Breve Análise do Smartphone Huawei P30 Lite
Os Top 10
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Multimídia
» Os Top 10 Portáteis de Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Leves para Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Acessíveis de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Premium de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 dos Portáteis Workstation
» Os Top 10 Subportáteis
» Os Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Os Top 10 Conversíveis
» Os Top 10 Tablets
» Os Top 10 Smartphones
» A melhores Telas de Portáteis Analisadas Pela Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos portáteis abaixo dos 500 Euros da Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos Portáteis abaixo dos 300 Euros
|
iluminação: 90 %
iluminação com acumulador: 451 cd/m²
Contraste: 820:1 (Preto: 0.55 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 2.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Huawei P30 Lite IPS LCD, 2312x1080, 6.2" | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6" | Motorola Moto G7 Plus IPS, 2270x1080, 6.2" | Xiaomi Poco F1 IPS, 2246x1080, 6.2" | Xiaomi Mi 8 AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | Samsung Galaxy A50 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Nokia 8.1 IPS, 2246x1080, 6.2" | Sony Xperia 10 IPS-LCD, 2520x1080, 6" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 10% | -79% | -21% | -63% | -18% | -40% | -37% | |
Brightness middle | 451 | 583 29% | 537 19% | 489 8% | 430 -5% | 644 43% | 567 26% | 547 21% |
Brightness | 430 | 577 34% | 525 22% | 486 13% | 434 1% | 628 46% | 547 27% | 525 22% |
Brightness Distribution | 90 | 97 8% | 85 -6% | 93 3% | 94 4% | 91 1% | 92 2% | 93 3% |
Black Level * | 0.55 | 0.58 -5% | 0.34 38% | 0.61 -11% | 0.36 35% | |||
Contrast | 820 | 926 13% | 1438 75% | 930 13% | 1519 85% | |||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.4 | 1.6 -14% | 6.41 -358% | 3.8 -171% | 5.09 -264% | 2.64 -89% | 4.39 -214% | 4.6 -229% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.4 | 3.9 11% | 10.86 -147% | 7.1 -61% | 8.05 -83% | 9.23 -110% | 7.28 -65% | 12.1 -175% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.5 | 2.7 -8% | 6.7 -168% | 4.4 -76% | 3.3 -32% | 2.5 -0% | 4.9 -96% | 3.9 -56% |
Gamma | 2.22 99% | 2.27 97% | 2.099 105% | 2.22 99% | 2.257 97% | 2.024 109% | 2.248 98% | 2.17 101% |
CCT | 6422 101% | 6267 104% | 8310 78% | 7213 90% | 7026 93% | 6649 98% | 7642 85% | 7158 91% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
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
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
31.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14.8 ms rise | |
↘ 16.4 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. » 83 % 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 | ||
54.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 26 ms rise | |
↘ 28.4 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. » 90 % 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 v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Huawei P30 Lite | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | |
Motorola Moto G7 Plus | |
Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
Nokia 8.1 | |
Sony Xperia 10 | |
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (124870 - 183420, n=10) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (30 - 33, n=8) | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chome 73) | |
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (30.4 - 33.9, n=6) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73) | |
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (52 - 69, n=11) | |
Motorola Moto G7 Plus | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (9041 - 10544, n=13) | |
Motorola Moto G7 Plus | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Sony Xperia 10 (Chrome Version 73) | |
Motorola Moto G7 Plus | |
Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 (3999 - 4853, n=13) | |
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73) | |
Nokia 8.1 (Chrome 71) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Huawei P30 Lite | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE | Motorola Moto G7 Plus | Xiaomi Poco F1 | Xiaomi Mi 8 | Samsung Galaxy A50 | Nokia 8.1 | Sony Xperia 10 | Average 128 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 19% | 3% | 18% | 45% | 7% | -13% | -11% | -1% | 469% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 293.2 | 492.5 68% | 283.6 -3% | 705 140% | 693 136% | 507 73% | 279.3 -5% | 273.8 -7% | 283 ? -3% | 1847 ? 530% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 158.6 | 190.1 20% | 208.7 32% | 155.6 -2% | 207.8 31% | 192.1 21% | 203.8 28% | 232.9 47% | 194.6 ? 23% | 1436 ? 805% |
Random Read 4KB | 71.6 | 115.8 62% | 76.6 7% | 101 41% | 136.3 90% | 98.9 38% | 69.9 -2% | 53.1 -26% | 82.7 ? 16% | 277 ? 287% |
Random Write 4KB | 87.3 | 21.86 -75% | 73.1 -16% | 17.81 -80% | 21 -76% | 18.2 -79% | 7.3 -92% | 14.39 -84% | 55.1 ? -37% | 308 ? 253% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 76.8 ? | 82.8 ? 8% | 85.3 ? 11% | 73.9 ? -4% | 84.7 ? 10% | 83.2 ? 8% | 78.1 ? 2% | |||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 67.8 ? | 62.1 ? -8% | 65.6 ? -3% | 60.7 ? -10% | 58.3 ? -14% | 63.8 ? -6% | 61.8 ? -9% |
Aspahlt 9 Legends
PUBG Compare
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.3 °C / 108 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 42.9 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.1 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Huawei P30 Lite audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (1.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 42% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 60% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 17% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.01 / 0.24 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.91 / 2.41 / 2.43 Watt |
Carga |
4.57 / 7.57 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Huawei P30 Lite 3340 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE 3070 mAh | Motorola Moto G7 Plus 3000 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F1 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 8 3400 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A50 4000 mAh | Nokia 8.1 3500 mAh | Sony Xperia 10 2870 mAh | Average HiSilicon Kirin 710 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 43% | 1% | 10% | -28% | 8% | 27% | 20% | -3% | 1% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.91 | 0.53 42% | 1.1 -21% | 0.65 29% | 1.5 -65% | 0.8 12% | 0.8 12% | 0.72 21% | 1.058 ? -16% | 0.895 ? 2% |
Idle Average * | 2.41 | 1.18 51% | 1.7 29% | 1.97 18% | 2.2 9% | 1.5 38% | 1.5 38% | 2.16 10% | 2.2 ? 9% | 1.453 ? 40% |
Idle Maximum * | 2.43 | 1.2 51% | 2.1 14% | 2.01 17% | 2.6 -7% | 1.7 30% | 1.8 26% | 2.17 11% | 2.57 ? -6% | 1.613 ? 34% |
Load Average * | 4.57 | 3.04 33% | 5.1 -12% | 4.29 6% | 6.1 -33% | 5.9 -29% | 3.2 30% | 3.32 27% | 4.61 ? -1% | 6.5 ? -42% |
Load Maximum * | 7.57 | 4.83 36% | 7.9 -4% | 9.05 -20% | 10.9 -44% | 8.3 -10% | 5.4 29% | 5.34 29% | 7.6 ? -0% | 9.86 ? -30% |
* ... smaller is better
Huawei P30 Lite 3340 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 SE 3070 mAh | Motorola Moto G7 Plus 3000 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F1 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 8 3400 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A50 4000 mAh | Nokia 8.1 3500 mAh | Sony Xperia 10 2870 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 11% | 19% | 43% | 29% | 32% | 32% | -1% | |
Reader / Idle | 1248 | 1374 10% | 2088 67% | 1634 31% | 1587 27% | 1682 35% | 1006 -19% | |
H.264 | 685 | 853 25% | 809 18% | 936 37% | 897 31% | 869 27% | 857 25% | 620 -9% |
WiFi v1.3 | 515 | 510 -1% | 715 39% | 808 57% | 736 43% | 701 36% | 738 43% | 541 5% |
Load | 198 | 218 10% | 196 -1% | 220 11% | 215 9% | 275 39% | 246 24% | 233 18% |
Pro
Contra
Assim como o seu predecessor o P30 Lite Acabou sendo um smartphone de gama média sólido e decente, incapaz de se diferenciar de seus concorrentes em relação a desempenho ou conectividade. O sufixo “Lite” é claramente perceptível, ao contrário de outros dispositivos, como o Xiaomi Mi 9 SE. Se você está procurando dispositivo diário poderoso e capaz, sugerimos dar uma olhada mais de perto no vasto campo de contendores do Snapdragon.
Embora existam muitos melhores smartphones de gama média disponíveis, esperamos que o P30 Lite se torne um dos smartphones de maior sucesso na sua faixa de preços.
O P30 Lite oferece um design moderno, uma excelente qualidade de construção e um painel IPS com ângulos de visão amplos e cores precisas. As câmeras, particularmente a câmera frontal de 24 MP, são mais do que adequadas para sua classe. No entanto, existem muitas deficiências pequenas que estragam a impressão geral, particularmente ao levar em conta o preço de rua da Huawei. Felizmente, o fabricante chinês provou ser adaptativo o suficiente para perceber que o ajuste de brilho baseado no contexto pode ser demais e, portanto, reduziu o efeito ao mínimo.
Huawei P30 Lite
- 11/04/2019 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich