487 100% | 8399 77% |
| Contrast | 1935 | 1307 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 219 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 219 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 219 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 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. » 15 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.5 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. » 2 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (sort by value) | |
| Asus ROG Phone | |
| Razer Phone 2 | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7998 - 13211, n=26) | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| Asus ROG Phone | |
| Razer Phone 2 | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7360 - 9868, n=27) | |
| AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Asus ROG Phone | |
| Razer Phone 2 | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (246366 - 299878, n=27) | |
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Asus ROG Phone | |
| Razer Phone 2 | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (162183 - 242953, n=23) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Asus ROG Phone (Chrome 70) | |
| Razer Phone 2 (Chrome 68) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=25) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Asus ROG Phone (Chrome 70) | |
| Razer Phone 2 (Chrome 68) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=28) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=28) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| Razer Phone 2 (Chrome 68) | |
| Asus ROG Phone (Chrome 70) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Asus ROG Phone (Chrome 70) | |
| Razer Phone 2 (Chrome 68) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (19 - 103, n=17) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Asus ROG Phone (Chrome 70) | |
| Razer Phone 2 (Chrome 68) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (96 - 291, n=23) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Asus ROG Phone | Razer Phone 2 | Huawei Mate 20 Pro | Xiaomi Black Shark | Sony Xperia XZ3 | Average 512 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -29% | 4% | -13% | -29% | -6% | 210% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 725 | 733 1% | 853 18% | 742 2% | 681 -6% | 682 ? -6% | 1839 ? 154% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 243.3 | 194.8 -20% | 196.4 -19% | 199.6 -18% | 196.1 -19% | 281 ? 15% | 1425 ? 486% |
| Random Read 4KB | 141.6 | 124.3 -12% | 157.4 11% | 127.2 -10% | 135.7 -4% | 136.4 ? -4% | 277 ? 96% |
| Random Write 4KB | 152 | 23.99 -84% | 157.8 4% | 114.1 -25% | 22.22 -85% | 106 ? -30% | 309 ? 103% |
| Subway Surfers | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| default | 60 fps | ||
| Arena of Valor | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| min | 31 fps | ||
| high HD | 61 fps | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 45 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.2 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Asus ROG Phone audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 26% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Razer Phone 2 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 46% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 64% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0 / 0.2 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.6 / 1.4 / 1.7 Watt |
| Carga |
3.8 / 10.6 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus ROG Phone 4000 mAh | Razer Phone 2 4000 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 4200 mAh | Apple iPhone Xs Max 3174 mAh | Xiaomi Black Shark 4000 mAh | Sony Xperia XZ3 3300 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -33% | -24% | -10% | -19% | 2% | -21% | -22% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.6 | 0.6 -0% | 0.95 -58% | 1 -67% | 0.8 -33% | 0.8 -33% | 0.862 ? -44% | 0.894 ? -49% |
| Idle Average * | 1.4 | 1.5 -7% | 2.17 -55% | 1.4 -0% | 1.5 -7% | 1.2 14% | 1.728 ? -23% | 1.456 ? -4% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.7 | 2.6 -53% | 2.25 -32% | 1.7 -0% | 2.3 -35% | 1.5 12% | 2.07 ? -22% | 1.616 ? 5% |
| Load Average * | 3.8 | 7.2 -89% | 4.47 -18% | 4.6 -21% | 4.8 -26% | 4.8 -26% | 4.87 ? -28% | 6.45 ? -70% |
| Load Maximum * | 10.6 | 12.3 -16% | 6.15 42% | 6.7 37% | 10.1 5% | 6.2 42% | 9.27 ? 13% | 9.8 ? 8% |
* ... smaller is better
| Asus ROG Phone 4000 mAh | Razer Phone 2 4000 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 4200 mAh | Apple iPhone Xs Max 3174 mAh | Xiaomi Black Shark 4000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 9% | 35% | 15% | 25% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1110 | 1630 47% | 1747 57% | 1305 18% | 1753 58% |
| H.264 | 800 | 742 -7% | 854 7% | 801 0% | 747 -7% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 533 | 531 0% | 767 44% | 742 39% | 711 33% |
| Load | 216 | 206 -5% | 282 31% | 223 3% | 253 17% |
Pro
Contra
A ASUS estabeleceu novos padrões com o seu ROG Phone, embora a primeira geração tenha espaço para melhorias. A empresa foi com tudo com os acessórios para jogos no ROG Phone, que são bastante caros. Além disso, seu monitor de 90 Hz é ideal para jogos, enquanto seus gatilhos ultrassônicos e software de jogos são adições úteis.
O ASUS ROG Phone define novos padrões para jogos de smartphone. O dispositivo é poderoso, e a ASUS tentou criar um ecossistema de jogos com vários acessórios, mas o dispositivo tem algumas desvantagens que impedem a obtenção de notas altas.
A iluminação AURA RGB é um toque agradável, enquanto o sistema de resfriamento da câmara de vapor é ótimo para dissipar o calor. Além disso, as câmeras são melhores do que esperávamos. Infelizmente, o nosso dispositivo de teste tem uma duração de bateria e Wi-Fi fracos. No geral, o ROG Phone é um ótimo smartphone que tem espaço para melhorar.
Asus ROG Phone
- 11/18/2018 v6 (old)
Inge Schwabe
Price comparison
