Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
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: 91 %
iluminação com acumulador: 378 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.95 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 1.86 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.13
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Google Nexus 5X Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash | HTC One A9 Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei P8 Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S6 Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | OnePlus 2 Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 10% | -1% | -55% | -18% | -35% | -25% | |
Brightness middle | 378 | 503 33% | 346 -8% | 453 20% | 335 -11% | 451 19% | 334 -12% |
Brightness | 380 | 498 31% | 349 -8% | 439 16% | 345 -9% | 446 17% | 341 -10% |
Brightness Distribution | 91 | 97 7% | 93 2% | 91 0% | 89 -2% | 90 -1% | 91 0% |
Black Level * | 0.38 | 0.28 | 0.3 | ||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.95 | 2.09 -7% | 1.55 21% | 4.7 -141% | 2.51 -29% | 3.84 -97% | 2.84 -46% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.09 | ||||||
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.86 | 2.12 -14% | 2.05 -10% | 5.03 -170% | 2.59 -39% | 3.97 -113% | 2.91 -56% |
Gamma | 2.13 103% | 2.27 97% | 2.15 102% | 2.27 97% | 2.43 91% | 2.46 89% | 2.01 109% |
CCT | 6376 102% | 6621 98% | 6267 104% | 7439 87% | 6424 101% | 7283 89% | 6432 101% |
Contrast | 1324 | 1618 | 1503 | ||||
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 72.04 | 58.07 | |||||
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 90.14 |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4 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. » 17 % 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 | ||
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise | |
↘ 4 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 16 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 240.4 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 240.4 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 240.4 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 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Geekbench 3 | |
32 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
32 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
OnePlus 2 |
AnTuTu v5 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
OnePlus 2 |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Samsung Galaxy S6 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
* ... smaller is better
BaseMark OS II - Memory (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 | |
Google Nexus 5X | |
HTC One A9 | |
Huawei P8 | |
OnePlus 2 | |
Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo |
Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
Configurações | Valor | ||
very low | 29 fps |
Dead Trigger 2 | |||
Configurações | Valor | ||
high | 34 fps |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.9 °C / 97 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 33.8 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.9 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Google Nexus 5X Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash | HTC One A9 Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei P8 Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S6 Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | OnePlus 2 Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heat | 6% | -3% | 5% | 4% | -23% | 9% | |
Maximum Upper Side * | 35.9 | 34.4 4% | 41.3 -15% | 35.7 1% | 35.6 1% | 45.8 -28% | 33.5 7% |
Maximum Bottom * | 33.8 | 37.4 -11% | 39.8 -18% | 31.3 7% | 35.9 -6% | 43.5 -29% | 34 -1% |
Idle Upper Side * | 32.8 | 28.2 14% | 28.7 12% | 33.2 -1% | 29.4 10% | 38.9 -19% | 27.8 15% |
Idle Bottom * | 31.5 | 25.8 18% | 28.4 10% | 27.6 12% | 28.6 9% | 36.9 -17% | 27.4 13% |
* ... smaller is better
desligado | 0 / 0.22 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.96 / 1.64 / 1.71 Watt |
Carga |
2.98 / 5.08 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Gossen Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Google Nexus 5X Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash | HTC One A9 Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei P8 Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S6 Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | OnePlus 2 Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -12% | 1% | -26% | 10% | -16% | -40% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.96 | 0.55 43% | 0.9 6% | 0.7 27% | 0.4 58% | 0.6 37% | 1.68 -75% |
Idle Average * | 1.64 | 1.44 12% | 1.2 27% | 2 -22% | 0.6 63% | 1.7 -4% | 2.2 -34% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.71 | 1.9 -11% | 1.4 18% | 2.1 -23% | 1.2 30% | 1.8 -5% | 2.33 -36% |
Load Average * | 2.98 | 3.36 -13% | 3.8 -28% | 4.9 -64% | 5 -68% | 5.7 -91% | 4.09 -37% |
Load Maximum * | 5.08 | 9.76 -92% | 5.9 -16% | 7.4 -46% | 6.8 -34% | 6 -18% | 5.92 -17% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Google Nexus 5X Adreno 418, 808 MSM8992, 32 GB eMMC Flash | HTC One A9 Adreno 405, 617 MSM8952, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei P8 Mali-T628 MP4, Kirin 930, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S6 Mali-T760 MP8, Exynos 7420, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | OnePlus 2 Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 64 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -31% | -47% | -41% | -37% | -38% | -11% | |
Reader / Idle | 2323 | 1775 -24% | 1154 -50% | 826 -64% | 1300 -44% | 1393 -40% | 1615 -30% |
H.264 | 672 | 555 -17% | 465 -31% | 581 -14% | 580 -14% | 773 15% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 626 | 412 -34% | 368 -41% | 434 -31% | 475 -24% | 356 -43% | 546 -13% |
Load | 483 | 245 -49% | 176 -64% | 215 -55% | 278 -42% | 229 -53% | 402 -17% |
WiFi | 575 |
Pro
Contra
O Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016) demonstra ser um avanço bem-sucedido do predecessor em quase todas as áreas. O smartphone de gama média é mais uma vez, muito elegante e, fora o flickering, ele possui um dos melhores painéis deste segmento. As câmeras também foram um pouco melhoradas. Outros pontos extras são as baixas emissões e a longa duração da bateria.
Grandes desvantagens não são encontradas. Teríamos desejado Wi-Fi ac, e a carcaça é bastante escorregadia devido à sua traseira de vidro, o qual diminui a boa impressão geral até certo ponto. No entanto, o maior problema é - como no predecessor - o desempenho. Com um preço recomendado de rua de 429 Euros (~$466), teríamos esperado um pouco mais de poder. O Galaxy A5 não apenas fica atrás se seus oponentes nos benchmarks, mas também são notados pequenos lags e falhas de vez em quando durante o uso diário. Se os modelos da gama média da linha A serão atualizados para Android 6.0 ainda não é certo.
A Samsung mais uma vez fornece um smartphone de muita alta qualidade e também caro com o seu novo Galaxy A5. A tela pertence a melhor do seu tipo, mas fica atrás de seus rivais em termos de desempenho.
Esta é uma versão reduzida da análise original. Você pode ler a análise completa em inglês aqui.
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
-
02/26/2016 v5 (old)
Andreas Osthoff