Breve Análise do Smartphone Honor 8

Name: Honor 8
Brand: Honor

Maravilha azul. O Honor 8 vem em uma atraente carcaça de 2,5D-glass e cores elegantes. Mas será que uma carcaça elegante e duas câmeras são suficiente para convencer os compradores na gama média altamente competitiva? Vamos descobrir em nosso teste.

Florian Wimmer, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 10/15/2016 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of Honor Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Honor 8 (8 Serie)

Processador

HiSilicon Kirin 950 8 x 2.3 GHz, Cortex-A72/-A53

Placa gráfica

ARM Mali-T880 MP4

Memória

4 GB

Pantalha

5.20 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 424 PPI, múltiplos-pontos, IPS, 16700000 colors, NTSC – 96%, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB

, 24.08 GB livre

Conexões

1 USB 2.0, 1 Infrared, Conexões Audio: 3,5 mm, Card Reader: micro-SD (TF) máx 128GB, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: acelerômetro, sensor de proximidade, bússola, giroscópio, sensor Hall, Miracast, DLNA, USB-OTG

Funcionamento em rede

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM (850/900/1800/1900), WCDMA (UMTS, HSPA+) (850/900/1900/2100), LTE FDD (LTE ipload 75 MBit/s, LTE download 300 MBit/s); SAR rate (head): 1.5 W/kg, LTE, GPS

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 7.45 x 145.5 x 71

Bateria

11.4 Wh, 3000 mAh Lítio-Polímero, Tempo de conversação 2G (de acordo com o fabricante): 28 h, Tempo de conversação 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 15 h, Standby 2G (de acordo com o fabricante): 360 h, Standby 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 360 h

Sistema Operativo

Android 6.0 Marshmallow

Camera

Primary Camera: 12 MPix CMOS, LED flash, f/2.2
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.4

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Alto falantes na borda inferior, Teclado: Teclado virtual, carregador,cabo USB-C, headset, ferramenta SIM, Administrador do telefone, HiCare, Designs, 24 Meses Garantia, fanless

peso

153 g, Suprimento de energia: 73 g

Preço

399 Euro

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
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	286 MBit/s +13%
Honor 8 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash	253 MBit/s
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	249 MBit/s -2%
Sony Xperia XA Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 16 GB eMMC Flash	92.5 MBit/s -63%
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m
OnePlus 3 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	256 MBit/s +31%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	205 MBit/s +5%
Honor 8 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash	195 MBit/s
Sony Xperia XA Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 16 GB eMMC Flash	83.6 MBit/s -57%

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


432 cd/m²	440 cd/m²	426 cd/m²
448 cd/m²	451 cd/m²	438 cd/m²
456 cd/m²	454 cd/m²	440 cd/m²

Distribuição do brilho

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 456 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 442.8 cd/m² Minimum: 2.46 cd/m²
iluminação: 93 %
iluminação com acumulador: 451 cd/m²
Contraste: 1128:1 (Preto: 0.4 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 6.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.33

	Honor 8 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2"	Google Nexus 5X IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2"	OnePlus 3 Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5"	Sony Xperia XA IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Huawei P9 IPS-NEO, JDI, 1920x1080, 5.2"
Screen		26%	6%	-14%	21%
Brightness middle	451	503 12%	419 -7%	518 15%	582 29%
Brightness	443	498 12%	431 -3%	475 7%	563 27%
Brightness Distribution	93	97 4%	84 -10%	81 -13%	91 -2%
Black Level *	0.4	0.38 5%		0.61 -53%	0.38 5%
Contrast	1128	1324 17%		849 -25%	1532 36%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	5.4	2.09 61%	4.1 24%	6.8 -26%	4.4 19%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	9.9		12 -21%	11.4 -15%	7.4 25%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	6.7	2.12 68%	3.3 51%	7 -4%	4.8 28%
Gamma	2.33 ^94%	2.27 ^97%	2.1 ^105%	2.35 ^94%	2.2 ^100%
CCT	8262 ^79%	6621 ^98%	6550 ^99%	8151 ^80%	6175 ^105%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)			89.38		77.78
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)			100		99.44

* ... smaller is better

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
34 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 13 ms rise
34 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 90 % 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
48 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 22 ms rise
48 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 26 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. » 80 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

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 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	94671 Points
OnePlus 3	142090 Points +50%
Sony Xperia XA	48331 Points -49%
Huawei P9	95743 Points +1%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	20235 Points
Google Nexus 5X	18898 Points -7%
OnePlus 3	30241 Points +49%
Sony Xperia XA	11156 Points -45%
Huawei P9	19854 Points -2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	22157 Points
Google Nexus 5X	22180 Points 0%
OnePlus 3	34023 Points +54%
Sony Xperia XA	10916 Points -51%
Huawei P9	21577 Points -3%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8	15531 Points
Google Nexus 5X	12451 Points -20%
OnePlus 3	21771 Points +40%
Sony Xperia XA	12138 Points -22%
Huawei P9	15517 Points 0%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Honor 8	1273 Points
Google Nexus 5X	1497 Points +18%
OnePlus 3	3424 Points +169%
Sony Xperia XA	603 Points -53%
Huawei P9	1237 Points -3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8	1112 Points
Google Nexus 5X	1942 Points +75%
OnePlus 3	4633 Points +317%
Sony Xperia XA	525 Points -53%
Huawei P9	1080 Points -3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Honor 8	2587 Points
Google Nexus 5X	831 Points -68%
OnePlus 3	1789 Points -31%
Sony Xperia XA	1259 Points -51%
Huawei P9	2510 Points -3%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8	43 fps
Google Nexus 5X	38 fps -12%
OnePlus 3	60 fps +40%
Sony Xperia XA	28 fps -35%
Huawei P9	43 fps 0%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8	41 fps
Google Nexus 5X	37 fps -10%
OnePlus 3	89 fps +117%
Sony Xperia XA	18 fps -56%
Huawei P9	40 fps -2%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Honor 8	19 fps
Google Nexus 5X	17 fps -11%
OnePlus 3	46 fps +142%
Sony Xperia XA	15 fps -21%
Huawei P9	19 fps 0%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8	19 fps
Google Nexus 5X	16 fps -16%
OnePlus 3	47 fps +147%
Sony Xperia XA	7.2 fps -62%
Huawei P9	18 fps -5%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8	11 fps
OnePlus 3	30 fps +173%
Sony Xperia XA	11 fps 0%
Huawei P9	11 fps 0%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Honor 8	10 fps
OnePlus 3	31 fps +210%
Sony Xperia XA	4.8 fps -52%
Huawei P9	10 fps 0%

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Honor 8	6735 Points
Google Nexus 5X	4324 Points -36%
OnePlus 3	7101 Points +5%
Sony Xperia XA	4685 Points -30%
Huawei P9	7058 Points +5%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Honor 8	2034 Points
Google Nexus 5X	1318 Points -35%
OnePlus 3	2496 Points +23%
Sony Xperia XA	1043 Points -49%
Huawei P9	2025 Points 0%
System (sort by value)
Honor 8	3952 Points
Google Nexus 5X	1730 Points -56%
OnePlus 3	3537 Points -11%
Sony Xperia XA	2289 Points -42%
Huawei P9	3930 Points -1%
Memory (sort by value)
Honor 8	2556 Points
Google Nexus 5X	1115 Points -56%
OnePlus 3	2052 Points -20%
Sony Xperia XA	1076 Points -58%
Huawei P9	2627 Points +3%
Graphics (sort by value)
Honor 8	1703 Points
Google Nexus 5X	2038 Points +20%
OnePlus 3	4813 Points +183%
Sony Xperia XA	669 Points -61%
Huawei P9	1583 Points -7%
Web (sort by value)
Honor 8	994 Points
Google Nexus 5X	769 Points -23%
OnePlus 3	1112 Points +12%
Sony Xperia XA	717 Points -28%
Huawei P9	1029 Points +4%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	1726 Points
OnePlus 3	1754 Points +2%
Huawei P9	1755 Points +2%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	5481 Points
OnePlus 3	4097 Points -25%
Huawei P9	4904 Points -11%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	3101 Points
OnePlus 3	7085 Points +128%
Huawei P9	3077 Points -1%

Legend

Honor 8 HiSilicon Kirin 950, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Google Nexus 5X Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 MSM8992, Qualcomm Adreno 418, 32 GB eMMC Flash

OnePlus 3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

Sony Xperia XA Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Huawei P9 HiSilicon Kirin 955, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash

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

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Honor 8	2979 ms *
Google Nexus 5X	4734 ms * -59%
OnePlus 3	2921 ms * +2%
Sony Xperia XA	9610 ms * -223%
Huawei P9	2923 ms * +2%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	10692 Points
Google Nexus 5X	8202 Points -23%
OnePlus 3	9155 Points -14%
Sony Xperia XA	4046 Points -62%
Huawei P9	11783 Points +10%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
Honor 8	138 Points
Google Nexus 5X	107 Points -22%
OnePlus 3	122 Points -12%
Sony Xperia XA	72 Points -48%
Huawei P9	128 Points -7%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Honor 8	64 Points
Google Nexus 5X	45 Points -30%
OnePlus 3	54.4 Points -15%
Sony Xperia XA	27.5 Points -57%
Huawei P9	68.4 Points +7%

* ... smaller is better

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Honor 8	247.5 MB/s
Google Nexus 5X	245.2 MB/s -1%
OnePlus 3	408.7 MB/s +65%
Sony Xperia XA	240.4 MB/s -3%
Huawei P9	281.3 MB/s +14%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Honor 8	119.3 MB/s
Google Nexus 5X	98.6 MB/s -17%
OnePlus 3	153.3 MB/s +28%
Sony Xperia XA	68.6 MB/s -42%
Huawei P9	72.2 MB/s -39%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Honor 8	34.16 MB/s
Google Nexus 5X	24.8 MB/s -27%
OnePlus 3	137.6 MB/s +303%
Sony Xperia XA	22.05 MB/s -35%
Huawei P9	39 MB/s +14%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Honor 8	31.5 MB/s
Google Nexus 5X	12.21 MB/s -61%
OnePlus 3	18.23 MB/s -42%
Sony Xperia XA	10.6 MB/s -66%
Huawei P9	47.45 MB/s +51%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Honor 8	53.7 MB/s
Sony Xperia XA	72.9 MB/s +36%
Huawei P9	55 MB/s +2%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Honor 8	23.59 MB/s
Sony Xperia XA	50.7 MB/s +115%
Huawei P9	24.83 MB/s +5%

Asphalt 8: Airborne
	Configurações	Valor
	high	30 fps
	very low	30 fps

... comparado com

Dead Trigger 2
	Configurações	Valor
	high	30 fps

... comparado com

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


40.4 °C	40.5 °C	40.6 °C
39.8 °C	39.7 °C	40.3 °C
39.1 °C	39.6 °C	39.9 °C

Máximo: 40.6 °C
Médio: 40 °C


37.5 °C	38.3 °C	39.9 °C
37.6 °C	38.3 °C	39.5 °C
37.5 °C	38.9 °C	38.9 °C

Máximo: 39.9 °C
Médio: 38.5 °C

alimentação elétrica 36 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.9 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40 °C / 104 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 40.6 °C / 105 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 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 36.4 °C / 98 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Honor 8 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 11.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 70% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 83% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Huawei P9 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 50% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

OnePlus 3 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 39% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 35% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.07 / 0.3 Watt
Ocioso	0.78 / 1.89 / 2.02 Watt
Carga	5.28 / 5.44 Watt


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

	Honor 8 3000 mAh	Google Nexus 5X mAh	OnePlus 3 3000 mAh	Sony Xperia XA 2300 mAh	Huawei P9 3000 mAh
Power Consumption		3%	-2%	15%	0%
Idle Minimum *	0.78	0.55 29%	0.57 27%	0.72 8%	0.77 1%
Idle Average *	1.89	1.44 24%	1.24 34%	1.5 21%	2.36 -25%
Idle Maximum *	2.02	1.9 6%	1.36 33%	1.57 22%	2.37 -17%
Load Average *	5.28	3.36 36%	5.92 -12%	3.48 34%	3.09 41%
Load Maximum *	5.44	9.76 -79%	10.53 -94%	6.04 -11%	5.35 2%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria

Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)		24h 47min
WiFi Websurfing		8h 19min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		8h 46min
Carga (máximo brilho)		4h 15min

	Honor 8 3000 mAh	Google Nexus 5X mAh	OnePlus 3 3000 mAh	Sony Xperia XA 2300 mAh	Huawei P9 3000 mAh
Battery Runtime		1%	31%	-31%	1%
Reader / Idle	1487	1775 19%	1338 -10%	775 -48%	1514 2%
H.264	526	555 6%	847 61%	460 -13%	568 8%
WiFi v1.3	499	412 -17%	840 68%	353 -29%	569 14%
Load	255	245 -4%	268 5%	170 -33%	206 -19%

Pro

+ Carcaça muito elegante

+ Muito sólido

+ Dual-SIM

+ NFC, USB OTG

+ Porta de infravermelhos

+ Wi-Fi veloz

+ Boas fotos da câmera

+ Leitor de digitais muito veloz

+ Softkey

+ Ampla gama de cores da tela

+ Alto desempenho

+ Bons alto falantes

+ Durações práticas da bateria

Contra

- Sem App2SD

- Diversidade de redes medíocre

- GPS, às vezes lento

- Qualidade moderada do microfone

- Tonalidade extremamente azul da tela

- Forte afogamento sob uso intenso

- Consumo de energia relativamente alto

In review: Honor 8. Review sample courtesy of Honor Germany.

A Huawei teve que cortar as asas do Honor 8 para evitar que se torne uma ameaça para o seu próprio modelo top, Huawei P9. O exclusivo e elegante design, o funcionamento veloz e preciso, e o alto desempenho deixam a dúvida de por que teríamos que gastar pelos menos 100 Euros (~$112) a mais no Huawei P9.

Por isso, a Huawei removeu a opção de tirar foto em branco e preto sem um filtro, instala um SoC um pouco antigo e utiliza uma tela com qualidade algo inferior, para pelo menos separar o Honor 8 do modelo premium até certo grau. No entanto, as diferenças são marginais no uso cotidiano, e a porta de infravermelhos inclusive é um ponto extra a favor do Honor 8.

A câmera baseia-se na mesma tecnologia e no mesmo sensor de imagens que o Huawei P9. A única coisa que falta é o logotipo Leica. Embora as fotos não sejam tão boas quanto as doHuawei P9, ainda são aceitáveis para uma câmera de smartphone. Completamente independente do seu irmão maior Huawei, a carcaça muito elegante e sólida, veloz leitor de digitais com função de softkey, e a boa configuração tornam o visual do Honor, muito impressionante. Ele não tem nada que esconder na gama média superior. No entanto, o OnePlus 3 oferece uma tela maior, mais poder, e uma duração de bateria ainda mais longa,pelo mesmo valor.

O Honor 8 é um excelente smartphone de gama média-alta que poderia ser o smartphone indicado para muitas pessoas com sua carcaça, desempenho, e funcionamento veloz. Ele inclusive se aproxima perigosamente ao Huawei P9 por 100 Euros (~$112) menos.

A maior parte das críticas se devem ao adware generosamente pré-carregado, o módulo GPS relativamente lento, e ao afogamento do SoC durante uso intenso prolongado. Além disso, o microfone é medíocre, e a tela tem uma forte tonalidade azul.

Em total, o Honor 8 deixou uma impressão muito positiva, e não deve temer nenhum a aparelho de comparação da gama média-alta. Os usuários que nem sempre desejam ter as últimas tecnologias em seus smartphones definitivamente deveriam dar uma chance ao Honor 8.

Honor 8 - 2016-09-28 09/28/2016 v5.1 ^(old)
Florian Wimmer

Acabamento

91%

Teclado

69 / 75 → 92%

Mouse

95%

Conectividade

52 / 60 → 86%

Peso

92%

Bateria

90%

Pantalha

85%

Desempenho do jogos

47 / 63 → 75%

Desempenho da aplicação

59 / 70 → 84%

Temperatura

85%

Ruído

100%

Audio

62 / 91 → 68%

Camera

73%

Médio

77%

87%

Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Smartphone Honor 8

Florian Wimmer, 2016-10-15 (Update: 2016-10-29)