Breve Análise do Smartphone Nokia 3

Name: Nokia 3
Brand: Nokia

Bem vindo de volta! A Nokia volta para o ringue dos fabricantes de smartphones e adiciona um dispositivo chamado Nokia 3 de nível de entrada ao mercado. Descobriremos se deve se esconder atrás do nome que soa bem ou se alcançara novas alturas no teste.

Florian Wimmer, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 08/02/2017 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of cyberport.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Nokia 3 (3 Serie)

Processador

Mediatek MT6737 4 x 1.3 GHz, Cortex-A53

Placa gráfica

ARM Mali-T720

Memória

2048 MB

Pantalha

5.00 polegadas 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 294 PPI, Tela táctil capacitiva, IPS, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB

, 9.5 GB livre

Conexões

1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector de áudio combinado de 3,5-mm, Card Reader: micro-SD máx. 128 GB, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: acelerômetro, giroscópio, sensor de proximidade, bússola

Funcionamento em rede

802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.0, GSM (850/900/1800/1900), UMTS (850/900/1900/2100), LTE (B1/B3/B5/B7/B8/B20/B28/B38/B40); bandwidth (download/upload): 150Mbps/50Mbps, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 8.68 x 143 x 71.4

Bateria

10 Wh, 2630 mAh Lítio-Ion

Sistema Operativo

Android 7.0 Nougat

Camera

Primary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0, contrast AF, LED flash, videos @720p/30FPS
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0, contrast AF, videos @720p/30FPS

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Alto-falante mono na borda inferior, Teclado: Teclado virtual, carregador, cabo USB, fones, ferramenta SIM, suporte, temas, 24 Meses Garantia, rádio FM, SAR rates: 0.94 W/kg (body), 0.76 W/kg (head), fanless

peso

141 g, Suprimento de energia: 57 g

Preço

159 Euro

Links

Nokia 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
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash (AVM FritzBox 6490)	106 MBit/s +38%
Sony Xperia E5 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)	78.7 MBit/s +3%
Nokia 3 Mali-T720, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5 GHz)	76.6 MBit/s
LG K8 2017 Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 2.4 GHz)	49.2 MBit/s -36%
Gigaset GS160 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 2.4 GHz)	48.2 MBit/s -37%
iperf3 receive AX12
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash (AVM FritzBox 6490)	99.7 MBit/s +23%
Nokia 3 Mali-T720, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5 GHz)	81.1 MBit/s
Sony Xperia E5 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)	79.9 MBit/s -1%
LG K8 2017 Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 2.4 GHz)	54.1 MBit/s -33%
Gigaset GS160 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 2.4 GHz)	33.5 MBit/s -59%

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


506 cd/m²	466 cd/m²	463 cd/m²
484 cd/m²	481 cd/m²	441 cd/m²
486 cd/m²	467 cd/m²	425 cd/m²

Distribuição do brilho

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 506 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 468.8 cd/m² Minimum: 16.2 cd/m²
iluminação: 84 %
iluminação com acumulador: 481 cd/m²
Contraste: 2186:1 (Preto: 0.22 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 8.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 8.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
95.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.16

	Nokia 3 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Gigaset GS160 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	LG K8 2017 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Sony Xperia E5 IPS, 1280x720, 5"
Screen		-6%	-24%	-24%	9%
Brightness middle	481	459 -5%	489 2%	358 -26%	538 12%
Brightness	469	452 -4%	479 2%	351 -25%	534 14%
Brightness Distribution	84	84 0%	95 13%	93 11%	96 14%
Black Level *	0.22	0.42 -91%	0.55 -150%	0.49 -123%	0.33 -50%
Contrast	2186	1093 -50%	889 -59%	731 -67%	1630 -25%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	8.1	4.5 44%	8.3 -2%	7.1 12%	5.7 30%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	15.4	10.6 31%	14.4 6%	14.9 3%	11 29%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	8.5	6.5 24%	8.7 -2%	6.5 24%	4.7 45%
Gamma	2.16 ^102%	2.22 ^99%	2.08 ^106%	2.12 ^104%	2.51 ^88%
CCT	9014 ^72%	7791 ^83%	9034 ^72%	8166 ^80%	7264 ^89%

* ... 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 8715 (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
22.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 11.2 ms rise
22.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 11.6 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. » 47 % 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
33 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 15 ms rise
33 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 18 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. » 41 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms).

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	27703 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	22218 Points -20%
Gigaset GS160	28459 Points +3%
LG K8 2017	30924 Points +12%
Sony Xperia E5	32477 Points +17%

PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	3439 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	2217 Points -36%
Gigaset GS160	2563 Points -25%
LG K8 2017	4673 Points +36%
Sony Xperia E5	3817 Points +11%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	2568 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	2217 Points -14%
LG K8 2017	2986 Points +16%
Sony Xperia E5	2785 Points +8%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Nokia 3	551 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	526 Points -5%
Gigaset GS160	178 Points -68%
LG K8 2017	371 Points -33%
Sony Xperia E5	567 Points +3%
System (sort by value)
Nokia 3	1081 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	887 Points -18%
Gigaset GS160	1029 Points -5%
LG K8 2017	1191 Points +10%
Sony Xperia E5	1091 Points +1%
Memory (sort by value)
Nokia 3	703 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	526 Points -25%
Gigaset GS160	497 Points -29%
LG K8 2017	634 Points -10%
Sony Xperia E5	552 Points -21%
Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3	211 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	308 Points +46%
Gigaset GS160	208 Points -1%
LG K8 2017	436 Points +107%
Sony Xperia E5	280 Points +33%
Web (sort by value)
Nokia 3	575 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	533 Points -7%
Gigaset GS160	9 Points -98%
LG K8 2017	616 Points +7%
Sony Xperia E5	639 Points +11%

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	556 Points
LG K8 2017	642 Points +15%
Sony Xperia E5	556 Points 0%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	1520 Points
LG K8 2017	1737 Points +14%
Sony Xperia E5	1527 Points 0%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	1045 Points
LG K8 2017	1203 Points +15%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	3665 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	4298 Points +17%
Gigaset GS160	3780 Points +3%
LG K8 2017	2951 Points -19%
Sony Xperia E5	5200 Points +42%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Nokia 3	3177 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	3836 Points +21%
Gigaset GS160	3291 Points +4%
LG K8 2017	2546 Points -20%
Sony Xperia E5	4615 Points +45%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3	7925 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	7429 Points -6%
Gigaset GS160	7881 Points -1%
LG K8 2017	6656 Points -16%
Sony Xperia E5	9349 Points +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Nokia 3	152 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	53 Points -65%
LG K8 2017	39 Points -74%
Sony Xperia E5	212 Points +39%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3	124 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	42 Points -66%
LG K8 2017	31 Points -75%
Sony Xperia E5	175 Points +41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3	745 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	558 Points -25%
LG K8 2017	622 Points -17%
Sony Xperia E5	817 Points +10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Nokia 3	106 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	Points -100%
LG K8 2017	Points -100%
Sony Xperia E5	124 Points +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 3	85 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	Points -100%
LG K8 2017	Points -100%
Sony Xperia E5	100 Points +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 3	686 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	Points -100%
LG K8 2017	Points -100%
Sony Xperia E5	835 Points +22%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3	10 fps
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	9.4 fps -6%
Gigaset GS160	11 fps +10%
LG K8 2017	6.4 fps -36%
Sony Xperia E5	15 fps +50%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3	6 fps
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	5.2 fps -13%
Gigaset GS160	6 fps 0%
LG K8 2017	3.4 fps -43%
Sony Xperia E5	8.4 fps +40%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 3	4.5 fps
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	3.8 fps -16%
Gigaset GS160	4.7 fps +4%
LG K8 2017	3.7 fps -18%
Sony Xperia E5	6 fps +33%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3	2.2 fps
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	1.8 fps -18%
Gigaset GS160	2.1 fps -5%
LG K8 2017	1.3 fps -41%
Sony Xperia E5	3 fps +36%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3	3.2 fps
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	fps -100%
Gigaset GS160	3.4 fps +6%
LG K8 2017	fps -100%
Sony Xperia E5	3.4 fps +6%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 3	1.4 fps
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	fps -100%
Gigaset GS160	1.4 fps 0%
LG K8 2017	fps -100%
Sony Xperia E5	1.9 fps +36%

Legend

Nokia 3 Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Gigaset GS160 Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

LG K8 2017 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Sony Xperia E5 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

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

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Sony Xperia E5	17.89 Points +28%
LG K8 2017	17.12 Points +23%
Gigaset GS160	14.43 Points +3%
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	14.1 Points +1%
Nokia 3	13.97 Points

Octane V2 - Total Score
LG K8 2017	3052 Points +35%
Sony Xperia E5	2910 Points +28%
Gigaset GS160	2493 Points +10%
Nokia 3	2269 Points
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	1938 Points -15%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Nokia 3	16759 ms *
Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	15895 ms * +5%
Gigaset GS160	13907 ms * +17%
Sony Xperia E5	13232 ms * +21%
LG K8 2017	10742 ms * +36%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
Nokia 3	49 Points
Gigaset GS160	47 Points -4%

* ... smaller is better

	Nokia 3	Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL	Gigaset GS160	LG K8 2017	Sony Xperia E5
AndroBench 3-5		-18%	-7%	78%	43%
Sequential Read 256KB	181	143 -21%	200.5 11%	270.8 50%	209.7 16%
Sequential Write 256KB	34	42.4 25%	46.6 37%	84.6 149%	83.1 144%
Random Read 4KB	17.7	19.7 11%	18.5 5%	41.6 135%	26.04 47%
Random Write 4KB	5.5	6.9 25%	6.8 24%	12.5 127%	9.84 79%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard	64.3	17.7 -72%	30.71 -52%	78.6 22%	65 1%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard	62.9	14.4 -77%	19.19 -69%	52.2 -17%	45.56 -28%

Asphalt 8: Airborne
	Configurações	Valor
	high	13 fps
	very low	28 fps

... comparado com

Dead Trigger 2
	Configurações	Valor
	high	29 fps

... comparado com

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


32 °C	31.4 °C	31.6 °C
32.5 °C	31.7 °C	32.5 °C
32.4 °C	32 °C	32 °C

Máximo: 32.5 °C
Médio: 32 °C


30 °C	31.1 °C	31.7 °C
29.9 °C	31.6 °C	33.3 °C
31 °C	32 °C	34.2 °C

Máximo: 34.2 °C
Médio: 31.6 °C

alimentação elétrica 38.7 °C | Temperatura do quarto 22 °C | Voltcraft IR-350

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32 °C / 90 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 32.5 °C / 91 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 34.2 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Nokia 3 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 39.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 74% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 85% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 12% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 61% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 77% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.11 / 0.2 Watt
Ocioso	0.67 / 1.35 / 1.39 Watt
Carga	3.1 / 4.02 Watt


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

	Nokia 3 2630 mAh	Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL 2600 mAh	Gigaset GS160 2500 mAh	LG K8 2017 2500 mAh	Sony Xperia E5 2300 mAh
Power Consumption		-23%	-19%	-7%	-49%
Idle Minimum *	0.67	0.92 -37%	0.56 16%	0.65 3%	1.03 -54%
Idle Average *	1.35	1.76 -30%	1.7 -26%	1.6 -19%	2.06 -53%
Idle Maximum *	1.39	1.85 -33%	1.75 -26%	1.62 -17%	2.12 -53%
Load Average *	3.1	3.47 -12%	4.17 -35%	2.97 4%	5.01 -62%
Load Maximum *	4.02	4.22 -5%	5.07 -26%	4.34 -8%	5.04 -25%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria

Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)		20h 58min
WiFi Websurfing		9h 12min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		10h 28min
Carga (máximo brilho)		4h 43min

	Nokia 3 2630 mAh	Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL 2600 mAh	Gigaset GS160 2500 mAh	LG K8 2017 2500 mAh	Sony Xperia E5 2300 mAh
Battery Runtime		-1%	4%	4%	-24%
Reader / Idle	1258	1224 -3%	1326 5%
H.264	628	617 -2%	702 12%
WiFi v1.3	552	572 4%	615 11%	594 8%	422 -24%
Load	283	277 -2%	244 -14%	280 -1%

Pro

+ Marco de metal

+ Carcaça elegante

+ Android relativamente puro

+ Comparativamente muitas bandas LTE

+ Alto-falantes e fones potentes

+ Tela brilhante e de alto contraste

+ Baixas temperaturas

+ Baixo consumo de energia

Contra

- Pobre qualidade da câmera

- GPS inexato

- Microfone um pouco insensível demais

- Iluminação heterogênea da tela

- Forte tonalidade azul

- Bateria não removível

In review: Nokia 3. Review sample courtesy of Cyberport.de

O Nokia 3 é quase um smartphone de nível básico de entrada, o que provavelmente seria suficiente para um início bem sucedido do mercado nesta categoria. No entanto, o dispositivo também nos surpreende com taxas realmente boas em algumas áreas, como brilho da tela, contraste, consumo de energia ou muitas bandas LTE.

Isso permite que se destaque na categoria, mas também há algumas deficiências que devem ser mantidas em mente. Existem câmeras consideravelmente melhores nesta faixa de preços e, em termos de desempenho, existe um dispositivo mais forte no mercado - oXperia E5. Além disso, o som do alto-falante e a precisão do GPS não são estelares, mas isso não pode ser esperado desta faixa de preços.

Tela brilhante e de alto contraste, baixo consumo de energia, carcaça elegante - o Nokia 3 tem uma boa posição na categoria de nível de entrada. No entanto, não deve haver muito valor em uma boa câmera, pois o smartphone só pode oferecer isso de forma condicional.

A elegante carcaça e os resultados de teste decentes em muitas áreas conferem ao Nokia 3 um bom início de mercado no setor de nível de entrada. Agora, estamos antecipando os testes de seu irmão maior, porque a Nokia precisa vir com mais para convencer os compradores na gama média.

Nokia 3 - 07/28/2017 v6 ^(old)
Florian Wimmer

Acabamento

76%

Teclado

65 / 75 → 87%

Mouse

87%

Conectividade

36 / 60 → 60%

Peso

93%

Bateria

92%

Pantalha

82%

Desempenho do jogos

6 / 63 → 10%

Desempenho da aplicação

30 / 70 → 43%

Temperatura

93%

Ruído

100%

Audio

47 / 91 → 52%

Camera

54%

Médio

66%

78%

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 Nokia 3

Florian Wimmer, 2017-08- 2 (Update: 2017-08-11)

Size Comparison

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

Nokia 3 audio analysis

Asus Zenfone Go ZB500KL audio analysis

Pro

Contra

More articles related to this device

Price comparison