Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A3 (2017)
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
Size comparison
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
HTC One A9s | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Huawei Nova | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
HTC One A9s | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Huawei Nova |
|
iluminação: 94 %
iluminação com acumulador: 574 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 1.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.09
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 Super AMOLED, 1280x720, 4.7" | BQ Aquaris X5 Plus IPS, 1920x1080, 5" | Huawei Nova IPS, 1920x1080, 5" | HTC One A9s IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Lenovo ZUK Z2 IPS, 1920x1080, 5" | Wiko U Feel Prime IPS, 1920x1080, 5" | Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 Super AMOLED, 1280x720, 4.7" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -16% | -47% | -53% | -55% | -51% | 4% | |
Brightness middle | 574 | 640 11% | 493 -14% | 348 -39% | 512 -11% | 411 -28% | 386 -33% |
Brightness | 576 | 609 6% | 485 -16% | 320 -44% | 502 -13% | 386 -33% | 394 -32% |
Brightness Distribution | 94 | 85 -10% | 94 0% | 85 -10% | 84 -11% | 86 -9% | 88 -6% |
Black Level * | 0.93 | 0.44 | 0.23 | 0.58 | 0.36 | ||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.4 | 2.8 -17% | 4.2 -75% | 3.5 -46% | 3.8 -58% | 4.3 -79% | 1.11 54% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.8 | 5.7 -50% | 6.6 -74% | 6.4 -68% | 11.2 -195% | 7.9 -108% | 3.35 12% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.9 | 2.6 -37% | 3.8 -100% | 4 -111% | 2.7 -42% | 2.8 -47% | 1.34 29% |
Gamma | 2.09 105% | 2.35 94% | 2.39 92% | 2.3 96% | 2.09 105% | 2.53 87% | 2.12 104% |
CCT | 6502 100% | 6477 100% | 7438 87% | 6527 100% | 6076 107% | 6589 99% | 6441 101% |
Contrast | 688 | 1120 | 1513 | 883 | 1142 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 250 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . 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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise | |
↘ 3 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 15 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5 ms rise | |
↘ 4 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. » 19 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
Geekbench 4.0 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Wiko U Feel Prime |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime |
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 | |
BQ Aquaris X5 Plus | |
Huawei Nova | |
HTC One A9s | |
Lenovo ZUK Z2 | |
Wiko U Feel Prime | |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 Mali-T830 MP1, 7870 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | BQ Aquaris X5 Plus Adreno 510, 652 MSM8976, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei Nova Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash | HTC One A9s Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash | Lenovo ZUK Z2 Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Wiko U Feel Prime Adreno 505, 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7578, 16 GB eMMC Flash | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 20% | 87% | 35% | -6% | 51% | -13% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 199.7 | 228.4 14% | 248.3 24% | 210.2 5% | 239.4 20% | 270.9 36% | 168.8 -15% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 45.96 | 47.03 2% | 75 63% | 68.6 49% | 46.52 1% | 137.3 199% | 27.27 -41% |
Random Read 4KB | 22.32 | 36.85 65% | 38.19 71% | 21.3 -5% | 21.27 -5% | 55 146% | 21.92 -2% |
Random Write 4KB | 9.62 | 12.44 29% | 44.63 364% | 34.6 260% | 5.64 -41% | 9.4 -2% | 10.27 7% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 75.5 | 73.2 -3% | 79.5 5% | 39.6 -48% | 41.98 -44% | ||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 50.1 | 54.9 10% | 47.69 -5% | 25.6 -49% | 35.21 -30% |
Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
Configurações | Valor | ||
high | 23 fps | ||
very low | 29 fps |
Dead Trigger 2 | |||
Configurações | Valor | ||
high | 52 fps |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.8 °C / 89 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 32 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.3 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 62% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 78% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 32.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 46% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 64% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HTC One A9s audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 11.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 72% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 84% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.01 / 0.07 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.37 / 0.78 / 0.84 Watt |
Carga |
1.52 / 2.75 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 2350 mAh | BQ Aquaris X5 Plus 3200 mAh | Huawei Nova 3020 mAh | HTC One A9s 2300 mAh | Lenovo ZUK Z2 3500 mAh | Wiko U Feel Prime 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 2300 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -137% | -111% | -185% | -193% | -94% | -82% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.37 | 0.87 -135% | 0.61 -65% | 1.29 -249% | 1.31 -254% | 0.66 -78% | 0.96 -159% |
Idle Average * | 0.78 | 1.33 -71% | 1.83 -135% | 2.28 -192% | 2.03 -160% | 1.66 -113% | 1.39 -78% |
Idle Maximum * | 0.84 | 1.35 -61% | 1.86 -121% | 2.52 -200% | 2.08 -148% | 1.76 -110% | 1.45 -73% |
Load Average * | 1.52 | 5.44 -258% | 3.71 -144% | 4.06 -167% | 5.45 -259% | 2.85 -88% | 2.65 -74% |
Load Maximum * | 2.75 | 7.11 -159% | 5.19 -89% | 5.91 -115% | 6.75 -145% | 5.01 -82% | 3.51 -28% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017 2350 mAh | BQ Aquaris X5 Plus 3200 mAh | Huawei Nova 3020 mAh | HTC One A9s 2300 mAh | Lenovo ZUK Z2 3500 mAh | Wiko U Feel Prime 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 2300 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -25% | -17% | -41% | -18% | -35% | -20% | |
Reader / Idle | 2862 | 1870 -35% | 1543 -46% | 1254 -56% | 1978 -31% | ||
H.264 | 988 | 717 -27% | 587 -41% | 863 -13% | |||
WiFi v1.3 | 668 | 504 -25% | 873 31% | 517 -23% | 546 -18% | 575 -14% | 628 -6% |
Load | 532 | 328 -38% | 245 -54% | 376 -29% |
Pro
Contra
Há pouca ou nada de necessidade de uma atualização para aqueles que já possuem o Galaxy A3 (2016). No entanto, com a sua qualidade de construção similar, o modelo deste ano tem algumas vantagens.
Primeiro que nada, o Galaxy A3 (2017) agora é resistente à poeira e água (IP68). Além disso, ele possui uma porta USB Type-C, sua câmera não sobressai mais na parte traseira, parece ser significantemente mais sólido graças à ausência do marco de alumínio mencionado anteriormente, e roda um sistema operacional Android 6.0.1 mais recente.
Atualizar o processador para o Exynos 7870 mais veloz teve o efeito esperado sobre o desempenho geral. As melhorias da duração da bateria são mais importantes: devido à sua incrível eficiência energética, o Galaxy A3 (2017) é uma besta extremamente durável. Ambas as câmeras também foram melhoradas, e a mais recente reiteração se sai muito melhor em condições de baixa iluminação. A câmera frontal foi atualizada de 5 para 8 megapixels.
O Galaxy A3 (2017) está muito longe de reinventar a roda; porém, suas melhorias iterativas foram suaves e eficazes.
Apesar de seu formato manuseável e bastante prático de 4,7 polegadas, a parte traseira lisa pode causar um alvoroço com alguns usuários. A única coisa que você pode fazer é testar por si mesmo se o telefone se sente escorregadio ou não. Nós não nos importamos com a traseira lisa. No entanto, não há maneira de disfarçar as deficiências do telefone: sem MHL, sem suporte para dual SIM, e sem estabilização ótica de imagem. Alguns usuários também podem notar o PWM-flickering em níveis de brilho abaixo dos 92%. Apesar destas limitações, o Galaxy A3 (2017) continua sendo um smartphone de gama média, sólido e respeitável com poucos motivos para reclamar.
There is little to no need for an upgrade for those who already own last year's Galaxy A3 (2016). With its similar build quality, this year's model does have a few advantages, though.
First of all the Galaxy A3 (2017) is now IP68 dust- and waterproof. In addition, it features a USB Type-C port, does not have its camera protruding from the back anymore, seems significantly sturdier thanks to the lack of aforementioned silver frame, and it's running a more recent Android 6.0.1 operating system.
Upgrading the processor to the faster Exynos 7870 did have the expected effect on overall performance. The battery life improvements are more important: due to its incredible power efficiency the Galaxy A3 (2017) is an extremely durable beast. Both cameras have been improved as well, and the latest reiteration fares much better under low-light conditions. The front-facing camera has been updated from 5 to 8 megapixels.
The Galaxy A3 (2017) is a far cry from reinventing the wheel; instead, its iterative improvements have been gentle and effective.
Despite its manageable and quite handy 4.7-inch form factor, the smooth back side may cause quite a stir with some users. The only thing you can really do is try for yourself whether or not the phone feels slippery. We for one did not mind the glassy back cover. Yet there is no way to sugarcoat the phone’s shortcomings: no MHL, no dual SIM-card support, and no optical image stabilization. Some users might also notice PWM-flickering at brightness levels below 92%. In spite of these limitations, the Galaxy A3 (2017) remains a very solid and respectable mid-range smartphone with little cause for complaint.
Samsung Galaxy A3 2017
- 09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Manuel Masiero