Breve Análise do Smartphone Google Pixel 3 XL
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 97 %
iluminação com acumulador: 410 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.16 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.219
| Google Pixel 3 XL AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.3" | Apple iPhone Xs Max OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5" | Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2" | Huawei Mate 20 Pro OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3" | Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium LCD-IPS, 3840x2160, 5.8" | Google Pixel 2 XL P-OLED, 2880x1440, 6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 34% | 17% | 29% | 1% | -11% | |
| Brightness middle | 410 | 656 60% | 565 38% | 576 40% | 477 16% | 415 1% |
| Brightness | 413 | 659 60% | 571 38% | 582 41% | 453 10% | 420 2% |
| Brightness Distribution | 97 | 88 -9% | 96 -1% | 90 -7% | 86 -11% | 87 -10% |
| Black Level * | 0.33 | |||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.16 | 1.7 46% | 2.3 27% | 1.3 59% | 2.1 34% | 2.7 15% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 5.5 | 2.8 49% | 4.8 13% | 3.5 36% | 8.2 -49% | 4.3 22% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.7 | 1.7 -0% | 1.9 -12% | 1.6 6% | 1.6 6% | 3.3 -94% |
| Gamma | 2.219 99% | 1.998 110% | 2.16 102% | 2.18 101% | 2.28 96% | 2.36 93% |
| CCT | 6653 98% | 6487 100% | 6332 103% | 6561 99% | 6425 101% | 6787 96% |
| Contrast | 1445 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 250 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 250 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 250 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 8706 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 18 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 4 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. » 44 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 17 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
| Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium | |
| Google Pixel 2 XL | |
| 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) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=25) | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=28) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68) | |
| Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=28) | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, 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) | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (19 - 103, n=17) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
| Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (96 - 291, n=23) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68) | |
| Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Google Pixel 3 XL | Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus | Huawei Mate 20 Pro | Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium | Google Pixel 2 XL | Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -14% | 18% | -20% | -10% | -4% | 253% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 633 | 819 29% | 853 35% | 749 18% | 760 20% | 696 ? 10% | 1894 ? 199% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 228.6 | 204.9 -10% | 196.4 -14% | 171 -25% | 195.3 -15% | 224 ? -2% | 1476 ? 546% |
| Random Read 4KB | 120.8 | 129.7 7% | 157.4 30% | 136 13% | 170.6 41% | 137.2 ? 14% | 278 ? 130% |
| Random Write 4KB | 132.7 | 22.74 -83% | 157.8 19% | 21.75 -84% | 17.84 -87% | 84.7 ? -36% | 312 ? 135% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 79.2 ? | 83.2 ? | 34.18 ? | 68.6 ? | |||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 67.2 ? | 72.4 ? | 30.23 ? | 52.2 ? |
| Arena of Valor | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| min | 60 fps | ||
| high HD | 60 fps | ||
| Shadow Fight 3 | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 60 fps | ||
| minimal | 60 fps | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.9 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.7 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Google Pixel 3 XL audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 73.5% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 73.5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 73.5% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (124.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 93% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 98% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Google Pixel 2 XL audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 26% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 46% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 47% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.1 / 0.2 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.7 / 1.4 / 2 Watt |
| Carga |
4.8 / 9.5 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Google Pixel 3 XL 3430 mAh | Apple iPhone Xs Max 3174 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus 3500 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 4200 mAh | Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium 3540 mAh | Google Pixel 2 XL 3520 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 1% | 26% | -12% | -13% | -15% | -10% | -11% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.7 | 1 -43% | 0.68 3% | 0.95 -36% | 0.67 4% | 1.28 -83% | 0.862 ? -23% | 0.883 ? -26% |
| Idle Average * | 1.4 | 1.4 -0% | 0.95 32% | 2.17 -55% | 2.5 -79% | 1.87 -34% | 1.728 ? -23% | 1.467 ? -5% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2 | 1.7 15% | 1.09 45% | 2.25 -13% | 2.51 -26% | 1.89 5% | 2.07 ? -4% | 1.621 ? 19% |
| Load Average * | 4.8 | 4.6 4% | 4.58 5% | 4.47 7% | 4.3 10% | 3.73 22% | 4.87 ? -1% | 6.58 ? -37% |
| Load Maximum * | 9.5 | 6.7 29% | 5.16 46% | 6.15 35% | 6.87 28% | 8.08 15% | 9.27 ? 2% | 9.91 ? -4% |
* ... smaller is better
| Google Pixel 3 XL 3430 mAh | Apple iPhone Xs Max 3174 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus 3500 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 4200 mAh | Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium 3540 mAh | Google Pixel 2 XL 3520 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -8% | -19% | 6% | -23% | -6% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1725 | 1305 -24% | 1343 -22% | 1747 1% | 1347 -22% | 1706 -1% |
| H.264 | 724 | 801 11% | 674 -7% | 854 18% | 520 -28% | 672 -7% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 691 | 742 7% | 521 -25% | 767 11% | 547 -21% | 581 -16% |
| Load | 299 | 223 -25% | 237 -21% | 282 -6% | 235 -21% | 302 1% |
Pro
Contra
Se você não gosta de entalhes, pode parar de ler agora. O Google Pixel 3 XL tem um nível enorme, que já está um passo atrás de alguns de seus concorrentes que têm entalhes menos obstrutivos, sensores de digitais na tela e até mesmo uma câmera frontal deslizante para maximizar suas relações de tela a corpo.
A câmera traseira do Google Pixel 3 XL tira fotos incríveis, mas seus recursos de vídeo estão desatualizados. Além disso, as câmeras frontais duplas são úteis, mas somente se você tirar selfies regularmente. Os recursos de RA e Digital Wellbeing também são novos, mas eles já estavam disponíveis com aplicativos de terceiros, portanto não são exatamente inovadores.
O Google Pixel 3 XL é muito caro pelo preço total para nos convencer de seus muitos excelentes recursos. Simplesmente não faz nada para se destacar da multidão.
O que resta com o Google Pixel 3 XL, é um smartphone elegante e bem construído que faz muitas coisas bem e poucas coisas mal. Infelizmente, não faz nada para se destacar de um mercado já saturado. A Google está otimista em cobrar até $999 pela versão de 128 GB. Recomendamos que você confira o Pixel 3 XL se puder comprá-lo abaixo do preço de varejo, já que é um ótimo smartphone com câmeras e alto-falantes de primeira classe.
Google Pixel 3 XL
- 08/31/2022 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt
Price comparison
