Breve Análise do Smartphone CAT S31

Name: CAT S31
Brand: CAT

Telefone da indústria inteligente. Os smartphones reforçados da Caterpillar, um fabricante de equipamentos de construção, estão entrando na próxima rodada. No exterior, tudo permanece como está, mas algumas melhorias foram feitas no interior . Em nosso teste, descobrimos o que é exatamente novo sobre o smartphone para exteriores extremos Cat S31.

Mike Wobker, ✓ Tanja Hinum (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 01/18/2018 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Smartphone Android

Test device courtesy of Catphones Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

CAT S31

Processador

Qualcomm Snapdragon 210 MSM8909 4 x 1.1 GHz, Cortex-A7

Placa gráfica

Qualcomm Adreno 304

Memória

2048 MB

Pantalha

4.70 polegadas 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 312 PPI, capacitiva, IPS, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB

, 13 GB livre

Conexões

1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector de 3,5 mm, Card Reader: microSD, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: Acelerômetro, Sensor de proximidade, Sensor de luz ambiente, Bússola

Funcionamento em rede

802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.1, GSM, GPRS, EDGE, WCDMA, UMTS, HSPA, HSPA+, LTE (Cat. 4), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 12.6 x 146 x 74.4

Bateria

4000 mAh Lítio-Ion, Tempo de conversação 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 30 h, Standby 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 912 h

Sistema Operativo

Android 7.1 Nougat

Camera

Primary Camera: 8 MPix
Secondary Camera: 2 MPix

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Mono, Teclado: na tela, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, 24 Meses Garantia, fanless, ruggedized

peso

200 g, Suprimento de energia: 85 g

Preço

330 Euro

Links

CAT página inicial

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Nomu S30 Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 64 GB eMMC Flash	102 MBit/s +160%
Blackview BV8000 Pro Mali-T880 MP2, Helio P20 MT6757, 64 GB eMMC Flash	96.1 MBit/s +145%
CAT S31 Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash	39.3 MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 Mali-T720, Exynos 7570, 16 GB eMMC Flash	37.9 MBit/s -4%
AGM A8 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 32 GB eMMC Flash	18.4 MBit/s -53%
iperf3 receive AX12
Nomu S30 Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 64 GB eMMC Flash	101 MBit/s +143%
Blackview BV8000 Pro Mali-T880 MP2, Helio P20 MT6757, 64 GB eMMC Flash	101 MBit/s +143%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 Mali-T720, Exynos 7570, 16 GB eMMC Flash	49.2 MBit/s +18%
CAT S31 Adreno 304, 210 MSM8909, 16 GB eMMC Flash	41.6 MBit/s
AGM A8 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 32 GB eMMC Flash	26.9 MBit/s -35%

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images


722 cd/m²	773 cd/m²	751 cd/m²
726 cd/m²	784 cd/m²	754 cd/m²
728 cd/m²	779 cd/m²	736 cd/m²

Distribuição do brilho

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 784 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 750.3 cd/m² Minimum: 36.9 cd/m²
iluminação: 92 %
iluminação com acumulador: 784 cd/m²
Contraste: 1742:1 (Preto: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.28 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 6.1 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.49

	CAT S31 IPS, 1280x720, 4.7"	AGM A8 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Nomu S30 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5"	Blackview BV8000 Pro IPS, 1920x1080, 5"	Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	CAT S40 IPS, 960x540, 4.7"
Screen		4%	-33%	-64%	-36%	-8%
Brightness middle	784	356 -55%	423 -46%	434 -45%	445 -43%	607 -23%
Brightness	750	343 -54%	421 -44%	414 -45%	437 -42%	579 -23%
Brightness Distribution	92	93 1%	93 1%	86 -7%	88 -4%	90 -2%
Black Level *	0.45	0.21 53%	0.26 42%	0.64 -42%	0.67 -49%	0.5 -11%
Contrast	1742	1695 -3%	1627 -7%	678 -61%	664 -62%	1214 -30%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	4.28	3.7 14%	7.8 -82%	9.8 -129%	6.5 -52%	4.25 1%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	8.75	8.3 5%	14.5 -66%	19.2 -119%	10.6 -21%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	6.1	1.9 69%	9.8 -61%	9.9 -62%	7.2 -18%	4.09 33%
Gamma	2.49 ^88%	2.5 ^88%	2.32 ^95%	2.64 ^83%	2.53 ^87%	2.61 ^84%
CCT	7175 ^91%	6412 ^101%	9828 ^66%	9219 ^71%	8274 ^79%	6959 ^93%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)						71.2034
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)						94.1292

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
24.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 13.6 ms rise
24.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 10.8 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 54 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 21 ms rise
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 21 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
CAT S31	24865 Points
AGM A8	26753 Points +8%
Nomu S30	50904 Points +105%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	64833 Points +161%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	35379 Points +42%

PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
CAT S31	3080 Points
AGM A8	2920 Points -5%
Nomu S30	3175 Points +3%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	4477 Points +45%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	4508 Points +46%
CAT S40	2927 Points -5%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
CAT S31	2300 Points
AGM A8	3701 Points +61%
Nomu S30	3405 Points +48%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	3801 Points +65%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	3446 Points +50%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
CAT S31	1 Points
AGM A8	622 Points +62100%
Nomu S30	964 Points +96300%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	1327 Points +132600%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	706 Points +70500%
CAT S40	477 Points +47600%
System (sort by value)
CAT S31	899 Points
AGM A8	1161 Points +29%
Nomu S30	2216 Points +146%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	3052 Points +239%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	1396 Points +55%
CAT S40	792 Points -12%
Memory (sort by value)
CAT S31	328 Points
AGM A8	757 Points +131%
Nomu S30	942 Points +187%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	1236 Points +277%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	1066 Points +225%
CAT S40	408 Points +24%
Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S31	256 Points
AGM A8	306 Points +20%
Nomu S30	670 Points +162%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	1118 Points +337%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	253 Points -1%
CAT S40	260 Points +2%
Web (sort by value)
CAT S31	10 Points
AGM A8	557 Points +5470%
Nomu S30	618 Points +6080%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	736 Points +7260%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	661 Points +6510%
CAT S40	616 Points +6060%

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
CAT S31	437 Points
AGM A8	515 Points +18%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	851 Points +95%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	629 Points +44%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
CAT S31	1135 Points
AGM A8	1383 Points +22%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	4053 Points +257%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	1855 Points +63%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Blackview BV8000 Pro	2929 Points

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
CAT S31	5291 Points
AGM A8	4372 Points -17%
Nomu S30	10763 Points +103%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	14506 Points +174%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	4661 Points -12%
CAT S40	4415 Points -17%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
CAT S31	5042 Points
AGM A8	3808 Points -24%
Nomu S30	10373 Points +106%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	14001 Points +178%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	3985 Points -21%
CAT S40	4014 Points -20%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
CAT S31	6396 Points
AGM A8	9082 Points +42%
Nomu S30	12394 Points +94%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	16603 Points +160%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	11459 Points +79%
CAT S40	6789 Points +6%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
AGM A8	54 Points
Nomu S30	592 Points
Blackview BV8000 Pro	1015 Points
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	193 Points
CAT S40	37 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
AGM A8	43 Points
Nomu S30	522 Points
Blackview BV8000 Pro	905 Points
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	157 Points
CAT S40	29 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
AGM A8	739 Points
Nomu S30	1114 Points
Blackview BV8000 Pro	1764 Points
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	955 Points
CAT S40	454 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
CAT S31	0 Points
Nomu S30	416 Points
Blackview BV8000 Pro	733 Points
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	107 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
CAT S31	0 Points
Nomu S30	351 Points
Blackview BV8000 Pro	628 Points
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	85 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
CAT S31	560 Points
Nomu S30	1182 Points +111%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	1757 Points +214%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	952 Points +70%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
CAT S31	9.8 fps
AGM A8	9.5 fps -3%
Nomu S30	17 fps +73%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	11 fps +12%
CAT S40	12 fps +22%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
CAT S31	5.6 fps
AGM A8	2.8 fps -50%
Nomu S30	17 fps +204%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	6.8 fps +21%
CAT S40	5.2 fps -7%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
CAT S31	4.3 fps
AGM A8	4 fps -7%
Nomu S30	7.1 fps +65%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	11 fps +156%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	5.4 fps +26%
CAT S40	6.2 fps +44%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
CAT S31	1.9 fps
AGM A8	1.8 fps -5%
Nomu S30	7.1 fps +274%
Blackview BV8000 Pro	10 fps +426%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4	2.6 fps +37%
CAT S40	1.8 fps -5%

Legend

CAT S31 Qualcomm Snapdragon 210 MSM8909, Qualcomm Adreno 304, 16 GB eMMC Flash

AGM A8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Nomu S30 Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 64 GB eMMC Flash

Blackview BV8000 Pro Mediatek Helio P20 (LP4) MT6757, ARM Mali-T880 MP2, 64 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 Samsung Exynos 7570 Quad, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash

CAT S40 Qualcomm Snapdragon 210 MSM8909, Qualcomm Adreno 304, 16 GB eMMC Flash

JetStream 1.1 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | WebXPRT 2015

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Blackview BV8000 Pro (Crome Version 51)	24.29 Points +95%
Nomu S30 (Chrome 57)	24.23 Points +95%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58)	20.99 Points +69%
AGM A8 (Chrome 58.0.3029.83)	16.9 Points +36%
CAT S31	12.44 Points

Octane V2 - Total Score
Blackview BV8000 Pro (Crome Version 51)	3609 Points +80%
Nomu S30 (Chrome 57)	3279 Points +63%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58)	3133 Points +56%
AGM A8	2733 Points +36%
CAT S31	2010 Points

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Nomu S30 (Chrome 57)	23914 ms * -34%
Blackview BV8000 Pro (Crome Version 51)	23224 ms * -30%
CAT S31	17828 ms *
AGM A8 (Chrome 58.0.3029.83)	12248 ms * +31%
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58)	11130 ms * +38%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58)	61 Points

* ... smaller is better

	CAT S31	AGM A8	Nomu S30	Blackview BV8000 Pro	Samsung Galaxy XCover 4
AndroBench 3-5		-21%	65%	119%	31%
Sequential Read 256KB	71.1	140.7 98%	242 240%	246.4 247%	181.6 155%
Sequential Write 256KB	62.1	69.5 12%	194.9 214%	177.1 185%	73.6 19%
Random Read 4KB	14.28	11.44 -20%	27.99 96%	52.7 269%	21.8 53%
Random Write 4KB	14.81	3.73 -75%	8.84 -40%	15.05 2%	11.9 -20%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard	81.8	22.01 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -73%	36.94 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -55%	79.3 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -3%	69 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -16%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard	59.5	20.46 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -66%	21.52 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -64%	68.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) 15%	55.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401) -6%

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


34.5 °C	33.9 °C	31.7 °C
36.4 °C	34.9 °C	31.9 °C
35.4 °C	34.9 °C	31.6 °C

Máximo: 36.4 °C
Médio: 33.9 °C


29.4 °C	32.2 °C	30.3 °C
30.1 °C	33.5 °C	31.7 °C
29.9 °C	33.9 °C	32.8 °C

Máximo: 33.9 °C
Médio: 31.5 °C

alimentação elétrica 34.2 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.9 °C | Voltcraft IR-350

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.9 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.4 °C / 98 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 33.9 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.8 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

CAT S31 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 65% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Apple iPhone X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 20% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 41% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.21 / 0.33 Watt
Ocioso	0.73 / 2.21 / 2.25 Watt
Carga	2.99 / 4.12 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	CAT S31 4000 mAh	AGM A8 4050 mAh	Nomu S30 5000 mAh	Blackview BV8000 Pro 4180 mAh	Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh	CAT S40 mAh
Power Consumption		-23%	-27%	-16%	-4%	-24%
Idle Minimum *	0.73	0.86 -18%	0.93 -27%	0.85 -16%	0.56 23%	1.2 -64%
Idle Average *	2.21	1.97 11%	2.31 -5%	1.56 29%	1.57 29%	2 10%
Idle Maximum *	2.25	2.04 9%	2.35 -4%	1.67 26%	1.68 25%	2.1 7%
Load Average *	2.99	4.86 -63%	4.57 -53%	4.37 -46%	4.6 -54%	4.3 -44%
Load Maximum *	4.12	6.43 -56%	6.1 -48%	7.06 -71%	5.92 -44%	5.3 -29%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria


WiFi Websurfing		17h 54min

	CAT S31 4000 mAh	AGM A8 4050 mAh	Nomu S30 5000 mAh	Blackview BV8000 Pro 4180 mAh	Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh	CAT S40 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3	1074	654 -39%	832 -23%	688 -36%	668 -38%	611 -43%

Pro

+ Carcaça robusta

+ Resistente à agua e poeira

+ Botão livremente atribuível

+ É possível sua operação com luvas

+ Excelente duração da bateria

+ Brilho muito alto

Contra

- Bateria não substituível

- SoC fraco

- Câmeras medíocre

The Cat S31 was provided by: CAT Phones Germany

Em nossos testes, o CAT S31 prova ser o dispositivo que o fabricante promete: Um smartphone reforçado que pode lidar com quase todos os ambientes. O fato de os internos técnicos não estarem atualizados com os últimos desenvolvimentos pode ser aceito, mas os potenciais clientes podem escolher a AGM, concorrente muito mais barata. Como um smartphone puro, o S31 é um dispositivo de nível de entrada com um sistema estável e um desempenho sólido. Aplicativos simples e atividades do navegador não são problema para o dispositivo. Se você quiser, pode até mesmo controlá-lo com luvas.

O CAT S31 é um smartphone sólido cuja tarefa principal é não quebrar. Ele consegue isso em qualquer caso, mas os usuários têm que fazer sem aplicativos exigentes.

Comprar um dispositivo tão robusto é muitas vezes uma decisão por instinto. As certificações e o design áspero e angular são oferecidos por todos os fornecedores de tais dispositivos. Se o CAT S31 pode realmente suportar as condições mais extremas, só pode ser visto através de um teste de resistência na respectiva área de aplicação do seu usuário. O S31 deixa uma impressão muito sólida, mas o preço elevado não pode ser justificado somente pelo desempenho e carcaça.

CAT S31 - 12/29/2017 v6 ^(old)
Mike Wobker

Acabamento

86%

Teclado

67 / 75 → 90%

Mouse

89%

Conectividade

37 / 60 → 62%

Peso

88%

Bateria